When political correctness collides with political correctness…
What happens when one politically correct notion collides with an opposite politically correct notion? Disastrous chaos if you’re the pessimistic type, but hilarious comedy if you’re an irony fan.
Take the true story (dailymail.co.uk) of British feminist journalist Cinnamon Heathcote-Drury.
She was standing in line behind a Muslim couple at the supermarket check-out, incensed at the indifferent attitude of the Muslim husband as his hajib covered wife struggled to load their many groceries on the conveyor belt.
Cinnamon confronted the husband, demanding to know why he didn’t help his poor wife with the groceries.
When he ignored her, Cinnamon brushed by him to help the woman herself in solidarity with her oppressed sister. Cinnamon later said “this is what feminism’s all about–women helping women”.
Husband and wife called the cops and had Cinnamon arrested under Britain’s “hate crimes” law, charging her with interference with their religion.
Seems the Muslims believe that women should do all the work in the household (including grocery shopping) and that the only reason the Muslim husband was in the supermarket in the first place was to accompany his wife who, without him, could not go out in public at all.
What a hilarious confrontation.
The feminist journalist thought to bully the husband into acting in accordance with her politically correct feminist views.
The Muslim couple defended the politically correct thought (espoused by progressives everywhere) that no culture is superior to another and that they were protected by British law to practice any (to non-Muslims) misogyny Islam allows.
The politically correct Left gave the Muslim couple absolutely no reason to adapt to Western ways. To the contrary, Cinnamon’s progressives have indoctrinated immigrants to believe that their culture is as good as any—and they continue to believe it is superior to any Western notion of culture.
In fact, the Muslim couple used the weakness in Cinnamon’s own culture to attack her by invoking the “hate crime” law! LOL!
The jury returned a Not Guilty verdict, but I doubt Cinnamon will be confronting Muslim shoppers any time soon.
With this incident in mind, all hell is about to break loose here in the U.S. as the federal Department of Transportation (DOT) has published a new manual on equity for the disabled in air travel.
Protecting the “disabled” is as American PC as you can get.
Following the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), the DOT has now defined “disability” to include a self proclaimed emotional problem in addition to more traditional kinds of disability.
Air travelers with any federally defined disability must be allowed to board any commercial aircraft with a “service animal” that provides “emotional support”.
While DOT draws the line, forbidding animals like snakes (on a plane), “ferrets, rodents, spiders…and reptiles”, a “service animal” can include a dog, miniature horse, monkey, and pot bellied pig.
While passengers with peanut allergies are fully protected under federal law, those with allergies to animals better take another plane.
In fact, service dogs routinely fly with their disabled masters. Lately miniature horses have shown up on planes and, last November, ABC News reported a 300 pound pot bellied pig on a flight from Philly to Seattle.
Wendy Ponzo, president of the North American Potbellied Pig Association, says that pigs can be used as service animals because they can be trained to open and close doors and use a litter box.
“They also seem to have a sense if the owner is not feeling well to stay by them”, Wendy says.
Airlines are required to allow these animals on board at no extra charge, and any rejection of a service animal on a flight must be documented in writing for the DOT.
Airport owners are also required to provide “relief areas” for service animals.
Americans are indoctrinated to accept any special accommodation for the disabled. As the TSA confiscates your liquids over 3 ounces, snow globes, and various sporting goods, but allows a (monkey, miniature horse, or pig) on board as a “service animal”, no doubt the average American passenger will cheer.
But what about the average Muslim passenger?
What happens (and it will happen) when the Muslim traveler demands the removal from the flight of the “unclean” dog or the (Allah help us) pig?
Which PC dogma will give way, the rights of the disabled or the religion of the Muslim passenger?
Air travel in the U.S. is about to become even more harrowing and interesting than it is now.