A long rant against homeschooling, or why Phillip Larkin was totally right PT 1

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • wuapinmon
    Soul Plumber
    • Dec 2008
    • 30711

    #1

    A long rant against homeschooling, or why Phillip Larkin was totally right PT 1

    I've got several points to make, so bear with me here.

    A) So, as a college professor, I am constantly astounded by the kinds of things kids put on their facebook pages for the whole world to see.

    B) Yesterday, I see the following "status update" from the child (A current BYU student) of an arch-conservative home-schooling family in my parents' ward in Atlanta, "***** is having an Martin Luther King Jr. Day party, stop by for some chocolate cake in the shape of his head. It's BYODR (Bring Your Own Du Rag).
    "
    C) Several other people I know had made comments about how funny her idea was, and proposed addendums to the party, including a "march to her house."

    D) Instead of scolding her privately for her tacit racism and signaling the presence of obtuseness and ignorance, due to the postings by other people I knew, and to hopefully shame them into taking the post down before word spread and the news latched hold of a "BYU students mock slain civil rights leader with chocolate cake and du rags" headline, I posted something along these lines (paraphrased) as a comment, "*****, I'm shocked at this level of ignorance from someone like you. Your parents would be appalled to see this. You are mocking one of the central figures of the civil rights movement, a man that many people revere for his efforts in support of the cause he championed and died for. You are a white girl from suburban Atlanta; you're civil rights have never been oppressed. Shame on all of you who thought this was funny. Take this down before it causes you big problems" and so on....that's not verbatim, but pretty close to what I was getting at.

    E) She took the post down, and put up this defiant, eighteen-year-old response:

    ***** apologizes to those who were offended, but maintains that MLK JR doesn't deserve his own holiday. Rather, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and ALL the people involved deserve to be recognized. MLK Jr was only a face. There should certainly be a holiday to celebrate and remember the Civil Rights Act of '64, but not one to celebrate MLK Jr. And, I'd like to reiterate my opinion that the Civil Rights Act of '64 was a great thing, but it would have happened with or without MLK Jr. The people who didn't get all the attention and praise are the ones that deserve the most respect--they paid the price without all the glory that MLK Jr got (for their efforts, mind you.)

    F) She then sent me this private message,
    Mac,

    A couple things--

    I'd like to apologize that my status offended you. The du rag comment was a little too far, I realize that.

    But, I would like to be sure that you dont take that to mean that I've changed my opinion of the holiday, because I certainly have not. I think MLK Jr did not deserve the enormous amount of credit he got for his average involvement. Yes, he was the face of the movement, and I imagine he did inspire many people. However, I don't think his actions warrant a holiday in his name---I would gladly celebrate a holiday (in a less ridiculous way) that was, essentially, honoring all the people involved in the success of the Civil Rights movement. But, MLK Jr is a poor face to the black community.

    Consider his many extramarital affairs. What kind of an example is he for young black men? A man who had no respect for marriage vows (or, more simply, personal commitments,) is put on a pedestal and celebrated. What message does that send to those young men? That disregarding proper behavior in relation to families and relationships is not only okay, but those who practice it are celebrated. Not for that particular action, but it is put on the back burner, as if much less important than anything else. And that isn't right. Civil rights are important. But, people have been enslaved and persecuted all through the ages. That hasn't stopped many of them from both working towards equality and living morally clean at the same time. Joseph Smith, for example, remained morally clean while trying to stop the persecution of the Mormons. And MLKJR was a Baptist minister. He knew adultery was breaking a commandment, no question about that.

    I believe that many, many good--even great-- people were involved in the civil rights movement. I don't, and will not, believe that MLK Jr was one of them.

    Sincerely,
    ***** ********

    P.S. My parents know my opinions. That isn't to say they agree with all of them, but I'm considerably offended that you would presume to tell me what would disappoint my parents. You don't know their private opinions as I do. And, they could easily see what I said. I am facebook friends with both of them.


    .................................................. .................................................. .
    So, I haven't even gotten around to responding to her yet. But, I need to vent a little. I'm often overwhelmed by the racism amongst Mormons. We're supposed to know better. I can see her taking issue with MLKJ on issues like morals, but the other rhetoric she spouts, to me, is indicative of regurgitation of ideas and theories that her parents have espoused and that she has accepted without investing much thought. Now, I do realize that she is 18, but I know lots of people who are homeschooled who think the same way. I am completely opposed to homeschooling, in almost every case, because:



    #1 Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (aka Mormons) are already on the margins of society. People view us as an oddity because of our strict doctrines, behaviors, and very different beliefs. The enduring belief that we all practice polygamy, even though over 100 years have gone by since that practice was ended, supports this point. We don't (at least we shouldn't) work or merchandise on Sundays which means that we are always crimping our friends' style about get togethers and parties [that is assuming we actually make friends outside the church--a frequent problem among Utahns who settle in the "Mission Field"]. We don't smoke, which all would agree is a good thing. We don't drink which most would agree is good in moderation, but makes for awkward moments sometimes. The thing that offends some people the most is that we don't drink coffee or tea (especially in the South). Iced tea was what I drank every day before I was baptized a member of the church. It courses through the veins of the South. We have been told since the 1830s to avoid it, that's why we don't drink it. Who knows how many chemicals, delicious delicious chemicals, it contains that might do us unknowable harm (It's the only thing I miss from my former life).

    Dating someone who is not Mormon is discouraged, not because we can't marry outside the group, but because you don't want to put yourself in a situation where your morals might be compromised by your natural feelings of affection and love for someone who doesn't, necessarily, share you same morals (and no, I'm not saying that only Mormons are moral----hardly!). It's hard enough for Mormons not to have sex with each other before marriage (which some do, sadly), let alone when you throw someone without the same morals into the mix (Again, I'm not saying that non-Mormons don't have morals). When people heard that I had only ever kissed or had sex with my wife when I got married they thought three things:

    A. He was too fat to ever get any action before (good thing I was too, cause otherwise I would've nailed anything that moved)
    B. How could he marry someone without knowing if they were compatible in bed? (Easy, we had nothing to compare with and there's a huge learning curve)
    C. That's just freaking weird!

    A kid I went to high school with thought that we didn't eat salt. Megan Hobbs told everyone in my U.S. History class that we believe in predestination (ABSOLUTELY NOT). An episode of cheers had Rebecca Howe say "Why can't more men send flowers?" To which Norm said, "Mormons can't send flowers?" and Cliff responded with some kind of historical background about why we don't send flowers. The next day at school people started asking me, "Why can't Mormons send flowers?" Of course we send flowers. (Funniest Mormon joke of all time: Will Ferrell on SNL during the Salt Lake Olympics dressed as a missionary and skiing down the mountain next to an athlete asking him if he knew about the Church). These misperceptions of who we are and what we believe already mark us as different from a young age. The media do much to reinforce stereotypes of Mormons, which couldn't be further from the truth. Nevermind that Jesus Christ is the center and focus of our religion. We are on the fringe, the margin, and anything that makes us moreso should be avoided.
    "Wuap's "problem" is that he is smart & principled & committed to a moral course of action. His actions are supposed to reflect his ethical code.
    The rest of us rarely bother to think about our actions." --Solon
  • wuapinmon
    Soul Plumber
    • Dec 2008
    • 30711

    #2
    PT2 Continued

    #2 Unless you are fabulously wealthy and never have to leave your home, you must interact with different people on a daily basis. With the focus on diversity and multi-culturism in our society you will come in contact with any variety of different people, cultures, opinions, beliefs, or habits. Woodstock, Georgia, twenty years ago the whitest county in the state (I'm guessing) is now full of other ethnicities and races. The dry cleaners next to Kroger has a shrine to Ganesh in plain view, just down the street from a Mercado Latino. I see African-Americans far more frequently around town that I did even 10 years ago. The world is a big beautiful place and in order to function in it as an adult, you need exposure to it from a young age. Adults are typically fossilized in their attitude towards change. If you've never had to deal with people until age 18, then you are ill prepared for life in the modern world. If your only friends are only ones from church, then you will be astounded when you realize that the majority of the people around you are both different from you, not Mormon, and (shocking as it might be to homeschoolers) still really decent, honest, intelligent people. The insular bubble of homeschooling creates people who can't deal with differences. I am not just speaking from having known one or two people. I can name over 20 people that I know who have been homeschooled and they almost all share these characteristics. Further isolating ourselves from the world serves no purpose. I saw The Village; all facades crumble violently when the only repair work done is on the inside.

    #3 Pride: In the Name of Love. There is a certain selfishness in any parent that wants to homeschool their children. A certain belief that "I can do it better" than the trained and educated professionals who are prepared to teach your children. Far too often homeschooled children suffer from the hen-pecking of an overprotective mother who smothers her children with their presence. Many times the homeschool parent believes that they can do a better job than anyone else. I've heard mothers talk of wanting to open a private school to educate other people's children (thus supporting the theory that the wound can only be healed by the spear that caused it) because they had been so "successful" with their own children. I know that there is no way I could teach my child calculus. Merely possessing a superior intellect doesn't mean jack if you can't teach languages, art, music, advanced math, physics, and all the other skills and knowledge your child needs. I could handle elementary school without a doubt, but if I did that, and then suddenly ushered them off to public school at grade 7, then holy crap! they'll have problems socially, which leads me to my next point.

    #4 Part of learning how to deal with people is dealing with people. If you go to school with your brothers and sisters, and your only social interactions are with kids at church, your cousins, and people on your sports rec-league teams, you are not ready for life as an adult. People are cruel, mean, unkind, asinine, rude, and will pick on you for no reason. If you've never been made fun of as a child, oh man, as an adult, we're talking Prozac or self-deception. Kids need to have crushes in third grade, get into a fight, get in trouble at school by someone else besides their parents. You need the agony of school lunch, and the joy of pizza day--little boxes of milk on a plastic tray. You need the idea of a deadline. If your assignment is late, it's a zero. Mom and Dad are less likely to punish you for missing a deadline when it's a fixed schedule.

    I laugh at homeschoolers' GPAs since their evaluations lie in the laps of their parents, given the subjective nature of parental judgement. People need deadlines and consequences. People need to fail and far more often than they do nowadays. You would have to be a complete moron to fail my Spanish class; the curriculum is designed so that everyone can pass. Failure should be an option. Not failing a grade, but failing a test. When I failed a trigonometry test in 12th grade with a 47, that was my impetus to start studying for real, to get a tutor (Joel Calhoun) and to turn around. I got a 97 on my next exam. If my parents had been teaching me that, I wouldn't have had the pressure and the stress of the deadline, and I wouldn't have learned as much as I did. Guaranteed! Kids need a healthy dose of NO, of Failure, of mockery, and of having good friends that they make away from the all-seeing eye of Mom. They need to see someone do something wrong. They need to see that other people, most people, make correct decisions and live good lives regardless of the faith (or lack of it) that they profess. They need to have the freedom to screw up "royally" and deal with the consequences of their actions from someone besides mom and dad. Nothing worse than getting inschool suspension for making fart noises when you had a substitute teacher so everyone would laugh and then the next day coming home with a form for your parents to sign detailing exactly WHY you were in trouble. That was a formative day in my childhood. If you make farting noises if you're homeschooled, you might get a timeout.

    #5 It has been my experience that homeschoolers typically believe that they are clearly smarter and better educated than their schooled peers. No doubt about this one. Classic homeschoolers' line, "That's not right, my Mom didn't teach me that." Some of them actually are smarter and better educated, the same can be said of people who are schooled. Intelligence and education are not in and of themselves guarantees for success. Without charisma you are dead in the water. Charisma can only be perfected by interacting with other people. One of the best compliments I've ever been paid (even though it was meant as an insult) was by the assistant to the president (McMinn) in my mission in Costa Rica. He told my greenie companion, quote "Be careful around Elder Williams, he has a way of getting people to do things they wouldn't normally do." Not saying that I'm charismatic, just persuasive, something I certainly didn't learn from hanging around my parents. Homeschoolers also suffer from being hothouse tomatoes. Sure you can graduate "high school" at 16, but then you are not ready maturity-wise for college. I had a 16 year old in my class once. She had been homeschooled. She was precise in her assignments, her participation in class, a model student. She also had no friends nor the tools to make them, was miserable, and didn't finish out the semester.

    #6 Torremarfilismo: Ivory tower syndrome pervades homeschoolers. The belief that you can conquer the world alone, or that the world's problems are far off or are someone else's problems comes from not being exposed to other people. "If people would just do it my way, the world would be perfect."

    #7 Kids need a break from their parents, and parents from their kids. There's something to be said for not being around people all the time. Even though I constantly whine that "It's not good for Mac to be alone" that only applies to the long term. I think it's healthy for a Mom to get a few hours of alone time each day. Raising children is hard work. Raising and educating them is two full time jobs. I wonder if anti-depressant usage is higher among homeschooling parents than others; it's a valid question.

    #8 Mixing religion and education might seem like a good idea, but it's not. While I do believe that we learn more when we are filled with the Spirit, and that a class started with a prayer was a special treat at BYU, I don't think that basing a child's education around the Gospel is a good idea. Even if your child plans to grow up to be a CES seminary teacher, he will be woefully unskilled if you teach him history from the narrow viewpoint of how it relates to the pioneers. A rigorously debated scholarly-written curriculum is vital to avoiding centrism and poor scholarship. I cringe when I read websites about LDS homeschoolers basing their studies around the Book of Mormon. This website in particular makes me cringe when I read its circular logic: http://www.ldshea.org/pages/info/Why%20LDS.htm For example, it is grossly misleading to claim that Brigham Young's opposition to tax-supported schools means that he advocated homeschooling. He thought individuals should pay for their children's education privately or through tutors as had been the custom previous to the American system.

    Come on! The Book of Mormon is Holy Scripture, not a textbook about science. Sure you can say, "Yes it is" and abstract it to fit whatever point, but why? Where's the meat? Where's the benefit, other than some self-righteous kitten-purring idea of "I'm being really obedient by "TEACHING" my child the (from) Book of Mormon?" The Church takes no official position on homeschooling other than they don't allow homeschoolers to use church buildings for their activities. I ask myself why they aren't allowed this when they allow almost any other educational activity other than election campaigning.

    I have other criticisms, which are too petty to list here. I do know one man who was homeschooled who came out ok, but he is the exception. I would love to know what people think. I know this is a long post, thank you for reading it if you made it this far.

    It's times like these when you should quote a little Philip Larkin:

    They **** you up, your mum and dad.
    They may not mean to, but they do.
    They fill you with the faults they had
    And add some extra, just for you.
    "Wuap's "problem" is that he is smart & principled & committed to a moral course of action. His actions are supposed to reflect his ethical code.
    The rest of us rarely bother to think about our actions." --Solon

    Comment

    • Jeff Lebowski
      Corporate lackey for Jesus
      • Nov 2008
      • 69687

      #3
      Homeschoolers have GPA's?????? That's hilarious. And a little freaky.

      Good for you for calling her out on the MLK thing. Perhaps she will see the light and thank you someday.

      Your analysis of the perils of homeschooling is spot on.
      "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
      "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
      "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

      Comment

      • Shaka
        Senior Member
        • Dec 2008
        • 10449

        #4
        I've often wondered if theres a correlation between homeschoolers childrens GPA's and the kids whos mothers provided the motivation to become Eagle Scouts. In both cases it might be the parent who earned the reward.

        Comment

        • ERCougar
          Junior Member
          • Nov 2008
          • 10978

          #5
          Aaahhh...the homeschooling debate again. You make some good points about the dangers, but I honestly don't get the animosity. I don't homeschool, but as I've watched my 2nd grader be bored out of his mind in his 2nd grade class, I'm really tempted. I'm not necessarily convinced I could do it better. The problem is that the attention of the teacher is demanded by the few slow kids in the class. So yeah, I could do better than the non-attention he's getting. I don't blame her either--I can't say I'd make huge extra efforts when they don't pay me squat. I'm really frustrated with Utah education. In Michigan, he completed Kindergarten in a gifted program that was outstanding. He was right in the middle of the class as far as abilities go. We move to Utah and he's ahead of the fourth graders. That's really frustrating, and I can understand the impulse to want to try it yourself.

          My wife, who grew up in the same school system, recalls being told fairly early on, that she's lucky she's smart because she "wouldn't ever have to work very hard in school." Great.

          There are definitely the homeschoolers who want to protect their kids from worldly influences. I disagree with this decision as I think a key component of education (both moral and secular) is encountering opposing viewpoints. Some parents want to protect their kids from social situations. In rare cases, I think this can be beneficial to the kid. The harms are overblown, as I'm not sure the "social skills" that kids learn in school are terribly valuable in their life. In the end, weird parents will raise weird kids, whether they go to public or home school.

          On racism in the church--I've made my thoughts clear on this before, but I think it's much more prevalent than anyone wants to admit. I've encountered this anti-MLK nonsense before in the church, and the person always pulls the extramarital affair card as justification (curiously, this one's ignored with other American heroes...). The priesthood ban's effects are not completely eliminated. One day they will be.
          At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
          -Berry Trammel, 12/3/10

          Comment

          • SteelBlue
            Senior Member
            • Nov 2008
            • 8189

            #6
            Originally posted by ERCougar View Post
            On racism in the church--I've made my thoughts clear on this before, but I think it's much more prevalent than anyone wants to admit. I've encountered this anti-MLK nonsense before in the church, and the person always pulls the extramarital affair card as justification (curiously, this one's ignored with other American heroes...). The priesthood ban's effects are not completely eliminated. One day they will be.
            I've only heard the extra-marital affairs argument from LDS folks. They used to mix it in with the communist accusations for good measure back when I was a kid.

            Comment

            • il Padrino Ute
              Junior Member
              • Nov 2008
              • 19161

              #7
              Originally posted by wuapinmon View Post
              #3 Pride: In the Name of Love.
              [youtube]RJCGYn_nhGQ[/youtube]
              "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill


              "I only know what I hear on the news." - Dear Leader

              Comment

              • RobinFinderson
                Banned
                • Nov 2008
                • 10548

                #8
                Holy Moses! Man you have a lot to say. I think some of your points have some merit, but as with most things, there isn't a right and wrong answer on the issue of homeschooling.

                So I'll play the contrarian, mostly for the fun of testing your ideas (so don't take it personally).

                First, regarding the MLK story, your student makes a pretty decent point, and she shares her ideas with quite a few black people, particularly black people who were part of the civil rights movement, but who had opposing views to King. Like King, Malcolm X has become the definitive figurehead for the alternate view, namely the willingness to demand equal rights under the law, even if it would require the use of force. These were competing MOVEMENTS, with many leaders. While most people have no problem recognizing MLK day as a celebration of the DREAM, dreamt by many, but best articulated by one (King), some people are a little bit sore that the emphasis wasn't spread a little wider. That's just different ways of seeing the world. Personally, its easy for me to see MLK day as an abstraction for all of that, but if a person prefers Stokely Carmichael to MLK, I can see why the holiday might irk.

                Of course her initial presentation of her thoughts, in a Facebook announcement, definitely lacks tact, and would lead a reasonable person to conclude that she is acting in a racist way. Still, I would be slow to assume the worst of her. For example, I have a gay, NYC-based secular Jewish friend. When we grab a bite to eat, I might joke with him and offer to tip for both of us in order to make sure the waiter gets a full 20%. I make a joke based on a terrible Jewish stereotype. He in turn might ask me if I have managed to convince any of the women that we both know to become a second or third wife. Between the two of us, our relationship is friendly enough, that these kinds of jokes don't matter. The tone, delivery and context communicate an awareness that the joke would be despicable, but for the camaraderie. Was this like your student, speaking as if to an intimate audience, not realizing how tone deaf her words would read to a broader audience? Could her real discretion be lack of tact, rather than anything really racist?

                As for homeschooling, I tend to agree that the majority of kids who go through it come out distinctly weird, but I tend to think this is a critique of the average homeschooling parents, rather than homeschooling in general. Homeschooling is actually a lovely idea, with roots in the rural agrarian culture (ie. Middle America and the American West). Anyone who cherishes time with their children above all else should be able to understand the appeal of homeschooling.

                But is homeschooling GOOD for children? I would argue that the quality of homeschooling depends on two things -- the quality of the parents as teachers, and the ability of the parents to provide strong social experience. Where I really tend to agree with you is in the fact that there are a lot of parents who homeschool who are not up to the task. But there are also a lot of good ones.

                And that brings me to my last point. There are very different homeschooling cultural trends. The one that you seem to be talking about are the religious homeschoolers, the ones taken out of class by parents that want them to avoid the world's giant taint. But there are also hippie home schoolers, and academic home schoolers. Most of the Mormon homeschoolers I have known fell into the religious class, but I have also have academic-type LDS friends who plan on homeschooling. I expect they will do very well.

                Comment

                • RobinFinderson
                  Banned
                  • Nov 2008
                  • 10548

                  #9
                  Originally posted by SteelBlue View Post
                  I've only heard the extra-marital affairs argument from LDS folks. They used to mix it in with the communist accusations for good measure back when I was a kid.
                  If this was the student's POV, Chief Wuapinmon did well to rein the kid in. I've heard this crap before too, even from bright Mormons who should know better.
                  Last edited by RobinFinderson; 01-11-2009, 09:12 AM.

                  Comment

                  • wuapinmon
                    Soul Plumber
                    • Dec 2008
                    • 30711

                    #10
                    Originally posted by wuapinmon View Post
                    Joseph Smith, for example, remained morally clean while trying to stop the persecution of the Mormons. And MLKJR was a Baptist minister. He knew adultery was breaking a commandment, no question about that.
                    I'm debating whether or not to mention to her that many non-LDS people view Joseph Smith as an adulterer because of polygamy....in her mind I'll become a heretic for saying that, and while I regard him as a prophet, most of the world does not, quite the opposite. What do yall think? Should I bring it up?
                    "Wuap's "problem" is that he is smart & principled & committed to a moral course of action. His actions are supposed to reflect his ethical code.
                    The rest of us rarely bother to think about our actions." --Solon

                    Comment

                    • woot
                      Resident Science Cop
                      • Nov 2008
                      • 5531

                      #11
                      Originally posted by wuapinmon View Post
                      I'm debating whether or not to mention to her that many non-LDS people view Joseph Smith as an adulterer because of polygamy....in her mind I'll become a heretic for saying that, and while I regard him as a prophet, most of the world does not, quite the opposite. What do yall think? Should I bring it up?
                      It might be helpful if you put in context of the way he practiced polygamy, rather than the doctrine of polygamy itself. I doubt that most mormons think that sending men on missions so he could marry their wives or guilting teenagers into marrying him on pain of hellfire were things he was expressly commanded to do.

                      Comment

                      • Babs
                        Not a Lawyer
                        • Nov 2008
                        • 17128

                        #12
                        Originally posted by wuapinmon View Post
                        MLK JR doesn't deserve his own holiday. Rather, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and ALL the people involved deserve to be recognized. MLK Jr was only a face. There should certainly be a holiday to celebrate and remember the Civil Rights Act of '64, but not one to celebrate MLK Jr. And, I'd like to reiterate my opinion that the Civil Rights Act of '64 was a great thing, but it would have happened with or without MLK Jr.
                        oh. my. god.

                        I'm speechless.

                        Is she really so ignorant? So misinformed? Or is she simply using her burgeoning rhetorical talent to construct a weak argument in a poor attempt to mask her racially-motivated resentment that a (gasp) black man should have his own holiday?


                        The people who didn't get all the attention and praise are the ones that deserve the most respect--they paid the price without all the glory that MLK Jr got.
                        John 15:13
                        Greater love has no man than this: that he should lay down his life for his friends.

                        Comment

                        • Jeff Lebowski
                          Corporate lackey for Jesus
                          • Nov 2008
                          • 69687

                          #13
                          Originally posted by wuapinmon View Post
                          I'm debating whether or not to mention to her that many non-LDS people view Joseph Smith as an adulterer because of polygamy....in her mind I'll become a heretic for saying that, and while I regard him as a prophet, most of the world does not, quite the opposite. What do yall think? Should I bring it up?
                          Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, etc. would probably be better starting points for a discussion. If she is a typical homeschooler, the founding fathers will be demigods to her.
                          "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                          "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                          "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                          Comment

                          • TripletDaddy
                            sweet triple
                            • Nov 2008
                            • 58186

                            #14
                            So are we basically saying that there is no room for humor? MLK is now a sacred cow? A chocolate MLK cake is not racism. It may be ignorance, esp if her audience would be sensitive to this, but why is it racism? I am not even convinced that do-rags are racist. There is no evidence in that facebook post that this girl feels that blacks are an inferior race, that they should be denied legal rights or equal treatment, or that she hates black people.

                            Her stance towards MLK as civil rights figurehead reflects immaturity, but not racism, esp if she is advocating that everyone involved, black or white, should get credit for the Civil Rights movement.

                            Hypersensitivity to all things race and gender seem to hinder the discussion as much as ignorance. This girl is guilty of stupidity, not racism. What am I missing here?
                            Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

                            sigpic

                            Comment

                            • RobinFinderson
                              Banned
                              • Nov 2008
                              • 10548

                              #15
                              Word, DDD.

                              Another example of hyper-racial sensitivity in recent media was the blow-up over Chip Saltsman passing around a CD with the song Barack The Magic Negro, to the tune of Puff the Magic Dragon.

                              The magical negro is a reference to the way fictional blacks were often portrayed in stories written by white people -- through their bumbling and common sense, the magical negro would rescue white people from themselves. The term 'magical negro' makes reference to the period when these stories were most popular (blacks were commonly called negroes), and is supposed to be a TIC way of exposing the racism (which would not have been overtly apparent at the time) in these black stereotypes.

                              SO when Saltsman suggests that the country might have seen Obama has a 'magical negro' type, he is using the idea in the same way that it is used in academic circles. I think it is useful to point out that Republicans were the first to pounce on him for this usage, and some liberals (disappointingly) followed suite after that.

                              Comment

                              Working...