The newest right-wing talking point is about the Hasbro toy \u2013 Mr. Potato Head.\u00a0\u00a0Growing up we knew \u201cMr. Potato Head\u201d as a series of plastic items you could stick on a baking potato, personalizing it.\u00a0\u00a0There was the original \u201cMr. Potato Head\u201d, complete with eyes, nose, mustache, mouth and hat. And then came \u201cMrs. Potato Head\u201d, with a purse, lipstick and a bright smile.\u00a0\u00a0They both also came with legs, so that your simple potato could become an anthropomorphic toy.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Later on, Hasbro even provided a plastic potato, so that potato heads could be \u201cstandardized\u201d in size and shape. And they added potato head children and even pets, so entire potato head family groups were created. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
But now the supposed \u201cliberal-radicals\u201d (as opposed to the liberal-moderates, I guess) have allegedly \u201cforced\u201d Hasbro to \u201cde-gender-ize\u201d their toy.\u00a0\u00a0Mr. Potato Head lost his \u201cmister\u201d, and he\u2019s losing his \u201che\u201d too.\u00a0\u00a0It\u2019s just a \u201cpotato head”. While playing with it, you can assign or not assign whatever gender you feel is appropriate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Now it\u2019s not like Mr. Potato Head has lost his \u201ctuber\u201d or his \u201cyams\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0He never had them, he was, in fact, either a real or a fake potato.\u00a0\u00a0The Hasbro Company is simply allowing children playing with their \u201cPotato Toy\u201d to make their own conclusions, or no conclusions at all, about gender.\u00a0\u00a0It\u2019s their toy, and their decision.\u00a0\u00a0Moustache placed over lip-stick smile \u2013 no problem.\u00a0\u00a0And there was no Court order given, and no Antifa associated crowd standing at the company gates in Providence, Rhode Island protesting the \u201chat and moustache\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0Hasbro made a marketing decision.\u00a0\u00a0They hope to sell more of their imagination inducing product.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But for a right-wing crowd still reeling from their complicity in the Insurrection, Mr. Potato Head is a perfect opportunity to change the subject. And while I don\u2019t expect to see too many marches to protect Mr. Potato Head\u2019s \u201cmanhood\u201d, he\/it is being used as a \u201cstraw-man\/potato\u201d argument for a subject that is much closer and dearer to the right-wing heart. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
A lot of the literature I get from the right end of the political spectrum proclaims that us \u201cliberal-radicals\u201d are taking away their religious freedom.\u00a0\u00a0By \u201ctaking away\u201d, what they are saying is that they are threatened by a world were gender identity isn\u2019t \u201cblack and white\u201d, or more specifically \u201cboy and girl\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0We all, even us \u201cliberal-radicals\u201d grew up with that specific knowledge.\u00a0\u00a0We knew what girls had and what boys had, and we knew why \u2013 it was science, either XX or XY.\u00a0\u00a0There was nothing clearer.\u00a0\u00a0And even if the science wasn’t absolutely clear back then, surely our sixth-grade health teacher wasn\u2019t going to talk about it!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But we now know that, like a lot of things we learned in sixth grade, this isn\u2019t quite right.\u00a0\u00a0We know that the XX\/XY thing is really much deeper and more complex.\u00a0\u00a0And we also know that hormonal influences in the womb and during the early years influence gender-identity as well as just having \u201ctubers\u201d and \u201cyams\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0Like most things in life, gender-identity is infinitely complicated; not a two-choice switch, but a dial, a spectrum of possible outcomes.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But that makes folks uncomfortable. And some of their discomfort is \u201cenforced\u201d by their religious beliefs \u2013 \u201cAdam and Eve, not Adam and Steve\u201d; and especially not \u201cArmani and Eastyn\u201d. That\u2019s where the \u201creligious freedom\u201d argument comes in: \u201cYou liberals can\u2019t FORCE me to accept complex gender identities. If you try to \u2013 you are violating my religious right (sic<\/em>)\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are lots of areas in our society where religious rights come up against individual rights.\u00a0\u00a0The tension between those two competing interests in the Bill of Rights are at the heart of some of our biggest political issues:\u00a0\u00a0from abortion to LGBTQIA equality, to gun rights.\u00a0\u00a0We as a nation are committed to allowing individuals to express their differences \u2013 it\u2019s in the First Amendment, right after the Religion part.\u00a0\u00a0And we allow individuals the privacy of their own lives and bodies \u2013 that\u2019s in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.\u00a0\u00a0And most importantly, our Constitution guarantees that Government won\u2019t take a side in religion \u2013 the wording couldn\u2019t be clearer:\u00a0\u00a0\u201cCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Which brings us to their next right-wing talking point:\u00a0\u00a0trans-gendered athletes.\u00a0\u00a0\u201cWe can let those \u2018boys\u2019 compete against girls, it\u2019s not fair\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0But, just like the potatoes and the XX\/XY thing, the question is so much more complex than that.\u00a0\u00a0Yes, there are inequities in how transgender athletes are allowed to compete.\u00a0\u00a0But frankly, most of the inequity is against the transgendered athlete, not their competitors.\u00a0\u00a0And while we can all site examples (NCAA Division III track and field) where it seems unfair, let\u2019s look at the bigger picture.\u00a0\u00a0The argument is that somehow these \u201cmen\u201d are taking advantage of women\u2019s athletics to gain \u201cprestige\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0But the reality is closer to this:\u00a0\u00a0the problems those transgendered athletes create by competing, are so much smaller than the problems they face by expressing their inward gender.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In short, they face so much rejection in society by being \u201cout\u201d, that it is beyond belief that they are willing to accept all of that \u2013 for a medal.\u00a0\u00a0The easy excuse to attack them is to say that they have hormonal advantages that the other women competitors don\u2019t have. But that’s not really so easily answered. Just as gender is not a “binary” choice, neither is hormonal levels or physical development. We don’t know where a trans-gendered athlete falls “on the scale”. Neither do we know where the so-called “normal” competitors fall. It’s just not a black and white issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We can say that the Constitution gives us the “right” to believe what we want. What the Constitution does not do, is give us the “right” to force others to believe what we do. The Constitution forces us to accept diversity- it’s written in “black letter law”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So while we can say \u201cI don\u2019t agree\u201d or \u201cI don\u2019t believe\u201d, neither of those can translate to \u201cyou can\u2019t be\u201d\u00a0\u00a0or \u201cyou can\u2019t do\u201d without infringing on other\u2019s Constitutional rights.\u00a0\u00a0No right is \u201cpre-eminent\u201d, they are all balanced.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n I can put a mustache on a potato, and I can put a lip-sticked smile underneath it, or give it a purse, or a hat \u2013 or not.\u00a0\u00a0It\u2019s my choice, not someone else’s.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Athletics<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Rights<\/h3>\n\n\n\n