I’m so over the rainbow

Why we are right to question how public money is spent when it comes to ideology

A few days ago, I found myself caught up in a spat on social media over a rainbow of all things.

Someone had posted about a council spending money on repainting a zebra crossing in rainbow colours, and all hell had broken loose.

My comment was simply;

“I used to like rainbows….”

Well, you’d think I’d said “Kill that puppy, now!” for all the hate it received. I had personal insults thrown at me, assumptions made about my views, solely for that.

I stand by what I said.

I did used to like rainbows. Now I am both suspicious of and jaded by them.

The same way I used to like blue hearts and didn’t mind paper straws.

Rainbows, eh?

What’s the first thing you think of when you someone mentions one?

A natural phenomenon born of rain and shine……..or an ideology?

“Why are you scared of a rainbow?”

someone piped up. Woah Nelly!

Had I said that? It was reminiscent of the

“Why are you frightened of a little needle? It’s just a jab, doesn’t hurt!”

comments being made a few years ago.

This ‘scared’ business, attempts to mock a valid concern by suggesting a person fears the most trivial aspect of it, deliberately or ignorantly glossing over a bigger picture.

To propose someone fears a rainbow is ridiculous. What many are cautious of, however, is what the rainbow has come to represent, to what ends this is harnessed and the merits of public money being allocated to it.

Rainbows have found themselves an emblem of a cause.

At face value, that cause is ‘inclusivity’.

Who doesn’t want to be onboard with ‘inclusivity’?

It’s one of those words like ‘safe’ that shits on all others.  To not want it, cleverly implies you want the opposite.

But before you steam ahead endorsing ‘inclusion’, it may be worth questioning a few things.

What are the specifics of this ‘inclusivity’ and does it completely align with all of own values and expectations to the extent you prefer spending money on it to repairing pot holes for example.

If you book an all inclusive package holiday, you quite rightly want to know what is included. You make your decision whether to book based on details, not a friendly sounding slogan.

If we are pouring public money into ‘inclusivity’ projects, it also stands to reason that the public should scrutinise what this entails and how far this extends.

Most people of my generation remember when the rainbow flag broadly stood for the rights of the LBG community. These days it has taken on a much wider remit.

The adding of the ‘T’ means that sexuality is becoming increasingly entangled with identity, whilst the  ‘+’ element routinely applied, suggests an ‘anything goes’ aspect. Plus what exactly?

Are there limits?

What are those limits?

What are yours?

When does supporting inclusivity become eroding the rights of another group?

The rights of women for example.

These are the questions I would suggest pondering.

The problem with ‘groupthink’, is that it doesn’t think. It drowns out other views. A passionate voice can easily become ‘the only way’ and ultimately serve to indoctrinate.

When it takes hold of the establishment, promoted as ‘progress’, it tramples on all else, which you might think is fine if you see said cause as advancement, but what if you don’t agree with all it encompasses?

This is what I have come to dislike.

A single ideology has infiltrated councils and public services without a thorough examination and explanation of the definition and boundaries of this.

Saying you object to money used in this way, has become synonymous with hate. “Oh you don’t want chips, you must want pizza”, “Don’t want rainbows, you must want swastikas”(another hijacked symbol, incidentally!).

This is simplistic, reductive and untrue.

As with most people, there is stuff I support and stuff I do not align myself with.

Because I support same sex relationships, does that mean I have to also endorse preferred pronouns and/or openly paraded fetishises?

We will all have a slightly different take and line in the sand. In a diverse world, that’s only right.

And what does ‘support’ mean exactly?

Are we saying we want no harm to come to someone or are we unwittingly endorsing more than that?

When public money is being spent, it is not just prudent to question these things, it is imperative.

Because if not, just like dear old Dorothy, we find ourselves dragged along with those lacking both brains and hearts.

We ain’t in Kansas no more, that’s for sure.

This is new territory.

Old ways of life both good and bad have been left behind, but just as Dorothy found a fraud behind a screen in Oz,  it won’t be all bluebirds at the end of this rainbow either.

So before you skip merrily down the yellow brick road, maybe consider where it is leading.

Those of us all there with our lemon drops, can already see it.

PS: I write lots of different things. If you appreciated this, you may appreciate more of my opinion and social commentary pieces. They are located under ‘Opinion Piece’ at the top of my ‘Mother Of Hope’ home page.