💾 Archived View for clemat.is › saccophore › library › ezines › textfiles › ezines › STUCKINTRAFFIC … captured on 2021-12-04 at 18:04:22.

View Raw

More Information

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

�
    =================================================================
                             Stuck In Traffic
            "Current Events, Cultural Phenomena, True Stories"
                        Issue #20 - November, 1996

    Contents:

    Dancing, Knives, and Kisses:
    Crazy things happen when schools rely on law enforcement agencies
    instead of parents.

    The War Against Pond Scum
    A true story about how a good person was cheated just because he
    wasn't native to the United States.

    Why Worry About The Millennium?
    Is Fox Television's new show, The Millennium just a more intense
    version of the X-Files?


    ===================================
                         Current Events
    Dancing, Knives, and Kisses

    Item: A local county school board has forbidden Physical Education
    teachers from teaching a popular dance, "The Macarena," in
    government schools because it is "too suggestive."

    Item: A little girl enrolled in a government elementary school
    brings a steak knife to school in her lunch box.  Not because she
    is mad and wants to hurt anyone, but because she wants to use it
    to cut up her lunch.  When her teacher discovers the little girl
    cutting up her lunch with a steak knife she is taken to the
    principal's office, expelled from school, and the school files
    police charges against her for bringing a dangerous weapon to
    school.  The little girl, an honors student, misses weeks from
    school and is forced to appear in front of a county judge and the
    local school board to answer for her crimes.  She has to beg to be
    allowed to return to school.  She has to promise never to bring
    another dangerous weapon to school again.

    Item: A little boy enrolled in a government elementary school
    kisses a little girl, one of his classmates, on the cheek during a
    classroom party.  His teacher publicly humiliates the child in
    front of the class, yelling at him.  The little boy is marched to
    the principal's office.  His parents are called.  The little boy
    is threatened with expulsion from school.  Harassment charges are
    filed against him.  And perhaps most importantly to this little
    boy, he is denied participation from his class party.  There have
    been no reports as to whether the little girl objected.

    The only word I can think of to describe these events is hysteria.
    And they are becoming more and more the norm in government
    education.

    Media institutions across the country have jumped on these stories
    and waged a campaign of feigned indignation that these things
    could have happened.  And it has generated a groundswell of public
    sympathy for the child victims of this hysteria.  Callers to local
    talk show have called for the teachers' resignation.  Editorial
    writers have called these events poor judgement.  Politicians,
    have used these events to score points with voters.  It is an
    election season after all.

    The outrage is justified of course.  Any reasonable person can see
    that in each of these incidents, more harm than good is being done
    to the child victims of these school policies.

    These incidents are not isolated or unrelated.  They are
    reflections of some fundamental problems in the mind set of
    government education and deserve to be analyzed in detail.

    The easiest of these incidents to dissect is the banning of "The
    Macarena" from government schools.  There are two aspects of
    teaching "Physical Education" to school age children.  First there
    is the lesson that exercise is good for you and can be enjoyable.
    Even painful strenuous exercise is good for the body and can be
    fun..  "No pain, no gain" and all that.  This is not very
    controversial.  But the other aspect of "physical education" is
    that we can express ourselves through movement, dance, and other
    sorts of physical activities.  Not only is exercise good for the
    body, it can be good for the soul.  Learning balance and grace and
    rhythm is just as beneficial as strength and speed and endurance.
    And nothing teaches these things better than dancing.  But
    expression is impossible without interpretation and that's where
    the controversies arise.  A dance may be interpreted as a
    beautiful expression through movement by some and interpreted as
    lewd and crude by others.  It is the school boards' job to balance
    the interests and interpretations of the parents.  By banning "the
    Macarena" from government schools' P.E.  classes, the school
    boards are abdicating their responsibility to balance the
    interests of all the parents and are unrealistically attempting to
    insulate children from learning about the expressive aspect of
    physical education.

    In the same spirit, one can't mature into an adult without
    learning how to use a sharp knife safely.  A proper parent teaches
    children at an early age that sharp knives are not toys, but tools
    that must be carefully handled.  The parent first teaches the
    child how to hold a knife safely.  How to carry a knife so that if
    the child trips or has an accident, they won't poke out an eye or
    cut themselves.  Then as the child develops a mastery of these
    basic skills, the parent moves on to teaching the child how to
    safely and properly use knives without causing danger to
    themselves or others.  Any parent that tries to insulate their
    children from ever coming into contact with a sharp knife is out
    of touch with reality and denying their child an important lesson.

    But it is also true that these lessons have to be closely
    monitored by a caring adult during the early stages.  And so it is
    not unreasonable for a school to forbid children from bringing
    sharp knives to school.  Lunchtime in even the most disciplined
    government schools are wildly chaotic and unstructured.  Teachers
    simply can't keep an eye on so many kids at one time, especially
    if they are going to get any lunch for themselves.  But to expel a
    child from school for this simple rule infraction and to charge
    her with "possession of a dangerous weapon," and to publicly
    humiliate her in front of the local school board for simply
    exercising one of life's basic skills that she apparently had
    successfully learned, is nothing short of cruelty.

    But the challenges associated with learning to use a knife are
    nothing compared to the difficulty of teaching children about the
    appropriateness of public displays of affection.  When is it O.K.
    for a boy to kiss a girl?  It's a very slippery concept because
    the situations are highly dependent on the context of the
    situation and the cultural background of the people involved.  You
    can't write down a set of rules for these sorts of interactions
    because they go far beyond mere etiquette.  At some level,
    children have to absorb these lessons by watching the adults
    around them and learning by example about what behaviors are
    appropriate in different situations.  They have to learn through
    trial and error how to recognize when a simple act of affection
    will be welcomed by the recipient and when it won't.  Mistakes are
    going to happen.  And learning how to deal with those mistakes and
    repair the damage is just as much a part of growing up as anything
    else.  If the little boy in questions kisses a girl when she
    doesn't welcome it, then he needs to learn to communicate that his
    intentions were sincere if misguided.  Likewise, growing children
    need to learn how to avoid "sending the wrong signals" and to
    handle unwanted advances when they occur.  Yes, it was probably
    inappropriate for such a young boy to kiss his classmate in that
    particular situation.  But by punishing that little boy so
    severely for kissing his classmate on the cheek, the government
    school runs the risk of frightening the little boy from ever
    taking a chance at affection again and stunting his emotional
    growth, denying him one of life's most important lessons.

    The bottom line is that government schools can't insulate children
    from the real world and they shouldn't try.  Can you expect that
    children will never learn that dancing can "be suggestive"?  Can
    you expect children to grow up without ever learning to use a
    sharp knife?  Can you expect people not to kiss each other?  Nope.
    No way.  Not on your life.

    The fundamental problem with these events is that the heavy hand
    of the state is inappropriately being used to try to teach kids
    these lessons.  The state, even in the form of local county
    government, is simply not delicate enough to deal with these
    situations.  It is too brutal.  The state is set up to deal with
    criminals, not to raise children.  The state can neither prevent
    children from learning about the expressive powers of their bodies
    nor teach them the difference between beautiful and lewd dancing.
    The state can neither prevent children from coming into contact
    from sharp knives nor teach them how to use one properly.  They
    state can neither prevent children from learning about personal
    relationships and affection nor teach them the social rules
    governing these relationships.  These lessons can and must be
    taught by parents and other caring adults.

    It is a grave mistake for government schools to be turning to the
    state to teach these lessons to children instead of turning to the
    parents.

    ==================================

    "He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already
    earned my contempt.  He has been given a large brain by mistake,
    since for him the spinal cord would suffice." - Mark Twain

    ==================================
                            True Story
    The War Against Pond Scum

    Talk about a slap in the face.  You never think much about crime
    and dishonesty and fraud until you become a victim of it.  You
    _say_ you are against crime.  You _say_ you are sympathetic to the
    plights of the victims of crime.  You vote for the politicians
    that convince you that they are the most "tough on crime." But it
    never quite sinks in.  You never quite believe that there are
    people in this world laying in wait to prey on others until you
    see it first hand.

    The shocking revelation to me was that these people who would take
    advantage of others aren't necessarily just wild-eyed, violent
    criminals like those you see on TV cop shows.  They are just petty
    frauds.  Scam artists.  Again.  Intellectually I was aware of
    these folks but having never really been victimized by that sort,
    it's hard to become emotionally aware of the problem.

    But I became aware of a petty fraud taking advantage of someone a
    few weeks ago and it really opened my eyes to how low some people
    can really sink.

    In the office where I work there is a oriental fellow, I'll call
    him Mike just to protect his privacy.  The area I work in has lots
    of people and I've never had the opportunity to work with Mike and
    I can't say I know him personally.  In fact I'm not even sure
    where he is from originally.  English is definitely not his
    primary language.  He knows English well enough to get by at work,
    but he clearly struggles with it.  And although he's not "fresh
    off the boat" by any means, I discovered that he just doesn't know
    that much about American culture and how things are done in the
    United States.

    The shocking thing I discovered is that there are people just
    waiting to take advantage of people like Mike.  OK.  Call me
    naive.  Like I said, intellectually I knew there were people like
    that.  But it wasn't until I heard about a recent experience that
    Mike had that it really sunk in with me.

    I had stopped by Mike's office to talk to his officemate, Jay,
    about a technical problem but when I got there, the two of them
    were discussing Mike's legal options and I got drawn into the
    story.

    It seems that Mike had been doing some moving over the previous
    weekend and had gone to rent a truck from one of the local truck
    rental agencies.  The typical deal from one of these agencies, in
    my area at least, is that you can rent a small moving truck for an
    afternoon for about 20 or 30 dollars.  Which was about the price
    that Mike had been quoted when he showed up at the rental place to
    rent a truck for the day.  However, the so-called "person" (I
    think of him more like pond scum) had told Mike that he had to put
    down a deposit on the truck in the neighborhood of $100.00
    dollars.  Now I have never had to do this when renting a truck but
    I suppose it's not totally out of the question.  But what this
    person did was go ahead and charge Mike's credit card for both the
    rental fee and the "deposit." Furthermore, the truck that Mike was
    given had no gas in it and he had to fill up the gas tank as soon
    as he left the rental place.  When Mike returned the truck, the
    rental place person directed Mike to the gas station next door to
    fill up the tank before coming into the rental place.  Mike,
    thinking this was standard practice paid for the tank of gas
    thinking he would get reimbursed for the gas.  But as it turned
    out the rental place owner informed Mike that the rules were that
    you had to return the truck with a full tank of gas.

    Not being as proficient in English as he would like, Mike had a
    difficult time explaining to the owner that the truck's tank was
    not full when he received the truck.  Or at least the rental place
    owner pretended he didn't understand what Mike was saying.

    But it gets worse.  No where in Mike's paperwork for the rental
    transaction does it show that the "deposit" was credited back to
    his credit card account.  Apparently that's what had started the
    whole discussion.  Mike had asked Jay about how rental
    transactions were supposed to be handled.  From what he could
    tell, his $30 rental had cost him close to $150 dollars by the
    time he added up the "deposit", the rental fee, and the full gas
    tank.

    Well, this is insane of course.  And Mike had a pretty good idea
    that he had been cheated but he wasn't sure just how it had
    happened and he most certainly wasn't sure how to handle the
    situation.

    So we explained to him that a "deposit" is something you get back
    when you return the equipment in the same condition that you got
    it.  Normally, rental places don't even charge it to your credit
    card.  They just take your credit card number, but they don't
    charge the deposit to your account unless they re actually going
    to collect it.  We can only guess why the rental place person had
    charged the account that $100.00 deposit.  And the other thing we
    explained to Mike was that the standard practice when renting
    vehicles is that you are required to pay for your own gas.  But
    you are supposed to receive a full tank of gas when you receive
    the truck and you return it with a full tank of gas.  That way you
    only pay for the gas you use.  Clearly, the rental company had
    managed to get Mike to pay for a tank of gas that he hadn't used.

    Mike has been given the shaft.  Pure and simple.  And I feel
    certain that it was for no other reason than the fact that Mike's
    English was less than perfect, he simply didn't know what to
    expect in business around here, and he's very polite and
    non-confrontational.

    But Mike's biggest surprise in the whole affair came when we
    started to tell him what to do about it.  We told him that the
    first thing he needed to do was call his credit card company and
    tell them not to pay the disputed bill.  We explained that he
    would then need to write a letter to the credit card company
    explaining the transaction in detail and ask them to resolve the
    dispute.  Mike was amazed.  He had no idea that this is one of the
    functions of a credit card company.  He had no idea that this was
    even an option to him.  Then we told him he needs to make 2 copies
    of the letter and all the paperwork and send copies to both the
    rental company and the Attorney General's office?  The Attorney
    General?  Mike didn't even know that he could report these folks
    for fraud.  Or I suppose he knew, but he simply had no idea how to
    go about pursuing legal action.

    So anyway, we helped him look up the Attorney General's office in
    the phone book so he could get the address of where to send the
    complaint.  And we told him what to say in the letter to the
    credit card company and stuff like that.  I'm not sure that we got
    it all exactly right, But we gave him a good start.

    The sad thing, as I told him, was that even if he got his deposit
    back and got reimbursed for the gas.  It would cost him much more
    that than his loss simply in the time he would be spending on the
    phone and writing letters.

    But we urged him to do it anyway.  That's the only way to see that
    justice is done.  That's the only way to make sure that scum like
    that rental place owner won't cheat someone else in the future.

    Mike said he would.

    I know good and well that if I had rented a truck from the same
    man, I wouldn't have had the problem.  Since I could communicate
    in English and I had obviously grown up in the United States, he
    knew that I knew what to expect.  I guess one of the advantages of
    being a native born American is that you aren't quite as easy a
    target for petty thieves.

    The whole incident made me want to go volunteer in some sort of
    organization.  Some organization that would help teach newcomers
    to the country how things are done in the United States.  Some
    organization that could tell immigrants where to go for help, how
    to report crimes and fraud to government agencies, and that sort
    of thing.

    Even though I wasn't directly involved in the incident, it made me
    want to wage a holy war against the pond scum

    ==================================
                         L'Ouverture
                The Black Marketplace of Ideas

              P.O.Box 8565, Atlanta, Georgia, 30306
            e-mail: cudjoe@leveller.org (404) 572-9141

                       Sample issue: $2

    ==================================
                    Cultural Phenomena
    Why Worry About The Millenium

    I first heard about Fox Television's new show, "Millennium" at the
    1996 World Science Fiction convention.  Planes were flying
    overhead carrying long banners that had nothing but the name of
    the show on them.  No one knew much of anything about the show
    except that it was created by Chris Carter, the same man that
    brought us the X-Files.  But that was enough to get people
    interested.  Since the X-Files is one of the most popular shows on
    TV, having spawned a whole genre of copycat television shows on
    other networks, people wondered what Carter was going to do to
    stay ahead of the pack.

    As the October 26th premiere drew nearer more information started
    coming out about the show.  Lance Henrikson was the lead
    character, playing Frank Black, an ex-FBI agent whose ability to
    track down serial killers is helped by his paranormal "gift" of
    being able to see inside the mind of the killer and see what the
    killer sees.  While most science fiction fans were pleased with
    the choice of Henrikson, there were many concerns that Millennium
    was going to be just another X-Files show turned up a notch.

    And in some sense the criticism is accurate.  The lead character
    is essentially a cop/detective.  He no longer works for the FBI,
    but is employed by a shadowy organization called The Millennium
    Group.  His job is to solve murders and other crimes that the
    normal police aren't able to solve, generally because the crime is
    tinged by some element of the paranormal or the unknown.

    But Millennium turns loose of the X-Files moorings of science and
    rationality and takes a flying leap into the unknown.  In
    Millennium, there is no Dana Scully to play the calm,
    dispassionate voice of science in opposition to Fox Mulder's
    theories of paranormal activity and government cover-ups.

    The premise of Millennium is that the end of the world is coming,
    as foretold by ancient prohecies.  Maybe not the literal end of
    the world but the end as we all know it.  And as part of the
    coming Millennium, evil forces are being unleashed on the world,
    causing fear and chaos.  These forces manifest themselves by
    taking over people, turning them into evil minded killers
    hell-bent on fulfilling the evil prohesy.  So far these evil
    forces haven't been explained in any more detail than that.  Most
    of the world in the show is unaware that of any connection between
    the crazy serial killers that are slowly becoming more and more
    common.  Frank Black, even though he has had more than his fair
    share of encounters with "the mind of the killer" is himself
    unsure of just what's going on.  When asked by a local policeman
    if he "really believes" in all that prophecy stuff, simply
    replies, "there are those of us who can't just stand by and let
    this happen." The point being whether or not the evil being
    unleashed on the world is due to the fulfillment of prohesy or
    just a product of the crazy times we live in, they have to do
    something about it.

    So unlike the X-Files, where the supernatural and the paranormal
    is constantly hinted at, but always remains frustratingly just
    around the corner.  In the world of Millennium, the supernatural
    is a given, even if not well understood or believed in by all.
    One worries that without the evil force in the world remaining
    unknown and elusive, it would destabilize the show, but it
    doesn't.  It actually lends itself to some continuity between
    episodes.  Instead of chasing a different paranormal phenomena
    each week, the way Mulder and Scully do on the X-Files, Frank
    Black is on an endless quest to foil the same evil force.

    And evil it is.  True to form, Fox Television is pushing the
    boundaries of network television to the limits.  Each episode
    warns viewers of its violent and disturbing content.  The warning
    are well justified.  Each episode, Frank ventures from his perfect
    wife and child, in their perfect suburban home into the seedy side
    of the world, where the chaos and the evil take the firmest hold.
    We see strip joints and drug deals.  Gang violence and cold
    blooded murder.  But it goes beyond the normal tough side of town
    stuff.  Frank Blacks psychic flashes of insight cause him to see
    the world as the deranged killers see the world, full of blood
    drenched walls and grotesque half-human figures.

    And Millennium manages to show us violence in an intense personal
    way without any of the traditional trappings of violence that
    censors complain about.  Yes you see lots of blood.  You see
    victims being attacked through Frank's flashes.  But they are so
    brief and shadowy that you can't say you actually saw the
    violence, Just given an impression of it.

    But the impressions aren't all.  In the premier episode, Frank and
    a fellow detective rescue a man that has been buried underground
    in a coffin with his eyes and mouth surgically sewn shut while his
    deranged attacker is deciding whether to kill him or not.  (This
    particular killer has a personal mission of ridding the world of
    aids victims.  So he captures likely suspects and buries them
    underground while he has their blood tested.) The scene where this
    man is rescued from his tomb is the most intense scene of horror
    I've ever seen on television and yet, it's difficult to claim that
    it's "violent." Disturbing?  Yes.  A victim of violence?  Yes.  Is
    the scene violent?  Wellllllll, not really.

    It seems as if one of the basic hooks built into Millennium is to
    see just how intense a show they can create and still remain on
    network TV.

    But Millennium is more that just a gimmick.  It's more than Chris
    Carter trying to see how much he can get away with.  If that were
    the only thing carrying the show, it wouldn't even be worth
    mentioning.

    The thing that sets Millennium apart from the X-Files, and the
    thing that makes Millennium worth watching is that Frank Black has
    a personal interest in fighting the evil forces in the world.
    While the recent seasons of X-files have given more and more air
    time to Fox Mulder's personal motivations, those motivations are
    usually secondary to the main plot line.  And whereas in the
    X-File, the paranormal forces and the government spooks are always
    trying to stay hidden, in Millennium, the evil forces are out to
    get Frank and most importantly, it is out to get Frank's wife
    Catherine (played by Megan Gallagher) and his daughter (played by
    Brittany Tiplady).  Periodically Frank receives in the mail
    polaroids of his family taken by an unknown stalker, as if the
    evil forces are threatening Frank, telling him not to get too
    close.  And so the game between good and evil begins.

    ================================
    Stuck In Traffic

    Stuck In Traffic is a monthly magazine dedicated to evaluating
    current events, examining cultural phenomena, and relating true
    stories.

    Why "Stuck In Traffic"?
    Because getting stuck in traffic is good for you.  It's an
    opportunity to think, ponder, and reflect on all things, from the
    personal to the global.  As Robert Pirsig wrote in _Zen and the
    Art of Motorcycle Maintenance_, "Let's consider a reevaluation of
    the situation in which we assume that the stuckness now occurring,
    the zero of consciousness, isn't the worst of all possible
    situations, but the best possible situation you could be in.
    After all, it's exactly this stuckness that Zen Buddhists go to so
    much trouble to induce...."

    Submissions
    Submissions to Stuck In Traffic are always welcome.  If you have
    something on your mind or a personal story you'd like to share,
    please do.  You don't have to be a great writer to be published
    here, just sincere.

    Contact Information
    All queries, submissions, subscription requests, comments, and
    hate-mail about Stuck In Traffic should be sent to Calvin Stacy
    Powers preferably via E-mail (powers@interpath.com) or by mail
    (2012 Talloway Drive, Cary, NC USA 27511).

    Copyright Notice

    Stuck In Traffic is published and copyrighted by Calvin Stacy
    Powers who reserves all rights.  Individual articles are
    copyrighted by their respective authors.  Unsigned articles are
    authored by Calvin Stacy Powers.  Permission is granted to
    redistribute and republish Stuck In Traffic for noncommercial
    purposes as long as it is redistributed as a whole, in its
    entirety, including this copyright notice.  For permission to
    republish an individual article, contact the author.

    E-mail Subscriptions

    E-mail subscriptions to the ASCII text edition of Stuck In Traffic
    are free.  Send your subscription request to either address listed
    above.

    Print Subscriptions
    Subscriptions to the printed edition of Stuck In Traffic are
    available for $10/year.  Make checks payable to Calvin Stacy
    Powers and send to the address listed above.  Individual issues
    are available for $2.


    Archives

    The ASCII text editions of Stuck In Traffic is archived on the
    internet by etext.org at the following URL:
    gopher://gopher.etext.org/11/Zines/StuckInTraffic

    Trades
    If you publish a `zine and would like to trade issues or ad-space,
    send your zine or ad to either address above.

    Alliances
    Stuck in Traffic supports the Blue Ribbon Campaign for free speech
    online.  See <URL:http://www.eff.org /blueribbon.html> for more
    information.  Stuck In Traffic also supports the Golden Key
    Campaign for electronic privacy and security.  See
    <URL:http://www.eff.org/goldkey.html>

    =================================================================