[speedgibson] Speed Gibson: Socio-Economic Bigotry

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by Speed Gibson:
Socio-Economic Bigotry
http://speedgibson.powerblogs.com/posts/1238204546.shtml


   It's been a long week at work, one with several clear examples of
   Murphy's law, like a well-timed power hit during a data recovery. But
   we got the pieces back together today, so I'm ready to take on a
   subject that's been bothering me all week, the "anti-bullying" bill.
   Here is Minnesota Public Radio's account of SF 971:

     A bill that would expand schools' anti-bullying policies goes
     before a Senate education committee for a vote next week.
     The bill sponsored by Democratic Sen. Scott Dibble of Minneapolis
     lists more than a dozen characteristics that could be targets for
     harassment. They include sexual orientation, socio-economic status
     and national origin.
     Schools must prohibit bullying in any form, but the only examples
     now listed are race, religion and gender. Dibble includes more
     examples so it's clear other forms of bullying won't be tolerated.
     But Republican Sen. Gen Olson of Minnetrista questioned the need to
     list so many characteristics when all bullying is already banned.

   I'll add that I saw a public school official on TV more or less say
   "so what?" in that they don't have staff to enforce the current law.
   What - an unfunded mandate? From the DFL?
   But let me focus on the language I found offensive in this bill:
   socio-economic status. As Sen. Olson says, bullying is already against
   the law for any reason. Why this specific clarification? Are the brats
   in Maple Grove taking too much lunch money from the kids in Brooklyn
   Park?
   Let's get something straight here. The kids where I live take care of
   themselves. They don't find someone else to fight their battles for
   them, watching, holding their coat. But beyond that, that
   "socio-economic status" is meaningful here is insulting. I even object
   to "socio-economic" being a "status" let alone legally actionable.
   This is the language of bigots.
   All you busybodies over in St. Paul, if you really want to do
   something meaningful for those in these "social-economic statuses" you
   profess to support, how about some vouchers to give them a real choice
   in education?