Month: December 2010

The story of Katie and the Star Wars water bottle

Maybe you’ve already seen it by now. CNN.com recently ran a story about Katie Goldman, a first-grader (7 years old) who likes Star Wars and who was teased at school for it. It wouldn’t be a newsworthy story, except for the curiosity of her mother, Carrie Goldman, who asked Katie about it until she finally got an answer. Carrie’s post on her blog entitled Portrait of an Adoption tells more of the story. I quote in part:

[A] week ago, as we were packing her lunch, Katie said, “My Star Wars water bottle is too small.  It doesn’t hold enough water.  Can I take a different one?”  She searched through the cupboard until she found a pink water bottle and said, “I’ll bring this.”

I was perplexed.  “Katie, that water bottle is no bigger than your Star Wars one.  I think it is actually smaller.”

“It’s fine, I’ll just take it,” she insisted.

I kept pushing the issue, because it didn’t make sense to me.  Suddenly, Katie burst into tears.

She wailed, “The first grade boys are teasing me at lunch because I have a Star Wars water bottle.  They say it’s only for boys.  Every day they make fun of me for drinking out of it.  I want them to stop, so I’ll just bring a pink water bottle.”

…

Is this how it starts?  Do kids find someone who does something differently and start to beat it out of her, first with words and sneers?  Must my daughter conform to be accepted?

Carrie closes her blog post with a call to action for other female Star Wars fans, and a reminder that it works the other way too (of course, it’s much easier to see boys getting teased for the pink water bottle). The CNN story goes on to mention Jen Yates’s entry to her blog epbot.com, a comment from Catherine Taber who voiced Padme Amidala in the animated series Star Wars: The Clone Wars, and the school’s first Proud To Be Me Day, to be held tomorrow (December 10).

My reaction to the story is multi-faceted, since it touches on a lot of things I have a strong opinion of. But first, a bit of background.

I was quite into Star Wars when I was a kid; the original theatrical releases of the first three movies (which are actually Episodes 4 through 6 in the sequence). I endured my share of teasing and bullying growing up. Even though I was at a private school through my elementary school years, little was done about it. (Remember, this was the early 1980s; if there were any communities they were bulletin boards on dialup modems, and the Internet was still primarily for research and would not open up to the public for a few more years. There were no websites or mommy blogs as we know them today.)

My ordeal with bullying and teasing eased up some after I transferred to a public school and moved in with my mom between my fifth and sixth grade years. It was still difficult to deal with some kids who just didn’t want to accept me for who I was. It was hard for me to make and keep friendships, a problem that has followed me well into adulthood.

First, Star Wars. Having grown up with Star Wars, it was a shock to me that anyone, any age, would ridicule another for showing off their support of George Lucas’s best known work. My interest in science fiction in general is not what it once was, but were George Lucas to change his mind and make Episodes 7 through 9, I’d probably still make sure I saw them in the theater during their original theatrical run, just to say I did. (Which, unfortunately, I cannot say for Episodes 1 through 3, which I only saw on DVD.)

Second, the (perceived) gender stereotypes upon which Katie’s bullying was based. Somehow and somewhere, these first-grade boys got it stuck in their heads that Star Wars is only for boys. These same boys probably also have it stuck in their heads that pink water bottles are for girls, and would undoubtedly ridicule a boy who had one the same way they ridiculed Katie. (It would not surprise me at all if Katie knew this and went straight for the pink water bottle thinking “the boys will never tease me for drinking out of this one.”) This disturbs me greatly. I’ve never been the most “macho” boy of the group; whether or not this was the root cause of some of the bullying I endured is up for debate. Either way, I honestly think it is not good for our generation to have such strong gender-based stereotypes at the tender young age of seven (there’s plenty of time for them to learn that, particularly post-puberty), and I think it would behoove us as a society to figure out where our kids are learning these things.

(Sidenote: I recall one instance of bullying against me where I was criticized for wearing my pants “low like a (female dog).” So I pulled them up as high as I could for the next few days. I was later criticized for wearing them “high like a (female dog)” which, unfortunately, was not far what I expected; my response was “Which is it? Because you just said ‘low like a (female dog)’ a few days before.” That shut them up for a while.)

Third, bullying in general, particularly among elementary school kids. We know school bullying has gotten more publicity in recent years. I’m not sure if it’s just that we know more about it now that the Internet has brought us all closer together (meaning that the bullying problem was this bad all along, we just didn’t know), or if the problem is a new one that happens to coincide with the Internet era. Either way, Katie’s story is a call to action. The kids that are in school today need to be taught in no uncertain terms that bullying is not okay.

Fourth, individuality (and some of this goes back to gender stereotypes as well). Everyone is different; no two people are exactly the same. The sooner in life people learn this, the better the world will be. It’s okay to be different, in the minority, to be the one girl in the class that likes Star Wars and playing football, to be the one boy in the class that likes pink water bottles and playing with dolls. While some professions are dominated by one gender over another (when I was in elementary school most of the boys thought it was odd that a boy wanted to be a teacher when he grew up), almost every career has at least some of both. It goes the same for a lot of things, including medical conditions. Not everyone is born or grows up in perfect health; I was underweight through a good portion of my childhood (you would never know this looking at me today).

Fifth and finally, the spectacular (if not first-rate) parenting skills of Carrie Goldman, without which this entire story as it happened would not have been possible, and also without which the result could have been disastrous at some point in the future. I wish there were more moms (and dads) like her out there, with strong and finely tuned instincts (would I be that wrong to refer to such instincts as “The Force?”), that know there’s more to the story than the water bottle is too small. This is an example of parenting every mom (and dad) can learn from.

In closing: To Katie, Carrie, and young bullying victims and their parents everywhere, may the Force be with you. Remember that you’re not alone.

Thoughts on Wikileaks, diplomatic cables, and the future of journalism

Unless you’ve been living under a rock or otherwise intentionally avoiding news reports for whatever reason, you have probably heard something about Wikileaks (if down, try this IP address-based link) and its release of cablegrams between embassies which has sparked a huge controversy. In case you haven’t, or you need to be brought up to speed quickly (all from CBS News):

And this is of course just the tip of the iceberg. I could link you to all the press coverage, but I’d be here all night doing that alone before offering up my viewpoint on some of the things that have happened.

The publication of documents intended to be kept secret is a balancing act that at times makes a circus tightrope walker’s routine seem easy by comparison. I was somewhat familiar with Julian Assange and the Wikileaks site prior to the cablegram releases. However, I had not spent a great deal of time visiting the site on a daily basis. That’s about to change; suffice it to say that I will probably be writing about the material on Wikileaks on a semi-regular basis, especially since the latest release has threatened the site’s continued existence.

And I feel that is a shame. I trust Julian’s judgment, and I do not believe he or the others responsible for maintaining Wikileaks would release the 652 cablegrams marked “Secret” without good reason. From the FAQ:

US authorities have said the release may put people at risk. Is this true?

Wikileaks has a four-year publishing history. During that time we have released documents pertaining to over 100 countries. There is no report, including from the US Government, of any of our releases ever having caused harm to any individual. For this release we are releasing the documents in a gradual manner, reviewing them with the assistance of our media partners.

And later on:

What will the effect be on the Middle East?

One newspaper has alleged the cables might destabalize the Middle East. These cables, by giving the players an unvarnished description of how they are seen, there will be a common ground on which to effectively negotiate peace and stability. We do not see this as a risk of destabilisation, but an opportunity for stabilisation and reform in the Middle East.

While it may be embarrassing to certain individuals for some of the contents of the cablegrams to be made public, this is not the same as being “put… at risk.” Sometimes, journalism requires embarrassing a few people for the greater good.

Until and unless there is hard evidence that someone has been injured or killed as the result of a release of information in the style of Wikileaks (not just from Wikileaks itself, but from any other organization which releases information in the same style), I personally regard Julian Assange as more of a modern-day hero, unlike some who appear to call him a modern-day zero (or other choice words, including “terrorist” and a few things I prefer not to put here).

I believe Wikileaks and websites like it are the future of journalism. Granted, most websites placed online will not have content quite as controversial as the leaked cablegrams currently at the center of attention. However, there is no shortage of information which large corporations, governments, or wealthy and influential individuals want to keep secret, which should be made public. As said by Thomas Jefferson, “An informed citizenry is the only true repository of the public will.”

I believe the latest release from Wikileaks has demonstrated the saying “information wants to be free” has never been more true, and has shattered any remaining doubts that the Internet is just a passing fad. It matters little what Amazon, Paypal, the US government, and others that wish to try to censor Wikileaks do. In the long term, they are all fighting a losing battle.

I wish Julian and his partners the best of luck in continuing the success of Wikileaks. May freedom of the press win and censorship lose.

Blocking traffic is a felony? Really?

As a former professional driver (messenger/courier), I’ve dealt with my share of traffic. I know first-hand it’s not the job to take if you’re trying to reduce your blood pressure from an unhealthy level, or if you’re trying to quit drinking, smoking, or swearing. (I was mostly guilty of the last of these, and I’ve joked that all couriers in Houston are fluent  in two languages: clean English and profanity.) For those and other reasons, it’s a job I will probably never take up again. I’ve learned a lot from the experience.

Nevertheless I was a bit dismayed to learn that over in Los Angeles, the DA is filing felony conspiracy charges against a rap group (the Imperial Stars) that blocked a freeway for a publicity stunt (laweekly.com). My rationale is this: there are all kinds of traffic accidents that result in a freeway getting shut down in major cities across the US (and elsewhere). The driver at fault rarely gets cited for a felony for the accident unless it results in serious injury or death and even then it is only for that and not the consequential traffic tie-up.

I don’t approve of what the Imperial Stars did. It’s inexcusable. However, I feel making it a felony is a step too far. Appropriate relief would include misdemeanor charges, and an injunction forbidding them from repeating this stunt. That, combined with the civil liability as suggested by one of the commenters on the LA Weekly story, is enough of a deterrent. Actually, the civil suits alone and resulting bad PR should be plenty to ensure that not only do the Imperial Stars not repeat this ill-advised stunt, but that nobody else tries this.

Please, let’s reserve felonies for the truly serious crimes. Not blocking traffic.

A call for sanity on speed limits

Yeah, I’m in a bit of a “stupid traffic law tricks” mode. This draft has been sitting in my drafts folder for about a month, and the article dates from July of this year. However, the issue at hand is still very current as Michigan is not the only place this happens.

Car and Driver recently reported on a situation in Michigan where local governments continue to enforce outdated speed limits which are set much lower than the prevailing speed of traffic, despite a specific state law to the contrary. This is a practice which happens to line the pockets of small “speed trap” towns at the expense of the motoring public.

Now, I agree in principle with reasonable speed limits being set on public roadways. However, all too often I see limits clearly set for revenue, such as the stretch of Jones Road through Jersey Village posted at 35 which, surprisingly, jumps to 45 as soon as you leave city limits. A post to survivalistboards.com also mentions Jersey Village and speed traps, and I know I’ve seen many others out there, including a post mentioning a ticket for 38 in a 35 (yes, three over the limit, when usual tolerance is five or ten) which I conveniently can’t find at the moment.

And it’s not just the small towns. A stretch of  Briar Forest between Gessner and Beltway 8, well inside Houston city limits, was posted 30 for years and was a frequent speed trap. However, in a rare move of actually doing something that made sense, the limit was raised to 40 briefly before being dropped down to 35. I haven’t been through the area recently (moved away) so I’m not sure if it’s still a “speed trap” now.

With speed limits frequently set too low on purpose for revenue, it’s a wonder that the violation rate is so high. It is simply not right for a government to create a dangerous situation by setting artificially low speed limits, then taxing the drivers that drive at a reasonable speed. (Yes, I am using the word “taxing” instead of “fining” on purpose.)

Stopping the stop sign madness

Having dealt with a few stop signs of dubious merit in and around the Houston area, I can certainly feel the pain of Cranston, RI residents.

An NPR story (which links to local reports with more information) details the stop sign crisis in Cranston, which has discovered around 700 stop signs installed without going through the proper channels. An investigation revealed that the state DOT installed some one-third of the signs at the entrances to state roads. There is a state statute in Rhode Island that all drivers must stop prior to entering a state road, sign or not. I don’t know Rhode Island law but it is quite possible the DOT was legally justified in leapfrogging the city by installing the signs.

Anyway, that still leaves a great many of the stop signs unaccounted for, and a potentially dangerous situation. Put up too many traffic control devices, and the motoring public starts to lose respect for all of them. As a consequence of the superfluous traffic lights and signs, those that are truly needed get ignored by more drivers, with potentially disastrous and fatal consequences.

I’d like to think that residents did not take it upon themselves to install stop signs. While it may seem harmless to them, it’s an invitation to disaster if everyone does it.