Political Correctness is censorship for the stupid. It's how you convince a nation that was only recently told morality was relative and we should be able to say and do anything and be respected by all, that there is, in fact, a thousand mile long list of taboos that immediately result in punishment and retribution if violated.
So the Red Cross is apologizing for a racist pool safety poster. The problem? The poster showed a cartoon of kids in a pool. Some kids doing 'cool' things. Some kids doing 'not cool' things. Given the headline, I knew something was amiss. So it didn't take me any time to see what the fuss was about. It looks like some of the 'not cool' kids were portrayed as minorities, while the 'cool' kids were white.
On further inspection, it looks like some white kids are 'not cool', too. But most importantly, all of the minority kids are involved in something 'not cool.' I know. I feel stupid writing this. And there is only one tweet connected to the protest. I don't know if there was a campaign, or if this one tweet was enough to elicit an apology.
That's not the point. The point is that we live in a society quickly giving away its freedoms to the squeakiest wheels. I understand that we want to protect minority voices against the fickle whims of the majority. On the other hand, we don't want to subject the majority to the fickle whims of the minority voices. Remember, the opposite of majority rule is dictatorship. And right now, it appears so many minority voices that spend their time protesting endless songs played backwards to find the hidden racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, Islamaphobia, this phobia or that phobia, aren't thinking about the long range implications of their indignation.
Pretty soon, the only thing left in our society that won't be punishable will be drugs, sex, and vulgarity. Everything else, no matter how sincere and helpful, will be scrutinized and, if found harmful or hateful, punished. Yeah. We live in that type of society. A country that mocked the pilgrims and puritans for their intolerant ways when I was growing up. Somehow, I can't help but think we owe those old timers an apology.
As a side note, I am surprised that the poster passed inspection. Having worked for an educational publisher some years ago, I found out just how stringent the concern over such 'insensitivity' was. For instance, we could not allow a text book that said 'Founding Fathers.' It had to be 'Founders', to eliminate the gender specific language. My personal favorite was on a list of suggestion. The suggestions weren't mandated, they were just suggestion. It said that Jack-O-Lanterns should be renamed 'Halloween Lanterns.' Any idea why? If you guessed that 'Jack' is a gender specific name that could cause potential distress and confusion for children who might read the text, you'd be correct.