If You're Offended & You Know It, Raise Your Hand
Are your feelings being hurt because you don't want to hurt someone else's feelings?
The musical “My Fair Lady” revolves around Eliza Doolittle, a poor Cockney flower woman, and Professor Henry Higgins, an erudite and cocky phonetics expert, and their difficult relationship. A few other characters emerge to drive home the story of lower-class vs upper-class morals and sensibilities. Eliza’s dad, Alfred P. Doolittle, is the most notable, a drunken dustman who only wants to make enough money to support his nightly binges at the pub.
Alfred has a partner at home, but he has no intention of marrying her until he accidentally comes into a lot of money and realizes he has to become a “respectable” wealthy Englishman. He goes on one last binge before his wedding day, dancing, singing and cavorting into the wee hours.
The 1964 movie version of Alfred singing “Get Me to the Church on Time” looked like this:
“There’s drinks and girls all over London,” Alfred declares before he starts singing, “and I’ve got to track them down in just a few more hours.” The rather tame visuals allow viewers to interpret for themselves what happens next. We can assume there’s a lot more than hugging and necking going on, but we can also choose to imagine Alfred giving a few good squeezes to women before he gives up his bachelorhood.
That is not the case with the revival of the Broadway musical “My Fair Lady,” which recently had a stop in Cleveland. The play follows along the lines of the original show and movie, with toe-tapping songs like “Wouldn’t It Be Loverly” and “The Street Where You Live,” while also exposing the ugly divisions between rich and poor. Then comes Alfred’s big number. He starts out being surrounded by showgirls and drunken friends, but about halfway through, the makings of an orgy begin to form. Simulated sex acts with women and men dressed like women take the number in a direction no one saw coming.
After that, the play lost its luster as Eliza and Henry continued toward a dramatic conclusion. The ultimate lesson, that wealth does not buy happiness and class strife often diminishes the treatment of poorer individuals, evaporated. The focus remained on the debauchery that had taken place a few scenes earlier.
I thought about why this offended me. First, while a revival often allows for some interpretation of the original, it doesn’t have the right to change it for the sake of being audacious and controversial. Second, the cross-dressing men in the scene embodied a stereotype that it seems the gay community would not want to embrace: men dressed garishly, their makeup accentuated to make them look like Bette Davis in “Whatever Happened to Baby Jane,” while they perform crude sex acts. Third, the newly interpreted scene was out of character for Alfred based on what we knew about him to that point.
I was still ruminating about this experience over the weekend, wondering if I should publicly address it, and worrying that I might somehow offend someone in doing so. Then yesterday, I read an article that turned my stomach, and I realized that it’s not okay to sit silently because you don’t want to be called out by the social media czars. If you don’t speak your mind and voice your opinion, your beliefs die. What’s more, you can’t grow and learn unless you share how you feel and have meaningful discussions with those who see things differently.
The title of the article, which was published by the Today Show: “Eight Dads Share How Abortion Shaped Their Lives.” Okay, I was intrigued, so I started reading. I really wish I had stopped at the headline.
“Eight dads are sharing how abortion has helped them become the fathers they are today, on what experts believe will likely be the last Father's Day before the Supreme Court issues a ruling that would overturn Roe v Wade.”
"I wouldn't be a father without abortion,” one of the men said. “The foreseeable exhaustion and resentment and discord that would have come with a second child we weren’t ready for would have come at the detriment to not only me and my wife, but my existing child as well,” said another.
I’m willing to assume this: Whatever your position is on abortion, you can agree that publishing a glowing article about it on Father’s Day is at the very least nonsensical, not to mention irresponsible.
Not that the Today Show cares, but I tweeted out my disgust:
I don’t have a ton of followers on Twitter (you can help change that if you like) so I doubt my tweet will have any effect. A few other people voiced their concerns on Twitter. For the most part, though, the article blew over like a summer breeze. Not many people noticed, and if they did they didn’t say anything.
I write about this here at the Critical Reader because each of us has values, ideas and beliefs that form the basis of who we are. These were shaped by family, community, study, travel and personal reflection. They have meaning. Not everyone has to agree with all of them, but people should at least respect what you have to say.
It’s okay to be offended, upset, or even angry about something you read. When you see only one side of an idea being highlighted as correct, you tend to shrink. Never mind the opposing view offends you. Better to suffer in silence than upset others and run the risk of being called a nasty name.
It’s your right, maybe even your obligation, to have a passionate and well-informed opinion on things. If you aren’t using offensive language or insulting a person’s integrity, you shouldn’t be shamed into staying silent. Maybe you’ll discover that a lot more people think the way you do, or maybe you’ll learn something about the opposing view and move your opinions in a different direction. Let’s bring honest, thoughtful conversation back into vogue.
While I’m on a roll, here are a few other recent items that offended me:
Ohio passed a law allowing teachers to be armed in the classroom after 24 hours of training. Why are we putting teachers in that position?
An almost-naked woman interrupted Mass at a Michigan church and chanted “Overturn Roe? Hell No!” Have some respect, please.
Kim Kardashian may or may not have damaged a famous Marilyn Monroe dress that she wore for her red-carpet entrance to the Met Gala, but Ripley’s shouldn’t have let her borrow it in the first place.
A 66-year-old man who has donated blood for almost 50 years shouldn’t suddenly be turned away because he refuses to answer a question about whether he is pregnant. (Spoiler alert: He wasn’t.)
What’s ticking you off that you’re hesitant to talk about? Let’s have a good discussion, maybe even a productive argument, about it. Let’s just not be silent.