Classes or Castes
I just wanted to make a comment on the campaign of Sen. John Edwards and his idea of “two Americas.” I didn’t give him much attention until I began to think about my own experience here in Knoxville.
Not too long ago, I worked in a local liquor store. Along with the other employees, I realized that there were customers who were treated very well and there were customers that were merely tolerated. But at this store, the treatment you received hinged upon which social class you were perceived to belong to.
As an example, one day I was asked into the owner’s office. I had accepted a check that had been returned. The owner’s father (not the owner) wanted to know if I remembered the customer. I did. He asked me what the customer looked like. “Six feet tall. Black hair. Glasses.” Then, he asked me if I would “invite this customer to my house for dinner,” I asked him to repeat the question. “Did he look like the sort of person that you would have over? Did he look well off?”
Now, I had recently left the University of Tennessee, and at the university you very quickly learn to not “judge a book by its cover.” When I explained this, I was told that the first aspect of a person you should take into account is how they appear. Do they look like they “belong here?” It was clear that there were people that were wanted in the store and there were people who were not.
Sen. Edwards is correct, and Knoxville might be a small example. At this particular store, some customers were given a royal treatment (no matter how badly they behaved). Others (minorities and those that “wouldn’t be welcome for dinner”) were encouraged to hand over their cash and head for the door.
I want to make it clear that I am not endorsing Sen. Edwards, but I am endorsing his idea. Even in K-town, we deal with “two Americas.” In my experience, it was outright class discrimination, but I’m sure it takes other forms in all environments. If Sen. Edwards doesn’t win the candidacy, he has at least given each of us something to examine in our own bit of America.
Robert A. Baird
Knoxville
Who’s the Man? You.
I was interested in answering Mr. Sanabria’s [Feb. 9 Incoming] question, “The next time I call 911, will anyone come?” To begin with, the police were not required to respond to your call. There is plenty of case law that proves this to be true. In one such case, a court went as far as to say that it is “the fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen” (Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d1—D.C.App.1981).
Such rulings defeat the purpose of calling 911. Dealing with issues such as medical emergencies, self-defense and car wrecks are not the government’s responsibility, but your own.
Chris Fortner
Knoxville
Don’t Trivialize Desperation
In reference to the following comment in the [Feb. 12] Seven Days section of your publication: “Some people will litigate over anything that annoys them. Anything.”
I believe the writer, in a lame attempt at being humorously cynical, failed to read and/or comprehend the remainder of the article before making sport of Ms. Carlin. Please consider in a serious manner the remainder of the article and basis for her objections, before rushing to judgment and jumping to conclusions. In an effort to be fair and unbiased, I did read the article completely; as a parent I agree with her in this context. “There is a segment of our society that is indifferent to whether simulated sexual assaults are celebrated in front of millions of children,” [attorney Wayne Ritchie] said.
It seems everyone wants to express, to one extreme or the other, their amazement over the baring of Ms. Jackson’s breast. I believe many of us are missing the point noted above by Mr. Ritchie. This was a staged mock physical assault of a sexual nature against a female. Given the added lyrics reinforcing Mr. Timberlake’s “intentions” to “have her naked” despite her willingness or wishes, there is little doubt in my mind as to the intended message. Therein lies the problem.
In my opinion, and Ms. Carlin’s, the breast was offensive in the context displayed, that of forced nakedness. What a man/boy wants, they can have by force is the message I see dramatically promoted in this little drama. Hello?
It is not the mere exposure of a body part that has us up in arms; it is the behavior leading up to the nudity that is alarming to parents of impressionable youth. What should we expect next year, a dramatized rape scenario? We are on a slippery slope when we argue whether this is appropriate material for midday network TV.
I do not believe it is a question of whether Ms. Carlin is a prude, an opportunist, a Christian, or simply overreacting; the real question for parents is how our children will integrate this behavior in their own private Idaho! I don’t want my children to be misled into believing there is anything acceptable about this “accidental” scenario.
My daughters don’t need to feel they have to “get naked” to please anyone but themselves. No matter how hot they look or who the young man thinks he is, they decide, not the Justin wannabe! My son will not be led to believe that this kind of behavior is in any way acceptable to treat a female in such a degrading manner. No matter how hot or powerful he believes he is, forcing nakedness on a partner, date or acquaintance is wrong!
What a disappointing example of the mindset of today’s culture when the message is that women are only as valuable as they are blatantly sexy and their only purpose is that of a vulnerable sex object who can be ravaged at will!
For years, the media arguments for protective parents have been that we should monitor our children’s viewing and simply change the channel or don’t go there to begin with. Fine, I accepted that responsibility and removed cable because of problems with mimicking behaviors and offensive language pervasive on cable. I accept and approve of the inevitable exposure of youth to the naked human form in a natural and artistic forum, but in a nonviolent context.
However, the context and behavior in this performance are reflective of the message and mindset of the producers; we all know where MTV’s mindset has taken us lately—they are literally dumpster diving when it comes to searching for their next shocking stunt. When kids of all ages are imitating Jackass, pro-athletes and wrestlers to the extent deaths are occurring (and it is happening) who is to question where this type of staged sex drama will lead our children?
If it takes a lawsuit to get the attention of the people responsible for the total irresponsibility, so be it. It seems money is the only ruling consideration anymore anyway.
But please, as the paper that claims to appeal to thinking individuals and [is] home to a wonderful parent and writer like Katie Allison Granju, don’t trivialize the actions of a desperate parent.
Eve Mynatt
Knoxville
Love’s a Better Valentine
The Valentine’s Issue [Feb. 12]—articles on porn stars, sadomasochism, masturbation, and some guy who passed around a “very large adult toy” to his couple friends.
Metro Pulse, couldn’t you do a little better than that? As the song says, “Where is the love?”
Also, I think Jack Neely [Jan. 22 Gamut] must have been snubbed by Lee Greenwood at some event. What a waste of space.
Paula Johnson
Knoxville
| 
