Steve Young is a real estate developer who wrote a column in today's Strib about one of my favorite topics: the "fun" people have in Minnesota. In one beautiful piece of opinion, he summed up what I have been saying for years about the thought process of most people in this state. If they start having too much fun around here, they usually think to themselves the following...
"Wow. I am really having fun. I better ramp this shit back and go do something that makes me fucking miserable like mow my lawn at the cabin or spend a Saturday morning at Menard's and a Saturday afternoon fixing up my house with the shit I bought at Menard's. I know some of my friends are playing a fun sport/going to a ball game/hitting the clubs today/tonight but hey...too much fun is a bad thing. I will not go with them and I will verbally berate anyone who does for having too much fun. It is abnormal. It is abnormal. It is abnormal...."
(sound of Theremin and person slipping into hypnosis)
Steve hits the nail on the head with the following quote from the article:
Ten years ago, I moved with my young children to Minneapolis from Chicago. That summer, and every summer since, when I go to one of the city beaches I am amazed and annoyed with the city officials who turned our natural gift, our city lakes, into large, boring wading pools -- people standing or sitting in the water, hampered by the multitude of antifun rules that the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board has imposed over the years.
It really is true, I am sad to say, for those of you readers who hail from other lands. Oh, and did you noticed that he moved from Chicago? A place where they know how to pull the stick out of their collective arses and have a good time.
For the full article click here.
7 comments:
Is it really that bad up there? In Chicago, we are a little more lax about rules. Common sense stuff usually applies. Police are OK with people drinking on the street, for example, as long as no one gets hurt and then it is broken up. I heard that you can't drink on the street in Minneapolis. Is that true?
Sadly, it is true. I have to say that I agree with Mr. Young. We aren't that fun of a state anymore.
Here is the list of rules from the Parks & Rec website:
General Rules
1. Smoking is not allowed in any beach areas.
2. Children under the age of 8 must be accompanied by an adult at all times.
3. Swim only within marked areas.
4. Only Coast Guard approved lifejackets are allowed and must be wore the correct way.
5. No running on beach.
6. No throwing sand or rocks.
7. No glass in any beach area.
8. Obey lifeguards at all times.
9. Infants and children who are not yet toilet-trained must wear a swim diaper.
10. “Chicken fights,” riding piggyback or throwing swimmers is prohibited.
11. No one is allowed in the water when the air temperature is 65 Fahrenheit or below.
12. Safety breaks are taken during the day at beaches.
My oh my, what horrible, draconian, fascist rules that no normal human could ever possibly comply with. The evil P&R board members want to extinguish everyone's fun.
Bullshit.
Rules are rarely, if ever, imposed to stop anyone's fun. There are presumably perfectly logical and sound reasoning behind all of these.
Well, except maybe #1. But I'm a smoker and I see the incursion of my liberties everywhere.
These rules exist to help to insure safety. Someone has to be responsible for these public recreation areas. Some entity has to be legally liable for any deaths or injuries on these premises. In this litigious atmosphere, the P&R Board is trying to keep their liability manageable. It's no fun when someone gets hurt screwing around, or worse still drowns. I think everyone wants to make sure that no one gets hurt or dies when they're out "having fun."
Mr. Young belongs to two groups that I have a hard time liking. Real Estate Developers and Carpetbaggers.
We have a fine state here, with our own persepective. As a natural born Minnesotan, I think our outlook is just fine, thank you. I resent newcomers moving here from somewhere else, and expecting us to conform to their cultural persepectives.
If I were to move to another state, assuming that I could find somewhere better in the continental U.S. than Minneapolis, I wouldn't expect the natives to conform to my expectations, I would try to conform to theirs. Or move if I couldn't.
That's my advice to Mr. Young. If you don't like it here, I'm sure you will be welcomed back to Chicago. Feel free to leave anytime.
That's why when I meet someone from the South, and they comment that Minnesota is cold. I say, "yep, all the time. You better not go there."
We don't need anymore carpetbaggers.
"I resent newcomers moving here from somewhere else..."
Well, that's part of the problem. Actually, it is the whole problem. I have lived here for 23 years and feel the resentment any time I try to have something outside of the Minnesotan definition of "fun" which is pretty much...oh...on a daily basis. In fact, that resentment is radiated in Biblical proportions to anyone who isn't from here. We aren't part of the group and it really is apparent.
I think it really is a shame considering how economically important it is, with so many people moving here to work at Best Buy, General Mills, 3M etc...to build a community.
Minnesota Nice is a myth...try Minnesota Ice.
Police are OK with people drinking on the street
Damn, I can't believe Chicago is better than San Diego, where you can't drink at the beach now, because a FEW people couldn't handle it.
…well, it just wouldn’t be me if I didn’t place a little of the blame on the liberal environment here. Nothing a little tort reform wouldn’t fix, though. Dan touched on it; “it’s a litigious atmosphere”. If people showed a bit more personal responsibility for their actions and weren’t out to sue someone/anyone every time an accident happened or smoke wafted into their personal space, it would be a much happier world. But, in today’s America, there is no such thing as an “accident”…someone is always liable and someone will always be looking to cash in.
"Minnesota nice" is a bit of a misnomer, but not for the reasons stated here.
Go Vikings!
A couple weeks ago I mentioned "Risk Assessment" in England. Here are some recent comments from my favorite European travel writer...
http://www.ricksteves.com/blog/index.cfm?fuseaction=entry&entryID=259
Highlight for me (and Dave too)...(he is talking about England here)...
Part of the high cost of living is the fear everyone has of being sued or burned up in a fire. I can’t walk down a hall without having to open big, heavy fire doors. Whenever I encounter something really inefficient or absurd, locals say, "risk assessment."
School kids are taking fewer historic field trips. Why? "Risk assessment...it's too legally risky for the schools." Some walking tours don't go if it's raining. Why? "Risk assessment...danger of an umbrella poking someone’s eye out." A male local guide refuses to do a tour if he has only one, female customer. Why? "Risk assessment...she may claim he molested her." Why is the water not really hot in my room? "Risk assessment...we don't want guests to scald themselves." Why can’t I open my window more than four inches? "Risk assessment... a baby fell out of a window once right here in London." What?! "We have even more lawyers than you do. It’s ruining our country. A burglar can sue me if he’s rifling through my home and he trips on a stray cord."
Then from the comments section - Those (irresponsible) actions that you blame on corporations should be treated as crimes, not as a golden parachute for someone who didn’t read the warning on the pack of smokes, or who hadn't heard the comment "coffin nails" for the last 100 years. The problem is we don’t have a Justice System, we have a legal system, built and operated by and for the wallet and ego of the lawyers.
Another comment - Rick, it's nice to see you recognize how absurd things can become in a highly litigous society.
The last comment by Matt is pretty cool too.
Yeah, yeah, we all know Bush passed tort reform - only a version of tort reform that didn't go far enough.
Post a Comment