The Stickup: Your Safety or Your Brain

Safe. Adjective: Protected from or not exposed to danger or risk; not likely to be harmed or lost.

In practice, our society has redefined what this word means because we have also redefined what harm means:

Harm. Noun: Physical injury, especially that which is deliberately inflicted.

We are at a point where we are afraid to have hard conversations. We don’t have the conversations because we want to be safe – not exposed to risk. The risk of being uncomfortable, the risk of being shamed, the risk of experiencing true feelings and/or empathy.

We all will pay the ultimate price for it.

Because we are afraid to have these conversations, we ban curriculums, books, and people. And we do this without research and data, without challenging discussions about desired and unintended outcomes. I say “we” because we put politicians in office without thinking twice about their agenda. Those politicians feel they have a blank check from their constituents – not all of them, just the simple majority.

So they make laws to keep us safe. But that is not enough for your pathos, so they involve your children.

“We do this to keep our children safe.”

Ask anyone who has lived in a big city. Your safety is a myth. Just because you feel good about yourself does not mean some type of conflict will not touch you. You can choose to live in your bubble, but it is only a matter of time before someone comes with a needle. “Safety” makes people weak because it causes people to stop asking questions. It causes people to stop thinking critically about positive and negative consequences. “Now that I have provided you safety, you may now relax. No need to arm yourself.”

So, we graciously take safety without considering the cost.

What is the cost of banning a book?

What is the cost of limiting curriculum?

What is the cost of keeping a group of individuals from equal access?

The cost is more than you think.

If you ban one book, what will stop you from banning another?

If you limit one curriculum, what will stop you from limiting another?

If you limit one group of people, what will stop you from limiting another?

Where is the line? What is the litmus test? What are the criteria? You will find that there are none.
The craziest thing is that we have literature to tell us the cost. Guess what? Many books are on the banned, censored, or challenged list. Let that soak in. See for yourself:

1984 – Control of society and information, Independence and Identity, Psychological Manipulation, and Loyalty.

The Handmaid’s Tale – Power and Hypocrisy, Survival, Rebellion, Womanhood, and Commodification.

Lord of the Flies – Man vs. Nature, The Nature of Evil, Dehumanization of Relationships, and Individualism vs. Community.

Flowers for Algernon – Treatment of the Mentally Disabled, Ignorance and Bliss, and Intellect vs. Emotion.

Grapes of Wrath – Common Experience, Corporate Greed, Industrialization, Organized Labor, and Hope.

The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian – Native American perspective on life on and off the Reservation.

The Color Purple – Spirituality, Race, Racism, Gender Roles, Self-Discovery.

The Lottery – Vulnerability of the individual, The importance of questioning tradition, and The Relationship Between Civilization and Violence.

I could go on and on…

Again, literature in our public libraries tells us what will happen if society accepts the control of information. Literature and curriculum that many politicians refuse to read or study but want to govern based on hearsay – based on fear. Can you not see how it is suspicious that the same information that contains the themes mentioned earlier are the ones that are being taken away from the public? Answer: It is not suspicious; it is intentional.

The answer is not to ban information. The answer is to teach responsible analysis of information. The answer is to teach critical thinking. The answer is to have discussions to discover and not to be “correct.”

Our schools are doing that. Stop believing what the news media tells you and spend some time in a public school getting to know the educators. Build your community by getting to know your neighbors and their children. Have open discourse with people who think differently than you do.

We no longer have to read about dystopian futures. We are headed towards it – and that is the scariest part.

When we know better, we do better.

When I set out to talk about the coverage of the NDHSAA state basketball tournament, it was to shed light on the inequality of our female athletes. It was to show that our girls deserve equal footing on whatever venture that they choose to pursue. It was to honor The Huskies, The Patriots, The Eagles, The Demons, The Rough Riders, The Mustangs, The Majettes, and The Sabers.

The reality is that these athletes are the leaders of their community. These athletes have little girls who will one day pick up a basketball because of them, which is a beautiful thing that helps grow the sport. Why would anyone want to stand in the way of that?

But I feel as though the focus has shifted a little, and I don’t want to lose focus of the seminal point here.

Whatever happens for the boys’ tournament, happens to the girls’ tournament. Equality.

– If the boys are televised, then girls should be as well.

– If the boys have a chance at the main court one year, then the girls should have a chance at the main court the following year.

– It is about equality, pure and simple.

I’ve had so many awesome conversations this past weekend. I’ve spoken to Dom Izzo, I’ve spoken to the NDHSAA Board of Directors, I’ve spoken to countless members of the basketball community and media. The crazy thing there are things we can all agree on:

– When the media rights contract was signed 4-5 years ago, streaming was not a consideration, it was a relatively new technology.

– The contract is for coverage of the girls’ and boys’ semifinal and final rounds of the tournament (both to be covered equally). WDAY has exclusive rights to the entire tournament, so any additional coverage by WDAY goes above and beyond the contract.

I’m order for WDAY to pay for the above and beyond service, someone has to pay for it.

– Since the new technologies are tried and tested, it is imperative that the contract is renegotiated to ensure equal coverage. I believe that happens next year.

So there’s a start, we can agree on those things, but, realistically, it is simply not good enough. We need change.

There is enough fault to go around. We can play the blame game all we want, but here are the facts:

– Shame on the parents (myself included) for accepting the status quo and not challenging companies and entities who play into these inequalities; this has been going on for a while and we know better!

– Shame on advertisers for throwing money at entities and organizations and not educating themselves on the workings of equality in production. They know better.

– Shame on the media for not asking the hard questions and uncovering the truth about what was happening. You know better.

– Shame on the NDHSAA for not protecting our female athletes, which is one of the sole purposes of your organization. You know better.

This is on all of us.

Let me be clear:

This is not about the streaming glitches,

This is not about viewership,

This is not about money,

This is not about me,

This is not about basketball

This is not about my beloved Huskies.

This is about access,

This is about equal protection.

This is about representation.

This is about equality.

We can fix this!

Equal.

Airtime.

For.

Women.

Period.

Equal Airtime For Women

Sexist and Discriminatory.
That is the only way to describe what is going on regarding forum communications and the North Dakota High School Activities Association’s State Basketball tournament.
Let me provide context as I understand it:
The boys’ quarterfinals are televised for free, and the girls’ quarterfinals will be streamed for a price. Do you mean to tell me that in 2022, we are still under the guise that male sports sell tickets and women sports do not? Do we still have entities looking to optimize the mighty dollar instead of furthering the sport for both males and females? We still believe that males deserve visibility and females don’t?
That is a crying shame.
It is bad enough that you barely report on local prep sports anymore, but it is even worse to realize that you have formulated your coverage based upon gender.
It is shameful,
It is disgusting,
And it needs to change. Now!
I am calling on every female, every parent of daughters, every true sports fan, and every human, and advertising companies. being to demand that this be changed immediately, and a statement of apology issued to all North Dakota female athletes.
Shame on the Forum Communications company for perpetuating female athletes’ stereotypes and shame on the NDHSAA for not demanding better for our female athletes. Thirty-two teams qualified for the state basketball tournament; twenty-eight of the thirty-two will appear on Television and get the recognition they deserve for making it. Let’s flip the calendar to 2022.