Million Sow March

Display a vocabulary larger than that of a 5-year-old, and you're part of the right-wing conspiracy to keep poor people living in abject poverty with nary an Advanced Placement class to their neighborhood school's name.

Let it slip that you know what aleph-null and Schroedinger's Cat are, and you might as well claim that you eat fried baby balls smothered in gravy as snacks.

Complain bitterly that academic standards are rapidly declining, and you're told that you're not thinking about the tortured feelings of the learning disabled and developmentally challenged.

Argue with a friend that Darwinism was afoot when a 15-year-old played Russian Roulette without checking the chamber because he was "like, totally sure" it was empty, and you're handed a flyer to the Million Mom March.

But before you scurry to your computer to check out the Million Mom March's mission statement, you flip on the TV and check out the pop culture phenomenon "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire." You know, to feel smug and superior.

Last night, I watched that show for the first time. I'd like to say it was also the last time, but much like the smashed mini-van I passed on the Turnpike last night, I have to look.

Why did I watch the show? I read that feminists were aghast that the show predominantly featured white males. In fact, the appearance of a black man warranted a few paragraphs from the Associated Press.

Stop the presses! Congress is mulling over a bill that could silence discussion on illegal drugs, but shit, that Millionaire show finally showed some diversity. Which one should get play, Frankie?

The show originally used a blind method of selecting contestants. Whoever could answer questions over the phone the quickest could win a spot on the show. There was no way of knowing if contestants were black, white, male, female, or a double amputee.

If women and minorities were being excluded, it stood to reason that the questions were fairly difficult, ala "Win Ben Stein's Money." After all, it's generally accepted that women and minorities are dumb as dirt, and need all of the assistance the government and ABC can provide them.

So, I was curious.

I only caught one contestant, but that was more than enough.

The second multiple choice (MULTIPLE CHOICE!) question asked of a 21-year-old, newly-married father of one was, "What are the polluting particles after a nuclear explosion called?"

The choices:

• Snow
• Dandruff
• Fallout
• Purple Haze

The guy used a lifeline. He honestly didn't know what the answer was. Now, even if one had never heard of "fallout," wouldn't the process of elimination lead one directly to it?

The third question was even more puzzling. (And I'm quoting from memory.)

Who is tennis player Martina Hingis named for?

• Martina Navratilova
• Betty Friedan
• Jenna Jameson
• Bessie Smith

He used another lifeline. I swear.

And just this morning, I read that a former contestant who won a paltry $1000 is suing ABC for $2 million to cover "damages" and "emotional distress." He answered a question about the Zodiac incorrectly, and he claims that an audible gasp from the audience made him doubt his answer.

As he left the stage, he said, "You know, you just robbed me of $31,000. True, it's $31,000 that wasn't technically mine in the first place, and I should consider myself lucky that America has game shows and lotteries to give hope to the proletariat, but this is also the wonderful land where I can sue at the drop of a hat because loser doesn't have to pay."

This is our future. Be warned. Be afraid. Come with me to my underground bunker in the Adirondacks.

But this dumbing down of Americans is not limited to game shows or academic standards. It extends to simple personal responsibility. Rather than take control for one's actions or the actions of one's children, it is far more convenient to place the blame on strangers.

Whenever a Bad Thing (tm) happens, mothers are turned into crusaders. They want to make sense of the death of their loved ones, or the deaths of those who fit the demographics of their loved ones. Life is chaotic, but they crave a sense of order and a feeling of womb-like safety.

Megan's Law stemmed from an irrational fear of rampant child molesters brought on by the rape and murder of a neglected 7-year-old girl. Never mind that 80 percent of children are sexually abused by a family member or friend of the family.

From the Parents For Megan's Law Web site, "Thanks to the efforts of Maureen Kanka and other advocates and lawmakers our community had the 'right' to access and be informed about known predatory sex offenders under Megan’s Law. . . . I believe that we have become so desensitized to the words 'sexual abuse' that we are forgetting that sexual abuse means what we have read above, that children are really being sexually tormented, really being tied up, really being raped and really being sodomized."

Prey on fears. Fears of the molester under the bed, waiting to claim one's beautiful, perfect child as his next victim.

In 1996, a federal building was bombed in Oklahoma City. 168 people were killed, and don't forget, 19 of those people were children being cared for in a daycare center.

How could we forget? Across the country, there are memorials erected to the dead children, but few are dedicated to the adults. And though the bombing was a rare incident, it wasn't long before mothers were up in arms over something.

The photo of a fireman carrying Aren Almon-Kok's dead 1-year-old child Baylee from the wreckage of the building is the image many of us recall first.

"I wanted to transfer that image from an image of terror to an image of safety," Almon-Kok told a House subcommittee. "I didn't mind using that image if it could save peoples' lives."

Now a spokeswoman for the Protecting People First Foundation (oh, how fucking perfect), she is supporting legislation aimed at protecting people from one of a bombing's deadliest hazards -- flying shards of glass.

In response to the bombing, President Clinton ordered shattered-resistant windows or protective laminate installed in the windows of daycare centers at federal buildings with a higher risk of attack.

About 25 percent of the day-care centers housed in federal buildings now have protective laminate, said Eric Cote, an official with the foundation, which is funded by the glass laminate industry.

Prey on fears. Fear of mad bombers itching to blow up federal daycare centers.

In the 1980s, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers was formed. Drunks, it seemed, were behind the wheel of every other car, waiting to cross the solid yellow lines and hit a strategically-placed group of fun-loving teens head-on.

It was a great cause. Who could rally against those faceless drunks stalking our highways?

Well . . . a little problem with that reasoning recently popped up.

When it comes to drunken-driving crashes, the stranger weaving down the highway is not the biggest threat to child passengers -- their own driver is, U.S. government research suggests.

Most children younger than 15 who were killed in such crashes were riding unrestrained in a car with someone old enough to be a parent or caregiver, according to a recent study.

Their analysis of U.S. motor vehicle accidents that killed child passengers from 1985-1996 found that 5,555 deaths involved a drunken driver. Of those, 64 per cent -- 3,556 -- happened while the child's own driver was intoxicated. Sixty-seven per cent of the drivers were old enough to be a parent or caregiver -- not an underage drunken driver.

Prey on fears. Fear of crazed drunks driving with ill-will in their hearts and a bottle of Cuervo in their left hands.

Which takes me back to the flyer for the Million Mom March.

America's moms are angry.

No shit. Go to any mall and see the twisted, pissed off faces of America's moms, pushing their Uberstrollers through the crowds -- breaking toes and taking names.

What they're angry about now is gun control.

First, let me qualify the defintion of "angry American mom" as "white, middle-class mother with too much free time between Tragedeigh's ballet class and Mistakι's capoiera lesson."

Those stomping their feet for change are those who rarely experience the cruelties of life. Their children aren't abandoned glue-sniffing cretins. Their children aren't forcibly recruited into government resistance groups. Their children don't run the risk of cholera. Their children don't have horribly distended stomachs. Their children don't live in run-down housing projects. Their children don't attend overcrowded schools with "teachers" who are really, really close -- really, I swear -- to getting their teaching credentials.

Their children are well-fed and well-educated. Their children live in nicely maintained cul-de-sacs. Their children wear nice clothing and shoes. Their children have health insurance. Their children can choose to join government resistance groups.

The only thing their children lack is the attention of their parents. The only time their parents give them a glance is when a school or daycare center shooting occurs. They hug their children, and think, "Wow, my genes were almost stopped by a bullet."

Then they call their local Congresswoman (or Congressman, if he's been sufficiently pussywhipped), and plan a march. Much like the march scheduled for May 13.

Tens of thousands of mothers are expected to gather on the National Mall Sunday for the Million Mom March, an event being billed as the largest gun control rally ever.

Those who can't attend are encouraged to tie up traffic on local highways by driving their Ford Explorers and Excursions at a slow, steady speed in the left lane with their right turn signal hypnotically blinking the Morse code message, "Gabba, gabba, hey, we accept you."

Their message to federal and state lawmakers: "Enact common-sense gun control legislation" and reduce the number of children dying from gun-related violence everyday.

"We shouldn't have to worry about sending our children to nursery school," said march founder Donna Dees-Thomases, a suburban New Jersey mother who was galvanized by the shootings at Grenada Day Care Center in California last summer.

And Mama Donna shouldn't worry about sending her children to nursery school. Such shootings are well-publicized but incredibly rare.

Oh, wait, perhaps she should, as daycare workers barely scrape by on minimum wage. Children are a precious resource and the future asswipers of America, unless one has to actually pay a living wage to those who care for their snoogum-boogums.

The march's organizers see gun control emerging as a key election year issue, one that could be -- for women of this decade -- what equal rights was for women in the 1970s or abortion rights in the 1980s. As a woman, I appreciate being told what my causes are.

A recent CBS News poll found 73 percent of women supported stricter regulations of handguns, compared to 56 percent of men who favored more gun control.

March organizers are quick to point to their own statistics, specifically one that found on average that 12 children die from gun violence in the United States every day.

Prey on fears. Fears of bloodied, maimed children littering the hallways of suburban high schools.

Pity the 12 children die a day statistic is as exaggerated as the ballyhooed statistic of domestic violence crusaders who claimed spousal abuse increased on Super Bowl Sunday.

The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and the National Safety Council (NSC) said that 181 children 0-14 years of age were victims of fatal gun accidents in 1995.

Gun control activists inflate their statistics by claiming "children" as those up to the age of 19, and occasionally, also put the ceiling at age 24.

When the word "children" is bandied about, it conjures up images of tow-headed, giggling, bike-riding 7 year olds. When it's claimed that "children" are being routinely killed by guns, it conjures up images of tow-headed, giggling, bike-riding 7 year olds finding daddy's gun and pointing it at his playmate.

Rarely does one envision the 16-year-old Latin King trying to get props from his gang by killing a rival gang member with a stolen or illegaly purchased gun. (Because, let's face it, 16-year-old, baby-faced Latin Kings aren't strolling into Wal-Mart with fake IDs in order to purchase weapons.)

Gun control activists want to pull on America's heartstrings by playing on their superficial love of children, and using cutiepatootie kiddies as their shields, it works. And by twisting statistics, they get the government's attention.

Those most likely to experience gun violence are not related to the women who will likely participate in the Million Mom March. According to the Department of Justice, the likelihood of a student bringing a gun to school or knowing a student who brought a gun to school is directly related to the race of the student (hint: not white), where the student lives (hint: not the suburbs), and the level of gang activity at the school (hint: drama club doesn't count).

So, when these mothers use Columbine as an example of what's wrong with America, they're overlooking the fact that their children have a greater chance of never taking an anti-depressant than taking a headshot. And the guns that are used in criminal acts are generally not store bought. Increased gun legislation won't stop the black market and street corner sales of weapons.

But what's a little logic when we can save one life?

From the horse's mouth:

MILLION MOM MARCH MOTHERS' DAY 2000 is dedicated to the mission of educating our children and our country about the life-threatening danger of guns. Although simplistic and seemingly self-evident, this mission is in direct conflict with a powerful, heavily financed cultural and political juggernaut, which justifies misuse of guns with references to freedom, liberty and the American Dream.

We, the mothers, know that life is the first inalienable right promised by our Constitution. Our children's lives far outweigh the right for just anyone, especially juveniles, to carry a semi-automatic assault weapon or Saturday night Special.

Freedom? Feh, who needs it?

What these mothers continue to overlook is that "our" children are not in grave danger from juveniles carrying semi-automatic assault weapons. They're in grave danger from their own parents, but who the fuck is going to march on Washington to save children from the people who gave them life?

Florida State University criminologist Dr. Gary Kleck suggests that some fatal gun accidents may actually be the culmination of a history of child abuse, in other words intentional homicides. Dr. Kleck cites a national survey conducted in 1976 (Strauss, M., et. al., Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family, Garden City, NY: Anchor Press, 1981), which found "3% of children had, in the previous year, had guns or knives (the two are combined in the source) actually used on them by their parents, according to the parents' own admissions. Since this translates into about 46,000 such incidents per year, it would not be surprising if a few dozen resulted in a gun death falsely reported as accidental."(Gary Kleck, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, p 209. Walter de Gruyter, Inc., New York, 1997.)

Perhaps a few thousand children die and are injured each year by gun violence, but an estimated 3,154,000 children were reported to child protective service agencies as alleged victims of child abuse or neglect in 1998, and approximately one million of these reports were confirmed. Approximately three children died each day in the United States from abuse or neglect in 1997.

While the nation’s overall crime rate fell 22 percent from 1993 to 1997, reports of child abuse and neglect grew by 8 percent and confirmed cases increased 4 percent.

During the period 1993-1997, Prevent Child Abuse America estimates that over 5,000 children died from abuse or neglect in the United States. Forty-five out of 1,000 children were reported as abused or neglected and 14 children out of 1,000 were confirmed as abused or neglected in 1998. Fifty-one percent of the reported cases in 1998 involved neglect, while 25 percent involved physical abuse, 10 percent involved sexual abuse, 3 percent involved emotional abuse and 11 percent were related to other forms of child maltreatment.

Children are more likely to be injured or killed by their parents. Not by the needle-dick sex offender who didn't get sufficient treatment. Not by flying shards of glass. Not by the lunatic zipping along with a BAC three times the legal limit. Not by Dylan or Dillon or Dilon or Dyylaan and his semi-automatic weapon.

These mothers crusading for safety for their children, and less freedom for the rest of us, aren't addressing the real problem.

But, hey, if it saves just one kid, who cares?

Providing jack-off material for white misogynists since 1997.

The Misanthropic Bitch does not encourage feedback. All submissions, though, become property of the Misanthropic Bitch. Submissions may be published or reused in any other medium.