From: brea9430@mach1.wlu.ca (breadner kenneth cecil joseph u)
Subject: Distinct Societies
Organization: Wilfrid Laurier University
Distribution: can
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:26:40 GMT

The other night, at the end of the news, there was a humourous piece on a
Mr. Smith, who lives somewhere in Ontario. He was passionately arguing that
all people named "SMITH" constitute a distinct society and should be treated
as such. 

It got me thinking. I didn't find it funny at all.

In Macleans last week, one columnist said that enough was enough--he noted
that the National Association of Ferret Owners has voted to reject the
Charlottetown Accord because there were no ferrets at the table and
furthermore, the proposed amendments do not guarantee anything for ferret
owners. I believe that was a joke; however, with the sort of news I have
been hearing of late, I can't be entirely sure.

Has anyone realized that ALL of us are distinct societies? Think about it.
Nearly all of us can be placed into the class of visible minority in some
way or another. I wear glasses. Somebody has flat feet. Someone else wears
braces.

This carries over to thoughts and opinions. Nearly all of us passionately
believes in something that the majority disdains. And, for those who don't,
you are certainly distinct from the rest of us.

I conclude that we ALL deserve the rights that come with distinctness.

But people are so concerned with being different that they forget how they
are the same. We have Quebec, or, less generally, some of the people in
Quebec, trying to build a wall between "us" and "them" by proclaiming their
differences. We have various women's rights groups, gay and lesbian
organizations, and Ferret Owners' Leagues demanding to be counted, anything
to be recognized, so long as everyone can percieve them as separate. 

But we are all human...aren't we?

If someone were to give me a word-association test right now, and were that
person to include the word "distinct", my first thought would be
"different". And then, if I were permitted a second response, it would be
"superior". Because that is what distinct really means, at least in the
sense that everyone in Canada is using it these days. People demanding
distinctness are really asking to be treated specially. 

I am sorry, but this annoys me. Back in the days when such constructions as
"womyn" were unheard of, it really seemed like most were content with what
they had--namely, peace, social benefits, and respect, and even happier with
what they didn't have--namely, famine, repression, and three-and-four digit
inflation rates. This isn't the case anymore. A vocal contingent of
Canadians has been shouting "More! More! More!" at the top of its collective
lungs. It seems like several have forgotten that old childhood rhyme, "Gimme
Gimme never gets, don't you know your manners yet"?

I would amend that to "Don't you know you're human yet?"

I'll shut up now. In the meantime, perhaps we can declare each and every one
of us distinct, and then get on with the business of living.

A Proud Canadian,

-- 
Ken Breadner	brea9430@mach1.wlu.ca (the BREADbox)  ...
Wilfrid Laurier Day Care Centre--oops, University, Waterloo, Ontario
These are my opinions, and all my professors think they are wrong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky can.politics:8344 soc.culture.canada:7430