Tuesday, June 26, 2007


"Gay pride in Toronto."

"Miss Fatty competition in Russia."

All over the world minority groups are expressing pride in themselves. But doesn't pride come before a fall?

Shouldn't society operate for the benefit of the majority of its citizens?

Will society eventually become the plaything of militant minorities demanding special rights based upon:

race, age, religion, health, diverse sexual preferences (with members of opposite sex, members of same sex, animals, children, etc), body size and shape, gender, physical and/or mental disabilities (or abilities), social class, etc?

(photos from Reuters)

NOTE: Sadly, discussion about how to achieve the correct balance between the rights of all minority groups (existing and potential) and the rights of the majority generally seems to gravitate towards the gay issue, a polarizing subject where real freedom of speech often seems to be missing. Surely this highlights a problem that minority groups can pose!


Neo said...

I completely agree Dan, it can be added to the list with greed, selfishness etc.etc.


Granny said...

Hi Dan. I'm not quite sure what you mean.

Usually it should be majority rule but sometimes the majority is wrong.

C.S. Monkus/ L. Sparrow said...


From my Toronto perspective.

The Idea of Pride, the reason for gathering, to have pride in our accomplishments, to be proud - rather than selfloathing gay men, lesbians, bisexuals...transexuals.... etc. etc... is quite beautiful.... the actuality of the event is mostly a big party now though....

1992 I marched for the first time ever.... and people threw eggs at us, told us we were going to hell.... yelled at us..... but we marched, willing to be ourselves instead of hiding.... that is what it is supposed to be about.... the pink triangele, remembering the pink triangle....remembering that people are murdered in different countries because of their sexual orientation ....

but the prode celebrations of today .... these kids have no idea...... sad really.

Peace and Blessings.

Lil Sparrow

Daniel said...

Thanks Neo, Granny and Lil.

It's an interesting issue contrasting the priority that society as a whole should and must be given to ensure its survival versus the rights of minority groups.

Is it possible that society could eventually become fragmented and unworkable because of pressure from minority groups?

betmo said...

there wouldn't be any 'minorities' if the majorities didn't marginalize them and give them that status.

Granny said...

Betmo said it better than I.

If the majority had ruled in 60's Alabama and Mississippi, we'd still have segregated restaurants and bathrooms.

Maybe someday the word "minority" will be relegated to the trash heap and we can consider the worth of each individual as themselves.

ninglun said...

Betmo and Granny, well said. I hesitated about commenting on this, as I have actually participated in Gay Pride and even (because of M) in Asian Gay Pride occasions. Better than shame!

Also, Daniel, you are in a minority yourself, if you think about it. Think of what the majority has given us in Australia this past eleven years...

C.S. Monkus/ L. Sparrow said...

Unfortunately ....

I believe that the majority of individuals in this world are more than happy to be treated like sheep and to follow follow follow .... right to the butcher yard.

Lets face it, minorities get the ball rolling and dictate to the majority what to do, how to do .... the final vote is the majority .... but it is the minority that gets the ball rolling.

my two cents!

Peace and Blessings

pissed off patricia said...

I think I would be more proud of something I could accomplish because of who I am and what I am able to do for others. But that's just me.

Daniel said...

It's an interesting proposition, Granny, a society that will operate with everyone being considered as an individual. There is no precedence for this in the animal or insect world! I'm unsure just how it would work.

Ninglun and Lil, I know you have both made sacrifices for your cause and admire you both for it!

Betmo, your comment is insightful as always.

Patricia, well said. The problem as I see it is in trying to knit individuality into a functioning society.

Granny said...

I probably didn't say that too well.

If minority meant only a fewer number, that would be one thing. Here, at least, it has come to mean "less than".

I'm not talking about special privileges, just equal rights. I'd like my younger son as well as my elder to be free to love and marry the person of his choice, a right I take for granted.

And I'd love for my girls to never hear the word nigger again.

In that respect, my country has a long way to go.

Daniel said...

I really don't think the world has changed much (except technologically speaking) in the last four thousand years, Granny.

We are still fighting and feuding and grabbing, still arguing about the merits of various religions, and the masses are still controlled and manipulated by a small minority.

The more things change the more they stay the same!

Naj said...

Will society eventually become the plaything of militant minorities demanding special rights based upon race, age, religion, health, diverse sexual preferences

Inverted discrimination is what I hate even more!

That said, I think if someone has a body like that in the first picture, he should be forbidden to cover it. :)

Daniel said...

Sadly, he has no interest in females, Naj. What a waste, eh?

marcelproust said...

O Daniel, Daniel, Daniel, you have a blind spot about gay issues, don't you! Or else it is a scab which you just can't help picking at.

The reason that the debate seems to gravitate to the gay issue is because that's always where you can't help pointing it to.

Daniel said...

I don't recall you commenting on this blog about anything else but the gay issue, Marcel. Perhaps it's you who have a problem?

After all, I did mention a large numbers of groups both real and potential. Cheers!

marcelproust said...

Daniel, you're right: I do have a problem - with your views on that topic.

I stayed away from your blog for many months because of that. On my first return I scrolled down past 7 posts which, even if I didn't agree with them totally, I agreed generally with the sentiments behind them, and, lo and behold, I found you harping again on the same old topic which had kept me away. Moreover, what you were saying seemed to me contradictory to some of your other sentiments with which I am in agreement, such as:

"we humans are easily conditioned, first by our parents, then our wider family, community, state, then country. From the beginning, we are told that this is good, that is bad, this is how males and females should behave, this is how worthwhile students, employees, sportspeople, citizens, etc, must act. To reinforce this we are taught about laws which govern our behaviour, the punishment that will follow should we deviate. All along, questioning of anything is strongly discouraged"


"our world could be a wonderful place and life a beautiful, peaceful experience with everyone caring for each other and sharing, with things like honesty and generosity and humility and selflessness being valued once again."

I don't generally see the need to comment on points with which I simply or even just approximately agree. But when I come across your (to me) surprising belligerence to minorities, including gay people, but also, it seems, extending to fat people, disabled people, but particularly gay people, I am afraid I just can't help myself. And that is because I am an interested party. Actually, I am fat, too, but that is a less pressing issue: the legal disabilities are fewer and I could always go on a diet.

I shall try to control myself more in the future.

Daniel said...

What you are suggesting, Marcel, is a dangerous form of censorship. And you are not the only one to try to impose it on me!

I never visit people's blogs and tell them what they should or shouldn't write about. To do so would be pretentious, entirely out of place, discourteous.

P.S. I have a bit of a weight problem myself! Cheers.