Listen & Be Heard Weekly Archives

Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas is protesting the war in Iraq. As the parishioners stand outside at funerals of U.S. soldiers, they scream loudly of injustice. Trouble is, these protesters aren?t anti-war. What they?re protesting is the defense of a country that allows homosexuals to live relatively free lives. These zealots are of the understanding that God is punishing the U.S. for permitting homosexuals to be regarded as normal. They look upon the soldiers? deaths as justice. The injustice is the defense of our nation. Not exactly loving thy neighbor, is it? I won?t provide the link to the church?s website in this column. Even the domain name was enough to make me cringe and I don?t consider myself easily shocked. However, I?m always thrown for a loop at this level of bias, lack of compassion and ignorance, manifested in vile actions.

Low-income, unattractive, and non-Caucasian people go missing every day. Do we hear about them? Maybe a blurb on the evening news the night it happens, disappearing into oblivion the next day. But, how many months of coverage did the Scott and Lacy Peterson case warrant? By the time Peterson was sentenced, we knew everything there was to know about the attractive, white, upper-middle class married couple. I suppose it?s hard to argue with ratings, but Natalee Holloway?s disappearance in Aruba also rated high on the media?s importance scale. Author Michelle Malkin describes it as the ?missing pretty girl syndrome.? Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post wrote a provocative column about it entitled, ?(White) Women We Love.? Here?s an excerpt:

A damsel must be white. This requirement is nonnegotiable. It helps if her frame is of dimensions that breathless cable television reporters can credibly describe as “petite,” and it also helps if she’s the kind of woman who wouldn’t really mind being called “petite,” a woman with a good deal of princess in her personality. She must be attractive — also nonnegotiable. Her economic status should be middle class or higher, but an exception can be made in the case of wartime (see: Jessica Lynch).

While these high-profile cases are important and the circumstances indeed tragic, I find it unfair that these are the only crimes of this nature deemed worthy of media attention. Is a person?s life less valuable because he or she is of color, overweight, or not born into money? I realize this is an age-old problem, but as far as we?ve come, the media still perpetuates this form of bigotry for the sake of ratings.

The only difference between the church?s and the media?s actions is the manner in which they?re delivered. While the church is absurd and abrasive with their slams, the media is slyer, posing as the caring, sobering bearer of bad news. The latter might even claim ignorance when confronted with news of a random shooting in San Francisco?s Mission District, while the church might praise it, considering the location. Either way, both are guilty of prejudice. The media?s transgression lies in omission and veiled exploitation, and the church?s in exclusion.

Some feel that prejudice falls into categories, i.e., black/white and that somehow, demonstrated homophobia is exempt from such distinction. I disagree. Cloaked as media attention or disguised as religion, it all points to dismissal of, or even hatred toward that which is not beautiful by society?s standards or traditional by our own. Jane Austen penned the novel Pride and Prejudice in 1813 and it?s a shame that the inspiration, minus the romanticism, is still alive and well in 2006. Maybe someday…