When I was starting middle school, my mom sat me down to talk about discrimination, which was an odd conversation for a white, heterosexual preteen girl who’s lived in an all-white neighborhood and who went to a predominantly white, all-girls Catholic school her whole life, but I suppose that’s why an explicit conversation was necessary. She told me that what I see on the outside as no bearing on the quality of a person. She told me that I’d be surprised at what I could learn from people who were different from me. I should treat boys the same way I’d treat girls. If there’s a coed sport—doesn’t matter which sport—I should join it. Befriend the eighth graders even though you’re only in sixth. Don’t exclude someone from your study group just because they might not be as smart as you.
When she was my age, my mom had to wear her siblings’ hand-me-downs. She was the seventh of eight children, so by the time the clothes were passed down to her, they were almost torn to shreds. The popular girls wouldn’t talk to her because she was poor, and they got the other girls to make fun of her. Her name was Tisha LaBeau, but they called her “Tissue LaBlow.”
I took this moral with me, not only through middle school, but throughout the rest of my life. My moral compass was set: all discrimination is was bad, all the time. But no. There is a such thing as good discrimination, mostly in regard to age. Pennsylvania law itself states that some discrimination is good. We’re discriminated against all the time: you must be sixteen to drive, eighteen to vote, twenty-one to drink, twenty-five to rent a car. Are these laws annoying? Yes. Did I drink last night even though I’m only twenty? Yes. But these laws—these discriminations—are for our safety. The state can only clear these statutes if they pass something called a “rational basis test,” which determines whether or not there is a legitimate state interest and public value in the law.
For example, Chapter 3122.1 of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code states that it’s a felony if an adult has sexual relations with a teenager who is under the age of sixteen. This is only legal if the adult is, at max, four years older than the teenager in question. Furthermore, someone who’s fifty and having sex with a thirteen year old will get in more trouble than someone who’s nineteen and having sex with a thirteen year old. However, if the teenager is under thirteen, any sexual contact by anyone is a felony. This is blatant age discrimination, but it’s designed to protect people who can’t necessarily protect themselves. Because to a seventh grader, a hot high school senior with a car and a minimum wage job seems super cool, but why would a senior want to be with a girl who’s barely started puberty?
In theory, discrimination is wrong, and growing up with that mentality made me a decent and inclusive person. But it actuality, it happens all the time, and it can be good, and it can be necessary. Everyone should not be treated equal.
Autobiography
1 Likes
765 Views
Share: