Archives

bookmark_borderThe United States is a totalitarian dictatorship

Posted on by Marissa

I haven’t yet posted about the horrendous state of affairs involving Donald Trump being arrested and charged with crimes for expressing unpopular views and challenging the results of an election.

Please do not mistake my lack of posts on this topic as apathy about the topic, or worse, tacit approval of the events that have happened.

Rather, I have been so upset, angered, and physically sick to my stomach about what has happened that I have been unable to put my thoughts into coherent words and sentences.

In this blog post, I will attempt to do just that, because it is important to make it clear that I am not even remotely okay with what has happened, and continues to happen, in this country.

To put it bluntly, but in my opinion 100% correctly, the United States is a totalitarian dictatorship.

Over the past three and a half years, I have witnessed:

  • The election of a president of the United States who believes that he has the right to require people to undergo medical procedures
  • A nationwide campaign of obliteration of all public art that represents minority cultural and ideological groups and that allows members of such groups to feel accepted and included
  • Mass arrests of dozens of people for the “crime” of holding a protest that advocated for an unpopular cause
  • The arrest of a former president for the “crimes” of expressing unpopular views and challenging the results of an election

I state unequivocally that the things that are happening in the United States today, and that have been happening in the United States over the past three and a half years, are completely unacceptable, and I condemn them fully and completely.

What is happening in the United States is nothing less than a war on dissent. A war on unpopular minorities. A war on human diversity. A war on individualism, on individual rights, on liberty, on freedom. A war on the entire concept of being different, of being a rebel, of resisting authority, of thinking for oneself.

And the worst thing about this war is that the people who are most fiercely waging it are portraying themselves as fighting for diversity and inclusion, and their opponents as intolerant, discriminatory, and racist. Those who have most ardently advocated against respect for fundamental rights are portraying themselves as fighting for liberty, freedom, and bodily autonomy, and their opponents as authoritarians, Nazis, and fascists.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The people who advocate for the removal of Confederate statues and the replacement of Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples’ Day are the people who are truly intolerant, who are truly genocidal, who are truly discriminatory, who are truly racist.

The people who demand the violation of the fundamental right to decline medical intervention, who demand that all people’s bodies be forcibly penetrated against their will – and make no mistake, that is exactly what proponents of vaccine mandates have been demanding – are the people who are truly authoritarians, who are truly fascists.

The United States today is run, dominated, controlled by people with no moral compass and no logical consistency, people who practice a form of hypocrisy so blatant, so appalling, and so profound that it is shocking to witness.

The very same people who demanded that everyone’s bodily autonomy be taken away, and condemned those who dared to stand up to them as morons, idiots, racists, white supremacists, and fascists, did an about face to immediately commence pontificating about the importance of bodily autonomy, and accusing their opponents of taking away liberties and freedoms, when the Supreme Court made a decision that jeopardized unfettered access to abortion.

The very same people who praised and fetishized “resistance” when it came in the form of destroying public art that represented minority cultural and ideological groups (making these acts of destruction the exact opposite of resistance), viciously insulted as “insurrectionists” and “rioters” those who engaged in actual resistance to authority.

And when it comes to historical figures who engaged in actual resistance to authority centuries ago, the very same people described above condemn those historical figures as “insurrectionists” and “traitors,” and therefore unworthy of honoring or celebrating.

The hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty are appalling. The people who run, dominate, and control the United States are using words to mean the exact opposite of what the words actually mean, and acting as if this is perfectly normal and the people who dare to question them are the problem.

People are ridiculed for using the word “tyranny” to characterize the things that have been happening in the United States… but it is 100% correct to characterize these events as tyranny.

I would argue that it is ridiculous for someone to claim that the things happening in the United States do not constitute tyranny.

The condition of the United States since 2020 has been one of authoritarianism, of tyranny, of totalitarianism, of complete intolerance for both human freedom and human diversity.

In the United States today, we live in a society that values conformity and compliance above all else, a society that is not only indifferent towards, but actively hostile towards, liberty and individual rights. Society demands that everyone be the same, that everyone follow the same norms, that everyone undergo the same medical procedures, that everyone live in the same way and think in the same way. It is treated as self-evident that everyone must undergo the procedures recommended by the medical establishment, everyone must follow the advice given by experts, and everyone must live under the policies that scientists decide will make people safest. What matters is that people follow norms, trust experts, and obey authority. What matters is that people silence their own feelings and perspectives and instead grovel at the feet of those deemed less “privileged” than themselves. No one is allowed to dissent, to rebel, to defy, to resist, to question authority, to think for oneself, to live in a way that deviates from the norm, or to be different from the majority in any way. These actions and attributes, which in my opinion are synonymous with being honorable and good, are instead equated with moral badness by a society that values nothing but conformity and compliance.

That is what I see happening in the United States today.

It is not acceptable. It is not even remotely close to being acceptable, and never will be. And I don’t want anyone to interpret a lack of writing on this topic, or the presence of writings on other topics, as acceptance. Because acceptance is the antithesis of how I feel about what is happening in the United States today.

bookmark_borderA**hole of the day: Kevin Farzad

Posted on by Marissa

The above post is, seemingly, intended to be funny. However, I don’t find it the least bit funny. I find it offensive and hurtful.

The author of this post, Kevin Farzad, seems to believe that for a person to remain in their hometown and eat at Olive Garden is somehow funny.

He seems to believe that these attributes somehow make a person racist, or at least inclined to make Facebook posts containing links to racist articles. 

He seems to believe that these attributes somehow make a person ridiculous, laughable, a joke.

I don’t get what is funny about any of this.

There is nothing wrong with living in the town that one is from.

There is nothing wrong with thinking that Olive Garden is fancy.

These things do not make a person racist, nor do they have anything to do with a person’s likelihood of posting a link to a racist article. These things are not funny. These things do not make a person ridiculous. These are just normal, and perfectly okay, things that a person might do.

I don’t understand why someone would think that a Facebook friend from high school, who hasn’t left their hometown and who considers Oliver Garden fancy, is funny.

I don’t understand why someone would consider such a person to be ridiculous, to be laughable, to be a joke.

Kevin Farzad is choosing to insult and ridicule people who are doing absolutely nothing wrong but are merely living in a different way than he does.

And I just don’t get what is funny about any of this.

As an autistic person, I live in a town directly bordering the town that I am from. As an autistic person, moving from place to place in service of a series of high-powered jobs that involve slaving for 80 hours a week, is simply not doable for me. As an autistic person, I don’t enjoy constantly going to trendy restaurants and bars. And because I don’t go out to eat very often, I do kind of consider Oliver Garden to be fancy.

As an autistic person whose special interest is history, I don’t support the BLM movement, because this movement advocates for discrimination against, and intentional infliction of harm and pain on, people like me. Some of the articles that I’ve shared on social media, as part of my advocacy for my right to exist, would probably be considered racist by Farzad.

Apparently, to Kevin Farzad, the idea that a person could behave, think, and live differently than he does is laughable.

Ridiculous.

A joke.

Well, I don’t find it funny.

Sorry, Kevin, that I’m autistic and therefore can’t live with roommates and move all over the country and work at a high-powered, 80-hour-a-week job and constantly go to trendy restaurants and bars and be a black supremacist.

Sorry, Kevin, that I am different than you.

Pardon me for being offended that you consider a person like me to be funny, to be laughable, to be ridiculous.

Pardon me for being offended by the implication that because I didn’t move across the country for a fancy job, that because I don’t go to hip new restaurants, I must be racist.

Pardon me for being offended that my existence is being treated as the punchline of a joke.

Sorry to be a stick in the mud, sorry to be a Debbie downer, but I find Kevin Farzad’s post to be stuck-up, mean, judgmental, intolerant, and hurtful.

I don’t get the point of it.

I don’t find it the least bit funny.

bookmark_borderHow to continue living…

Posted on by Marissa

How to continue living when you’ve failed to get your way on something that matters so incredibly much that without it, life is not worth living.

Something so incredibly important that in my opinion, it is not a matter of merely getting one’s way at all, but a matter of whether or not one’s fundamental rights are respected.

There are no words adequate to the task of fully conveying how upset the failure to get my way, the failure of others to respect my fundamental rights, has made me.

There are no words capable of fully conveying the pain, the anguish, the suffering that I have endured.

How to continue living when the topic on which I’ve been defeated is so crucially important to my life, to my happiness, to my well-being, that all other topics are trifles in comparison, and putting time and energy into them seems equivalent to fretting about the arrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic.

Conventional wisdom says that one shouldn’t dwell on things over which one has no control, that one should instead direct one’s focus and energy towards the things that one can control.

But how can it be wise, or sensible, or worthwhile, to direct my focus and energy towards the things that don’t matter, and away from the things that do?

How to continue living when the defeat is so complete, so thorough, that it is difficult if not impossible to find a silver lining, to find any reason for hope, to find any way of putting a positive spin on the situation?

How to continue living in a society that is collectively responsible for inflicting this horrific defeat on me, for taking away the thing that I need in order to have a life that is worth living?

How to enjoy anything when every company, every institution, every organization, every governmental and non-governmental entity, is to some extent complicit in this atrocity, in this violation of my rights?

How to coexist with a loss that involves a subject of such crucial importance to me, a loss that is so complete as to allow no room for hope, a loss that was inflicted on purpose?

These are just a few of the thoughts swirling around my head today.

These are the questions with which I’ve wrestled for over three years, and with which I must continue to wrestle.

At the moment, I don’t have answers. Only questions.

bookmark_borderA**hole of the day: littleauntsherry

Posted on by Marissa

For reasons that I cannot comprehend, someone decided to leave the following extraordinarily idiotic comment on an Instagram post by Breyer model horses about a Secretariat-themed coloring contest:

First of all, thoroughbreds do not end up being slaughtered. That statement is factually incorrect.

Second, perhaps Breyer supports horse racing because it has to do with horses, and Breyer is a model horse company? Just a thought. 

Third, um, yes, Breyer follows the official Kentucky Derby Instagram account. Why would that be surprising to anyone? To repeat, Breyer is a model horse company. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that they would follow and support other brands, companies, and organizations that also have to do with horses. If anything, it would be strange if Breyer didn’t follow the Kentucky Derby on Instagram.

Fourth, I don’t understand Littleauntsherry’s demand that Breyer “join the rest of us in the 21st century.” Littleauntsherry appears to believe that horse racing was more popular in the 20th century than it is in the 21st century. More problematically, she appears to be presuming that if this is true, then it follows that horse racing is bad. This presumption is the apparent motivation behind her demand that Breyer join people in the 21st century by giving up its support for horse racing. But this conclusion does not follow from this premise; therefore there is no justification for Littleauntsherry’s demand. The century in which something is popular has nothing to do with its goodness or badness. Joining other people in the 21st century is not in any way superior to remaining in the 20th century, and by presuming that it is, Littleauntsherry demonstrates both complete intolerance for people who are different than her, as well as a complete lack of logic.

As you can see above, things get even worse when a logical and reasonable person has the audacity to call out Littleauntsherry on her BS. She responds in a way that is even more nonsensical and idiotic than her original comment.

Why is Littleauntsherry telling Southdakodo to google horse racing? This simply makes no sense. Southdakodo is the one who is telling Littleauntsherry that she is talking about things she knows nothing of… not the other way around. Yet Littleauntsherry is acting as if Southdakodo is the one lacking knowledge. She is even stating that Southdakodo is on a “quest for knowledge,” which Southdakodo has done nothing to indicate is the case. Littleauntsherry may very well believe that Southdakodo lacks knowledge. But if this is what she is claiming, then she needs to actually state it, as opposed to presuming it, because as is, her response makes no sense.

Making matters even worse, Littleauntsherry chooses to ridicule Southdakodo’s username for no apparent reason other than to be mean-spirited and cruel.

In conclusion, Littleauntsherry’s comments on this Breyer post exemplify the stuck-up, self-righteous, and mean-spirited attitudes of so many in our society. She claims to be advocating for the well-being of horses, when in reality she is needlessly introducing meanness and nastiness into an innocent, happy, and fun post, insulting and attacking a company that did nothing wrong, demonstrating a complete lack of logic, and ridiculing a fellow Instagram user who did nothing wrong. As is so frequently the case in our society, it is the people who most vociferously claim to value decency, humane treatment, and kindness, who are in reality the most cruel, mean-spirited, and nasty. If a person actually cared about being kind, their very first order of business would be abstaining from actively and gratuitously inflicting pain on others.

Yet actively and gratuitously inflicting pain on others is exactly what Littleauntsherry is doing here.

The real question that I have for Littleauntsherry is: why would you leave such a mean-spirited, idiotic, and illogical series of comments? All you’ve accomplished by doing so is to show off your self-righteousness, cruelty, nastiness, meanness, and intolerance.

bookmark_border“The USA is a white settler colonialist state”

Posted on by Marissa

“The USA is a white settler colonialist state…”

What the heck does that even mean? What is a “settler colonialist state”?

We need to eliminate the term “settler colonialism” from our lexicon. Phrases like this are meaningless mush, with no use or purpose other than to insult and shame people based on their skin color.

How exactly are immigration laws racist?

How exactly is your statement “truth,” Bree Newsome?

And how exactly are people wanting to outlaw it? Who exactly are the “they” of whom you speak, and what steps have they taken to outlaw statements like yours? More importantly, how can you claim that statements like this one are in danger of being outlawed when every major politician of the ruling party, every major corporation, and every member of the mainstream media, is parroting it?

 

Similarly to the question with which I began this blog post… what the hell is a “white colonial power structure?” This seems to be just more meaningless mush whose only goal and only effect is to paint an autistic person like me, who has been told that I have no choice other than to sacrifice my wishes, preferences, needs, and happiness for the expectations of others for my entire life, as somehow “privileged” and therefore bad and having no right to complain or be upset about anything. Thereby doubling down on the exact things I’ve been told ad nauseam by neurotypical society my entire life. Awesome.

Also, how can someone “maintain white rulership in the USA” when such a thing has never existed?

Also, what racist violence, exactly, is Newsome referring to?

And what anti-democratic violence, exactly, is Newsome referring to?

And why is it a bad thing for something to be anti-democratic, anyway? To speak of anti-democratic violence as if it is a bad thing presumes that to be pro-democratic is good, and I strenuously dispute this presumption. Democracy is a form of government in which the policies implemented are the ones that are favored by the largest number of people. Given that the goodness or badness of a policy has nothing to do with the number of people that favor it, democracy is not a good form of government. To be anti-democratic is not something bad, because a democracy is not something good.

In conclusion, this Instagram post and the account that posted it are just another example of our society’s practice of privileging and elevating the voices of those who have not experienced discrimination or significant hardship, while stomping on those who have. If the people who run this Instagram account actually wanted to feature the voices of the oppressed, they would feature tweets and blog posts by people like me, who have been shamed as sick and bad our entire lives… and for our entire lives had our feelings and perspectives dismissed as “privileged” because we were born with the wrong skin color.

bookmark_borderChristopher Columbus update

Posted on by Marissa

Another visit to Christopher Columbus…

I weaved my way through the streets of the North End, both too hot and too cold at the same time. In front of the Old North Church, a gaggle of tourists waited in line for tickets. A street sweeper came rumbling down the street. From somewhere nearby, the hammering and banging of some sort of construction project rang out. I was approaching Chris’s home from a different angle than I had before, so I had to look closely at the street signs and storefronts to figure out which way to go. Dodging cars, delivery trucks, a US Foods employee maneuvering a two-wheeler stacked with boxes, and several people pushing carts of books down the sidewalk, I knew that I was getting close. And it was about time, too. I had stopped at Revere Beach before going to Boston, and passed through the park, now haunted, where his pitiful empty pedestal still stands, surrounded by people walking to and fro and enjoying their day, oblivious to its significance. Plus, both the orange and blue lines were operating under speed restrictions, meaning that for the majority of my journey, the train crawled painfully along at a snail’s pace.

The hot sun was beating down, punctuated by biting cold wind. This, combined with noise of various sorts, people walking every which way, and the mental overload of having to concentrate simultaneously on avoiding bumping into said people and figuring out which direction to go, almost made me regret making the trip. I felt irritated and annoyed, my brain overloaded.

But then I saw Chris.

Watching over the parking lot from his new pedestal, there he was. 

I noticed a couple of changes: he had finally lost the plastic wrap that had been clinging to his torso, and the asphalt expanse around him was divided into parking spaces, complete with pristine new white lines and numbers.

Another change: unlike during my earlier visit, I was not able to be alone with Chris. Just as I got there, an elderly gentleman drove up to the gate, got out of his car to open it, and drove into the parking lot before closing and locking the gate again. Presumably he was one of the residents of the building, which houses both the headquarters of the Knights of Columbus Ausonia Council, as well as apartments for low-income seniors. 

Hello, Chris. I’ve braved a lot of things in order to come see you. The train was ridiculously slow, and people are walking in all different directions, and honking their horns, and blocking my way, and driving down the street just as I’m about to cross it, and hammering and banging, and squealing and laughing, and talking really loud on their cell phones, and just overall driving me crazy. It is hot and cold at the same time, and my feet are starting to hurt. But you make it all worthwhile. 

I felt self-conscious in front of the old man, figuring he would think me a weirdo for standing there staring at a statue. It was his home, after all, and not mine. I didn’t feel free to spend as much time with Chris as I wanted to. So I stood at the fence for a few moments, and then bid him farewell. I left feeling unsettled, my mind swirling with mixed emotions about the fact that the man I love, the marble figure who holds such profound significance, is essentially owned by a bunch of old people.

Bye, Chris. Sorry this is such a short visit. But I’ll be back.

8/1/2023

bookmark_borderRevere Beach sand sculpture photos (8/1/23)

Posted on by Marissa

Last weekend was the Revere Beach Sand Sculpting Festival. Due to my work schedule, I wasn’t able to go to the festival, but I decided to head to the beach on my day off to see if the sand sculptures were still there and if so, what condition they were in.

There had been severe rain on Saturday night, and unfortunately it really affected the sculptures. Some were so severely damaged that they were unrecognizable, others were largely intact, and most were somewhere in between these two extremes. Seeing them was both sad and cool at the same time. It was a poignant reminder of the impermanence of life.

Check out the photos below:

bookmark_borderRebutting biased Yahoo News article about Jason Aldean

Posted on by Marissa

I recently came across an article from Yahoo News about Jason Aldean’s song, “Try That In a Small Town.” Both the article and the people quoted in it display the intolerant, authoritarian bias that is infuriatingly common in the media today, which I will explain and rebut below:

The article quotes Aldean’s response to his critics: “In the past 24 hours I have been accused of releasing a pro-lynching song (a song that has been out since May) and was subject to the comparison that I (direct quote) was not too pleased with the nationwide BLM protests.”

Well, yes. It’s kind of understandable that a person wouldn’t be too pleased with the nationwide BLM protests, given that these protests are racist and have the goal of destroying everything that makes life worth living. I’m not sure why being displeased with the BLM protests would be considered a bad thing.

“The country star — who witnessed the worst gun massacre in U.S. history at the 2017 Route 91 Harvest music festival in Las Vegas — had already caught flak for the song’s seemingly pro-gun lyrics… In a tweet, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America founder Shannon Watts pointed out the hypocrisy of an artist ‘who was onstage during the mass shooting… that killed 60 people and wounded over 400 more’ recording a song ‘about how he and his friends will shoot you if you try to take their guns.'”

Why would “pro-gun” lyrics be something that a person would catch flak for? I’m not sure why being in favor of people’s fundamental rights being respected would be considered a bad thing.

Also, I don’t understand Shannon Watts’ allegation of hypocrisy (let alone Yahoo‘s decision to take this false and nonsensical allegation as a fact by using the words “pointed out”). Aldean witnessed and survived a crime. And he does not believe that every person in the country ought to be punished for the crime. I am not sure why this is considered hypocritical. I am not sure why Watts, and Yahoo, believe that logical consistency requires the belief that whenever a crime occurs, the correct response is to punish all people by violating their rights.

“In another viral tweet, police reform activist Brittany Packnett Cunningham pointed out: ‘Uvalde? Small town. VA Tech? Small college town. Newtown? Small New England town. Parkland? Small town that had just been voted Florida’s *safest* town. Most mass shootings occur in *small towns*. Your listeners are dying.'”

I am not sure what the locations of mass shootings have to do with anything. It is morally unacceptable to respond to mass shootings by violating people’s rights, regardless of the locations in which the shootings take place. As for the claim that Aldean’s listeners are dying… well, yes. Of course they are. Every person dies eventually, regardless of whether or not they listen to Aldean’s music. Perhaps Cunningham is trying to point out that Aldean’s listeners have died in mass shootings. I don’t see the point of that observation, either. Mass shootings, just like any other type of tragedy, happen from time to time. Given this, it makes sense that some victims would be Aldean listeners and some wouldn’t, because one would expect the victims of tragedies to represent more or less a cross-section of the population. Again, I don’t really get the point of this observation. It is morally unacceptable to respond to mass shootings by violating people’s rights, regardless of whether or not the victims are Aldean’s listeners.

The article quotes Mississippi Free Press news editor Ashton Pittman, who tweeted: “Jason Aldean shot this at the site where a white lynch mob strung Henry Choate up at the Maury County Courthouse in Columbia, Tenn., after dragging his body through the streets with a car in 1927.”

And this is relevant how? Also, I think Pittman meant to say, “a lynch mob,” as opposed to “a white lynch mob.” There is no reason to mention the race of the members of the mob, other than to be blatantly racist, and presumably the editor of a newspaper does not intend to be blatantly racist.

The article also quotes reporter Matthew Chapman, who said that the song “absolutely captures everything about the American Right, from the paranoid threats of violence, to the irrational fetishization of communities where everyone acts and thinks the same, to the fact that the singer in fact grew up in a city.”

First of all, Chapman’s use of the term “American Right” is somewhat bigoted, because it paints an entire nationality in a negative and pejorative light. Why wouldn’t he just say, “the Right”? Also, I am not sure what aspects of Aldean’s song Chapman considers to be “paranoid.” I am also unsure why liking something would be considered “fetishization” or “irrational.” I’d be interested in hearing Chapman explain what factors make an affinity for something “irrational” and constituting “fetishization,” as opposed to normal and rational. Also, I’m confused as to why Chapman characterizes the types of communities Aldean likes as “communities where everyone acts and thinks the same.” The types of communities that Aldean sings about are actually communities where everyone acts and thinks differently from the norm. Those who subscribe to the ideology of political correctness, as Chapman and Aldean’s critics do, actually form a community where everyone acts and thinks the same. That is why those who subscribe to this ideology have been so eager for the removal of statues honoring the Confederacy and Christopher Columbus – because those statues symbolize the idea of being different and thinking differently from the majority. By having the courage to challenge this ideology of mindless conformity, Aldean and the communities about which he sings are doing the exact opposite of everyone acting and thinking the same. And of course, Chapman chooses to condemn Aldean and the “American Right” for… acting and thinking differently than he does. He characterizes as “irrational fetishization” the fact that someone likes something different from what he likes. In reality, it is Chapman, and not Aldean, who irrationally fetishizes communities where everyone acts and thinks the same. Chapman has the whole “acting and thinking the same” thing completely backward and is a complete hypocrite. Chapman’s contemptuous, self-righteous, and idiotic comment captures everything about the ideology of mindless conformity that is commonly referred to as the left. 

The Yahoo article also quotes Rev. Jacqui Lewis, who said: “There is no non-racialized way to write a song about lynching.” This statement is false. The concept of lynching has nothing to do with race. People of any race can lynch someone of any race. There is also the fact that Aldean’s song is not about lynching, so I am not sure why Lewis chose to mention lynching at all.

And the article quotes someone named Leigh Love, who wrote: “It’s like he forgot about the January 6 insurrection.” This statement really confuses me. I am not sure what the protest that took place on January 6 has to do with Aldean’s song, or what it is about Aldean’s song that indicates that he forgot about that protest. I’m also not sure why Love considers resistance to an unjust and tyrannical authority to be bad. Love almost seems to be implying that because people resisted authority, everything associated with those people and their ideology is bad and should never be praised or spoken of positively ever again. If this is, indeed, what Love is implying, then her statement is one of the most appalling instances of bigotry, intolerance, cruelty, moral bankruptcy, and aggressive, mindless conformity that I have ever seen in my life. If this is, indeed, what Love is implying, then she is an absolutely terrible person whose despicable views should not be amplified or platformed in any way.

“However, a representative for the video’s production company, TackleBox, told Yahoo Entertainment that ‘Try That in a Small Town’ was shot at a ‘popular filming location outside of Nashville’ and claimed several other projects have been filmed there over the years.”

The use of the word “claimed” implies that the author of the article doubts the veracity of the representative’s statement. The author should have used a more neutral word such as “said.”

“Responding to the growing backlash Tuesday, Aldean continued to deny that his song and video have any racist or pro-gun connotations.”

Similarly, the use of the word “deny” demonstrates bias because it implies that the author doubts what Aldean is saying. Also, I’m not sure if Aldean is denying that his song has pro-gun connotations or merely stating that there is nothing bad about having such connotations. He certainly would be 100% correct if he was doing the latter because, as I explained above, there is nothing bad about being in favor of people’s fundamental rights being respected.

“He and his wife, influencer Brittany Aldean, have posted anti-Joe Biden, anti-vaccine and pro-Trump statements online and they caught flak for spending New Year’s Eve 2021 weekend with Donald Trump.”

I am not sure why someone would catch flak for spending a New Year’s Eve weekend with Donald Trump. Trump is simply a person, with good and bad attributes, just like any other person. Would Yahoo characterize someone as having “caught flak” if that person had spent a weekend with Joe Biden? Also, I am not sure whether the Aldeans have actually posted anti-vaccine statements online, or whether they have merely posted statements expressing opposition to vaccine mandates. Being opposed to forcing people to do something against their will is not the same as being opposed to the thing itself. I am not sure why this is such a difficult concept for Yahoo to grasp.

“In September 2022, the singer parted ways with his publicity company of 17 years, GreenRoom, after Brittany drew the ire of liberal country stars like Maren Morris and Cassadee Pope with what many considered to be transphobic remarks.”

It’s interesting that the article mentions Brittany Aldean’s remarks and what some people consider to be objectionable about them, while completely omitting any mention of Morris’s remarks in response, which were vastly more intolerant, insulting, hurtful, problematic, offensive, and deserving of criticism.

bookmark_border“Is it ever morally acceptable to visit a Confederate historical site?”

Posted on by Marissa

“Is it ever morally acceptable to visit a Confederate historical site?”

Such is the question that was asked in a recent New York Times ethics column.

It sickens and disgusts me that someone would even ask this question.

The Confederacy is my special interest.

It is everything that makes my life worth living.

It is beauty, it is joy, it is happiness, it is freedom.

The fact that I would even need to defend the moral acceptability of the thing that makes my life worth living is appalling and abhorrent, and makes me feel sick to my stomach.

But this very attitude – that the Confederacy is somehow immoral – is not new.

This is the first time that I have seen the question explicitly asked, the first time that I have seen the words “morally acceptable” printed in the same sentence as the words “Confederate historical site.” But the attitude that the Confederacy is somehow immoral is precisely the reason for the pain and trauma that I have experienced over the past three years. This attitude is exactly what motivates the countless atrocities that have been carried out against Confederate statues, monuments, and historical makers of all sorts all over the country and even the world. The atrocities that have been carried out against me.

And the attitude underlying these actions is precisely why they have been so painful and traumatizing, and why I characterize them as atrocities. It is not simply the loss of the statues and monuments – collectively the thing that makes my life worth living – that has inflicted such trauma and pain. It is the fact that their removal is a moral condemnation of the statues themselves, the ideas that they stand for, and the people who like them.

The removal of Confederate statues is a moral condemnation of me.

If statues had been destroyed accidentally – say by an earthquake or a tornado – it would be sad, and I would grieve their loss. But the destruction of the statues is not accidental. It is intentional, systematic, and pervasive. What has made the past three years so bad is that in addition to my grief – layered on top of an already agonizing experience – are the shame, anger, and rage of being almost unanimously rejected, repudiated, and morally condemned by our society.

This intentional destruction is a way of saying: who I am is immoral. Who I am is morally unacceptable.

That is why the removal of Confederate statues hurts so much. Because it is a moral condemnation of me. For being autistic. For being different. For being a rebel. For supporting the losing side. For liking something that most people do not like.

In a society where things that used to be considered immoral – abortion, homosexuality, having a baby out of wedlock – have become almost unanimously accepted, it hurts that the very essence of who I am is morally condemned.

It hurts that someone would even ask the question of whether the very essence of who I am is ever morally acceptable, let alone that someone would answer in the negative, or even think about answering in the negative. (I did not read the column itself, because I know that doing so would be too painful for me to be able to tolerate, but my guess is that the ethicist at the Times did not provide a positive answer.)

It hurts that the question would even be framed in this way.

I am a good person. Many people would likely disagree, but I genuinely believe that. I haven’t done anything wrong by being autistic, by being different, by being a rebel, by supporting the losing side, by liking something that most people do not like. I haven’t done anything to deserve moral condemnation.

So I affirm: not only is visiting a Confederate historical site perfectly morally acceptable; it is morally good. Always. All the time. In fact, it is the most morally good thing imaginable. There is nothing more morally good than Confederate history, the sites, artifacts, and public art associated with it, and the decision to support it by visiting those sites.

The real question that should be asked: is a world without Confederate historical sites morally acceptable?

The answer is no. Obviously not. I feel more strongly about that answer than I do anything else in the world.

bookmark_borderChristopher Columbus in his new home

Posted on by Marissa

It had been a difficult week, with many things weighing on my mind that are hard to put into words. When I woke up in the morning, something made me decide to visit Christopher Columbus. Something told me that he would understand, even though he is not technically alive.

So I took the train to Boston. Upon getting out at Haymarket, I noticed that many things were different from the last time I was there. The Government Center garage was almost completely dismantled, with a huge yellow crane towering over the scene. A glass skyscraper emblazoned with the words “State Street” loomed nearby. There was also a new row of buildings, containing a Gordon Ramsay burger restaurant, in the area where fruit vendors set up their stands on Fridays and Saturdays.

All of these changes, combined with the constant stream of foot traffic flowing around me, caused me to start feeling overstimulated. It was hot and sunny, and I felt dizzy and tired.

I also began to get nervous about Chris himself. He had not officially been unveiled in his new location, and the finishing touches were still being put on the space, so I didn’t know what the setup would be. I didn’t know how publicly visible (if at all) he would be, or how the courtyard would be configured around him. I expected that I would have to do a bit of searching in order to find him, and I was concerned that I might attract curious stares or (God forbid) questions from passerby. I figured there was also a possibility he wouldn’t be publicly visible at all, and I would have made the trip into Boston for nothing. 

Despite this, I crossed over the Rose Kennedy Greenway and into the North End. The narrow streets were filled with people going about their business: tourists taking selfies, kids in matching t-shirts who appeared to be on some sort of field trip, businesspeople rushing to work, young people in trendy activewear returning home from their workouts, employees wheeling boxes of various food products into restaurants. While making my way through the bustling streets, I looked to my left in search of the correct side street to turn onto. To my surprise, there he was, his familiar white marble form unmistakable. 

The sight of him took my breath away. 

I was not expecting Chris to be so easy to find. 

In fact, the sighting of my beloved statue was so unexpected that instead of turning onto that side street, I continued with the flow of foot traffic, not wanting to abruptly change direction and cut people off. I decided to first check out the view of Chris from the opposite direction, and then to circle back. So I ended up on a shady, somewhat secluded street, where an old man sat on some porch steps, chatting on his cell phone. He looked up briefly when he saw me, but quickly turned his attention back to his conversation. Down a short alley and behind a black, metal fence was Chris. Only his back was visible from this view. He stood beside a brick building, presumably the new headquarters for the Knights of Columbus Ausonia Council, which also contains apartments for low-income seniors. I snapped a few shots, then headed back to see my friend from the front.

I returned to the main drag, and then turned onto the side street down which I had glimpsed Chris before. In stark contrast to the bustling streets surrounding it, the little lane was deserted, with the exception of several parked construction vehicles and a lone pedestrian who soon disappeared through the door of an apartment building.

In almost eerie silence, and beneath the baking sun, I was alone with Chris. 

His face had the same pensive look that I remembered, his arms still crossed sternly across his chest. He stood atop a simple granite pedestal, anchored to the ground with concrete. The area around him was bare and stark, the vacant asphalt expanse devoid of any flowers or landscaping. There was no noise other than a county song playing faintly in the distance. A piece of clear plastic wrap, still clinging to his torso, stirred briefly in a faint breeze. 

I was struck by the contrast between Chris’s quiet, seemingly deserted new home and the crowded, noisy streets surrounding it. I was also struck by the seeming indifference of those crowds of people: sightseeing, laughing, chatting, strolling, and working, none of them displaying any outward indication that they cared one iota whether Chris existed or not. No acknowledgement that standing tall in their midst was the marble embodiment of the pain that has tormented me for three years, changed my life completely, and on more than one occasion nearly ended it.

Thanks to a black metal fence, adorned with “no trespassing” signs, I could get no more than about 30 feet from Chris. Hopefully that fence, along with several security cameras nearby, will keep him safe. But the fence did not block him from view. I took pictures from various angles and simply stood and looked at him for a while. 

Do you remember me? I thought. I remember you. You haven’t changed at all. This city has changed, though. This city hates you. It hates me too. So we’re the same.

Are you happy here? I wondered. Are you in pain? Are you angry at what happened to you? Are you sad that you’re not in the park anymore? Do you miss it?

It was nearly noon, the sun almost directly overhead and the pavement baking beneath my feet. 

What do you think about this weather? I wondered Do you like the sun beating down like this? I thought about my Stonewall Jackson statue, and how beautifully he shines when the sun warms his bronze surface. I bet you do. Statues like the hotness. Yeah, you do.

It’s been nice to see you, I thought, as if Chris could somehow hear me (and as if it’s perfectly normal to try to telepathically send your thoughts to a statue). Stonewall Jackson sends his regards. I think you’d like him, if you could meet him.

All right, I’ll be back.

I glanced back at him one more time, sending a silent farewell, before making my way down the deserted side street and rejoining the crowds teeming down the main thoroughfare.

Don’t get me wrong: I am still angry at what happened to Chris. It is an injustice, and always will be. I was upset when I first saw photos of Chris, with his head once more attached to him, at his new location. Upset because the images confirmed his eviction from his rightful place, and because others had learned the news before I did (I saw the photos on social media two days after they were posted).

But spending a few moments with Chris lifted my spirits and was good for my soul. I was glad to see him after three years of not being able to do so.

7/18/2023