My sure-to-be-unpopular opinion/rant...

[Dana]

You know, I am looking for information and hoping to get some real answers. I am not trying to dig a hole. I am trying to get at something that could really make a difference for me in the way I have viewed things in the past because of where I live. If I can put this stuff out there and see that it is sensationalized crap that isn't true, and that gives me a stronger perspective on unfairness, how is that a bad thing?

 

All during this thread I have been accused of supporting racism because of one comment about some stupid coach who I didn't even know before yesterday. I live in what is probably the only area of the country that still has racism, (although in my city, I am very much in the minority). I am looking for answers. I want to see the facts. I want people to help me see information that could possibly help me change attitudes of people around me for the better.

 

If that isn't worth it, I don't know what is.

 

And if you do get knowledge and more information that changes how you think, that's really worthwhile.

 

You may want to do some reading in other locations as well. It may be wise to do some more reading from a couple of other sources before making some of the comments you have made. I guarantee you that you are nowhere near the only area of the country that still has racism.

 

When I moved from SC to CA, the racism was much less blatant in CA - but it's definitely still there.

 

I applaud your willingness and interest to learn, but many of your comments ARE racist (including "I live in what is probably the only area of the country that still has racism"). I hope you'll be able to learn more and look back at this thread and see how much you've grown from where you are now.

 

I really would suggest reading from other sites.

Goodness... just watching the Daily Show on occasion will point out some of the hypocrisy (on all sides). They've had some really good things about Fox. (And they do go after both sides.)

[Mrs Mungo]

I think you would get more value from researching these things on your own than trotting out spurious news stories that are (as far as I can tell) from white supremacist sources and expecting us to debunk them for you. Several of us posted a lot of stories, documentary links, books and so forth. There has been plenty of meat to get you started, if that is your real goal.

[Dicentra]

This topic reminds me of an ad I saw the other day for a magazine called "Good Old Days":

http://www.goodolddaysmagazine.com/

I've not seen the inside of the magazine and I've only read the article they currently have online for free but my immediate response in seeing the ad for the magazine was thinking, "I wonder whose version of the "good old days" they're referring to?"

[mommymilkies]

nm.  I come back to 5 pages more and I'm discombobulated. :lol:  

 

[StaceyinLA]

Well maybe I should say an area where racism is "accepted."

 

Here's a perfect example. Because of the crime here, and the percentages of the blacks in prison versus whites, the black on black crime reported so often, etc., I would NEVER have believed that whites commit 69% of all crimes in the US, and that in fact, blacks only commit a higher percentage of TWO types of crimes. That is just not the impression one would have from what is seen locally.

 

I truly appreciate the ability to learn from things here and be challenged in my thought processes.

[Rosie_0801]

The skeptic in me wonders if the push to pc behaviour is just another divide and conquer scheme. It seems counterintuitive, but doesn't it actually make people less tolerant? There is this whole new set of social rules and anyone who doesn't follow them is harassed by those who do = more division. To teach people not to notice differences, you have to first point out the differences they are not to notice.

 

Not sure if I'm making any sense, it's getting close to my bedtime so my thinking probably isn't as sharp as it could be. Lol!

 

In the short term, probably yes. Eventually the topic in question becomes the new normal and only people right on the extremes still go on about it.

 

You know, I am looking for information and hoping to get some real answers. 

 

I beg your pardon. I haven't seen any real questions. Maybe it would help if you state them more clearly. I'd be delighted to help, if only to distract myself from the pain of a little girl crying over the bossy E rule. If that isn't an example of the reality that life involves pain, I don't know what is.

[StaceyinLA]

I think you would get more value from researching these things on your own than trotting out spurious news stories that are (as far as I can tell) from white supremacist sources and expecting us to debunk them for you. Several of us posted a lot of stories, documentary links, books and so forth. There has been plenty of meat to get you started, if that is your real goal.

Well in my defense, what I posted wasn't found on a white supremacist site, and I had no way of knowing that anything would link back to that. I certainly do not subscribe to that type of thinking or accept it as being remotely tolerable.

[Dana]

Well maybe I should say an area where racism is "accepted."

 

Here's a perfect example. Because of the crime here, and the percentages of the blacks in prison versus whites, the black on black crime reported so often, etc., I would NEVER have believed that whites commit 69% of all crimes in the US, and that in fact, blacks only commit a higher percentage of TWO types of crimes. That is just not the impression one would have from what is seen locally.

 

I truly appreciate the ability to learn from things here and be challenged in my thought processes.

 

But with the way reporting is done at a national level... you weren't aware of this.

That's one way the US IS still racist.

Racism is "accepted" when Obama's birth certificate is called into question even after he releases a copy of the same version of MY birth certificate (I was also born in HI....I've never had to produce the long form).  (And I don't want to go political here - but this is the example that springs to my mind on a relatively recent national level.)

[Mrs Mungo]

Well maybe I should say an area where racism is "accepted."

 

Here's a perfect example. Because of the crime here, and the percentages of the blacks in prison versus whites, the black on black crime reported so often, etc., I would NEVER have believed that whites commit 69% of all crimes in the US, and that in fact, blacks only commit a higher percentage of TWO types of crimes. That is just not the impression one would have from what is seen locally.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2012/03/13/11351/the-top-10-most-startling-facts-about-people-of-color-and-criminal-justice-in-the-united-states/

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-quigley/fourteen-examples-of-raci_b_658947.html

 

http://www.hrw.org/news/2009/03/02/us-drug-arrests-skewed-race

 

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/05/louisiana_is_the_worlds_prison.html

 

http://www.sentencingproject.org/template/page.cfm?id=122

 

http://www.amazon.com/Savage-Inequalities-Children-Americas-Schools/dp/0770435688

[SadieMarie]

 

I try not to post controversial things on any forum/social media, etc., but I seriously cannot wrap my head around why everyone in this country is so whiny, and can never tolerate an opinion that is different from, or even possibly offensive to, their own. When did EVERYTHING have to become so politically correct that a person isn't entitled to their own opinion?

 

Who says he is not entitled to his own opinion?  And I am entitled to my opinion that he is a jerk and I am entitled to say it.  And if I am in a leadership position in a commercial enterprise that he represents and his offensive comments have hurt that enterprise I am entitled to cut him loose.  And hurrah for the NBA I say!!!  He isn't sitting in jail or been fined by a government authority.  He is free to think and say whatever he wants.  This reminds me of the Duck Dynasty guy  about his free speech lol.  He is free to say what ever he wants in any interview and not be thrown in jail.  But why should a business have to hang on to him if that free speech hurts its bottom line?  If I have a company and an employee stands out front on his off hours with signs that are sure to offend the majority of my customers, I have to keep him on?  I have to tolerate that without responding? I can't fire his ass?  That is ridiculous.  I can't have him arrested but I am entitled to protect my enterprise.  

 

There are ALWAYS going to be people who are racist. They are ALWAYS going to be people who disagree with gay marriage. There are ALWAYS going to be people who are staunchly pro-life. There are ALWAYS going to be people who are pro-choice. There are ALWAYS going to be people who mock others for their beliefs, the way they look, act, dress, etc.

 

Ok, and there are ALWAYS going to be people who are not racist.  There are ALWAYS going to be people who support gay marriage. There are ALWAYS going to be people who are staunchly pro-choice.  There are ALWAYS going to be people who want to stand up for those who are mocked for their beliefs, the way they look, act, dress, etc.  And they have the right to free speech also.  

 

I just don't understand how, in a supposed free country, we think we can demand that everyone will agree on everything, and no one will ever say anything offensive.

 

I don't understand how, in a supposed free country, we think we can demand that nobody will disagree with us when they find something we say to be offensive.

 

I can tell you - I was picked on mercilessly throughout a lot of my school years (it's probably one of the biggest reasons I chose to home school my kids). I am a normal, functional human being who never shot up my school, blamed anyone, required years of therapy, or anything of that nature. Kids are cruel. People are cruel. It was just life, and I dealt with it. I guess I just do not understand why people these days can't do the same.

 

People are dealing with it.  We all get to choose our own way to deal with it.  We ALL have that freedom.  And black basketball players get to choose how they want to deal with it.  And NBA officials get to choose how they want to deal with it.  And each fan gets to choose how to deal with it.  Comparing it to shooting up a school is sort of way out there IMHO.  If I object and go on social media and say so it is the equivalent of shooting up a school, or blaming anyone or going to therapy?  You have kind of lost me there.  I don't know how you dealt with it.  I am guessing that you suffered in silence and that makes me sort of sad.  Why is that better?  Why not speak up and fight back?  If someone picks on my daughter I don't want her to just take it and be a quiet girl.  I would want her to fight back, even if it is messy and loud.  Even if it causes a big fuss.

 

[StaceyinLA]

I think you would get more value from researching these things on your own than trotting out spurious news stories that are (as far as I can tell) from white supremacist sources and expecting us to debunk them for you. Several of us posted a lot of stories, documentary links, books and so forth. There has been plenty of meat to get you started, if that is your real goal.

The other thing is, if these stories are being promoted as evidence that the media is ignoring black on white crime, and people are pushing this as true information, wouldn't my being able to debunk it be a good thing? I mean I realize that's not y'all's responsibility, but clearly if the information isn't balanced I could use some help.

[StaceyinLA]

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2012/03/13/11351/the-top-10-most-startling-facts-about-people-of-color-and-criminal-justice-in-the-united-states/

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-quigley/fourteen-examples-of-raci_b_658947.html

 

http://www.hrw.org/news/2009/03/02/us-drug-arrests-skewed-race

 

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/05/louisiana_is_the_worlds_prison.html

 

http://www.sentencingproject.org/template/page.cfm?id=122

 

http://www.amazon.com/Savage-Inequalities-Children-Americas-Schools/dp/0770435688

Thank you for these. I really appreciate it.

[Mrs Mungo]

The other thing is, if these stories are being promoted as evidence that the media is ignoring black on white crime, and people are pushing this as true information, wouldn't my being able to debunk it be a good thing? I mean I realize that's not y'all's responsibility, but clearly if the information isn't balanced I could use some help.

Promoted by WHOM? I haven't seen any promotion of such "evidence." Again, when I searched random phrases from the block of text, all I came up with were white supremacist websites. Someone once linked a piece of evidence from stormfront, and I just said, "you realize that is a white supremacist website?" And they dropped it. I don't associate with the types of people who would even suggest I needed to debunk it in some way after being confronted with the source.

[plumshadow]

"For if you suffer your people to be ill-educated  and their manner be corrupted from their infancy, and then punish them for those crimes to which their first education disposed them, what else is to be concluded from this, but that you first make thieve then punish them." Thomas More Utopia

 

Crime and race is a multi-faceted problem. There is nothing inherently lacking in blacks to make them extraordinarily  subject to law breaking, those statistic are a symptom of a huge societal problem. Many people are quick to point out the statistics of the end result of a country failing its people while glossing over the cause.

[StaceyinLA]

Promoted by WHOM? I haven't seen any promotion of such "evidence." Again, when I searched random phrases from the block of text, all I came up with were white supremacist websites. Someone once linked a piece of evidence from stormfront, and I just said, "you realize that is a white supremacist website?" And they dropped it. I don't associate with the types of people who would even suggest I needed to debunk it in some way after being confronted with the source.

I understand what you're saying, but the actual information was on a conservative news site. I guess that's why I'm confused.

[mommymilkies]

I think we were better off when kids still prayed in school, and were spanked on occasion, and more moms stayed home and raised children, and families went to church together, and sex and violence wasn't glorified, and people had pride in their country and were willing to fight to protect it, and when the military was treated with the respect they deserve, and when crimes were actually punished, and when teens didn't kill other teens, or toddlers, or their parents, and when school shootings weren't common, and when victims had more rights than criminals, and on and on.

 

Call me old-fashioned, stupid, ignorant, whatever. I can take it.

 

Um, yeah.  Glad this one was covered because WOW.  I mean, I know every generation idealizes the past to some degree.  I remember everything being AWESOME when I was a kid.  It wasn't until I was older that I realized we lived in absolute poverty and it wasn't normal for there to be body outlines at the park where you play or dirt floors in homes.  I don't know a single person who ever had the idealized life you state above.  I know my parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents certainly didn't. 

Why do people have pretty memories of suburban enclaves peopled only by the right sort? I mean, back in the good old days?

 

This is extraordinarily simple: Only one kind of folks lived there because the folks who lived there kept (or drove) all the other folks out.

 

They didn't just put up a fence keeping out the obviously unwelcome sorts. They also reacted when somebody previously approved found themselves on the wrong side of conventions, whether it was their fault or not. Keep that garden weeded! Keep up appearances!

 

Churches with no divorcees. Really? Because none of the people who get divorced were regular churchgoers with strong faith who would have liked to keep their faith community? Because nobody ever found themselves divorced against their will? Or is it because some churches made divorced persons feel so unwelcome that they decided to leave the church and moreover the town that was no longer home?

 

Lovely neighborhoods with lots of stay-at-home moms? That was history, but for a mighty long time now that particular convention has been spelled M-O-N-E-Y. The fact that times have changed financially has not dampened a mother's love, no matter how she utilizes the community to help her raise her precious children. I'm talking about daycares and public schools that are necessary, not optional but necessary, for the majority. That mother is no less a mother than the June Cleaver who was fiction.

 

Better teens in the past? Hmm. Maybe today we have a little less shipping off the ugly situations, with pregnant girls sent off to relatives in quiet shame or unruly boys installed in military academies. Our kids at risk tend to be all mixed in with our kids not at risk, for lots of reasons. I'm not sure about that theory, just wondering aloud, but I do know for a fact that my nearest inner city neighborhood (where my son happens to work at a fast food restaurant) has been exactly as bad as it is now for 60 years. Avoid being out in the dark and on everybody-knows-which streets and you'll probably survive. Get it wrong on the weekend and you mightn't. Yet here we all are. And my son, and his friends at work, are very fine young people with a future and a hope and they fix the tacos. Y'know? Realities of city life.

 

Having lived with one foot in that neighborhood and one foot in the nearby "nice" town I don't always prefer the nice town. In rougher areas the battles are out in the open. The Veneer Keepers scare me sometimes. Their kids can be just as full of devilment and destruction but nobody knows because they dress so fine and drive nice cars and have a college scholarship. But alcoholism, abortion, crimes of revenge, drug addiction -- there's a heap of trouble behind the brand names. At least in the rough part of town, if you are on a collision course to self-destruction it's soon obvious. Maybe quick enough for somebody to notice and help.

 

I'm with the others in this thread that come from families that would not have been approved in the good old days, if there were such a thing. Native Americans were not invited to that party. My German American ancestors (some yet living) had their upward mobility interrupted by their stint in an internment camp during the war. (Oddly, that was not in my high school history book but it happened.) They never quite got over that. Christian families, no divorce, stay at home moms, awesome kids, patriotic to the point that some of their kids were fighting in the US military while their parents were in camps...

 

appearances mean nothing. Personal integrity on an individual basis is ALL there is. Character comes one person at a time. There was no holy moment in history. This is not the worst its ever been. At least now we're all talking, and those of us who choose to opt out of isolating and rejecting others as a community may do so. We have every freedom to run away from bigoted gatekeepers of any kind, and our decision to do so is the only decision that matters in the race/class/religious/political wars.

 

 

 

I'm out of likes, so a giant  :iagree:

 

 

 

I think you would get more value from researching these things on your own than trotting out spurious news stories that are (as far as I can tell) from white supremacist sources and expecting us to debunk them for you. Several of us posted a lot of stories, documentary links, books and so forth. There has been plenty of meat to get you started, if that is your real goal.

:iagree:

 

This is all just so offensive and backwards that I'll leave it there so I'm not banned. 

[Cammie]

:iagree:

 

The bolded is often the case.  People who have had the privilege of holding the "majority" belief or protected right for so incredibly long are unaccustomed to others vocalizing their dissent.  That part, the vocalization, is what has become more popular and common over the last, say, 25 - 30 years.  It makes people uncomfortable and they mistake it for being attacked or belittled, when really it's just people who have traditionally held their tongues actually speaking up and speaking out. 

 

Quoting because I am not able to give this 100 likes.  I think  you hit the nail on the head.  Certain groups are certainly feeling like they are under attack because all of the sudden a huge percentage of Americans, and the media, and the world are in agreement on a number of traditionally "liberal" causes.  It must be disconcerting for those who have always seen them selves as in the majority to see that power being eroded from all directions. 

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I understand what you're saying, but the actual information was on a conservative news site. I guess that's why I'm confused.

 

Did you actually read it?  The way it was worded should have been a hint something wasn't quite right about it. 

[Slartibartfast]

I didn't have time to even mention anything about what I posted because I've been trying to look up statistics for BR crime.

 

The list was an article in The Examiner, which is definitely a conservative publication. I haven't had time to look up anything yet, and was just going to note that this might be some of the incidents the other poster above was referring to.

 

I absolutely expected that some of you would look these things up to see if they were, in fact, truth.

 

The Examiner is one of those sites where people write random articles for pennies per click. It isn't a valid source for anything. It isn't a conservative site, it is a random junk site.

[zoobie]

The Examiner is one of those sites where people write random articles for pennies per click. It isn't a valid source for anything. It isn't a conservative site, it is a random junk site.

It's made up of all the stuff your (or at least my) crazy racist uncle forwards on email.

[OnTheBrink]

I think the biggest issue is respect. I find it's rare to find people who behave respectfully when faced with an opposing pov or belief. You don't have to feel respect for others, but it hurts no one to behave respectfully. Because let's be honest here, no one has ever changed their own or anyone else's thoughts or opinions by belittling them. 

[SadieMarie]

It's made up of all the stuff your (or at least my) crazy racist uncle forwards on email.

LOL!  I bet he knows my crazy racist uncle.  It was a sad day when he learned how to surf the net.  Did you get the one about President Obama working to set himself up as a dictator instead of stepping down after two terms?  That was a good one lol.

[Joanne]

This isn't true. I remember praying with our teacher leading, in a public school in 6th grade. That wasn't a ridiculous number of years ago. There were no lynch mobs. I know of only one person who experienced abuse during that time. Most of my friends' parents were married to one another (I think by high school I had met 2 people who had parents that were divorced). The majority of my friends had moms who stayed at home. There were always moms involved in the schools, being room mothers and the like, so I know a lot of the moms stayed home.

 

I also babysat for a LOT of families in middle school and high school. I don't remember ever babysitting for any who had been divorced, and most of them were single income families. One couple I sat for had 2 jobs. I kept the kids from 3-5 which was between when she left for her nursing shift and he got home from work.

 

Maybe I didn't live in the real world, but whatever it was, it seemed a lot better than what it is now.

 

 

1. Prayer happens in schools, it is just private. If you allow (Christian) prayer, will you also also a Wiccan casting a circle?
2. I remember race riots and lynch mobs.
3. You know of one person who experienced abuse because spousal, elder, and child abuse was not discussed or talked about. When I was sexually abused by a *family member* and my parents went to the Pastor (in 1970's), they were told not to do anything about it.
4. There are moms (and DADS) involved in elementary schools across the country - not just in private schools similar to where I work.
5. What makes "stay at home" better, inherently?
6. People weren't divorced, but that does not = happy, healthy, vibrant marriage. All you can know is that it means not divorced (on paper).

It was also the time (I assume we are somewhat close in age) of mental illness being underdiagnosed and undertreated. Bullying was rampant. Hazing (sports teams, military, Greek society) was the norm. Qualified women were routinely turned down for higher level work. The mechansims to protect children, women, and the elderly were minimal and rudimentary (remember Hedda Nessbaum?). Smoking cigarettes was common, and the 1-3 drink a day was also common. Oh! And drunk driving typicaly meant that a person would be allowed to DRIVE HOME with a reminder to "be careful."  The Roman Catholic church was as a system hiding pedophelia. It was okay to hit children with hairbrushes, belts, and paddles. Washing mouths out with soap was a known discipline tool. (And, to an earlier poster "spare the rod, spoil the child IS NOT IN THE BIBLE). Left handed people were punished. Learning disabilities punished.

 

Yea, the good old days. Awesome sauce.

[mommymilkies]

 

1. Prayer happens in schools, it is just private. If you allow (Christian) prayer, will you also also a Wiccan casting a circle?
2. I remember race riots and lynch mobs.
3. You know of one person who experienced abuse because spousal, elder, and child abuse was not discussed or talked about. When I was sexually abused by a *family member* and my parents went to the Pastor (in 1970's), they were told not to do anything about it.
4. There are moms (and DADS) involved in elementary schools across the country - not just in private schools similar to where I work.
5. What makes "stay at home" better, inherently?
6. People weren't divorced, but that does not = happy, healthy, vibrant marriage. All you can know is that it means not divorced (on paper).

It was also the time (I assume we are somewhat close in age) of mental illness being underdiagnosed and undertreated. Bullying was rampant. Hazing (sports teams, military, Greek society) was the norm. Qualified women were routinely turned down for higher level work. The mechansims to protect children, women, and the elderly were minimal and rudimentary (remember Hedda Nessbaum?). Smoking cigarettes was common, and the 1-3 drink a day was also common. Oh! And drunk driving typicaly meant that a person would be allowed to DRIVE HOME with a reminder to "be careful."  The Roman Catholic church was as a system hiding pedophelia. It was okay to hit children with hairbrushes, belts, and paddles. Washing mouths out with soap was a known discipline tool. (And, to an earlier poster "spare the rod, spoil the child IS NOT IN THE BIBLE). Left handed people were punished. Learning disabilities punished.

 

Yea, the good old days. Awesome sauce.

 

:iagree: Because I can't "like" this!

[zoobie]

LOL! I bet he knows my crazy racist uncle. It was a sad day when he learned how to surf the net. Did you get the one about President Obama working to set himself up as a dictator instead of stepping down after two terms? That was a good one lol.

I think he finally removed me from the forward list after I told him I'd be donating $1 in his name to the appropriate liberal organization for every email. I asked nicely twice to no avail.

[Scrub Jay]

 

1. Prayer happens in schools, it is just private. If you allow (Christian) prayer, will you also also a Wiccan casting a circle?
2. I remember race riots and lynch mobs.
3. You know of one person who experienced abuse because spousal, elder, and child abuse was not discussed or talked about. When I was sexually abused by a *family member* and my parents went to the Pastor (in 1970's), they were told not to do anything about it.
4. There are moms (and DADS) involved in elementary schools across the country - not just in private schools similar to where I work.
5. What makes "stay at home" better, inherently?
6. People weren't divorced, but that does not = happy, healthy, vibrant marriage. All you can know is that it means not divorced (on paper).

It was also the time (I assume we are somewhat close in age) of mental illness being underdiagnosed and undertreated. Bullying was rampant. Hazing (sports teams, military, Greek society) was the norm. Qualified women were routinely turned down for higher level work. The mechansims to protect children, women, and the elderly were minimal and rudimentary (remember Hedda Nessbaum?). Smoking cigarettes was common, and the 1-3 drink a day was also common. Oh! And drunk driving typicaly meant that a person would be allowed to DRIVE HOME with a reminder to "be careful."  The Roman Catholic church was as a system hiding pedophelia. It was okay to hit children with hairbrushes, belts, and paddles. Washing mouths out with soap was a known discipline tool. (And, to an earlier poster "spare the rod, spoil the child IS NOT IN THE BIBLE). Left handed people were punished. Learning disabilities punished.

 

Yea, the good old days. Awesome sauce.

 

 

Likety like like, likety like. :cheers2:

 

 

[JadeOrchidSong]

I only read to page 2, so I'm sorry if I am repeating someone else's point. There is a double standard. It is a double standard when the mainstream media pounces on one person's comments, and plays it over, and over, and over, as a news story, for days. It is a double standard when they IGNORE when other people make similar or worse comments, because they are in a protected minority. It is a double standard when the justice department and president will jump into the fray over one racial beating or killing, but will remain silent in another (races reversed.) You can absolutely be RUINED (witch hunt) by the media, activists, etc. Yet, other groups can say or do racist things, and there is silence.

 

It is a double standard when the news media makes it a policy to NOT mention the race of perpetrators UNLESS it is someone in the racial majority.

That is not.ok.

 

I think when such double standards are exhibited by those in power (media, government), the person who is pounced on in an uneven way, should be able to sue for harassment, especially when it can be proven through stats of news stories vs. crimes, or slander, that one racial group is being targeted for reporting more than others.

 

Edited to add: the same should be the case for people in certain religious groups vs, others, one sex over another, one sexual orientation over another, or etc. Race is just one example.

I agree! Great post!

[justasque]

Actually, there are incidences of these things, and in the very recent past. I would have to look them up.

 

Sometimes there is a double standard in the mainstream media. I wonder sometimes if they don't do it to stir up trouble and make more news.

 

 

Well, there's the problem.  They *do* absolutely do things to stir up trouble and make more news.  They slant news stories to make them more sensational.  The more clicks, the more money they make, and we are more likely to click on sensational, controversial stuff.  And both opinion show hosts and everyday bloggers often pontificate on the issues of the day without doing their homework and getting the full facts right.  You might benefit from finding some news sources that try to avoid the sensational stuff, or that take those stories and report them carefully, with good fact-checking and with enough background to put things in context.  IN another thread, people recommended NPR (radio), the BBC, and quite a few other sources that tend to avoid the "gotcha" news and focus on actually informing the listener instead of just getting them riled up.

 

 

Well, I guess those days of feeling safe do seem awesome compared to today when I'm reminded of the double homicide of my neighbors 2 days ago at every turn. Life back then was infinitely more simple than the reality of knowing the depravity that can be out there.

 

Other than that, I don't really believe that's what I'm longing for (God knows that means I'd have to relive my teens, and who wants to go there).  ;-p

 

((( StaceyinLA )))  An incident like that can really shake you up, and get you feeling cynical about the world.  See if you can keep an eye out for the good in people over the next little while. Look not at cable news or sensational web sites, but at your own neighborhood.  Find the grandma who helps in the local school, the folks who volunteer to run the Sunday school, the child who shares their treat with someone else, the busy mom who brings a dinner to someone who is ill, the retired guy who mows his disabled neighbor's lawn for free.  Those people are out there - in fact, there's a lot of them. That's the real world, not the crazy scary stories on cable news, you know?

 

You know, I am looking for information and hoping to get some real answers. I am not trying to dig a hole. I am trying to get at something that could really make a difference for me in the way I have viewed things in the past because of where I live. If I can put this stuff out there and see that it is sensationalized crap that isn't true, and that gives me a stronger perspective on unfairness, how is that a bad thing?

 

All during this thread I have been accused of supporting racism because of one comment about some stupid coach who I didn't even know before yesterday. I live in what is probably the only area of the country that still has racism, (although in my city, I am very much in the minority). I am looking for answers. I want to see the facts. I want people to help me see information that could possibly help me change attitudes of people around me for the better.

 

If that isn't worth it, I don't know what is.

 

You might want to start a thread asking about how to discern what is a good source of information, and what is telling only half-truths. I can see that you're a good person who is being fed quite a bit of misinformation, and your opinions seem to flow from that.  I'm glad you are open to learning how to sift through the click-bait and find accurate news and information.  Developing a healthy skepticism can help you to not get riled up by misinformation, and to see things in a more complex but realistic way. It can make you a better citizen, and in turn make our country better.  As homeschooling moms/afterschooling moms, the better we are at these things the better we will be at teaching our children, too.  They deserve the best information we can provide for them..

[KidsHappen]

I'm out of likes, so consider this post "liked". 

 

There is a limit on likes?

[Rosie_0801]

Here's a different perspective on the news. :lol: http://www.philosophersmail.com

[Catwoman]

There is a limit on likes?

Yes.

 

Many of us have found out the hard way. :glare:

 

I hate it when I run out of likes!!!

[SKL]

The skeptic in me wonders if the push to pc behaviour is just another divide and conquer scheme. It seems counterintuitive, but doesn't it actually make people less tolerant? There is this whole new set of social rules and anyone who doesn't follow them is harassed by those who do = more division. To teach people not to notice differences, you have to first point out the differences they are not to notice.

 

Not sure if I'm making any sense, it's getting close to my bedtime so my thinking probably isn't as sharp as it could be. Lol!

I was having a similar thought.  I want the people in the minority to be free to speak their minds.  But for that to be meaningful and sustainable, all people have to be free to speak their minds.  When the only people allowed to say what they really think are Rap artists, what is really happening? 

 

Which brings up a related issue - why are black people only allowed to have certain political views?  Is that really best for any or all of us?  This is just one example.  As a woman I've borne more than one smackdown over being pro-life and a few other things.  I don't want to get into details of each specific view, I'm trying to focus on the overall philosophy that liberty and justice for all doesn't work if it excludes any group, majority or minority.  And, that being unable to listen to others (or at least let them speak without attacking) is a very primitive condition.  Pointing out that other groups have been denied liberties or shut down in the past does not support the rationality of doing it now.

 

I'm not talking about one guy saying something racist.  I'm talking about the overall trend over recent years.

 

[Jenny in Florida]

Nope. Not at all. I'm saying EVERYONE has the right to an opinion, and people shouldn't whine and try to ruin people's lives when they have a differing one.

 

But this doesn't make sense. I mean, you know that, right?

 

If "everyone" is allowed to have an express an opinion, then everyone who doesn't agree with you has exactly as much right to disagree with you as you have to say your piece in the first place.

 

Look, I have a lot of opinions and beliefs with which many other people disagree. The fact that, if you tell me what you believe and I vigorously defend a different view or try to explain to you why what you said was hurtful to someone else does not mean I am "whining." In fact, I would argue that a person who expresses an opinion and then complains about the consequences is the one whining.

 

As others have said, you do have a right to hold and express your opinion (although many people like to conveniently forget that there are Constitutional limits to the whole free speech thing). What you don't have is a right to be immune from a response.

[Mrs Mungo]

The fact is, nearly all news sources only tell half-truths, because they often cannot discern (or are not interested in discerning) "the truth." I know a number of people who were involved in a very specific incident overseas that made the news. A number of news articles were released about it. None of them were remotely accurate. They took parts of several different incidents, mashed them up with some rumors, some direct lies from people who weren't there and presented it as a single, cohesive story.

 

Being part of the military community, I see misunderstandings and outright lies in the media *all the time*. The military has a policy to almost never answer anything that appears in the media. Commanders are told not to reply to letters from family members that appear in local media, even when it isn't true at all. For example, we once knew a company commander who had a nasty letter written about him in Stars and Stripes. It was from a family member who claimed that she had been in the hospital and nobody from the Family Readiness Group had visited her. The company commander *and* his wife (who was the FRG Leader) had both visited. But, apparently, they had failed to explicitly mention that they were there on behalf of the FRG. The family member wasn't intending to mislead people, but she did. That is the sort of thing I see *a LOT*.

[Audrey]

I think we were better off when kids still prayed in school, and were spanked on occasion, and more moms stayed home and raised children, and families went to church together, and sex and violence wasn't glorified, and people had pride in their country and were willing to fight to protect it, and when the military was treated with the respect they deserve, and when crimes were actually punished, and when teens didn't kill other teens, or toddlers, or their parents, and when school shootings weren't common, and when victims had more rights than criminals, and on and on.

 

Call me old-fashioned, stupid, ignorant, whatever. I can take it.

 

You may be all of those things, but one thing you are not is a victim.  It's good that you state what you believe so everyone will know from whence you are coming.  But, own it, girl.  Don't play the poor-me game when people point to your own exact words and call you for what you've said yourself. 

 

Personally, I appreciate people who are right upfront, no filters, just saying what they think and believe.  It lets me know how high my waders need to be, or if that pool of scum is just too deep to bother.

[Joanne]

I was having a similar thought.  I want the people in the minority to be free to speak their minds.  But for that to be meaningful and sustainable, all people have to be free to speak their minds.  When the only people allowed to say what they really think are Rap artists, what is really happening? 

 

Which brings up a related issue - why are black people only allowed to have certain political views?  Is that really best for any or all of us?  This is just one example.  As a woman I've borne more than one smackdown over being pro-life and a few other things.  I don't want to get into details of each specific view, I'm trying to focus on the overall philosophy that liberty and justice for all doesn't work if it excludes any group, majority or minority.  And, that being unable to listen to others (or at least let them speak without attacking) is a very primitive condition.  Pointing out that other groups have been denied liberties or shut down in the past does not support the rationality of doing it now.

 

I'm not talking about one guy saying something racist.  I'm talking about the overall trend over recent years.

 

 

WTH are you talking about?

And, besides the bold, who in the US isn't "allowed to speak their minds?" Maybe you don't live in the US.

[SKL]

WTH are you talking about?

And, besides the bold, who in the US isn't "allowed to speak their minds?" Maybe you don't live in the US.

 

Condoleeza Rice for one example out of many.  Bill Cosby for another.  I could go on all night but I have better things to do.

 

Your tone implies you are intolerant of my freedom of expression.

 

[Jenny in Florida]

Well it doesn't surprise me that people think religious opposition to anything is on the hate continuum, but there ARE people with religious convictions and they are entitled to their right to have them. 

 

One of the biggest reasons (actually probably the ONLY reason) I wind up voting against gay marriage is because, in general, those who support gay marriage are pro-choice. Murdered babies take priority for me. I don't think there is really anything more hateful in this world.

 

And, see, the idea that "religious" gives you a pass just doesn't work for me. You know what? I'm religious, too. And there are many denominations and individual churches who do not agree with your stance on the marriage equality issue. In fact, there are several denominations who are actively working against you, because they consider the kind of discrimination that passively sitting by and allowing others to deny a minority human rights is religiously abhorrent.

 

And, not to bust your bubble, but I'm a big advocate of marriage equality AND pro-life. 

 

Of course, I'm pro-all-life, which means I don't kill animals and eat them. I don't support the death penalty. 

 

One of my personal pet peeves is people who use that term "pro-life" in such a limited, specific way.

[justasque]

... When the only people allowed to say what they really think are Rap artists, what is really happening? 

 

...

 

 

I don't understand this comment, but maybe we live in very different communities.  

 

My world is filled with all kinds of people saying what they really think.  In-person I discuss current events with friends, family members, neighbors, etc.  In the media I read bloggers (both pro and amateur), and news sources (local newspapers, online news sites, international sites), plus I listen to the radio and to podcasts from several countries.  Online of course I have all of you.  

 

While I suppose there are rap artists here and there in all of the above, (well, maybe not at WTM, but who knows, we are multi-talented people here), the only place I encounter rap artists on a regular basis is at the gym, where they are rarely pontificating on political issues; instead they're usually urging me to shake my, er, assets in an effort to get fit.  

 

Where are you finding these rap artists, and in what context are they the only ones you feel can say what they really think?

 

ETA:

 

Condoleeza Rice for one example out of many.  Bill Cosby for another.  I could go on all night but I have better things to do.

 

Your tone implies you are intolerant of my freedom of expression.

Wait - What?

Condoleeza Rice and Bill Cosby aren't rap artists.

Condoleeza Rice was Secretary of State and is a serious piano player.

Bill Cosby is a comedian.

[Joanne]

 

 

I don't understand this comment, but maybe we live in very different communities.  

 

My world is filled with all kinds of people saying what they really think.  In-person I discuss current events with friends, family members, neighbors, etc.  In the media I read bloggers (both pro and amateur), and news sources (local newspapers, online news sites, international sites), plus I listen to the radio and to podcasts from several countries.  Online of course I have all of you.  

 

 

 

 

A quick scroll through my very diverse FB newsfeed belies the idea that there is not freedom of expression.

[Jenny in Florida]

As far as I know the government is in no way restricting his right to state his opinion, and I agree there should be no *government* sanction related to his statements.

 

If his statements violated the contract he signed with the NBA they are within their rights to respond as laid out in the contract.

 

As I understand it, the person who made and then leaked the tapes was his own mistress. It's not like the government bugged his home and used the tapes to prosecute him. 

 

As a result of the negative publicity generated by his offensive remarks, other businesses pulled their sponsorship from the team he owns. It seems to me that this is one of those cases in which one person had the right to express his opinion, and other people who run businesses who disagreed with him responded by refusing to give their money to a man they find reprehensible. 

 

His team is part of a league, also, as I understand it, a private business. The league, with whom he has some sort of contractual agreement (I am so not a sports person!) determined that he had in some way broken their rules and imposed punishment.

 

This was all done by private individuals and commercial businesses. The government was no involved. There was no abuse of power.

 

Apparently, there is some provision in the league agreement that he signed that allows the league to force him to sell the team. Please note that he will receive fair market value for his asset. He's hardly going to be "ruined."

[Jenny in Florida]

 

So basically you can have any opinion you want, but you'd better censor it but good if you participate in the US economy.  Or have pretty much any aspirations whatsoever.

 

Thomas Jefferson would never have been allowed to write the Declaration of Independence under these rules.  Nor would Abraham Lincoln have been able to write the Emancipation Proclamation.  Pretty much nobody would have been able to write or do anything of value because everyone has expressed some politically incorrect thought at some time or other.

 

 

A couple of thoughts:

 

1. There are plenty of businesses that make hay by capitalizing on their conservative values. Like individuals, businesses are free to express their opinions, as long as they are willing to accept the consequences. That goes both ways. Disney has been subjected to a number of boycotts over the years by various conservative groups. Lots of conservatives will proudly tell you that they don't go to mainstream movies or see films starring certain actors, because they do not support the values they believe those films express. I don't think any of us would argue that parents should purchase video games they think are unacceptable for their children in the name of "fairness" or "free speech." These freedoms for both ways.

 

2. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor Abraham Lincoln represented a business. The situations are not comparable.

[StaceyinLA]

And, see, the idea that "religious" gives you a pass just doesn't work for me. You know what? I'm religious, too. And there are many denominations and individual churches who do not agree with your stance on the marriage equality issue. In fact, there are several denominations who are actively working against you, because they consider the kind of discrimination that passively sitting by and allowing others to deny a minority human rights is religiously abhorrent.

 

And, not to bust your bubble, but I'm a big advocate of marriage equality AND pro-life.

 

Of course, I'm pro-all-life, which means I don't kill animals and eat them. I don't support the death penalty.

 

One of my personal pet peeves is people who use that term "pro-life" in such a limited, specific way.

This was addressed and clarified much earlier in the thread, wherein I stated that if someone is pro gay marriage but also pro-choice (as is often the case with politicians), I'd not vote for them because being pro-life (for the unborn) is more important of an issue FOR ME.

 

If you read further you will also read more about how I feel regarding the gay marriage issue overall.

[Mrs Mungo]

He's hardly going to be "ruined."

Good point. The guy in question is a *billionaire*.

[Jenny in Florida]

I thought I rendered you speechless...

 

Some things:

 

Murdering other kids, family members, etc., some just for the fun of it, or to see what it "felt" like (certainly including mass shootings)

 

Bullying (obviously prevalent since my thoughts on the matter were quickly shut down)

 

Social behaviors that get progressively worse (have any of you seen some of the parties/orgies/dances, etc.)

 

Blatant disrespect towards adults and those in authority positions

 

Threatening those in authority positions (teachers especially)

 

Just entitlement attitudes in general that they seem to "deserve" everything

 

 

Certainly some of this is parenting, or lack of, but there are some huge social problems going on with our teen culture.

 

 

Oh, goodness. 

 

Most (maybe all?) of the things you listed have been around forever. The difference, I think, is that a lot of them were simply accepted. No one questioned whether it was okay to pick on the fat kid. So, it didn't get discussed on Fox News.

 

As for the "social behaviors" you mentioned, I think I could tell you stories about the kids I hung out with during my own youth more 35 years ago that might be pretty upsetting to you. And we were tame compared to many of the others we knew. Meanwhile, my own son and his friends are doing well in school, going to church (not one you'd approve of, of course), devoting themselves to cool activities like dance and singing and film-making and working on the school newspaper, volunteering for community organizations, working for social change . . . I hardly think the youth of today are blazing any trails with regard to bad behavior. With the internet and various electronic gadgets, it's just a whole lot easier to share evidence of that behavior with the world.

[SKL]

2. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor Abraham Lincoln represented a business. The situations are not comparable.

 

They represented large populations of American citizens, though.  (Actually they both were business men, but that was not as important in this context.)

 

There were plenty of other influential people who were also business men and who also had expressed opinions in the past.  Everyone has.  It isn't wrong to be a represent a business (or a population) AND have an opinion.

[StaceyinLA]

Oh, goodness.

 

Most (maybe all?) of the things you listed have been around forever. The difference, I think, is that a lot of them were simply accepted. No one questioned whether it was okay to pick on the fat kid. So, it didn't get discussed on Fox News.

 

As for the "social behaviors" you mentioned, I think I could tell you stories about the kids I hung out with during my own youth more 35 years ago that might be pretty upsetting to you. And we were tame compared to many of the others we knew. Meanwhile, my own son and his friends are doing well in school, going to church (not one you'd approve of, of course), devoting themselves to cool activities like dance and singing and film-making and working on the school newspaper, volunteering for community organizations, working for social change . . . I hardly think the youth of today are blazing any trails with regard to bad behavior. With the internet and various electronic gadgets, it's just a whole lot easier to share evidence of that behavior with the world.

Yeah, I've pretty much been hammered for that post as well. It's the way it seems to me. There probably is truth in how much more "in our face" it is because of social media, and media in general.

 

The church comment was uncalled for, as I don't feel the need to judge your choice of where to worship.

[Jenny in Florida]

When I search phrases from that block of text, Stacey, all I get is white supremacist websites. Source? Link?

 

Wow, yes, The "White Unity" blog?

 

White News Now?

[justasque]

As I understand it, the person who made and then leaked the tapes was his own mistress. It's not like the government bugged his home and used the tapes to prosecute him.

Quite. For me, this is very much a case where Mr. Sterling has made his own bed, and now he must lie in it. If you choose to have both a wife and a mistress, you can expect a certain amount of drama as a result, and if you are a wealthy public figure, the drama may spill over into the press, regardless of details about the legality of covert taping in your state. Had Mr. Sterling lived a quiet life, remaining faithful to his wife, he might not have found himself in his present predicament, even if he had expressed the same controversial views privately to his wife.

[Jenny in Florida]

 

1. You know of one person who experienced abuse because spousal, elder, and child abuse was not discussed or talked about. When I was sexually abused by a *family member* and my parents went to the Pastor (in 1970's), they were told not to do anything about it.

 

 

Yep, in my idyllic suburban city (which grew significantly when nearby Los Angeles was about to implement bussing to integrate their schools and a lot of white folks want to run away), we had one of the first large sex abuse in a Catholic church stories. 

 

Edit: I just looked it up, since I didn't remember a lot of details. According to the Los Angeles Times, the priest whose case I remembered remains on the list of the 10 priests with the most sexual abuse complaints in California. I found another article that quotes some of the public responses, such as letters to the editor of the local paper, when the case broke. There were plenty of people in my middle-class, low crime, lovely city who publicly said that the kids (some as young as 7) were making up their stories or complained that it shouldn't be wrong to "show a little affection" to a child. 

 

My gay friend was too afraid to come out because he was already being bullied at school for "acting gay." He spent a lot of time after high school struggling with addiction and some other problems sparked by the pain of dealing with the way people treated him.

 

Another guy I knew was sexually abused by his stepfather. His mother threw him out of the house when he tried to tell her about it.

 

Really, none of this is new.