But no matter what Foxx meant, the intended effect, from what I have gathered from the comments, but heard and read, on different sites, was quite different.
Many of us who went through the upheavals of the 60s like to take a little solace from the perception that we have made, at least, some progress. Unfortunately, all too often, as I look round, I have to admit that any progress made was, at best, very limited.
". . . it's necessary right now, until we can get to the place where we don't recognize whether a person is Black or White or Asian or Native American."
"When," I immediately asked myself, "is that going to be?" Here we are, more than 40 years after the signing of the Civil Rights Act outlawing racial discrimination and we are still delineating one group from another based solely on the color of their skins. "Why?" I asked.
The answer came to me almost as quickly as the question.
The very fact that we "need" racially - or religiously, or sexually, or orientationally, or culturally - defined organizations is the very reason we no longer need them.
If, as the woman quoted above, I listen to or see an entertainer and think of that person as being of a particular race, gender, religion, orientation, or whatever - then I am, at that moment, betraying the very standards I preach and promote. As long as I separate people into groups of whatever definition, I am segregating, and, because I am segregating, I am discriminating.
And, with that said, as long as we, as a society, allow the divisions of people by whatever classification we might choose - is there a "Society for Balding, Gaelic Opinion Writers from
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
