A "Healthy" Control of Equality

Reece Frazier
May 10, 2010
FD5

The world we live in is filled with preferences. For genetic reasons, and others, we tend to prefer some things to others. Typically these preferences amount to nothing more than choosing to go on the highway versus the freeway, or getting soy milk rather than whole milk. These preferences, in this form, are generally harmless. However, preferences can turn into prejudice, and in its extreme form can become hatred. If every time someone thought or acted upon a prejudice toward another person, they were forced to pay a monetary dollar amount, the world would surely be rid of such nonsensical actions.

For years, people have been taught to treat minorities as something different – something not understood. This concept of different treatment has led to prejudices in various forms. We hold the door open for some people, while we let go for others. We scream obscenities at an Asian woman who drives obnoxiously, but merely raise a brow when a character from “The Hills” swerves into our lane. Then, there are those who go insofar as to persecute those of different skin colors, or of different cultural backgrounds, and even those with different tastes than that of our own.

In 2004, the US Federal Bureau of Investigations (“FBI”) reported that, “All states except Hawaii reported at least one hate crime last year.” The total reported for 2003 was 7,489 – finding that 1,200 of these crimes were based on sexual orientation! Several years later, the one state where a “hate crime” was not committed received a severe blow from its leading university’s head football coach.

University of Hawaii Football coach Greg McMackin was recently suspended for slurs regarding homosexuality. In a news conference he said, “We do something special at Notre Dame game and they get out and do this little cheer. This little faggot dance.” Following his commentary, coach McMackin was suspended for 30 days, and forced to take a 7% pay cut, amounting to more than $160,000 for his ‘gay slur.’ He later apologized, and committed to donate time toward the gay community. Although he has yet to follow through on his community service, this piece of recent history does show that monetary consequences for prejudicial comments has an impact. Surely, this penalty reminds McMackin to think twice before acting out in such a manner.

If indeed, individuals were punished, monetarily, for their derogatory remarks against minorities, or rather, negative remarks against anyone based on a certain characteristic, the behavior would surely disappear. Certain guidelines would of course need to be put in order. For example, these “penalties” would need to be reasonable and within the violator’s ability to pay, but severe enough to strike the individual in a way which would remind them not to do it again. If extreme amounts were imposed, the tortfeasor would most likely circumvent any payment at all. On the other hand, if the amount were too nominal, no one would care and continue on with the behavior.

Opponents of such a measure will argue that implementation and enforcement of this penalty system is virtually impossible. While that may be true, in part, this proposed system would come with a monitoring system similar to that of the novel “1984” by George Orwell. Cameras in every building, and the Thought Police, walking throughout every neighborhood, would surely catch all, if not most, infractions of this holistic system. Violators would receive a citation for each and every infraction. In a few years’ time, the enforcement system would be paid for, and the idea of discrimination could only be erased from the human mind.

In my Yearbook class in high school we had a “swear jar.” Every time someone exclaimed a profanity, they were forced to pay $1 and put it in the swear jar. This jar was then used to complete a community service project in the neighborhood (the source of the funds was usually left out when donated). Enforcement usually consisted of telling on your neighbor, and constant monitoring by the teacher’s aides. This communal system of “making the world a better place” was practical and the results were successful.

At the end of each year, over three years, the total amounts placed into the jar decreased, with the largest decrease being between the second and third years. This real-world test of a fiscal penalty system is proof that this system would ultimately work.

Although the world is filled with personal ideals of what it should be, and who should be in it, the idea of equality can be forced down people’s throats and extremist thinking, which inevitable leads to acts based on hate, can be eliminated. Working toward a system where people must (literally) pay for their actions would lead toward a more peaceful society where everyone is an equal. As dogs are trained to fetch, we too, as humans, can be trained to “think equal.”


Works Cited

Anderson, Curt. “FBI Reports More Than 7,400 Hate Crimes.” 22 Nov. 2004. Charlotte.com. 10 May 2010. [http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/10246350.htm].

Arab, Zahid. “University of Hawaii Coach Greg McMackin Suspended.” 31 July 2009. KHNL.com. 10 May 2010. [http://www.khnl.com/Global/story.asp?S=10830037].

Hasty, Mark. "Hawaii's Greg McMackin Apologizes for Gay Slur Aimed at Notre Dame." 30 July 2009. NCAA -- Fanhouse. 10 May 2010. [http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2009/07/30/hawaiis-greg-mcmackin-apologizes-for-gay-slur-aimed-at-notre-da/].