C'est Moi, Catie

An anecdote…

I love Lady Gaga. Ask anyone. She is an insane performer and an equally amazing singer… two things I really respect (and wish I could do myself).

But my love for her is more than that. She is the epitome of what I would like to believe I am fighting for. A friend of mine tonight was sort of teasing me for liking (loving) her – “She’s too out there … She’s over the top … She’s gotta tone it down a little.” Then things got a little more serious, and a comparison was made between Gaga and an “equally” controversial performer: Eminem. Laughing, my friend said, “I mean, if Eminem had to tone it down, then doesn’t she have to tone it down?” Of course, he was referring to her “hanging herself” performance at the VMAs (I replied that you can’t win them all). He remarked that there were parallels between the two: “[They are both p]eople who don’t go with societies morals [norms, let's say].”

I had to take this opportunity to finally get to say what I’ve always wanted to say about Eminem (that is, ever since I grew up and realized all those people protesting outside his concerts were right!!)…

I get the hanging thing, and how that could be (and was) offensive to some people. But Eminem uses his relative influence over people (listeners) to reinforce already negative stigmas toward already horribly oppressed people, e.g. women, gays, you name it. While I’m sure he has a million reasons for why people should not take him so seriously, or feel so offended, I can’t support his ability to even defend himself. In the spotlight, he is aware that his sentiments will be repeated: at his concerts, in the car. Hate breeds hate; this is a fact.

You go, girl

Further, Lady Gaga has a mission. We can all agree that she’s controversial and she certainly isn’t “normal.” But that’s the point – and I think her agenda is bigger than people give her crazy outfits and envelope-pushing performances credit for. She actually wants to change people’s ideas of what is ”normal.” The simple idea of “normal” is oppressive. This is why she doesn’t respond to the hermaphrodite rumors, or dismiss gay rumors, or conform to “fashion norms”… ever.

Yeah, I love her. And her heart-pounding, crazy music that makes me want to dance in the library. BUt more importantly is one thing we should all take away from her: Her message is truth… and it’s progress.

Sorry to my friend… Hope you don’t mind me using your Devil’s Advocate skills to make a point.

The Locus of Moral Decay is… Tiger?

Does anyone remember Republican South Carolina governor Mark Sanford? You know, the one who left his post for five days to visit his mistress in Argentina? And told the quietly curious American people that he was hiking in the Appalachians? Well, earlier today, the South Carolina subcommittee created to investigate this situation decided that Sanford’s actions do not merit impeachment, per the SC constitution.

But wait a minute… last time I checked, lying about your whereabouts to your constituents (perjury?), lying to other governmental officials (obstruction of justice?), and leaving office for an unwarranted, extended period of time (abuse of power), were all offenses that are punishable by impeachment. Oh and not to mention adultery. But maybe the law has changed since 1998.

Excuse me if I’m being aggressive, or angry, but isn’t it people like Sanford who “cheapen” the “sanctity of marriage” when they abandon their wives and children for mistresses and ignore their familial and political duties? What about “American heroes” like Tiger Woods who find sleeping with a potential 10 mistresses to be nothing more than regretful “transgressions”? Is it the liberals’ fault that Larry Craig was caught with his pants down, or that Paul Stanley extorted a 22-year-old girl? How can we hand marriage AND political or social power over to people who fill the “tradition” of marriage with lies, cheating, and the squashing of good-old “family values”? And further, how can we let them get away with it? Especially when we condemn others for immorality before they even get the chance to let their children down??

The longer we make second-class citizens out of a potential 10 percent of the American population, the longer we cheapen the institution of marriage that is denied to them. It’s not American to give rights to only one class of people – and it’s even worse if we don’t punish those who clearly exploit those privileges we have given them.

When will liberals be satisfied? When second-class citizens are not created and perpetuated by elite majority legislation, and decidedly first-class citizens are not allowed to keep their plush social rungs in the face of “reprehensible,” “arrogant” and “indefensible” actions.