Hmmmmmmm.......Did you not just judge me? And lump me into a group that runs around wearing white sheets and pointed hats? You are naive!
What's not fair about it? Stereotyping may not be PC, but it's human nature, and it's based on the instinct of self-preservation. To suggest that people should shun the conclusions they come to naturally as a result of their experiences, is unrealistic, unreasonable...and not going to happen. You know, stereotyping used to work very well for society. It caused stigmas - and stigmas kept people from acting in socially unacceptable ways. It was stigmas that kept young ladies from having babies at age 15. They knew that having an out-of-wedlock kid at that age could ruin their reputation for life, and so they made sure they didn't get pregant. And if they did, they didn't advertise it as something to be proud of. Getting in fights at school placed the stigma of "loser" on a young man...so young men didn't start fights in the hallways and classrooms with anyone who they felt "dissed" them. Being on welfare placed the stigma of "inadequate" on a head of a household, so parents worked hard to support themselves and their families. There was pride in not being supported by other people and shame in having to accept charity and handouts. Now all these stigmas are gone, thanks to PC panderers, and look what has happened. Milllions of girls having babies earlier and earlier and bragging about the baby-daddy based not on his involvement in the child's life (they don't expect him to be involved), but on his reputation as a gang-banger. Young men - and young women, for that fact - now just as soon start a fight with someone they "think" has looked at them wrong...it happens every single day in our schools. And they get respect from their peers for it. And welfare...geesh,don't get me started. Getting as many free handouts as possible is a much-respected art form in some cultures. And how, pray tell, do you know what is in a stranger's heart? Why? Because in your experience, those wearing sheets and pointed hats did bad things? Well guess what.... The same people you are calling down for stereotyping, are simply doing the same thing. Black kid with the crotch of their pants down to the knees, do-rag on the head, threatening swagger? Looks like a thug to me. Black kid wearing a parka with an orange liner in 60 degree weather? Sounds like a black "stealer" to me. Black kid with all red accessories? Looks like a gang-banger (or gang-banger wanna be, which is just as bad) to me. These outter "appearances" tells most productive citizens to be afraid, stay away from them, and guard the safety of yourself, your family and your posessions. And thats because when these things happen - crime, intimidation, violence....this is the way the perpetrators are dressed. And if you were to walk into most local middle or high schools, you'll notice that the majority of the black kids are dressed just like that. They know what these forms of attire say to the rest of society. If they don't want to be stereotyped, they can make the choice not to imitate those they least want to be associated with. The fact that they don't, says alot. And the fact that their parents spend money to help them imitate thugs, gang-bangers and criminals...tells even more. It tells me that the values and priorities that I attribute to that culture are indeed enforced by the parents as well as the kids and their peers. In other words, my "stereotyping" appears to be right on the money. I get it. If it's YOUR experience and stereotype, it's okay. If its anyone elses, it's not. Gotcha. And tell us...would you accept an organ from one of the folks in a white sheet if you needed it?
harleygirl wrote I agree,she? hits kind of hard,,doesn't she, (her answer to Grace Slick) She Tells it like it is,Maybe she should run for public office Scarey isn't she,,a smart woman:lol:
What's really scary is how polarized this discussion has become. It all seems to be "us against them." Whatever happened to "Love thy neighbor . . . ;" "Do unto others . . . ;" Judge not . . . " ?
which is precisely why the problems remain unsloved -- until we are willing to make an effort towards understanding and towards reaching out, not just in government programs, but individual to individual the problems will remain with us always -- collectively we must make an effort towards understanding, towards compassion and empathy -- seems to me when i posted a thread on darfur i was shot down because so many on 4042.com felt "we" should take care of our own and yet this thread says the opposite in so many ways -- there are three ways to be poor -- there is the working poor, the situational poor (due to a death, or loss of a job, or medical disability, etc.) and then there is generational poverty -- all these areas need to addressed -- like it or not we are all tied to one another in so many many ways -- and what impacts the least of us will eventually impact the greatest of us....
Can you provide examples of how you feel "we" need to make more effort towards "understanding" and "reaching out"? Where is the "refuses to get off their duffs and make an honest effort to support themselves" way to be poor? Or do you refuse to see the reality of the existance of that category?
get involved with the very ones you deem as "unsaveable" -- isn't that what Jesus did -- associate with the thieves and prostitutes, the lepers -- isn't that what he asks us to do?? mentor a child who has less than you, volunteer in the local boys and girls clubs, tutor in an adult literacy program, be a foster parent, volunteer in a school that has a high poverty rate, encourage your church/congregation to adopt a school in a high poverty area -- to assist with tutoring, etc., work to insure all children are provided decent health care, work to assure that there is affordable housing that is livable and close to jobs, assure that mental health and substance abuse programs are available, support the increase of minimum wage --if you are tired of funding the handout -- what are you doing to be the hand up?? wwjd?? Where is the "refuses to get off their duffs and make an honest effort to support themselves" way to be poor? i don't deny their existence, but i do not believe they are the majority of the poor (studies done by non partisan and partisan groups alike show that to be true) -- they make great media so therefore we are led to believe they represent all those in poverty and that is wrong -- also i might add there is an easy to read book A Framework for Understanding Poverty by Ruby K. Payne that might go a long way towards helping understanding ...
Nor does it make those assumptions any more correct than any other wild guess. People also fear the unknown, but exploring the unknown has improved our lives dramatically. Yes, and it kept those ignorant rednecks in their place. You had to know your betters and act accordingly didn't you? Stigma's prevented out-of-wedlock children, no wait they caused more people to get married to prevent the out-of-wedlock birth of a child. If they had prevented the pregnancy you would not have had to add the later sentence. It did seem to move the fights to after school, but it did not prevent them by any means. Which really improved the plight of the people who were in such situations, did it not? The poor houses and debtors prisons were also good investments in society were they not? Nah, more like civilization has moved on. We no longer have such a short life expectancy that children of 15 really need to be married. You are not trying to interject a racial stereotype in here are you? Of course you are, because it does not make as big of an impact if you cannot point to a "them" to dislike. There was never such a time before either? Of course not, or you would know of it. Yes, "some" cultures as in those who are formed around this view. More generalizations and stereotypical statements which are supposed to be taken at face value due to their generality and presentation as if they were factual in some way. Other than a personal belief can you provide some semblance of proof for your statements? Anecdotal examples do not work either unless you want anecdotal evidence in return. You do not, but you assume the worst just to be safe right? Or is it just based on prejudice and bias? What of a WHITE kid with these attributes? They should imitate the white kids? The ones NOT also wearing the clothes you oppose? You have to love circular logic especially in the realm of bigotry. Nice pot-kettle reply there .... :roll: Yes, I would. Why let a good organ go to waste if they were an organ donor?
To return to the original part of the thread, the state and federal governments involved owe aplogies for their involvement in the slavery, Anmerican Indian treatment, and the Japanese internment issues. I do not believe reparations are appropriate but an apology is. There are no slave owners still living but the governments are still "living" and were involved.
I'll handle you in several posts Wayne...you deserve a thorough response. I have taken the liberty to remove your strawmen, however. :mrgreen: Stereotypes are more than often correct. You may not find them politically correct, but they are correct. People are smarter than you give them credit for, Wayne. A person of sound mind knows the difference between one anecdote...and repeated displays of behavior by a group that shares traits. It is human nature to learn from experience and act on those lessons. That you think it's "unfair" doesn't matter. The fact is that these assumptions have worked for thousands of years. Original man learned that most animals with horns will hurt them...possibly kill them. Thus, they approached animals with horns with great care. Sure, there were probably some species that had a gentler disposition, however until they were darned sure which ones those were...ALL were suspect. And I guarantee that this use of learned lessons and stereotyping animals based on their appearance saved many an early man's life. Were the alleged "ignorant rednecks" causing harm to people and their property? If so, they should have been considered with care. If not, then there would be no reason to do so. See...that's what you bleeding heart liberals can't seem to figure out. There is a difference: A culture that has a disproportionate rate of crime, violence and personal injury perpetrated against others....are going to be stereotyped as dangerous. Those who exhibit the traits and behaviors of that culture will likewise be stereotyped as dangerous. A culture that displays dumb behavior that most of us wouldn't do...but that doesn't harm others nor their property....are going to be stereotyped as stupid and not something to aspire to...but not dangerous. Those that exhibit the traits and behaviors of that culture will be stereotyped as dumb and not something to look up to...but not dangerous. What you have said above, makes no sense what-so-ever. Allow me to put it in simpler terms just for you... Stigmas prevented out-of-wedlock children by causing young girls to think twice before just hopping into bed with a boy or a man, on a whim. They understood there were consequences and those consequences were long-standing. Anger and shame from parents, being looked down on by others, being considered promiscuous by the entire community. Those were bad things to happen to a girl...and they served as incentives NOT to take the chance at 15. Those stigmas are now removed by bleeding heart liberals such as yourself. How dare we call a promiscuous girl promiscuous, lest we harm her fragile self-esteem. How dare we make a girl feel she made a drastic mistake when she made that poor choice to bed a man when she was 15. Instead, lets celebrate her bad choices and reward her for her poor judgement. Lets just act like everything is normal and nothing was done wrong. And now liberals got what they wanted. Problem is, you also want those of us who made smarter choices to help pay for the results of those bad choices. And girls will continue to make those bad choices as long as parents and liberals keep rewarding them for that bad judgement and acting like nothing is wrong in what they did.
It prevented them from happening several times a day every day. Even in the late 70s when I was in high school, a fight was a big deal. It was news. It was fodder for discussion for days, even weeks. Who, why...it was not a usual event. When someone got into a fight, it caused the other kids in school to see them differently, negatively. As it should. Today, fights happen all day, every day in schools. And kids earn respect for being violent against others...do you not understand that?!?! That is not a positive thing, Wayne, it is a social tragedy. Yes, it did improve their plight. Good honest hard work is good for people. It's good for their families. It brings a sense of accomplishment. And having a sense of accomplishment causes people to want to aspire higher and accomplish more. Kids seeing their parents work hard to get over hard times is a fantastic lesson. It's a wonderful, productive thing...that sense of accomplishment. It took people places. Civilization isn't "moving on" when it become more uncivilized, Wayne. The changes we are discussing are not positive changes. What do you see as positive in the fact that over 72% of teen births in North Carolina are out of wedlock? What do you see as positive in the knowledge that there were 10,959 acts of reported crime and violence in NC schools for 2005-2006? (and those don't include the ones NOT reported...which schools are notorious for). Your insinuations of racism don't faze me, Wayne. That's an old, tired tactic of liberals that has lost it's luster...and it's power. I'm interjecting FACTS...and I realize that really throws you, but facts are a part of life. They aren't something you can pick and choose to include in your idea of reality. They are there in front of your nose, whether they fit your world or not. What? We're talking about kids who will pummel another child just because the perpetrator literally didn't like the way the kid looked at him. And no, this didn't use to happen very often at all in our schools. But it sure does now. And the fact that the few fights that used to occur happened outside of school...yet now they occur daily and INSIDE the hallways and classrooms of our schools shows an additional problem that has arisen. These kids have no respect for other students, no respect for the institution of education, and no respect for the authority of parents, staff and administration that would provide the consequences they should fear, but don't. They don't care WHO sees them fight. They don't care WHO finds out about it. That is tragic and frightening.
Here are your "non-anecdotal" examples...straight from the United Council on Welfare fraud. http://www.ucowf.org/news.hwmc-08-17-2003.htm "Forty of the 42 state fraud directors polled were of the opinion that child care fraud posed a problem in their states and of the two answering in the negative, one still provided examples of the types of child care fraud that has occurred within its boundaries. In those states that did maintain detailed statistics, fraud was discovered in upwards of 69 percent of the investigations conducted with total annual discovered fraud amounts ranging from $10,000 to over $1 million. In one recent Colorado case a client forged her pay stubs reducing the claimed amount of income to her household. As a result she received over $12,000 in child care assistance over 14 months to which she was not entitled. Two Virginia women failed to report that their husbands were employed and residing in their homes resulting in losses of $16, 482.00 and $15, 962.00, respectively. A Minnesota woman falsely reported living alone when her able-bodied husband was, in fact, in the household and collected more than $91,000 in child care assistance over four years. In another Colorado case, a client claimed residence in one county while residing in another. A recovery of $33,553.00 was established for a two year period. A Rochester, New York woman, whom I prosecuted, claimed that her brother was caring for her 11 children. Payments were sent in her brother’s name to her mother’s address. The brother, in fact, had been incarcerated for over 10 years on a rape conviction and her husband was, in fact residing in the household and caring for the children. The loss amount was limited to $77,000 because agency records failed to cover the entire period of the fraud. The illegally obtained money made the client ineligible for the food stamps the family received and the Section 8 housing in which they resided. Another Rochester woman stole an acquaintance’s social security card, established a vendor account using the acquaintance’s social security number and her own mother’s address. Twenty-seven thousand dollars in child care payments were sent to her mother who signed the checks and gave them to the recipient over a two year period. Free care for five children was provided by the client’s mother and her 85 year old grandmother. In Wyoming, two sisters claimed a third was providing day care for their children when, in fact, the third sister was fully employed and they were not. This resulted in a loss of $6,700 over a period of 14 months. Similarly, two Virginia clients, employed by the same company, claimed each provided services for the other when, in fact, they worked the same hours. A claim of $36,474.00was established. Another Virginia woman failed to report that she had lost her job on three separate occasions, yet continued to send her children to child care each time. The overpayments totaled nearly $4000."
When I am in the presence of someone who exhibits traits associated with those who are dangerous, yes...I assume the worst to be on the safe side. Its called self-preservation. I have seen white boys who have fallen for the gang-banger look thinking it's cool, and if they are hanging with the associated group, and acting as that group does, then yes....they are just as suspect. They should imitate those behaviors that gain the respect of others in society. Treating others and their property with respect, dressing in a way that does not imitate people in prison, exhibiting behaviors that do not imitate people in prison, being honest and earning what they want rather than stealing it....all these things are acceptable behavior. Doesn't matter what color they are. If they exhibit acceptable behaviors, they will be respected and accepted as contributing to society. Simple as that. Circular logic? How does defining the truth that kids who deliberately imitate criminals...and their parents who enable them to do so...are causing their own selves to be stereotyped.....to be considered circular logic? You include the most irrelevant and non-sensical things in your posts, Wayne. I called the poster out because after railing on people for stereotyping, the poster turned around and justified a prime example of her own stereotyping. How can I be calling the kettle black...when I am justifying ALL stereotyping as natural to human nature, and as a protective mechanism that works?
stereotype A stereotype is used to catergorize a group of people. People don't understand that type of person, so they put them into classifications, thinking that everyone who is that needs to be like that, or anyone who acts like their classifications is one. Stereotype for Goths are black clothes, black makeup, depressed, hated by society. Stereotype for Punks are mohawks, spikes, chains, menace to society, always getting in trouble. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stereotype
Thank you Grace...Happy Easter to you too! At least it WAS a Happy Easter until the kidlet put the malted milk balls in front of me. Now I'm simmering in a haze of sugar and misery.
