Headlines that Create Frenzies and Words like Equity

Here’s a headline that will spin your head: 

“Op-ed: California parents should be forced to swap their kids.” 

I heard about this while listening to an influencer on Facebook. His headline read “Left pushes Universal Orphanhood.” I said to myself, what? That’s not for real, is it? Universal Orphanhood! I listened.

Then like any writer bent for the search of truth, I Googled the title. Ah! The big bold headline, “Op-ed: California parents should be forced to swap their kids.” Curious, I listened on. This writing is attributed to Joe Mathews who writes for the Connecting California column for Zócalo Public Square.

Misleading Information

I must say, I’ve witnessed both sides of the political spectrum exaggerating issues. This amplification constructs—I think, division, angry faces and words, pointing fingers, and a cause to insult others. I’m not saying we can’t be outraged by things happening in our world. But honestly, what spun in your head when you read: “California parents should be forced to swap their kids.” Or “Left pushes Universal Orphanhood? You’re prepared for a fight, right? Especially if the headlines are your only main course. Both headlines suggest a removing of your freedom and parenthood. That's a fight in the making.

Facetious Statement

As I read and reread Mr. Mathews’ piece, I got it. Sometimes my synapses fire too slow. My first clue Mathews was being facetious was when the broadcaster interviewing him mentioned Johnathan Swift, who was an Anglo-Irish satirist in 1700. As my older daughter pointed out, this should've clued me to the tone of his opinion piece on his radical proposal. Although, when he mentioned that Swift was about--eating our children, Mr. Mathews stated he wouldn’t go that far. Hence, leading to his intentions in aiming as a facetious mess-with-your head observation.

Sometimes people provocatively use words or phrases to make a point. To wake up the masses so to speak. To joggle their narrow thinking about a topic or word usage or confront the stupidity of some rational.

Investigate

As I read, I discovered “equity” was his topic. And it seemed to me he felt the need to jar selected people who have double standards about the word equity. Let’s define equality and equity as I believe the words are often linked or confused. You probably know what they mean but for my expose’, let’s clarify.

Equity and equality are words we’ve heard a heaping portion of at the beginning of 2020.

Equality is about fairness. Everyone deserves to have the same opportunities and chances to rise above or advance their life—you know the American dream.

Equity is according to the dictionary, “recognizes that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome.” [Italics mine for emphasis].

To me, this means no matter how hard or little one works, we all reach the same results. All is fair and evenhanded. Equity does not care if you worked hard to get where you are or if the drug addict, whose wasted his life, becomes financially stable despite his laziness and addiction. Equity says we all acquire the exact outcome. Hmm?

Swap Kids Proposal

From what I ascertain is Joe Mathews believes the word equity is spoken carelessly and without understanding; therefore, his proposal for parents to swap kids with the less fortunate would be a fair and equitable trade. I interpret this as put action to your words.

He wrote:

"Today’s Californians often hold up equity — the idea of a just society completely free from bias — as our greatest value. Gov. Gavin Newsom says he makes decisions through “an equity lens.”

Therefore, Mr. Mathews produced a proposal, which would cause both political parties to be content. I think on one’s first inspection of Joe’s headline, you’re like, is this guy out-of-his mind? But wait before you jump off the cliff of psychosis. I think he is trying to make a valid point.

Here are a few highlights from Joe’s opinion piece. He wrote:

“For Californians to triumph in true equity” by which he means something needs to happen, like parents relinquishing their pride and joys “for the State to raise.”

“Institutions from dance ensembles to tech companies have publicly pledged themselves to equity, along with diversity and inclusion.” He cites, Plato who adopted Socrates recommendations children should “be possessed in common so that no parent will know his own offspring or any child his parents.”

He elaborates on this unifying proposal.

Mathews says, “[This] should be politically unifying, fitting hand-in-glove with the most cherished policies of progressives and Trumpians alike.”

“. . . anti-racism and gender identity in schools face a bitter backlash from parents. Ending parenthood would end the backlash, helping dismantle white supremacy and outdated gender norms.”

“. . . Republicans are happy to jettison parents’ rights in pursuit of their greatest passions, like violating migrant rights. Once you’ve gone so far as to take immigrant children from their parents . . ., it’s a short walk to separating all Americans from their progeny.”

On the idea of “Safe haven” laws, which allow women to give their newborns “over to authorities after birth.” He explains, “My proposal would merely make mandatory such handovers of babies to the state. Perhaps such coercion sounds dystopian . . . imagine the solidarity that universal Orphanhood would create. Wouldn’t children, raised in one system, find it easier to collaborate on climate change and other global problems?

Rushing to Opinions

I’ve witnessed people who’ve rushed to opinions on a matter, a meme, or a talk show without fully investigating what the meaning of the writer and or speaker is conveying. We, as people, tend to filter words through our scrutiny of what we think is right. We are lazy in acquiring facts over fiction. I’m guilty as the next.

As understood, the conquest to swap children would usurps parental rights, defeat nepotism, eliminate family wealth that’s passed on, and cultivates offspring“loyal only to society.” If we are spouting equity, then Mr. Mathews asserts, “The rich should give their children to the poor, and the poor should give their children to the rich.”

I submit, Mr. Mathews is painting a picture worth more than a thousand words. What if? What if we put our actions behind the word equity? What would that look like? I think Joe outlined well what that would look like in his proposal to make all things equitable for everyone.

Essentially, he is saying, if we’re going to shout “equity” we better think about what that means in all facets of our lives. He states, “. . .our relentless pursuit of equity might birth a brave new world.” Of course, he is being tongue-in-cheek. [Italics mine for emphasis].

I believe he sums his discourse by saying,

“Now, I don’t expect universal support for universal orphanhood. A few contrarians, lost in the empty chasm between American extremes, might object to this rational proposal on emotional grounds. They might argue that pursuing your own conception of family is fundamental to freedom.” [Italics & bold type mine for emphasis].

Now we come to the climax of Joe Mathews’ proposal to pursue universal orphanhood. If you only fixed on the headline or that of the Facebook influencer, you might be fuming. Just another freedom “they” are trying to seize to take over the world. You know I’m right! (FYI: I'm not saying there are people out there trying to undo our democracy).

Close the Gap

Thank you for reading my expose', I hope I've contributed to a clearer understanding on the writer’s intent for his headline exposing “equity.” Also, to show how incorrect the title by the influencer, “Left pushes Universal Orphanhood” lead to a confusion and misrepresentation of his meaning.

I say, if we are serious about equity, put action to your words. If you believe in “equity,” are you ready to allow a parent swap? Will you forfeit what you have worked for in providing a safe loving home to make it more equitable for children who are unfortunate?

I didn’t think so. Although sometimes we would love to give our children away.

So, to lessen the gap of misinformation, before jumping to conclusions, or riding the wild horse into battle--seek the truth, speak the truth, and get the facts. Just because I’m a conservative, I don’t have all the answers, nor am I always right (though I'd like to think I am!). And vice-a-versa. Let’s make a constructive effort to critically think and research before we open our mouths or type a reply to a post. I believe this will bridge the gap to misinformation and rantings, which is a waste of our time.

Think. Speak. Truth. Be kind.

Joe Mathews’ article can be read here: https://www.kcrw.com/news/shows/zocalos-connecting-california/california-children-swap-orphans-equity