Two stories ...contradictory
A Toronto Councillor tweets the word "hot" a lot. The Mayor says it's inappropriate. The Councillor should apologize. The Councillor says, yes he should and does. But still tweets the word "hot" a lot.
Where does it say the Mayor of a municipality has authority to act as arbiter of language? Why would any Mayor imagine being elected automatically endows that level of judgment?
Incredibly, some do.
The Councillor is described in the Star story as "flirtatious". He is said to be sixty- three years old. What kind of word is that to describe a tweeting sixty-three year old.?
Presumably something about his personality, revealed by vocabulary, was audible during his campaign for office. Could it have been part of his appeal ?
Where does the Mayor get off admonishing a councillor on suitable language?
Concurrently the saga was being waged about whether or not the Mayor should participate in the ten day celebration of homosexuality in Toronto
He doesn't want to.
Those who want him to, say if he doesn't ,people will say he is homophobic, even if he is not.
Some will say that . A former Mayor of Toronto, John Sewell , in the seventies, appeared on a platform of speakers arguing for gay rights. Some said he was homosexual because he supported gay rights. He wasn't. They said it anyway . He was a one-term Mayor
He also had the audacity to suggest the Toronto police were accountable to the community. That was the real reason for his single term in office.
A former Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau made a statement:
"The State has no business in the bedrooms of the nation "...or words to that effect. Laws proclaiming homosexuality a crime, were being changed.
It was said Trudeau was homosexual. He wasn't either. Didn't stop them from saying it.
So they may say the current Toronto Mayor is homophobic. Some may think that's fine.
Whether he is or he isn't ...is that not also O.K. Does he not have a right to be wrong?
While talking about one person's right to be a flaming drag queen, should we not include a person's right to be the heterosexual opposite. ...however that might express itself..... I can't think of a way right now..... except maybe a Speedo swim suit!!!!!
Or... here's an original idea.... maybe we should just consider the subject an entirely private matter...not suitable for public debate.
And while we're at it ....let's not any of us presume to dictate what vocabulary one might use to express him or herself . It is very much tied up in a person's personality.
If the State has no business in the bedroom, it surely has no business in the psyche either.
Saturday, 2 July 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
I believe that Mayor Ford has every right not to attend any of the pride events if he does not want to. Just because previous mayors did should not make it an obligation for all. This is one argument that has been cited as a reason for why he should. Nonsense!
I agree that no mayor - or councillor - has the right to dictate the words used by others, period. We have had a few of those who would try in public office in this town. I wonder what it is about being elected politically that seems to give the right to laud it over others in all aspects of life, not just seeing to public business matters.
Post a Comment