HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2011-10-06, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2011. PAGE 5.
Not to get too intimate or anything
but…I have a tattoo. It’s okay though
– I’m totally ashamed of it. Not
because it’s garish or off-colour or says
anything stupid like TIFFANY FOREVER or
GO, LEAFS! I’m ashamed of it
because…because…
Well, we’ll get to that; first a little
background. Number one, my tattoo is more
than a half-century old. I got it when John
Diefenbaker was Prime Minister, Alaska and
Hawaii were brand new states, Johnny Horton
was warbling about The Battle of New
Orleans, draft beer was ten cents a glass and
Toronto had a team in the NHL.
It was also a time when the only human
beings who actually sported tattoos were
circus freaks, Maori warriors, deep sea sailors,
Japanese gangsters and guys doing five to 10
for B and E.
Oh, and a skinny teenager from rural
Ontario who spent one summer as a deckhand
on a Liberian oil tanker. My ship dry-docked
in New York for five days and I wanted to
purchase something ‘commemorative’ of my
brief career on the open seas.
Commemorative. That’s French for ‘stupid’.
I went to Coney Island, found a tattoo
parlour, laid my money down (a Canadian
fiver, three singles). “WHADDYA GOT
HEAH? COLOURED MONEY???
FUGGEDDABOUDDIT!”
Convinced the guy in the sweaty shirt and
three-day stubble that my money was good –
underwent 20 minutes of intense
unpleasantness and came away with my tattoo
– a three-inch-high anchor with a stylized
ribbon winding around it.
I couldn’t wait to show it off to my folks.
When I got home I flashed my tat. My father
rolled his eyes. My mother crossed herself
(and we weren’t even Catholic). “You’ll never
get a decent job in your life,” she predicted.
She was wrong about that – but only because
my tattoo was on my upper arm which was
hidden, even in a short-sleeve shirt.
I could choose to whom I wanted to expose
my tattoo and I did – often (see ‘stupid’
above). I was the only student in the entire
school who had one and I think it garnered me
some street cred among the hoods and
layabouts who smoked out behind the
portables, but that was about it, advantage-
wise.
Until the Tattoo Revolution hit.
At some point in the ‘70s or ‘80s tattoos
became fashionable. Suddenly they were
everywhere. Bank tellers had them and so did
teeny boppers lollygagging on their way to
school. Professional basketball games became
exercises in watching lofty, out-of-focus
blueprints with arms and legs drift up and
down the court.
What’s more the new tattoos were beautiful.
They came in vibrant, striking colours and
designs that boggled the mind. The best of
them were unquestionably works of art.
My tattoo looked like a Smartcar at a Ferrari
convention.
Gradually I came to dread public occasions
like going to the beach or changing in a locker
room – anything that involved taking off my
shirt in front of strangers. Other guys – women
too – would be adorned with flaming
starbursts, sleek panthers or whimsical tiger
lilies undulating up and down their torsos…
And there I’d be, with my dinky little anchor
rusting away on my arm.
“Is that a birthmark?” someone asked me.
Sheesh.
Tattoos are now so commonplace they’re
creeping out of shirt collars and below
hemlines. Ankle tattoos are very chic, as are
permanent Celtic armbands. I shared an
elevator with a young businessman who had
what looked like a jungle vine crawling up his
neck and around his ear.
“The visible tattoo has emerged as a new
status symbol,” says fashion writer Amanda
Hess. “It’s a stamp for those rebellious (and
privileged) enough to pull it off.”
Aye, there’s the rub – a visible tattoo used to
mean that you were either on shore leave or a
Person of Interest to law enforcement
authorities. Nowadays, a visible tattoo means
you’re so good at what you do you don’t have
to worry about other people’s approval of your
appearance. What used to be an outlaw gesture
of defiance to society has become a trendy
statement of ‘with-it ness’.
The story of my life: a fashion plate just
slightly ahead of my time.
Arthur
Black
Other Views Tattoos go from outlaw to chic
October is my favourite month of the
year for several reasons. I hate
Halloween, so it can’t be that. So what
could it be? Of course, it’s playoff baseball.
This year it got started early with four teams
vying for just two Wild Card spots on the last
day of the season.
It was the most exciting conclusion to a
baseball regular season I had ever seen and it’s
all because baseball lives by one simple rule:
there is no clock, there is no timer and you
need 27 outs to win.
In the bottom of the eighth inning on Sept.
28 the Tampa Bay Rays were in the process of
coming back from a seven-run deficit using the
final two innings of the game to do so. At the
same time, the Boston Red Sox, the other team
vying with the Rays for the Wild Card spot,
were up by a score of 3-2 with just one strike
remaining between the Red Sox and the final
remaining playoff spot.
Now that the stage has been set, let’s stop to
think what would have happened in similar late
hours of games in other sports. In a football
game, with a lead and the game winding down,
the soon-to-be-victorious quarterback would
begin kneeling out downs to run out the clock.
In hockey, the frustrating defense of dump and
chase would be employed and in soccer, the
ball would just be passed about by three
defenders, not allowing the other team to get
within 20 yards of the ball.
Baseball, however, is different.
No matter how out of hand the game is, no
matter how long it has been going on, the
winning team still has to get its final three outs.
If those the Rays/Yankees game and the Red
Sox/Orioles games from late last month are
played in any other sport, fans are robbed of
one of the greatest nights of sports they’ll ever
see and they’ll be treated to another boring
kneeldown, or a passing exhibition in the
winning team’s end.
In baseball, the closing pitcher stands atop
the mound and has to get the last batter out,
just as the starting pitcher had to get the first
batter out.
So while people may whine that baseball
games are long and boring, they are one of the
few sports that provide true competition to the
end. And in the case of Sept. 28, the Yankees,
up 7-0 in the late innings would have just run
out the clock in football, causing the Rays to
never come back and the Red Sox, just one
strike away from a one-run victory, certainly
would have been mailing it in at that point.
However, because a baseball game isn’t
complete until 27 outs have been recorded, the
Rays rallied back to win 8-7 and the Red Sox
were allowed to break their fans’ hearts and
implode in the bottom of the ninth with two
outs and two strikes on the Baltimore hitter,
leaving the door open for the Rays to make
their way into the playoffs and sending the Red
Sox home for another fall.
Sure it might not be a popular opinion in
Canada where our national sports channels
give you 15 minutes of highlights and analysis
on preseason hockey before they give you the
rundown on a playoff baseball game, but
baseball will always have that link to history.
No one is trying to beat a buzzer and no one is
checking the big digital clock to see how much
time they have left. It’s just a pitcher and a
batter and someone has to win that match-up
before the teams can call it a day.
So it may be old-fashioned, but if there was
a clock on the scoreboard that robbed fans of
that finish on Sept. 28, it just wouldn’t have
been the same, and I think any baseball fan
would tell you the exact same thing.
27 outs to win
I suppose I’ll need to start this column with
the preface that has accompanied so many
of my columns regarding political
ideologies; I’m not endorsing or condemning a
certain political party or ideology.
As far as people want to read into my
choices (be it the blue hat that’s replaced my
red, which has nothing to do with Liberals or
Conservatives, or my new travel coffee mug
which is distinctly green) – I don’t advertise
or popularize any political party.
What I do is something I’ve wanted to
do since Grade 12; let the people of
Huron County know the news that is
important.
Provincial Conservative Party leader
Tim Hudak needs to do one of three things,
he needs to rein his candidates in,
get with the times or be clear with his
beliefs.
Two of Hudak’s potential MPPs in
the Brampton area were seen recently
handing out flyers that demonize a document
that is part of the elementary school
curriculum that calls for teachers to challenge
homophobia.
The document, called “Challenging
Homophobia and Heterosexism,” calls for
specific practices to be used to show that there
are different gender identities and sexual
preferences in the world through lessons
focused on Gay Pride events and how gender
affects storytelling.
I said “get with the times,” because, in
Hudak’s response, he says that Premier Dalton
McGuinty has “lost touch with mainstream”
Ontario with these teachings.
According to the flyer, the document calls
for teachers not to inform parents when these
topics are being discussed in class.
This is the crux of their argument, that the
Liberal party’s motives are to hide these
lessons from parents.
In my reading of it, I saw it more as a
suggestion not to treat these lessons any
different from the other lessons already taught;
don’t advertise these anymore than you would
changing math units.
To me, it seemed fairly reasonable.
This isn’t indoctrination we’re talking about,
it’s a lesson plan.
Are parents informed every time a student or
class is going to tackle a new section in
their education? Do notices go home every
time a class moves from addition to
subtraction? No.
Why should parents be warned ahead of
time as to what is going to be taught,
especially if it is such a charged topic?
If a parent is concerned enough about what
is being taught at school, they should do the
research ahead of time and look at some of the
alternative schooling systems (home
schooling, private schools, the Catholic
School Board) if they feel strongly about the
message a particular system is sending.
Some of the particularly ‘heinous’ practices
that are endorsed, according to the candidates’
propaganda regarding the document,
include reading a story about gay pride
events, hosting a kissing booth and putting
gender-specific spins on fairy tales and folks
tales.
While I’m sure the hygienic nature of a
kissing booth needs to be questioned, the rest
doesn’t seem like something that needs
parental involvement or consent – the attitude
of parents that would take up arms against
those lesson plans are likely those that the
school system is probably trying to subvert to
impress upon students the idea that all people
should be treated equally regardless of gender
and sexual preference.
And, again, if someone believes that the
lessons that children would take away from
this are wrong, they need to become
proactively involved in their children’s lives
and not wait until someone with a political
agenda or too much time on their hands points
it out to them.
Now, before anyone accuses me of being
anti-Conservative, I should also point out that
Provincial Premier and Liberal Party leader
Dalton McGuinty succumbed to the pressures
of religious groups last year and rescinded a
new sex education program that would teach
younger students about non-traditional
families.
McGuinty decided to pull back on the plan
as some religious groups were uncomfortable
with eight and nine year olds learning about
anything other than the nuclear family (a
mother and a father and their children in the
same household).
As someone who grew up in both a nuclear
and a “split” household, I can tell you that the
existence of such families is more prevalent
than some people think, and certainly isn’t
taboo.
If anything teaching them about different
life choices and different models of families
may lead to a decrease in bullying and more
acceptance among peers.
It may also teach children one of the most
important lessons I think they can learn; “gay”
is not an insult.
Nothing boils my blood more than someone
referring to a situation, person or object as
‘gay’. It’s a sure sign of a weak mind.
So, as to the headline, is Hudak
homophobic? Well, that’s not for me to
say, but for anyone to say an education
encouraging equality among people
regardless of sexual orientation is “out of
touch with mainstream Ontario” is pretty
out of touch with society as a whole,
regardless of provincial boundaries.
Shawn
Loughlin
Shawn’s Sense
Denny
Scott
Denny’s Den
Hudak sending homophobic messsage