I was just reading this lovely piece on the blog called, “Pink is for Boys” : http://pinkisforboys.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/i-would-just-like-to-say-that-it-is-my-conviction
It made me think.
I have been battling this for years one way or another. I knew a young boy who loved Barbies. We watched him playing with dolls and clothes and figured that was probably an indication of his sexual orientation, but since we didn’t care about his sexual orientation, that was no big deal.
It was interesting that when he finally ‘came out’ in high school, everyone just shrugged their shoulders and said, “Yeah. We knew.” He was bullied before he came out, but not after. When he could acknowledge the truth of himself, others were more willing to accept it as well. Perhaps the bullies realised that before it was assault, but after it’d be a hate crime?
So it is with many things. If we accept other ways of thinking or being, we acknowledge the truth in ourselves as well as the truth in others. Acceptance lets pink into our palette and adds beauty to our sunrises.
My Middle School students get angry when they are challenged for saying “That’s so gay!” One is forever saying, “It means happy!” She doesn’t like the response that then she should say, “This is so happy!” Not accepting the consequences of their words is part of their age, and teaching them to show empathy can be challenging. Their brains are only beginning to learn abstraction, and some of them are still so concrete it will likely be years before they’re able to grasp what they’re really saying. They’re ostracizing 10% of the population with that kind of remark, and they have trouble seeing why that’s a problem. I’ll keep working on it. Hopefully we’ll get more boys willing to wear pink for anti-bullying days, and more kids of both sexes willing to discuss why they are so angry if other people are different from them. Acceptance is a powerful thing, but for some, their own acceptance is so precarious that they aren’t willing to risk accepting others.
What do you think?



what’s in a name? May 20, 2011
Tags: hockey, Jets, NHL, postaday2011, Ralph Hass, team name, Thrashers, Winnipeg
I’m taking page out of the blog of my old pal Ralph Hass today with a sport’s commentary… (tongue in cheek though it may be!)
The big sports news in Canada today is that negotiations are in progress to bring the Atlantic Thrashers to Winnipeg. Manitobans are dancing in the streets over the idea of a return to NHL hockey in their province. The next question is, “What will they be called?” Some are determined that the team should harken back nostalgically and be called the Winnipeg Jets; others think the team should keep its name and become the Winnipeg Thrashers.
I vote for “None of the Above” and submit that the name should both be new and something meaningful for the province. Something powerful. A name that conveys a real force of nature.
I vote for The Red River Flood.
The Manitoba Sandbaggers?
The Winnipeg Dikebreakers?
If you don’t like those, how about The Prairie Blizzard? That might be the ideal choice, actually, since it includes 3 provinces, and prairie blizzards can strike ferociously any time during the extremely long hockey season…
I mean really, what do Jets and Thrashers have to do with anything? At least lets have a name that tells you something about the people who support the team. Manitoba Threshers fits with the agriculture of the region. Maybe that would work?
Good luck Winnipeg. May the flood water recede and the NHL return.
Share this: