Do you watch Wheel of Fortune http://www.wheeloffortune.com/? I have, off and on over the many years this TV show has been on television. At this point in my life, I do not usually watch game shows in their entirety and on purpose. I frequently watch game shows as "fillers;" in other words the show is on the same channel as the next TV program I want to watch, or is on the same channel as the TV program I just watched, and I do not want to watch something else, until the next awaited show airs. So, I may or may not be paying close attention to the show. The same is true for Jeopardy http://www.jeopardy.com/.
One thing about Wheel of Fortune is how the role of Vanna White http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanna_White has evolved. In the beginning she was just the letter turner. The letters could have been turned mechanically, like the blocks were turned on Concentration. But some genius recognized the value of having a dazzling beauty perform this chore. I suspect that about 50% of the viewing public are as interested in watching Ms. White turn letters as they are in what the puzzle is. Ms. White has gone from being a mostly silent letter turner to an integral part of the speaking show.
Her job could have gone long ago: TV has the digital capabilities of turning or lighting up letters with no help from a person. But Vanna White is as much a part of Wheel of Fortune as is Pat Sajak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Sajak, the host.
So recently, and I cannot tell you when, I have noticed something on "America's Game." that I found very exciting and positive. When the game's winner is decided, the winner is asked who is cheering for them in the live audience. Contestants bring anybody and everybody: parents, siblings, children, spouses, aunts, uncles, cousins, best friends, coworkers, for example. Recently, I have noticed contestants introducing same sex supporters as "my special friend," "my partner," "my life partner," and most recently, a male contestant introduced his husband.
I think this is so positive that people are willing to acknowledge their relationships in public and on national TV. The Wikipedia information on Pat Sajak indicates he is a conservative, so I have to wonder how he feels about this. But it is what it is. 30 states now recognize same sex marriage. We have to deal with the reality that sexual preference is a right. And should be accorded the benefits, privileges and freedoms accorded to that right.
I think this is a good thing for the American Public. People with same sex "special friends" have been in my life as long as I can remember. I learned about homosexuality in high school, and got to know many homosexuals in college. As my life has evolved, I have gotten to know many more people who are homosexual, who are in various degrees of acknowledgement of their sexuality. And my relationships with them are in various degrees from acquaintance or co-worker, to good friend.
Years ago, I was in a break room at work, and my co-workers were disparaging homosexuals. Uncharacteristically for me, I was brave enough to say they should be careful how they talk about homosexuals, because they do not know who in the room might be one. I embarrassed some people that day, and made enemies of others.
Some people in my life have accusingly told me that my friends are homosexuals. My response has been "so." I did not care if the accusation was right or wrong. It makes no difference. Those people are right. I do have friends who are homosexuals, but not all of my friends are homosexuals. I make friends based on the character of the person, not their sexual preference. I have very few close friends, and I cherish those I have. Their religion, ethnic origin, or sexual preference is of no consequence to me. Their character and interaction with me is.
Isn't this "America's Game?" Not our race, religion, gender preference, sexual preference, creed, national origin, ethnicity, age, or physical and mental capability, or socioeconomic status? Are we not all created equal under the law? True we are all individuals with individuals talents and capabilities, but should we not all be offered similar, equal or consistent opportunities under the law? Sure our personal circumstances do not necessarily offer us equal economic, educational or social advantages. But shouldn't we have the opportunity to those if we can access those? And shouldn't our government be working towards making those opportunities more universally accessible to all citizens? Isn't this "America's Game?"
No comments:
Post a Comment