Because all machines are deliberately pointed toward a single TV screen, there are a number of unspoken, yet inflexible rules that are observed. First off, when choosing a channel, news is always a safe bet -- preferably, uncontroversial local news, or perhaps, ESPN.
Changing the channel towards national news tends to up the ante. This move enters the partisan fray and reduces the comfort level in the room. It also telegraphs your political predilections. Turning to CNN or MSNBC will tell your fellow exercisers that you are probably not a fan of the president elect. While turning to Fox News will almost certainly raise suspicions that you own a “Make America Great Again” baseball cap.
On rare occasions one may avoid news altogether and watch a rerun from the History Channel. But this is frowned upon. What is a definite no-no is to turn on an episode of CSI. Nobody wants to work out to a group of over-smart and edgy detectives picking through a gruesome crime scene.
But the cardinal rule of channel surfing in the cardio room is this: Never, ever change the channel unilaterally. If there is anybody else, at all, in the room they are to be consulted in the meekest of terms. One does not simply waltz into the room and turn to your favorite program.
If, however, the entire room is empty when you arrive, you can operate the remote with impunity. But always keep in mind the considerations outlined above. You never know who will enter next and judge your channel choices.
I actually have a fairly serious point to make by this light-hearted look at cardio room culture. The first point is that culture really does exist. It is an objective thing that governs much of our lives, quite apart from written laws, ordinances and regulations. Culture is the lubrication which helps people get along smoothly.
This is part of the problem with our world today. Individualism is supremely interested in personal freedom to do whatever, whenever, and with whomever. It cries out, “You can’t make me be polite, or decent. This is America, and I am free to behave however I want.”
True enough. But when we cast aside voluntary civility, we inevitably create a vacuum that must be filled with the force of law. Laws, backed up by the considerable force of government, will always be more wooden and clunky than the original culture. The subtle etiquette that once smoothed our rough edges is replaced by government that claims total control over even the slightest choices.
Imagine the outcry if the Rec. Center should suddenly feel the need to spell out the rules for the TV in the cardio room, posting them in large print on the walls, and enforcing them with fines, suspensions of membership, and public shaming. Suddenly, the good natured give and take would be replaced by an angry, by-the-book environment.
There is also another interesting phenomenon of cardio room culture that is worth looking at. Remember the rule against unilaterally changing the channel? Nobody, and I mean nobody, would dare to switch programs without consulting everyone else in the room. But that rule does not apply to the power switch.
Those of us who consider the “off” button to be a legitimate choice of programming, stand almost completely alone. I cannot tell you the number of times that I entered the cardio room and found myself in sole control of the remote. Considering my choices, I thumbed the “off” switch to enjoy a workout without the sound and fury of the flat screen deity.
No sooner had I got started when someone else walks into the room and, without the slightest hesitation, turns the TV back on. Apparently, in cardio room culture, the “off” button is not a recognized as a choice in itself, but as an open invitation for somebody else to make a choice.
I do not mean to criticize anybody. In fact, I would be embarrassed if anybody became self-conscious around me. I am not complaining. I am observing and reflecting. Reflecting that while we live in a sea of choices, some choices are so basic that they are not even counted as choices. And those choices, once made, determine what choices remain for everyone else.
In an insightful essay, Anthony Esolen calls this the “Nude Beach Principle” (“The Illusion of Neutrality,” Public Discourse, 9-11-2014). If somebody should desire to have a beach where they can publicly swim in their birthday suit, there can be no neutral approach to the question.
You may attempt to be neutral by saying that anybody may swim in their birthday suit, but nobody is required to. But this compromise is an illusion. If you allow even one person to swim in the buff, you are making a definite statement that such behavior is perfectly acceptable. For parents who disagree with that statement and wish to raise their family in a culture where that statement is not true, their desires have been thwarted, and that beach has now become off limits.
It is the essence of living in community to recognize that individual choices are never isolated. It is the essence of culture to recognize that permissions granted to even one person affect all persons.
So, as we work together to build community, let us stay fully conscious of these dynamics. Let us remember that by self-discipline and deference to the sensitivities of my neighbor, I can build a culture that doesn’t require the micromanaging laws which stifle freedom.
And let us remember that when laws do become necessary, neutrality is not always possible. Responsible public law may mean that we need to accommodate the nude bather by building a privacy fence, rather than ruin the entire beach for the community.
No comments:
Post a Comment