When to blame the young person, the school, the diocese?

123457

Comments

  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    There is in any case an important difference between, everyone did something stupid and insensitive when younger, and, everyone did something stupid and insensitive therefore we shouldn't say it's stupid and insensitive.
  • Dafyd wrote: »
    There is in any case an important difference between, everyone did something stupid and insensitive when younger, and, everyone did something stupid and insensitive therefore we shouldn't say it's stupid and insensitive.

    I did stupid and insensitive things when I was younger. My age didn't make those things less stupid or insensitive. It doesn't absolve me of responsibility for them. About the only excuse I can offer is that, back then, I didn't know any better. Now, hopefully I do. (Most of the time. Sadly not all).

    The boys' behaviour was stupid and insensitive. The behaviour of the adults around them wasn't much better. The apple doesn't appear to have fallen far from the tree.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    And I will point out, once again, the enormous difference between doing something stupid and insensitive because we're young and ignorant and then -- rather than simply apologizing -- hiring PR firms and lawyers to defend and/or explain away our stupid insensitivity on national TV.

    Explaining that one's racism stems from youth and ignorance doesn't remove the racism. It simply advertises the fact that you've never had to consider any viewpoints or experience beyond your own.

    IMO, that is one of the most poisonous aspects of privilege and the development of all these "gated educational communities" in the US which segregate our young into economically-landscaped ghettoes.

  • Ohher wrote: »
    And I will point out, once again, the enormous difference between doing something stupid and insensitive because we're young and ignorant and then -- rather than simply apologizing -- hiring PR firms and lawyers to defend and/or explain away our stupid insensitivity on national TV.

    Explaining that one's racism stems from youth and ignorance doesn't remove the racism. It simply advertises the fact that you've never had to consider any viewpoints or experience beyond your own.

    IMO, that is one of the most poisonous aspects of privilege and the development of all these "gated educational communities" in the US which segregate our young into economically-landscaped ghettoes.

    Exactly. The first reaction to the situation by the adults in the room was to get lawyered up and attempt to explain the whole thing away / blame others for what happened. It's not a great example to set a young person.
  • Twilight wrote: »
    ...And I did not suggest that Mousethief or Rossweisse ever did anything racist. Dumb and racist are two different things.
    Well, thank you for that much.

  • I just want to say that, as the teacher at a private school in the American South/Southwest who is about to take a group of students to DC, I have a list of warnings I will be giving them tomorrow. These will include reminding them to dress warmly, as DC, unlike the real South, is cold in February. It will also include.... other things. I certainly would never allow a student to wear a MAGA hat on a school-sponsored trip. As a teacher, I don't share my political beliefs with students (at least in terms of American politics, although -- as a world history teacher -- I have been accused of bias against the Chinese Communist Party and the British Conservative Party).
  • Rossweisse wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    ...And I did not suggest that Mousethief or Rossweisse ever did anything racist. Dumb and racist are two different things.
    Well, thank you for that much.

    Heh. Being called dumb by Twilight is especially meaningful to me.
  • TwilightTwilight Shipmate
    I didn't call either one of you dumb, I asked if you hadn't done some dumb things when you were sixteen.
    Ohher wrote: »
    And I will point out, once again, the enormous difference between doing something stupid and insensitive because we're young and ignorant and then -- rather than simply apologizing -- hiring PR firms and lawyers to defend and/or explain away our stupid insensitivity on national TV.

    And I'll point out once again that the person criticized here for his parents hiring a PR firm was Sandmann who did nothing racist, stupid or insensitive at all. He did not dance, cheer, nor make a tomahawk motion. He stood still and smiled. Why should he have apologized for that? Or do you expect all of these kids to apologize to you for being born into well-to-do families or blamed for their parents choice of school? Maybe they should just apologize for being white and privileged. Why is it so very important to you that this kid grovel to you?

  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited February 8
    Do you not recognise the expression on his face as contempt ? For reference.
  • TubbsTubbs Admin
    edited February 8
    Twilight wrote: »
    I didn't call either one of you dumb, I asked if you hadn't done some dumb things when you were sixteen.
    Ohher wrote: »
    And I will point out, once again, the enormous difference between doing something stupid and insensitive because we're young and ignorant and then -- rather than simply apologizing -- hiring PR firms and lawyers to defend and/or explain away our stupid insensitivity on national TV.

    And I'll point out once again that the person criticized here for his parents hiring a PR firm was Sandmann who did nothing racist, stupid or insensitive at all. He did not dance, cheer, nor make a tomahawk motion. He stood still and smiled. Why should he have apologized for that? Or do you expect all of these kids to apologize to you for being born into well-to-do families or blamed for their parents choice of school? Maybe they should just apologize for being white and privileged. Why is it so very important to you that this kid grovel to you?

    No one expects grovelling. Maybe just an acknowledgement being part of a group that's cat-calling at girls * and a Native American may, to the casual observer, make you look racist and sexist. Even if you’re not. .

    No one in the group – either the adults or the young people – had enough sense to realise how this could look to others or do something about it. All it needed was for someone to utter those immortal words, “Come on lads, we’re better than this … Let’s move along”.

    And no one in the group appears to be willing to accept any personal responsibility for what happened. The first quote I saw about this on FB wasn't from Sandmann but from one of the other parents who was blaming everyone else and insisting their boys behaved like little gentlemen. **

    School trips are funny occasions though. All the normal rules of engagement seem to be off.
    At the same age, a bunch of us from my all-girls school went to a stately home. There was an altercation between one of the girls on the trip and another girl. The other girl’s boyfriend had looked at the girl in my class “for too long”. The teachers stood by and did nothing as getting involved in that kind of nonsense wasn’t their job. It wasn’t worth the detention time to ask at what point it would have been. The other girl was totally up for a scrap.

    * If the other footage of boys at the rally shouting sexist comments at passing young women is the same group.

    ** Using some alternative definition that I am unfamiliar with
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Twilight wrote: »
    And I'll point out once again that the person criticized here for his parents hiring a PR firm was Sandmann who did nothing racist, stupid or insensitive at all. He did not dance, cheer, nor make a tomahawk motion. He stood still and smiled. Why should he have apologized for that? Or do you expect all of these kids to apologize to you for being born into well-to-do families or blamed for their parents choice of school? Maybe they should just apologize for being white and privileged. Why is it so very important to you that this kid grovel to you?

    Why is it so important to you that this smirking, standing-his-ground kid be seen as innocent?

  • TwilightTwilight Shipmate
    Because he is.
  • Innocent of what? He was in Washington DC to protest women's constitutional rights, which makes him a smirking misogynist busybody.
  • And let's not forget the MAGA hat, which means this "innocent' boy thinks taking health insurance away from poor people to give money to the rich, grabbing women by the pussy, and kidnapping, abusing and trafficking children are what will make America "great".
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Really? You know this on the basis of the exact same footage and coverage that has convinced who-knows-how-many-million other people plus a boatload of Shipmates that Sandmann was in fact wearing a MAGA hat (now associated by many with support of the president's painfully obvious racism) while smirking in Philips' face; that he could have made (but didn't even attempt to make) room for Philips and the other drummers; that he did nothing at all to discourage classmates all around him from chanting, jumping up-and-down, and tomahawk-chopping in open mockery of the Native American group.

    Someone who is not playing at "I'm standing my ground and I'll show this asshole drummer who really counts around here" could have backed up a few steps, encouraging those behind him to do likewise, but no. Sandmann didn't do that.

    Someone who is not hell-bent on provoking, challenging, or mocking a stranger lowers his eyes and/or looks away instead of locking gazes while smirking at and standing toe-to-toe with him (check doublethink's link if you sincerely believe Sandmann was smiling rather than smirking), but no. Sandmann didn't do that.

    A sterling young innocent -- someone who stands proudly against racism and sexism, who is at least minimally self-aware at 16 and who has at least a couple of basic clues from his expensive education about Native American status vis-a-vis his own in this culture -- might have turned to his own group and yelled, "Guys, guys! Cool it! Show a little respect!" but no. Sandmann didn't do that, either.

    The fact is, your view of Sandmann is contradicted by what we all saw. You apparently hold your view alone, or nearly so, among Shipmates. Sure, we might all be wrong, and you might have the right of it. But it appears your conviction is supported more by your desire that it be true than by any of the available evidence. So I ask again: why is Sandmann's innocence, so little in evidence in what we've seen, so important to you?
  • Twilight wrote: »
    And I'll point out once again that the person criticized here for his parents hiring a PR firm was Sandmann who did nothing racist, stupid or insensitive at all. He did not dance, cheer, nor make a tomahawk motion. He stood still and smiled....
    He smirked. (A smirk should never be confused with a smile.) He wore a MAGA cap, which is, at this point in the United States, a universal symbol of racist, sexist, I'm-better-than-you white male assertions of superiority.

    No one expects the little creep to "grovel" (seriously? even from you, that's over the top), but some acknowledgement that he might have erred ever so slightly would be helpful.


  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    Rossweisse wrote: »
    No one expects the little creep to "grovel" (seriously? even from you, that's over the top), but some acknowledgement that he might have erred ever so slightly would be helpful.
    Twilight seems to think that it's all or nothing, total glorious victory or utter humiliating defeat, and there's no room for a mid-range "meh, could have done better there, sorry", which is where 99.9% of apologies are given, and accepted.
  • I was contemplating earlier an incident in my life earlier where I moderately disrespected someone. I was in my late teens, not really intending to be offensive but letting things slide to an unacceptable level.

    I'm still ashamed about it more than 25 years later.

    And that, to me is the difference here. Many if us have done inappropriate things. People with one kind of upbringing have the resources to avoid feeling shame and to deflect blame onto others.

    The rest of us dream about these incidents 25 years later. The rest of us bring up our children to try to have them avoid being that dick.
  • tclunetclune Shipmate
    mr cheesy wrote: »
    Many if us have done inappropriate things. People with one kind of upbringing have the resources to avoid feeling shame and to deflect blame onto others.

    The rest of us dream about these incidents 25 years later. The rest of us bring up our children to try to have them avoid being that dick.
    The tribalist self-righteousness that permeates this thread is disheartening. It started with a misleading video clip that had the desired effect of rallying the political outrage of people who didn't know what happened, but knew whose side they were on. When the context became available, it was just too late for people to back down from their high horse. I know it's a fool's errand, but let me ask people to think about whether or not they really know what is in the heart of a youngster whose parents have hired a PR firm in the face of a nation-wide attack on their children. For that matter, do you really know that everyone who wears a MAGA hat is per force a racist? Is there any hope at all of people moderating their pre-programmed outrage, or is the need to identify one's politics so overwhelming that there is no room for human decency on any side of what can be used for political theater any more?
  • Excuse me, is there a reason why you are quoting me? Given that I was talking generally about being a teenage dick?
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    tclune wrote: »
    The tribalist self-righteousness that permeates this thread is disheartening. It started with a misleading video clip that had the desired effect of rallying the political outrage of people who didn't know what happened, but knew whose side they were on. When the context became available, it was just too late for people to back down from their high horse. I know it's a fool's errand, but let me ask people to think about whether or not they really know what is in the heart of a youngster whose parents have hired a PR firm in the face of a nation-wide attack on their children. For that matter, do you really know that everyone who wears a MAGA hat is per force a racist? Is there any hope at all of people moderating their pre-programmed outrage, or is the need to identify one's politics so overwhelming that there is no room for human decency on any side of what can be used for political theater any more?

    Sorry, are you channelling Twilight here? There's been very little 'outrage', no one's been on a 'high horse', and it's mostly been decent, heartfelt conversation. Mostly.

    But yes, anyone who wears a MAGA hat is certainly opening themselves up to accusations of racism, in the same way that someone flying the Confederate battle flag is. If they're not supporting racist views, then... don't do it.
  • TwilightTwilight Shipmate
    About half of all Americans voted for Trump, and I think many of them would wear a MAGA hat to show that they support him. I refuse to believe they are all racists. They may support him for a dozen other reasons; because they think he will put conservative people on the Supreme Court, because they are pro-choice, because they have always voted Republican, because they're military and think he supports them, because they're rich and worried about their taxes, because they fear change, because they're dumb. I don't know all their reasons, but I don't think wearing a hat that supports the current president means you're racist. I don't even think Trump is a racist, I think the only thing in the world he really cares about is money and he would respect a rich African American more than a poor white man, any day of the week. I voted for Obama but I thought his wife's visits to schools to talk about childhood obesity were misguided. If I had warn a pro-Obama hat would it have meant I was all for shaming overweight kids in front of their friends? No. Support for a politician doesn't mean you support everything he ever said or did.

    I've said why I think the kids were wearing the MAGA hats, because they were all about Pro-choice on that particular day and they think Trump supports Pro-choice. ( I don't think Trump cares about the abortion issue one way or another, or the wall, or immigrants, those issues just appeal to his voters and keep him in office so he can keep making big money deals.)

    The idea that this kid was responsible for talking his classmates out of what they were doing (is he even popular?) or that he should have moved back when no one asked him to, and Phillips and his friends, could have easily moved around him is ludicrous. It looked to me, and probably felt to Sandmann, as though Phillips was trying to tell him something with his drumming and he was quietly trying to understand or at least not provoke him further. What would make him think Phillips wanted him to move? Did Phillips ever say, "Would you stand aside so I can walk straight up the stairs?" Without those words and in those circumstances, backing up or turning away from Phillips might have looked very rude. As for smile vs smirk, it's hard to say for sure. Sandmann says he was trying to show friendliness and I see no reason to disbelieve him. To me his smile looked nervous and self-conscious as to be expected when suddenly singled out as the center of attention.

    If apologies are in order, why shouldn't Philipps apologize? He walked up, backed by his friends, straight into the face of a boy standing where he had been told to stand, waiting for a bus. He proceeded to pound a drum in the boy's ear for a long moment. When the bus came and the boy walked away, Phillips claimed a victory and said the kids were "running from the police." The next day Phillips went on national TV and gave an account of what happened that no video anywhere substantiates.
  • Twilight wrote: »
    About half of all Americans voted for Trump, and I think many of them would wear a MAGA hat to show that they support him. I refuse to believe they are all racists.

    The thing is though... opinion poll after opinion poll has shown that the most important issue motivating Trump voters is immigration. And his immigration position is racist. It just is. "Sh*thole countries", "why don't we get more people coming here from Norway", calling Mexican immigrants rapists and drug dealers, it keeps going on. His racism wasn't hidden, it was front and center in his campaign.

    This blog post by the author John Scalzi expresses how I feel about it pretty well. If people support a political agenda that disproportionately harms people of color, they are taking a racist action, whatever else they want to call it. It doesn't matter how they feel in their hearts, or how many friends of other races they have. Actions matter.

    I know there are some people who voted for Trump because they want pro-life judges. But abortion goes *up* under Republican administrations. We need to stop making excuses for pro-life people who don't acknowledge the facts on the ground, which is that reducing poverty and increasing free access to birth control are far more effective against abortion than any measures Republicans ever take. Being pro-life is at best a mental fig leaf for wanting to vote for the rest of the Republican agenda.
  • Doc Tor wrote: »
    Rossweisse wrote: »
    No one expects the little creep to "grovel" (seriously? even from you, that's over the top), but some acknowledgement that he might have erred ever so slightly would be helpful.
    Twilight seems to think that it's all or nothing, total glorious victory or utter humiliating defeat, and there's no room for a mid-range "meh, could have done better there, sorry", which is where 99.9% of apologies are given, and accepted.

    Just like Trump.
  • Twilight wrote: »
    About half of all Americans voted for Trump,

    Ahem. Trump garnered 62,979,636 votes. The population of the United States is approximately 325.7 million. About 19% of all Americans voted for Trump.

  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    Twilight said
    About half of all Americans voted for Trump, and I think many of them would wear a MAGA hat to show that they support him. I refuse to believe they are all racists.

    No, less than 50% of all Americans voted for anyone. Of that, a little less than half of those who voted voted for Trump. So we are talking about 25% of all Americans voted for Trump. Now I hesitate to say how many Americans are out and out racists, but I can tell you all those who identify as white nationalists did vote for Trump. They were the swing voters in the last election.

  • TwilightTwilight Shipmate
    Gramps quote: Of that, a little less than half of those who voted voted for Trump."

    Yes, that's what I meant to say; about half ( a "little less than half" is "about half") of all Americans (who voted) voted for Trump.

    I left out the "who voted" part thinking that would be understood. That was a big mistake on my part. I apologize.

    Antisocial Alto you're preaching to the choir about abortion. I know all the stats and can't believe the ignorance of some of my friends who continue to think the best way to reduce abortions is to make birth control hard to get and abortions illegal. Still, they go to churches every week where they are told that Roe v Wade is as bad as permission to kill inconvenient five year-olds and it becomes the single biggest political issue in their heads. They also keep reminding themselves that there are legal ways to enter the country and allowing any other way is unfair to the people who wait to enter by legal means. I disagree with them but I can't hate them.


    Just like Trump.
    mousethief wrote: »
    Heh. Being called dumb by Twilight is especially meaningful to me.

    The childish snickering, from the back of the class, by the teacher's pet, gets so old. If you want to make personal insults why don't you call me to Hell where I can answer back without getting suspended?

  • Twilight wrote: »
    About half of all Americans voted for Trump, and I think many of them would wear a MAGA hat to show that they support him. I refuse to believe they are all racists. ...
    I'm sure that some aren't, or don't believe that they are. But almost all the Trump supporters I know are anti-immigration, and, in the current ugly atmosphere, that seems to equal racism.

    Others have already set you straight on your erroneous statement about the number of Americans who voted for Trump.

  • Twilight wrote: »
    The childish snickering, from the back of the class, by the teacher's pet, gets so old. If you want to make personal insults why don't you call me to Hell where I can answer back without getting suspended?

    Sigh. As you wish.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    edited February 12
    Is there a non-rhetorical, academic, forensic analysis of this yet?

    Let alone conflict resolution that doesn't demonize the natural conservative majority?
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    Well, the majority consensus on the thread is that the chaperones fucked up big time, put their charges in harm's way, and allowed the boys to exhibit behaviour that was going to get them into trouble.

    Also, that the Black Hebrew Israelites were and are all dicks.
  • Why I find the school and chaperones more culpable is that groups of teenage boys are more likely than individual teenage boys to exhibit behaviour that is going to get them into trouble. The school should have been prepared for this, and planned accordingly, including contingency plans and chaperones trained and ready to deal with difficult situations.

    It goes without saying that the Black Hebrew Israelites were inflammatory, but the school boys should not have been allowed anywhere near them. And that was the chaperones' responsibility.
  • Aye, the responsible grown ups weren't. Moving on...
  • This is the final investigative report commissioned by the diocese.
  • edited February 14
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    This is the final investigative report commissioned by the diocese.
    From the above;
    Investigators said they did not interview Phillips or Sandmann in person for their report. Instead, they reviewed a written account of the incident Sandmann provided shortly after returning to Covington, which they found to “accurately reflect the facts.”

    Which means it does not meet any standard for an administrative review or investigation of anything.

    From the comments below the article
    MAGA is a VERY thinly veiled "Make America White Again".

    That's just your opinion, man.

    That's a FACT, boy.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    This is the final investigative report commissioned by the diocese.
    From the above;
    Investigators said they did not interview Phillips or Sandmann in person for their report. Instead, they reviewed a written account of the incident Sandmann provided shortly after returning to Covington, which they found to “accurately reflect the facts.”

    Which means it does not meet any standard for an administrative review or investigation of anything.

    From the comments below the article
    MAGA is a VERY thinly veiled "Make America White Again".

    That's just your opinion, man.

    That's a FACT, boy.

    Oh, I agree, the report is a white-wash. Excuse the pun.
  • RussRuss Shipmate
    tclune wrote: »
    Is there any hope at all of people moderating their pre-programmed outrage, or is the need to identify one's politics so overwhelming that there is no room for human decency on any side of what can be used for political theater any more?

    The charge against Mr Sandmann - wearing a facial expression that shows inadequate respect - may not seem very serious.

    (Not quite at the level of "thoughtcrime" yet, but pretty close).

    But the lack of a sense of perspective that we're seeing here in the scale of the reaction seems to relate to the use of the r-word.

    In the progressive lexicon, racism is something that manifests in the most trivial ways, but simultaneously is a Really Serious issue.

    There's something quite McCarthyite about it. Future historians will be fascinated...

    To the social progressives, the recognition of human decency in others is conditional on a show of rejecting racism in its entirety. A single lapse destroys a career and none of the on-message people think this disproportionate at all.


  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Russ wrote: »

    To the social progressives, the recognition of human decency in others is conditional on a show of rejecting racism in its entirety. A single lapse destroys a career and none of the on-message people think this disproportionate at all.


    Another interpretation would be that a "single lapse" indicates underlying acceptance of racist assumptions, which perhaps should destroy a career in creating policies in a multi-racial society.
  • Ohher wrote: »
    Another interpretation would be that a "single lapse" indicates underlying acceptance of racist assumptions, which perhaps should destroy a career in creating policies in a multi-racial society.

    And how can TELL if it's just a sour nothing, or indicative of an underlying attitude of longstanding?

    Scenario 1: Sandmann's parents hire a PR firm

    Scenario 2: Sandmann apologizes and promises to do better in the future.

    Hardly rocket science.

  • tclunetclune Shipmate
    This NYT opinion piece seems relevant. FWIW
  • Russ wrote: »
    tclune wrote: »
    Is there any hope at all of people moderating their pre-programmed outrage, or is the need to identify one's politics so overwhelming that there is no room for human decency on any side of what can be used for political theater any more?

    The charge against Mr Sandmann - wearing a facial expression that shows inadequate respect - may not seem very serious.

    (Not quite at the level of "thoughtcrime" yet, but pretty close).

    But the lack of a sense of perspective that we're seeing here in the scale of the reaction seems to relate to the use of the r-word.

    In the progressive lexicon, racism is something that manifests in the most trivial ways, but simultaneously is a Really Serious issue.

    There's something quite McCarthyite about it. Future historians will be fascinated...

    To the social progressives, the recognition of human decency in others is conditional on a show of rejecting racism in its entirety. A single lapse destroys a career and none of the on-message people think this disproportionate at all.


    Because it's not. Privilege must pay.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    From the above;
    Investigators said they did not interview Phillips or Sandmann in person for their report. Instead, they reviewed a written account of the incident Sandmann provided shortly after returning to Covington, which they found to “accurately reflect the facts.”

    Which means it does not meet any standard for an administrative review or investigation of anything.

    What sort of administrative review are you thinking of?
  • edited February 16
    Oh maybe one which actually inquired of the youth. Who is the subject of the thing. :head slap by own hand:
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    By whom? It's up to the diocese to say if it wants any greater enquiry.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    The goal of any inquiry by the diocese was almost certainly an effort to lessen damage to the school's reputation and calm down its board of trustees. In that context, what possible point would there be to questioning Sandmann?
  • Ohher wrote: »
    The goal of any inquiry by the diocese was almost certainly an effort to lessen damage to the school's reputation and calm down its board of trustees. In that context, what possible point would there be to questioning Sandmann?

    Meaning of course that the inquiry is a sham.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Was there ever any doubt on that point?
  • If y'all honestly believe that "a single lapse" into blinkered white privilege is enough to lose someone their job, you're going to have to explain how the editorial staff of the New York Times is still employed. And all the morning talk show people, and everyone who stood up for broken windows policing in the 90s, and Charles Murray, and (ptui) Fox News.
  • What job does Sandmann have? Being a student at a poncy high school? Has he lost that?
Sign In or Register to comment.