hungry Category: Life
I was drawn to a story on CNN today, or the "secular media" as my uncle who works for the NSA has labeled it. This is the same uncle who sent me a book with a note enclosed that said "it's also good to read, Zach." I was offended, considering that I read on average about one or two books a month. Who said the members of the "family values" party aren't in touch with their own? The CNN story is regarding Jeff Daly and his discovery of a long lost sister he had sketchy memories of from his childhood. When Jeff was six, his sister mysteriously and unexpectedly disappeared from the Daly's home nine days before her third birthday. Each and every night thereafter at the dinner table Jeff would simply ask, "Where's Molly?" To which his parents would promptly reply, "Stop asking about Molly." This would obviously be confusing for a six year old child to comprehend, one day he has a younger sister just as he has for the past three years. Then the next day, poof, she is gone without a trace and never to be asked or spoke of again. If you are not familiar with how exciting it is for a child to have a younger brother or sister, ask your parents to recall your personal situation as a kid, whether that be when your junior sibling was born, or your older brother or sister's reaction when you came into the world.
Over five decades later, Jeff found out what actually happened to his sister Molly. You see, back in 1957, some families and parents were unsure of how to handle and care for mentally and physically challenged children. Upon hearing of mild to severe retardation in their child, most parents with no information and limited resources would have them institutionalized. In fact, at the pinnacle of institutionalizing children in 1967, more than 100,000 children had been sent to 162 state facilities across the country.
However, this entry is not about Jeff and his sister Molly and how they reconnected 50 years after she vanished from Jeff's life. This entry is not even about the days when parents would give up their children, many times never to see or hear from them again. Almost like giving up on a business venture that went down in flames, never to be spoken about again because of the shame of failure brought on by its failed results. This entry is about something almost entirely different. Well, in a way.
I work in a bank, that much you should know of me. I work in a bank with people that are 10, 20 and sometimes 30 plus years older than me. That much you probably know as well, if you've kept up with my entries in the past six months or so. I work with some people my age that work here, however we are clearly the minority, or so it seems based on the stale environment for which we work in. I say stale because the people that range from their 40's to 60's long for a time where life was simpler and do not wish to live in a world where they are challenged at their age. Because of this entitlement they have earned by no specific means, they do not have the time and energy to worry about the issues that my generation have caused or continue to perpetuate.
I always have found it somewhat disillusioning that when some people reach a certain age, they do not care to learn new things or participate in the continuation of learning new ways of thinking, changing the flaws in their philosophy or how they process information. They will sit and complain how life moves too fast, or how there are too many conveniences in the world. That kids my age and younger are too soft and have not yet learned and will never learn the valuable lessons as they did when they were our age. The passing of knowledge from generation to generation seems to be stilted by this sentiment. Why would you not want the younger generation to find new and better ways to learn and grow? Or why would you not want to share the values you acquired while coming of age? Is it because these people felt that their generation did things the right way and we've somehow lost the values that were constructed in those particular periods of recent history? This brings me to the point of this entry, the longing for the "good old days."
I have heard that phrase on many occasions from the mouths of the inhabitants in my small Midwestern city in which I came of age.
This poses my first question, why do people long for a day that was simple with not a care in the world? Almost like wanting to live in a world as an adult but with the feeling of childhood innocence? I remember my childhood in this way, I could not wait to grow up so I could go places, see things and learn about new ways of life outside of my boring neighborhood. Of course, at the age of seven I could not have comprehended this thought on this level, however the feeling of wanting to get out and do something was there. Why move backwards? I still carry that thought with me today like a lucky penny. For me, why dwell on how wonderful things were in the 80's and 90's? I mean, were they really that great in the first place?
Which leads me to my next question, why are people from the "baby-boomer" generation and the previous generations so hell bent on returning our current state of affairs to how they recollect on their childhood or adolescence? One person I work with comes to mind almost immediately. He is the retired police officer who I have mentioned a few times in previous entries. He constantly talks about how things were better in the 50's, and how the "kids on college campuses in the 60's ruined the fabric of what makes
Let's go back to what he said to dissect where the real problem lies. This individual wishes that the 60's never happened. Well, not that they never happened, just that they didn't happen like they did. I've learned that people that long for these "good old days" also wish upon themselves the ability to alter the course of history. He likes to believe the world would be a better place had the 50's continued on, in other words. That good Christian values would have ruled over the country and that women would stay at home to care for their families. "This country was founded on good, sound Christian values, you know." He really believes this. Nevermind the fact that the country was really founded by slave owning white men who were tired of being oppressed mainly because of what? That's right, government oppression through the church.
Does anyone remember the 50's who will read this? Probably not. We only know of what our parents or grandparents tell us. It was a time where you could leave your front door unlocked, people (and by people I mean men) had good jobs, you knew all your neighbors and the family was number one. I don't have a problem with some of those sentiments, obviously. I would like to be able to leave my door unlocked without fear of being robbed or murdered for a senseless reason. I'd even like to get to know my neighbors. However, I do not wish to live a world where a woman is not able to choose what she wants to do with her life. I also do not wish to live in a world where I would walk into a restaurant and have separate bathrooms for white and black people. Damn the 60's and all of that useless progress for the civil rights of minorities. Damn them straight to hell.
Of course, when this point is presented to my Barney Fife like co-worker, he dismisses that argument as "just my opinion" and "we would have eventually found our way there." Really? People, including him, from his generation proclaim the following generations and my generation as being "too soft." The problem I have with this statement or feeling is that rather than try to understand people that are not of the same thought process and frame of mind as him, he would rather travel back in time and live in an era where no one would challenge his thoughts and beliefs and live in a world where things are "easy." I wonder what his wife would say, who works, if her husband wishes for a time where she would have been frowned on by others if she kept her job outside of the home? Anyway, is that not the definition of being "soft?" He would rather live in a world where people basically gave their children away because they cannot handle a mentally or physically challenged child. Just like the Daly family. Social services and public programs and their affect on the family increased their reach across the country since the early 70's and made it easier for the parents of special needs children to care for them in their own homes. It's something else that those "damn idealistic hippies" brought upon our country. Shame on them.
It's becoming increasingly apparent to me that the people of my parent's and grandparent's generation find this time and place is not for them. Why is that? I believe it's partially because people in general are always looking for an easier way out. It's also partially because people cannot help themselves when it comes to being right. No one wants to be wrong. Is this how we will be when me and my generation are in our 40's and 50's? Will we be looking down our noses at the progress and steps our children and grandchildren will make to try and correct generations of discrimination and hate in our world? Or will we break the cycle and try to find common ground and attempt to make things better for future generations? Is it even something that we can change? Or is it human nature to feel like your contemporaries did it right, and no one else can do it better? For now, living in a world with people like my friend the ex-police officer will have to be done with a certain level of understanding of where he came from.
He comes from a world that is different than my own. He learned how to deal with people in an era where it was socially acceptable to tell a woman her place, tell a minority their place and tell himself that because he is white and male that his place is at the top of the people he oppresses to make himself feel better. Is it just me, or are most white, middle-aged
 | Currently listening : Let It Bleed By The Rolling Stones Release date: 25 October, 1990 |
No comments:
Post a Comment