Month: September 2023

Deception, equivocations, fraud, lying, misstatements and omissions amount to forms of rampant misinformation that poisons our ability to make sound decisions surrounding nearly every aspect of our lives. And some wealthy and powerful people are okay with that, especially when they benefit financially and politically from it. A few days ago, I watched a congressional hearing wherein Republican congressmen berated the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) chairwoman for questioning social media companies that permit dangerous misinformation to proliferate on their sites. The MAGA Republicans challenged her authority to determine what constituted misinformation. I thought to myself that this is the root of the problem.

Since Donald Trump brought his distorted relationship with reality, his introduction of “alternative facts”, and his branding of unfavorable journalism as “fake news”, too many in this nation have abandoned the notion that objective truths actually exist. Truth is simply the expression of verifiable facts. We have allowed opinions, feelings, hunches, theories, and unsubstantiated accusations to live on par with truth as if truth no longer exists. Misinformation is simply a broad term to describe any departure from truth. If the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is restricted from regulating fraud and deceptive business practices, then we are in great trouble as consumers. But some people, beyond the wealthy and powerful, don’t find this disturbing.

I have an immigrant son-in-law who can be described as a libertarian. He is against government regulations because he believes that the free market will eventually correct the poor behavior of businesses. He believes that allowing consumers to experience heartache and injuries leads to the eventual demise of those bad businesses. We argue over the merits of government regulations all the time. He thinks they are unnecessary while I think they are. At the heart of both our arguments is survival. He believes that the best businesses will ultimately thrive as customers abandon products that don’t work as advertised or when people are harmed by bad products. That is how markets are designed to work and he is correct. The problem as I see it that real people are injured, killed, and harmed in the process. The damage can be irreparable. I care deeply about the immediate survival of people and damage to the environment that is caused by deception motivated by short-term profiteers. And absent government regulation, the problem can only get worse.

With the introduction of artificial intelligence, the ability to distinguish between what is true and what is misinformation will become more difficult without new government regulations. It’s already difficult to find a reliable source of news and information. This has driven me to watch more congressional hearings in real time and to pay closer attention to people with actual credentials for information. It is evident to me that the credibility of politicians and news stations have been compromised by greed. I’m reminded of that Biblical passage in I Timothy 6;10 that says, “For the love of money is the root of all evil….”

In practice, my son-in-law is correct. Since corporations and billionaires have bought and paid for news outlets and politicians, the marketplace of information has been set free. We as consumers are forced to question everything and to rely on primary sources for information as much as possible. But it’s time consuming and few people have the time to invest in fact-finding. This is why I find it so disappointing that very few people have turned off Fox News, even after a court found them responsible for lying about the 2020 election being stolen and having to pay millions for defamation. Their viewers never even heard about it. I lament that the majority of Americans continue to get their information from unreliable sources and suffering because of it.

However, as an optimist, even given the diminished power of the FTC, I believe that we will reach a tipping point when the pain, damage, deaths, and injuries to people, communities, and the environment caused by misinformation become too much to endure. Only then will the free-market demand truth from the news media and politicians. I predict that greater truth and more reliable sources of truth are in our future. I just hope it isn’t too late for our children, grandchildren, and the planet.

I love music and musical performance, especially dancing. However, since the pandemic and our continued vulnerability, I haven’t attended any concerts in public spaces. These days, my enjoyment of musical performance comes through a screen. So, this past week, I tuned into the MTV Video Music Awards to watch a variety of performances from popular artists.

I got through about an hour of the show when I decided that I’d had enough with watching young black and brown women exposing their bodies while dancing and singing in overtly sexual ways. I get that this is performance art and self-expression, and I don’t begrudge anyone their right to express themselves in this way. I’m fine if this is how someone chooses to present themselves to the world. I just know I didn’t care for it.

During particular acts, I experienced a myriad of emotions as I watched. I’m probably a little bit prudish, but my primary emotion was disgust. As female after female exposed herself and twerked in front of the camera, each more sexually explicit than the other, I found myself downright bored. I turned off the television and went to bed.

The following day, when I learned that Taylor Swift won nine music video awards, I began to unpack my thoughts and feelings about the performances of the black and brown women I saw on the show. First, I am thankful to live in a country that allows for freedom of expression. Second, I’m happy if these young women find a sense of female empowerment by performing sexually explicit lyrics and dance moves. Third, I had this horrifying thought that these young black and brown women were persuaded that their ticket to fame and monetary success in the music industry was granted only if they performed in this way. Too many were downright nasty and I know I didn’t like it.

I don’t know the truth behind their motivation to expose themselves. I do know that the market and the award decision-makers decided to give the more conservative Taylor Swift a nod that night. It is a form of subtle censorship when powerful people behind the scenes actually decide who wins coveted awards for their art. Personally, I’m for letting the viewer, the reader, and the buyer, decide. For example, I engaged in a personal form of censorship by turning off the television and refusing to watch any longer. I engage in it when I refuse to purchase music with lyrics that I find offensive. I don’t watch performances that disgust me. I can be a prude if I choose to, while not denying others the right to enjoy violent or sexually explicit content. My entire adulthood has been an exercise in personal censorship and I’m thankful to live in a country where I get to decide for myself.

As a parent, I’ve exercised censorship regarding my own children, and I want to preserve that right for others. For example, there was a time when I didn’t allow my kids to watch “The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air”. They were at an impressionable age, and I later explained to them that I didn’t want to expose them to people constantly insulting each other for laughs as an acceptable way to communicate in our home. I wanted their interactions with one another to be marked with mutual respect and acceptance. I also limited access to content that contained violence, sex, and horror during their formative years. So, as my children were growing up, I didn’t allow violent video games, rap music, or sexually explicit videos in our home. Adult words, adult conversations, and adult books were kept among adults. This is all censorship. In a free society, I’m all for the freedom to censor content to protect my own soul and that of my own children when they are young.

I’m fully in favor or self-censorship; not government censorship. I’m grateful for guides like movie ratings and labeling content as “explicit” to help us consumers know what to expect. It is true that one person’s art is another person’s trash. Some content hurts my soul while other people are completely unscathed by it. And that is okay. We are diverse human beings. I’m not sure why I’m turned off by near-naked women twerking, but I don’t like it, and I don’t have to explain myself. I also hate boxing and MMA matches because I’m repulsed by seeing folks hit each other. I literally become sick to my stomach. But I have a son and daughter who love those matches.

The ability to make these censoring decisions for my own children when they were young was essential to instilling my idea of basic human values within them. It doesn’t mean that they weren’t exposed to content I disapproved of outside our home. I know they were. But making censoring decisions at home empowered, encouraged, and enabled them to question their own values as they grew up in society and were exposed to other content.

It was my own mother who censored my exposure to certain things. As a result, I recall refusing a role in a play at fourteen because the content of the play went against values I adopted from my mother’s early influence. My mother left the choice to me, and I had to ask myself where I stood on the content before moving forward. I credit my mother’s early content censorship for helping shape my values. With that kind of clarity, I had the courage to refuse the role despite peer pressure. I was able to clearly articulate my objection to the content. That particular play was produced without my participation, and I was fine with that.

Essentially, what I’m saying is that the beauty of living in a free society is having the ability to exercise the tools of private censorship for ourselves and our children. We can turn the channel, refuse to purchase, scroll past, opt out, or not read. Living in a free society means everyone has the right to express themselves and consumers have the right to embrace or reject that expression on a personal level or on behalf of their underage children. What we don’t have the right to do is decide for others what they can and cannot see or how they can or cannot express themselves.

Right now, this freedom is being challenged by groups who believe they have the right and moral high ground to censor art, literature, and even history to limit what other people’s children are exposed to. That isn’t freedom. That is a form of religious tyranny that must be fought against at school board meetings, in the courts, and at the ballot box.

I may not like to see young women twerking half-naked, but I will defend their right to express themselves that way. I’ll simply exercise my right to turn the channel.

One of the only things I enjoy about visiting my dentist’s office is the friendly conversations with the staff. In particular, the dental assistant almost always asks to see the newest photos of my grandsons. Of course, I’m happy to share them. This week’s visit was no different until after viewing the pictures she entreated me to ensure they are homeschooled because teachers are teaching kids weird things. I asked what “weird things” were being taught? And of course, it was that whole right-wing propaganda surrounding gender and homosexuality. After I internally rolled my eyes and let out a sigh, I realized that it would be irresponsible to forego the opportunity to share a different perspective with her.

So, I did. I began with my experience as a former teacher, as a person with many teacher friends, and a former educator in a school of education. I calmly explained that teachers aren’t teaching children to question their gender nor are they grooming children to become homosexuals. I explained that teachers may need to explain human differences as a means of creating a learning environment free from bullying and discrimination on the basis of actual differences that children are already encountering. I explained that in the process of normalizing differences, some children might then feel safe and comfortable enough to admit to being “different”.

I relayed my experience with an enraged mother who accused the University of “turning her son gay”. I told her how I patiently explained to the mother that we lack both the ability and the motivation to do that. I continued to relay how I explained to the mother that her son was already gay when he arrived but that he finally felt safe enough to come out of the closet society had shoved him in. I explained how I understood that parents are afraid for their children because they know that being different will make life difficult for that child who identifies as gay or transgender.

After relaying my experience, I assured the dental assistant that teachers understand the hardships as well, which is why they don’t encourage students to question their gender or sexual orientation, but instead work diligently to create a safe learning environment for everyone, especially for those children who are different. I felt a sense of satisfaction when she expressed relief at my explanation. But she is just one of many people poisoned by a right-wing agenda to garner votes by propagating unfounded fears of teachers and books. Since the legalization of gay marriage, the introduction of new gender pronouns, and the popularity of pride parades and drag shows, religious conservatives are seeking ways to shove LGBTQ+ folks back in the closet.

I grew up in a family and a Christian community where we simply didn’t acknowledge the non-binary gender differences nor the non-heterosexual orientation of members of our family or church. The closet was a real thing and those who ventured outside of it were punished severely. It’s accurate to say that we rolled our eyes at the girl who dressed like a guy. We quietly referred to the gay pianist as “different” but didn’t ask any questions. Our belief was that only God had the right to judge, so we better not judge them. Instead, we engaged in this strange “don’t ask, don’t tell” social arrangement that was convenient for the majority, but devastating to those who were different. That tacit ostracization was not only disrespectful in its denial of the full humanity of fellow human beings, but it was hurtful and lead to murder, broken families, and high rates of suicide. It’s sad that in 2023, Black transgender murder rates are increasing and violent attacks on the LGBTQ+ community are also on the rise.

As with any legal and social progress that expands the rights and protections of minorities, there will be those who long for what they perceive as the good old days. As a society in 2023, we find ourselves arguing over whether a spectrum of human gender actually exists even as people who identify as non-binary present themselves publicly. Some people will go to their graves believing that God created only males and females. Period. They become confused when they learn that a few people are born with an indeterminate sex. They become even more confused when they learn that the human brain can be mapped as male or female and that a person’s brain gender may not match their genitals. They become enraged at the thought of these truths coming to light because it not only challenges their religious beliefs but calls upon them to expand their view of humanity itself.

It pains me to watch people I care about look upon a transgender person with disgust. I realize that no amount of reasoning can extricate the disgust they were socially conditioned to feel over a lifetime. And that is frustrating. All I can do is demonstrate my acceptance of that person by treating them with the same dignity and respect I afford all human beings. The same is true when confronted by a gay couple. While others look on with distain, I can model respect, acceptance, and kindness and hopefully bring some sustaining joy, comfort, and hope to people who are different.

As members of the human race and voters, we have a duty to recognize that violence and laws motivated by prejudice, bigotry, and discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community are on the rise. Even social media support for LGBTQ+ is attacked. I was shocked and disheartened by the negative feedback I received when I promoted the idea that better humans are inclusive and utilized a pride flag as an example of expanded inclusion. Laura Ann Carleton, a mother of nine and a storeowner was murdered for displaying a pride flag.

As I write this, there are mean-spirited and extremely vocal religious zealots and social conservatives pressuring politicians and lawmakers to shove people back in the closet. Too many apathetic parents are allowing groups like Moms for Liberty to ban books and to punish teachers when they address the full range of humanity in service to a safe learning environment. These books and conversations not only build awareness and empathy, but they increase the capacity of children to accept differences without resorting to bullying and discrimination. Creating a safe and inclusive environment in our schools increases learning, reduces suicides, and likely will reduce school shootings that are often an angry response to bullying and feeling ostracized.

Let’s not shy away from a fight with a few closed-minded people who are trying to shove our friends, family members, fellow citizens, and human beings who are different, back in the closet. As educated and decent human beings, it is up to us to stick our collective foots in the door and refuse to return to the days of shame, disregard, and discrimination against human beings who just happen to be different. Are there complicated issues to address around sports? Sure, there are. So, let’s address them together using our knowledge of science, a commitment to fairness, and all the compassion we can muster.