I was catching up on DVR programs the other night. One of them, as I’ve said before, is The View. I was watching hot topics of one of this week’s shows where they were discussing the governor’s race in Oklahoma (I think). Apparently one of the candidates said she would make a better governor because she has six kids and a husband and her opponent has never been married or had kids. They were bickering about it and Elizabeth (who I never agree with) came out with a statement that surprised me. Did I mention I never agree with her? Well she said this should not be used in the race because if they use motherhood etc as an argument for being a good candidate for governor (or anything else for that matter) then they can also use it as an argument for being a bad candidate for governor (or anything else).
I completely agree. If you are applying for a job and they ask – are you married? Do you have children? - that is discrimination. Marital and parental status has little bearing on how well someone is going to do in a job. Plus why are women being held to this standard (which Joy brought up). No one asks a man – well what type of husband / father are you?
Sherry made a point which annoyed me. She said that parents are more compassionate. The example she used was that people who become annoyed with noisy children in an airport / airplane are typically not parents. I have to disagree with her completely. I’m a parent and noisy kids annoy the heck out of me. Now I understand that there are times when you have to discipline your kid and also when they are fussy. But I’ve seen parents do the dumbest things when it comes to their kids. They either cave in and give them what they want when they shouldn’t or they ignore the bad behavior and wonder why everyone else is annoyed with their kid. They are annoyed because you aren’t doing your job.
Kids cry and fuss. That goes without saying. How a parent handles it determines whether I’m annoyed or not. If the parent is ignoring the behavior and the kid is misbehaving then it annoys me. If the parent is making every attempt to distract and maintain discipline with a child then I’m not annoyed because you can see they are attempting to parent.
There was one other issue which annoyed me. Apparently some woman put up an ad in a church for a roommate. She advertised for a Christian roommate. Well this is discrimination. All the women on the view said she should not have gotten in trouble for it. I think she should because she was discriminating.
First she put it up in a church so most likely she is going to get someone from that targeted group. Second all she had to do was say while interviewing that I’m a Christian and this is an integral part of my life. Then she could have asked if that would bother or interfere with the relationship of roommates. She really only had to put in there that she wanted a like minded roommate and then she wouldn’t have been in trouble at all.
If we let even individuals discriminate then we are allowing it everywhere because it isn’t groups that discriminate willy nilly. It is individuals within the group who set the policies. So if this woman were on a committee for a homeless shelter would she be willing to allow Muslims, Buddhists, Atheists, etc in to the shelter? Or would she require that everyone within the shelter be Christian?
One more and then I promise I’m done ranting about The View. They had a discussion about an article on the Marie Claire website concerning fat people. I didn’t read the article or go to the website – I just know what was discussed on the View. Apparently this author had issues with fat people in general but specifically about fat people on TV. She objected to the Mike and Molly show (I think that is the name of it) which features two overweight individuals. I’ve not seen this show either. The author was very disparaging and critical. It is obvious she has body issues of her own from the quotes I heard. Fat people are the one acceptable discrimination left in our society. It is okay to tell fat jokes, to look down on overweight people, to disparage and denigrate them. This is also discrimination. Apparently the writer got blasted because she did write an apology. The question is did she write the apology because she rethought her point of view or because she was getting so much flack about her opinions. One other question I have is where the hell was the editor that they allowed this to go on the website with such discriminatory wording and opinions? Why didn’t the editor take a step back and say – hey wait a minute. Maybe because at Marie Claire (being a fashion magazine which probably perpetuates the need for women to be size 0) doesn’t think about how those women of any size would feel about such an offensive piece.