There was a bit of a scuffle at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch this past week because the cover of their weekend magazine (at least, I think that's what it is) featured an interracial couple. The story was about "best places to kiss", which is a fairly stupid idea for a story, and not at all about interracial couples or dating.
St. Louis was not in an uproar, but it was noted on the paper's blog that they received more than a few comments and criticisms of the decision to use an interracial couple in the cover photo. The ensuing comments on the blog are a real treat if you want to read some backwards-ass thinking, but to be fair, there were far more positive comments than negative.
I bring this up not to bemoan the state of race relations or progressive attitudes, but to celebrate them. I read through most of the comments about the picture on the P-D website, and the arguments against interracial marriage were put forth by only 6 or 7 people. The vast majority of the replies and other commentary were positive and from 10-20 times as many individuals.
I think, then, that we can begin ignoring the vocal minority in this matter completely. There is a time when you must strive to educate and change people, so that you can achieve a progressive-thinking majority. But in the area of interracial coupling, we've got that. Something like 3/4 people think interracial dating is fine. And I'd bet dollars to donuts that a good portion of that remaining 1/4 are older folks who just won't change. But they will shuffle off this mortal coil. So why argue this? There is nothing to gain, as those final holdouts are either ignorant racists or stubborn. And we don't need them. They are, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant.
If St. Louis, a "flyover city" with significant racial tensions, can only serve up only 1 racist for every 10 progressives (on this topic, anyway), we are probably okay.
Also, the next time you have to argue gay marriage with someone, anti-miscegenation laws would be a great comparison to make. The exact same arguments applied then: it was against the natural order, it would lead to immorality, and so forth. Those who oppose gay marriage now will, in 30 years, be in the same position as those who opposed "race mixing". We will pity you and wonder how you could not see beyond your own prejudices.
Worst of all, you will be viewed just like anti-interracial types are viewed today: irrelevant.
April 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment