So sorry, Elton ... we aren't ALL like that

I am an Arkansan. I was born in Texas, went to school in Texas, spent a brief insanity-filled spell in Louisiana, but I was raised and I currently reside in Arkansas. And I feel the need today to defend her.

I had always been a bit detached from the state, mainly because of sports. Anyone who knows my family knows that sports occupy a large portion of our frontal lobe. Football, basketball, baseball, olympic events, the occasional celebrity poker tournament ... we watch it all. Being proud members of the Baylor University family (and I have had to defend those people at various times in my life, believe me), I had to grow up in the era of the Southwest Conference. A Baylor supporter in the land of the Razorbacks caused me more than a little grief, and the "Hog Call" was a like a tornado siren to me. 

But that has ebbed. I will never put a Hog hat on my fragile noggin, but I can watch the Sugar Bowl without bursting a blood vessel. 

My love for my state has come in my adult years, and although I have no problem packing up my things if the right job opportunity came along (seriously, are there any jobs out there?), my home is here, and despite birds falling from the sky, I plan to make it my home for as long as possible.

That's what made some recent news so disheartening. It seems that an "Us" magazine cover depicting Sir Elton John and his partner/husband holding his newly adopted baby was deemed "offensive" by patrons of the Harps Grocery Store in Mountain Home. A plastic shield was placed over the image with the absolutely laughable tagline: "Family Shield. To protect young Harps shoppers." If they really wanted to protect young Harps shoppers, maybe they should put a shield on the Butterfingers.

That's sad enough, but what I am most upset about is the knee-jerk reaction that has become the norm these days. In one message board discussing the news story, the title read, "Arkansas: #1 in intolerance and homophobia." Posts inside contained cutting remarks, such as, "Stay classy, Arkansas" and "Another reason to avoid Arkansas." During my feeble attempt to paint the reaction as blanket stereotypes, I was given this comeback: "Sometimes stereotyping is bad. Sometimes it's just faster."

Instead of letting this go (actually, this has all been resolved and the magazine sits proudly without a shield, but more on that later), I have decided to analyze what we know and what we can surmise so that when we paint with a broad brush, maybe we can keep our work inside the lines.

Let's take the actual magazine cover. To be offensive to someone who does not approve of same sex couples adopting children, that person would have to know exactly what the picture on the cover was promoting. Someone wandering through a checkout line who was not overly familiar with Elton John or his lifestyle wouldn't be able to make that connection based on the information given. The mag shows John holding a baby with David Furnish. The headline reads: "Elton's Baby!" One can assume they are a couple, but it is not stated. How many younger shoppers would give that cover a second look anyway? How many would decipher the image and the words and decide that they have been corrupted? My over/under would stand at zero.

So ...

What we think we know: Cover including gay couple with newborn adopted son is offensive to several shoppers in Mountain Home. Manager places "shield" over magazine to show "compassion."  Pic showing shield is tweeted out, and the Internet is abuzz.

What we do know: Shield was placed. Pic was tweeted. Shield was removed.

What we don't know: We don't know if anyone complained. That is the story from management. This could very well be the case of one man on one shift having a problem and "dealing with it." Maybe someone complained. Maybe two people complained. But all we know is that a decision was made most likely by one man. I don't really see this person gathering all the cashiers and stockboys together.

Manager: "Listen, I like 'Crocodile Rock' as much as the next person, but do we really need to see this next to the Cheetos? Let's put her to a vote!"

Nah, the circumstantial evidence says that this was the decision of one person. And if it weren't for a regular shopper, Jennifer Huddleston, it would have gone unnoticed. Huddleston saw the shield, took a pic and pleaded for someone to get the news out. I must admit that if I had seen it, I probably would have thought that the magazine was in the wrong place. More than likely, I would have rolled my eyes. I am not sure I would have taken a pic and sent it to Anderson Cooper.

So we have the actions of Huddleston vs. the actions of a manager. Seems to me like those two viewpoints cancel each other out. And in the defense of the Harps chain, their response was quick and honest, and the matter was reversed.

"We reviewed the magazine in question, removed the shield and are selling the magazine in all our locations without any shield. Our true intention is not to offend anyone in our stores, and this incident happened at just one of our 65 locations, which when brought to our attention, we reversed." Good for them.

Incidents like this make me sad, mainly because Arkansas has such a diverse population. We have been the home of presidents and presidential candidates. But headlines choose to use the entire state when fishing for news items. Instead of using Huddleston in the headline — "Local woman shines light on intolerant magazine shield" — the headlines use "Arkansas" and "censor" pretty close together.

This is a minor incident to be sure, but it does show what lies in the hearts of some people. So if Arkansas needs to take the bullet for a feeble-minded individual, I guess we can take it. We are a part of that mean-ole south mentality. Us and Mississippi and Alabama and Georgia ... which happens to be the U.S. home of Elton John. I wonder where he shops for groceries?