That's a youtube video about the Jena Six, should be work safe I think (I watched it and saw nothing offensive), It's not from the most unbiased source, but the facts check out with other things I've heard of. Basically the whole affair is like a blast from the 1960s the way I've heard it. It's absurd and it's wrong.
Here's the wikipedia summary:
quote:Jena Six refers to a group of six African American teenagers who have been arrested and charged with crimes related to their alleged involvement in the assault of a European American teenager in Jena, Louisiana, Louisiana, on December 4, 2006. The incident is one of many racially charged events that have occured in the town since what has been called a prank involving the "white tree" on the Jena High School campus. Critics of the case, including civil rights leaders Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, have claimed that the arrests and subsequent charges were racially motivated.[1]
...
The "White Tree" Incident
At Jena High School, students of different races seldom sat together. Black students traditionally sat on bleachers near the auditorium, while white students sat under a large shade tree, referred to as the "white tree", in the center of the school courtyard.[2]
During a school assembly on August 31, 2006, a black male freshman student asked permission from the principal to sit in the shade of the "white tree."[3] According to the recounting of events given by U.S. Attorney Donald Washington, the question was posed in a "jocular fashion."[17] The principal told the students they could "sit wherever they wanted."[3]
The following morning, three nooses were discovered hanging from the tree. Anthony Jackson, one of two black teachers at the high school, recalled, "I jokingly said to another teacher, 'One's for you, one's for me. Who's the other one for?'" Jena's principal learned that three white students were responsible and recommended expulsion. The board of education overruled his recommendation, to which Superintendent Roy Breithaupt agreed. The punishment was reduced to three days of in-school suspension.[2][4] The school superintendent was quoted as saying, "Adolescents play pranks. I don't think it was a threat against anybody."[18] Black residents of Jena claim that this decision stoked racial tensions that led to subsequent events.[4] The school district and parents who were aware of the incident did not report it to the police or any legal authority, though such incidents may be prosecuted as federal hate crimes by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.[17]
In late July, U.S. Attorney Donald Washington noted the lack of connection between the noose incident and the beating at Jena High school, noting that the more than 40 statements all failed to mention the noose incident.[17]
I'm rather flabbergasted. I didn't think crap like this still happened in the states much, even in the deep south. I can't believe the government has gotten away with as much as they have already with out a huge national outcry. There's starting to be one, but I would have thought one would have started much sooner. What do people think?
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
So what has the government gotten away with? For that matter, which government?
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
Local DA's office.
Letting white folks off easy while absolutely slamming these black kids.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:A Louisiana appeals court Friday vacated the remaining conviction of a teenager accused in a violent, racially charged incident in Jena, Louisiana, his attorney said.
Bob Noel said the 3rd District Court of Appeals in Lake Charles threw out the conviction for second degree battery against Mychal Bell, saying the charges should have been brought in juvenile court.
"We're happy now, but tomorrow is another day," Noel told reporters.
The future of the case against Bell is up to the district attorney, who must decide whether to refile the charges in juvenile court, Noel said.
"We have to wait and see what the other side's going to do, how they're going to react," he said.
Bell's defense team would be filing a motion to get him out of prison, where he has been since his arrest in December, Noel said.
"The primary concern is to get Mychal Bell out of jail and into school where he needs to be," he said.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
What the big "Racial" flag is about:
At a party a group of white boys beat up one black boy doing serious damage. No police charges were made.
When one of the white boys was found bragging about what they had done, and how they would do it again, a group of 6 black boys attacked him. They were prosecuted originally for Attempted Murder in the 2nd Degree. This was dropped, upon trial, to Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon. The weapon was a tennis shoe. The 22 year maximum sentence would have left the 18 year old boy in jail till he was 40, and that is what the prosecutor was after. His explanation, the boy in question had a history of violence.
However, this does not explain that when another white boy pulled a shot-gun on a couple of black boys, he was not charged with a crime. This may have been because the black boys quickly, and without injury, took the gun from him before any shots were fired.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Local DA's office.
Letting white folks off easy while absolutely slamming these black kids.
Um...from what I've read about the case, there weren't any incidences of six white kids teaming up to beat up one black kid. So...it's not the same. I mean, I do think the kids who hung those nooses should've been expelled, but that's not the same as ganging up on somebody and physically attacking him.
Edit: Nevermind. I hadn't heard about the first attack.
-pH
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
I think these boys were incredibly wrong to assault their classmate and I agree that charges should be filed. Whether it was provoked or unprovoked, violence is not the way to solve things.
However, from what I heard, the boy attacked was released from that hospital only hours later and in time to attend school ring ceremony. And yet the battery charges required use of a "deadly weapon" which was how prosecutors labelled the boys' tennis shoes. Now, I am aware that people can be kicked to death but the charges seem high considering he was released from the hospital the same day.
Then there's the whole issue in which a 16 was tried as an adult but I'm glad to see that has been corrected.
What bothers me the most is what little has been done to punish the students who hung the nooses. The parish has rules on the books in regards to hate crimes and "institutional vandalism" clearly seems to be the category these nooses fall under being on school property and with the intent to offend and incite a reaction.
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
All of the attackers should have been charged as juveniles. 15 years in prison for a 16 year old is ridiculous in a situation like this.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
The other boys were 17 at the time of the attack though and therefore adults under Louisiana law.
Though I feel bad that a few months in age means the punishments won't be equal for all the boys.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I agree absolutely that the kids who hung the nooses should have been expelled. I think it's important to note that the principal told the kids they could sit anywhere, and recommended expulsion. Good for him. Shame on the board and superintendent for overruling his recommendation.
As for the assaults, I don't know enough to say. Certainly it seems the charges on the black kids were inflated, though they should have been charged. Violently attacking a classmate is never the right solution, even if they were retaliating against a previous beating. But, attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon does seem to be the wrong tack to take here. When they say he has a history of violence, what are they talking about? did the kid have a juvenile record for violent crimes?
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I hadn't heard anything about white kids beating up the black kid. Every story I've read about this had it as: 1. Black kids sit at "white" tree. 2. White kid hangs nooses on tree. 3. White kids given slap on the wrist punishment. 4. Black kids beat the crap out of white kid.
Do I think the white kids should have been expelled? Yes. Do I think the black kids should be expelled? Yes. Do I think they should face criminal charges? Yes.
I think there's still something missing from the stories the media are telling.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I hadn't heard anything about white kids beating up the black kid. Every story I've read about this had it as: 1. Black kids sit at "white" tree. 2. White kid hangs nooses on tree. 3. White kids given slap on the wrist punishment. 4. Black kids beat the crap out of white kid.
Do I think the white kids should have been expelled? Yes. Do I think the black kids should be expelled? Yes. Do I think they should face criminal charges? Yes.
This is also how I heard it.
-pH
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Here's my question. Who calls it the "white tree"? The black kids or the white kids?
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Woah. (Double post.) I clicked on the Jena High School link on wikipedia. Their school motto is "Know your place, boy." Please tell me that's a quote from some inspirational presidential speech.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
More interesting info from the Wikipedia article:
quote:The six accused of attempted second-degree murder are black and attacked a single white student after a week of intimidation between the two groups, including the one who was assaulted.[3] Intimidation cited includes an off campus incident, in which a white student responded to threats by brandishing a gun. Black students allegedly wrestled away the gun and were then held in custody and charged with theft when they refused to return the gun, while no charges were made against the white student.[4]
On June 26, 2007 the first day of trial for Mychal Bell, one of the defendants, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the charges for Bell to aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy to commit aggravated second-degree battery.[5] Bell was found guilty by an all-white jury, and will face the possibility of up to 22 years in prison when he is sentenced.[4] The sentencing was originally scheduled for July 30, but has been delayed until September 20, 2007. [6] However, the case is currently in dispute, as the court-appointed public defender did not call a single witness in his attempt to defend Bell.[7] The other five students will be tried at a later date.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Okay, noose situation aside (that should have been dealt with differently, obviously) I'm not sure that I wouldn't brandish a gun too if a kid with a serious criminal record for violence was "threatening" me, whether or not I deserved to be threatened. I'm not saying that the blacks were at fault here, I'm just saying that there's probably a lot of missing information.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
Is racism alive? Yes. Is it well? I don't personally think so. One would be hard-pressed to find many people who condone such obviously racist attitudes--even in the South. I can't personally speak for all the South, and I've heard anecdotal evidence that there are still some pockets and communities where racism still rears its ugly head, but I can match those anecdotes with those of my own which have led me to believe that the South is, on the whole, LESS racist than many other parts of the country.
However, as I said, racism is indeed alive. I think we would be better served, though, if we focused more on trying to eliminate prevailing racial stereotypes which are bolstered by the media and our pop culture, rather than pick out the isolated incidents like the one in small town Louisiana and decry them. Stereotypes are a much more ingrained form of racism, and leads to all kinds of decisions being made based upon color of skin instead of content of character. Progess has been made on the overt racism front, but the less recognizable forms of racism have unfortunately been allowed to prosper for way too long.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
I mostly agree with you, Brian. Racism tends to be a little more in your face in the South. A reasonably self-aware white person can't help but stop and examine their feelings when subjects like these come up. Plus, it's been fairly drilled into us that racism is bad. Well, the obvious stuff, anyway.
It's the more subtle forms that are still prevelant, and I blame those on the fact that as a whole, people of one race don't know people of another. We see each other at work, but we don't live in the same neighborhoods, go to the same churches, or join the same clubs.
Then you get the occasional minority who frames his entire existence around his race and the perceived injustices he receives because of it. We play D&D occasionally with a guy out of Miami who's always screaming racism when he doesn't get his way, and I don't get it. How marginalized can you be as a Spanish-speaking hispanic in Miami?
Heck, maybe he is. But he never trusts the rest of us enough to tell us. My perception is that he must be doing ok. It's Miami. I don't have any way to know how hard it can still be unless somebody tells me. I feel like I don't count enough as a real person for him to bother explaining things to me because of my race.
I wish people would realize that racism isn't just about white folk keeping others down and really examine their feelings about everybody of every race. Let's get rid of the assumptions and accusations and try to treat people like individuals.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:I'm rather flabbergasted. I didn't think crap like this still happened in the states much, even in the deep south.
You're very naive. We've come along way, but people aren't as civilized as you imagine. However, I'm sure that motto on the wiki site was someone's idea of a humorous edit.
Posted by Damien.m (Member # 8462) on :
quote:Originally posted by Threads: All of the attackers should have been charged as juveniles. 15 years in prison for a 16 year old is ridiculous in a situation like this.
I have to agree that 15 years is completely ridiculous. However I'm seventeen and am mature enough to know that if I committed a crime I should be treated as an adult. I can say the same for most 16/17 year olds. The law looks on teenagers as kids but we aren't as naive as people think we are, and if a teenager commits a crime he still knows what he's doing, regardless of age.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I think parents and/or the school should be held partially responsible for juvenile crimes. One of the reasons juveniles have limited rights is that they are understood by mature society as ill-equipped to deal with the demands of society, in all its nuances, and their behavior is under the stewardship of a guardian. In just about every case of juvenile crime, where we only partially blame the kid, I think there should be a deeper investigation as to where balance of the fault goes.
This is not necessarily to punish the indirect offenders-- the parents, school, church, whomever-- but to more thoroughly address the phenomena of juvenile crime.
It seems appropriate to believe that the sins of the father should not be held against the son, but I'm not so sure that the sins of the son shouldn't be held against the father.
[ September 19, 2007, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
quote:The law looks on teenagers as kids but we aren't as naive as people think we are
Ya know, of course, that adults were at one time teenagers themselves, so it's not like adults are completely ignorant about the lives and maturity levels of teenagers.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
When I was 17, I thought I was so smart and wise. And in some ways, I was (when compared to some of my peers or siblings) but compared to now, I was pretty clueless. I disagree with punishing the parent. Some times it is the parent's fault, but sometimes, the parent is struggling and doing the best they can in a hard situation.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
I guess that at the very least, the people of Linden, Texas are grateful to Jena. I suspect that the events in Jena will move Linden even further back in the corners of the public consciousness:
quote:In 2003, the town of Linden was embroiled in controversy when an African-American mentally disabled man was taunted and beaten because of his race[1].
"Authorities in this poor, pine-locked east Texas hamlet had said that Johnson, well-known around town as a friendly but 'slow' character , was lured to an all-white pasture party where underage drinkers fed him alcohol and picked on him.
Authorities said Johnson, who lived with his mother and brother and had no criminal background or history of violence, was taunted for the defendants' amusement. He was found unconscious on a fire ant mound and had suffered a serious concussion and bleeding in the brain."
"Billy Ray Johnson, 46, lives in a nursing home because of the injuries he suffered in the beating. In the criminal case, the men accused of assaulting him were fined and sentenced to probation and jail time, but none served more than 60 days behind bars."
"District Attorney Randal Lee said before the sentences were imposed that the juries' decisions were in line with other juries who sympathize with first-time offenders. He pointed out that the so-called beating involved one punch."
[AP NEWS April 22, 2007]
To be fair, a jury in a civil trial (after all the negative publicity) awarded 9 million dollars in damages to Johnson from his attackers. Very little of this award will ever be collected of course, because the attackers have low-wage jobs.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Out of curiousity, I don't remember reading, are there hate crime laws in Jena? And if so, are they being charged with a hate crime?
Posted by Damien.m (Member # 8462) on :
quote:Originally posted by camus: Ya know, of course, that adults were at one time teenagers themselves, so it's not like adults are completely ignorant about the lives and maturity levels of teenagers.
Regardless of how much an adult understands the maturity of a teenager I think it really comes down to wether you agree with the fact that a 16 or 17 year old is any less responsible for a crime than an 18 year old.
*edited for spelling*
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
In regards to the White on Black gang attack, it was something I heard on NPR a couple of weeks ago. It seems Snopes backs me up on it:
quote: quote:I'm rather flabbergasted. I didn't think crap like this still happened in the states much, even in the deep south.
You're very naive. We've come along way, but people aren't as civilized as you imagine. However, I'm sure that motto on the wiki site was someone's idea of a humorous edit.
That's a little harsh pooka. Not so much naive as optimistic and hopeful. Also I haven't heard about anything like this, save isolated incidents, for a long time. But according to the Washington Post it's pretty widespread:
quote:Civil rights advocates say the issues are much larger than Jena. Zealous prosecutions of black youngsters are multiplying across the nation, they say. They cite three highly visible cases in which white prosecutors won prison sentences of up to 10 years against black teenagers, only to have those sentences voided on appeal.
In Douglas County, Ga., Genarlow Wilson was convicted of molestation and sentenced to 10 years for engaging in consensual sex with a 15-year-old girl when he was 17. He served more than two years before a judge voided the sentence, but Wilson, now 21, remains in prison while the state appeals.
Also in Georgia, the state Supreme Court threw out the conviction of Marcus Dixon, 19, who was serving a 10-year prison sentence for having sex with an underage white girl in 2003.
In Paris, Tex., a special conservator ordered the release of Shaquanda Cotton, 16, who was serving up to seven years for shoving a white teacher's aide in 2005. Months earlier, the same white judge had given probation to a 14-year-old white girl who burned down her family's home.
"We are seeing two systems of justice: one system of justice for white folks and one system of justice for black folks," said Jordan Flaherty, an editor who is following the Louisiana case for Left Turn magazine, an liberal activist publication based in New York.
Also what bothers me just as much as the overkill charges is that there were aggressions committed by whites that were largely ignored or the whites were charged with far less than these black students are: A group of white students attacked one of the Jena six at a party with beer bottles. A few of them were charged with misdemeanors. (From the snopes article posted above.) A white student threatened a group of black students with a gun. The black students were able to get it away from him and no shots were fired. But no one was charged there (or according the some accounts the black students were actually charged with theft of a firearm! Not verified.)
That's what disturbs me more than anything else, or did anyway till I read that Washington Post article.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I really don't like it when people say in effect,
"Look here this judge sent a black teenager to jail for 10 years because he shoved a white person, and not a month before that that same judge sent a white girl to 10 days probation for burning down her parents house!"
It reeks of selective description. Even if those rulings are true on paper, you can't just line up two rulings next to each other and paint a judge based on that. You really have to line up many cases and study them all in their entirety before an obvious picture of racism can really be pictured.
what if the white girl accidentally burned down her family's home? What if the person who shoved a teachers aide had a history of violence, or was a convicted felon? What if he made threatening remarks? What if it was clear he intended to go through with his threats? Obviously this is all speculation but newspapers often ignore past history and context and simply spurt out the rulings and expect us to all be outraged at what appears on the surface to be gross injustice.
I saw some cops on television give an Asian guy in Florida a ticket because he had open containers of alcohol on the beach passed curfew, when asked right after the cops left why he had gotten a ticket his response was, "I got a ticket for being Asian in public."
It's easy to call prosecution of African Americans aggressive and overzealous because right now African Americans commit more crimes disproportionate to their population. I'm not going to dabble into explaining why that is right now but when about 66% of African American males are spending time in jail and they make up about 10% of the total population that's alot of black hands getting cuffs slapped on, and it's easy to perceive that as, "Black people are punished more vigorously then white people."
Racism is alive in the US, of that I am certain. But compared to how healthy it used to be I would not say it is, "well." I honestly feel it is being slowly starved to death. But I can also see how it can still surge to life and cause alot of harm.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
BB, I'm glad you said something about the way the newspapers are stating these cases. You said it a lot better than I could have.
-pH
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I think there's something to be said for the role that the media plays in keeping prejudice alive, more than just how they word it, but in what they choose to present to us at all. Michael Moore, for all his faults, nailed it in Bowling for Columbine. I see the same reports he was talking about every night when I watch the local news, which is Detroit's news. It's always about corruption, scandal, black men raping and murdering, and then ends with a puppy being rescued from a tree.
And it's the same every night. You have to imagine it's not difficult for white people in the suburbs, largely isolated from the poverty and violence of the inner cities, to start making assumptions based on what they see on TV every night. It almost comes down to either behavioral conditioning, or a Pavlovian Response. In many mostly white suburbs in Detroit, you don't really see many black people. When you go into the city, it's likely it's all you'll see. And if you don't go into the city that often, chances are the majority of your exposure to them will be via the news. And if all your experiences, daily, nightly, always, on the news, are negative, then you'll make unwarranted assumptions.
I'm neither excusing, agreeing with, or chastising the hearts and minds of Metro Detroiters, by the way, I'm offering my anaylsis on why I think things are the way they are. If you want to root out racism, on BOTH sides, because let's face it, racism isn't just a one way White on Black street, it's very much two way. I'll tell you about my experiences in Atlanta this past summer if you want a tiny anecdotal piece of the other side, but it's there. But if you really want to root it out, you have to change perceptions, and you have to stop inner city violence and poverty.
That might not change things in rural America, but I also think this problem is unfairly categorized as a southern hick problem. In other words, a lot of people think racism is only alive in the deep south on farms and back country roads. It's not. It's alive in white suburbs in the north, and black inner cities in the north as well, and in the south, and in the west, it's everywhere. It's just not as pronounced as it was 30 years ago. Like BB said, we're slowly starving it to death, but we make progress measured by generations, not by years. We make each generation a little better than the last.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
BB, a drugie my boyfriend used to hang out with once got a ticket for speeding down a dark road after leaving the home of a known drug dealer. (He usually did 80 or 90, so I'm sure it was a truely excessive speed.) He claims he got ticketed for DWB.
While racism is a little scarier when hicks in the deep south are the ones doing it (there are parts of our home county we wouldn't take a black friend after dark, just in case) I agree with Lyr that it's something we all have to deal with. Recognizing our stereotypes and getting to know people of other races is probably the best way to kill racism.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
It's funny. The first thought I had when I read about the case was, "I wonder whose shoe they used to beat him up?" It's not like the Jena Six picked the first white kid they saw at random. The report all but said the victim was an ass.
I figure white people commit similar crimes with less tact and control of the legislature, from drug use to suspicious entertainment to stealing. Since there is more institutional support and they are more likely to get tipped off and stop before prosecution, the crimes don't come down to violence or jail time. Call it tricknology or whatever you want, but until there is a crackdown on shrooms, creative tax filing, and stealing office supplies or whatever it is white people do to get by, I have a hard time respecting their laws and their law enforcement. I actually think that if enough functional white lawbreakers like Scooter Libby went to jail, we'd rethink the our criminal system.
The US can stand a Martha Stewart or two doing time in good humor, but if we hauled in every deceptive accountant, lawyer, salesman and executive officer from a good family, the only people left would be engineers and cubicle dwellers too far removed from the decision making process to be considered culpable, or human.
You want to deal with racism in urban America? Have white people move back into cities and send their kids to public schools. Put your kids and your security where your mouth is or shut up. J.M. Coetzee's most famous book is Disgraced. It's the most penetrating and productive novel concerning race relations I've read in years.
[ September 19, 2007, 10:22 AM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Have white people move back into cities and send their kids to public schools.
Are you aware of the percentage of white people who a) live in cities and b) send their kids to public schools?
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
quote: It's easy to call prosecution of African Americans aggressive and overzealous because right now African Americans commit more crimes disproportionate to their population. I'm not going to dabble into explaining why that is right now but when about 66% of African American males are spending time in jail and they make up about 10% of the total population that's a lot of black hands getting cuffs slapped on, and it's easy to perceive that as, "Black people are punished more vigorously then white people."
The relevant statistic isn't prisoners to general population (because, you're right, that's completely skewed by arrest rates - though that of course is a whole other social issue) but rather prisoners to either arrested or convicted people.
If it can be shown that African Americans are in fact incarcerated disproportionately, or perhaps convicted disproportionately, then that is obviously a racial issue.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Are you aware of the percentage of white people who a) live in cities and b) send their kids to public schools?
No. If you are going to deny the existence of white flight in the later half of the 20th century, I'm not going to fight you. I'm sure you can marshal statistics saying that white flight doesn't exist, ex-cons aren't discriminated against in the job market, women are paid at a rate equal to men, Baghdad's and Des Moines' crime rates are comparable, and that Clinton actually was black.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Now that was a bit of baffling razzle-dazzle.
My point, Irami, is that "urban" is not actually a synonym for "black." Neither is "poor" or "public-school educated."
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
Wouldn't it make more sense to get blacks out of the inner city than to put others back in to punish them? How dare you do well for yourself now go suffer with the drop outs? That's not very encouraging.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by imogen:
quote: It's easy to call prosecution of African Americans aggressive and overzealous because right now African Americans commit more crimes disproportionate to their population. I'm not going to dabble into explaining why that is right now but when about 66% of African American males are spending time in jail and they make up about 10% of the total population that's a lot of black hands getting cuffs slapped on, and it's easy to perceive that as, "Black people are punished more vigorously then white people."
The relevant statistic isn't prisoners to general population (because, you're right, that's completely skewed by arrest rates - though that of course is a whole other social issue) but rather prisoners to either arrested or convicted people.
If it can be shown that African Americans are in fact incarcerated disproportionately, or perhaps convicted disproportionately, then that is obviously a racial issue.
I'm reasonably sure African American's are disproportionately convicted and sent to jail relative to their population. It was talked about in all my criminal justice classes (I took 3) and in my Anthropology class. Hispanics too as disproportionately convicted but not to the extent of African Americans who are the highest group. Asian Americans do better then both groups and even better then whites, which is not surprising as for example in Japan they have the lowest crime rates in the world, south China is I believe also very low for incidents of drug use and violent crime.
Though this is all relative to Caucasian Americans who are the bar by which other groups are measured.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
quote:south China is I believe also very low for incidents of drug use and violent crime.
Does that include opium? Or are we only talking about recent statistics?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert Hugo:
quote:south China is I believe also very low for incidents of drug use and violent crime.
Does that include opium? Or are we only talking about recent statistics?
Recent statistics. Opium in south China is as recent as say women's suffrage in the US.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I'm reasonably sure African American's are disproportionately convicted and sent to jail relative to their population. It was talked about in all my criminal justice classes (I took 3) and in my Anthropology class. Hispanics too as disproportionately convicted but not to the extent of African Americans who are the highest group. Asian Americans do better then both groups and even better then whites, which is not surprising as for example in Japan they have the lowest crime rates in the world, south China is I believe also very low for incidents of drug use and violent crime.
Though this is all relative to Caucasian Americans who are the bar by which other groups are measured.
I am a little confused at what exactly the statistic you are looking at says (convicted vs population). Is it saying that for every 10 black men arrested 9 are convicted (numbers made up) vs for every 10 white men arrested 5 are convicted? Or is it saying that 9 black men out of a population of 20 are convicted vs 5 white men out of a population of 100?
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by Javert Hugo:
quote:south China is I believe also very low for incidents of drug use and violent crime.
Does that include opium? Or are we only talking about recent statistics?
Recent statistics. Opium in south China is as recent as say women's suffrage in the US.
While the opium use was Chinese, the Opium Wars would be more of an example of violent crime done by Caucasians rather than the Chinese (or rather, the combination of Chinese militia and Manchu banner forces). But I kid Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Opium in south China is as recent as say women's suffrage in the US.
I do believe women's suffrage is current in the US, unless things have changed more than I realized since I expat'd. At least, I hope so, given that I am sending in an absentee ballot for the next presidential election.
*grin
[You may have meant to write "as say the initial establishment of women's suffrage in the US."]
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:The report all but said the victim was an ass.
I saw a report on this kid today, CNN about 8:30am CST - and while I can't comment as to whether or not he is an ass, I can say his injuries were far more extensive than I was led to believe reading other reports, including the Washington Post article which only said he "suffered no life-threatening injuries". I was led to believe it was only cuts and bruises, but in fact it was more serious. This kid was knocked down, and kicked about the head and face until he became unconscious. He was treated for a concussion. His life wasn't in jeopardy this time, true, but we're not talking about someone shoved him and he broke a nail on his pinky finger. That could have been very serious - people have died before from being beaten and kicked in the head, you know.
His family said there are thousands of dollars in medical bills - I can believe that, if he had a CAT scan, which I'm certain he did with a head injury. They also said they've received numerous death threats, and the kid has dropped out of school due to all the negative attention. So here we have a family whose son was attacked, beaten viciously, they are saddled with huge medical bills they're struggling to pay, their son is so disillusioned with the way he's been treated in the media he's dropped out, and they have to field death threats. I don't care if he was, to use your term "an ass" that's not right.
So what if he went to a ring ceremony later? That doesn't mean he wasn't hurt and the incident wasn't serious. I once went to a family function after one-day surgery, because it was important enough to me not to miss it. That didn't mean I wasn't in pain, or didn't still have injuries on my body.
I'm a little disturbed at how the media is portraying this, because I had the impression the kid was barely harmed, and the pictures and story I saw this morning showed me fairly serious injuries, which would require emergency treatment.
The old adage is true - there's two sides to every story, and this kid's side is being rather unfairly represented in most media reports.
Posted by grammargoddess (Member # 10828) on :
I'm glad so many people mentioned the bias in the media. I think every article I read just now (and that's just the ones posted) told a slightly different story. And all those little differences and omissions are important. No matter what, though, it seems the school system and government weren't playing fair. Those boys deserved to be tried (at least for assault), but so should have the other boys. As far as the crime and poverty rampant in the African American community in general, I think it's less an issue of whitey getting off their backs or bailing them out as it is an issue of some aspects of their culture needing to change. I grew up in and live in the south, and I was raised by a single mom in HUD housing, just like many of my black peers. The difference was, my culture prizes education and theirs does not. It was perfectly acceptable for them to be in General rated classes and to get Cs or Ds. Definitely not at my house. I want to point out, though that I did have black friends in my honors and AP classes at school. However, they were usually from Muslim families or from upper-SES families that stressed education. And for the information of the person talking about blacks in cities, we currently live in a nice mid-price suburb that is predominately African American. And those AAs are mainly educated and working hard to succeed. You can be sure their kids are busting their butts in school, too. These people just had to decide to change how their own personal culture would view education. That to me is more valuable than affirmative action.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholar:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I'm reasonably sure African American's are disproportionately convicted and sent to jail relative to their population. It was talked about in all my criminal justice classes (I took 3) and in my Anthropology class. Hispanics too as disproportionately convicted but not to the extent of African Americans who are the highest group. Asian Americans do better then both groups and even better then whites, which is not surprising as for example in Japan they have the lowest crime rates in the world, south China is I believe also very low for incidents of drug use and violent crime.
Though this is all relative to Caucasian Americans who are the bar by which other groups are measured.
I am a little confused at what exactly the statistic you are looking at says (convicted vs population). Is it saying that for every 10 black men arrested 9 are convicted (numbers made up) vs for every 10 white men arrested 5 are convicted? Or is it saying that 9 black men out of a population of 20 are convicted vs 5 white men out of a population of 100?
I am saying that approx 2 out of 3 African American males are at some stage in the American penal system. With African Americans as a block making up 10% of the total population.
Mucus: I was talking about more when Opium ceased to be a major part of the South Chinese situation.
Claudia:
quote:I do believe women's suffrage is current in the US, unless things have changed more than I realized since I expat'd. At least, I hope so, given that I am sending in an absentee ballot for the next presidential election.
*grin
You may have meant to write "as say the initial establishment of women's suffrage in the US."
Hmph! Your hyper literalness can't put a damper on my day! I meant opium was on the way out in China about the time women's suffrage movement in the US was getting what it wanted.
Did you know Wyoming and Utah were the first states to vote for giving women folks the vote? In Wyoming's case it was likely because the male female ratio was 1:6 and it was believed giving women the vote would be an incentive for women to immigrate to the state.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I'll be the first to say that nobody deserves be beaten unconscious. There is also a special degradation that goes along with knowing that the supposed authorities are going to blithely ignore three nooses being hung from a tree. That's harassment. It's near terrorism.
The school board's and administration's complacency bred vigilantism. That's what the Jena Six are, teenage vigilantes. If the black kids had picked a white kid at random and beat him senseless, it would have been a whole different thing. This was a racially charged verbal altercation that turned physical partially because the school had proved itself woefully incompetent at addressing racially charged symbolic altercations.
Take the six, try them as juveniles, but then by all means, do an investigation as to negligence on behalf of the school administration.
[ September 20, 2007, 07:40 AM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:His family said there are thousands of dollars in medical bills - I can believe that, if he had a CAT scan, which I'm certain he did with a head injury. They also said they've received numerous death threats, and the kid has dropped out of school due to all the negative attention. So here we have a family whose son was attacked, beaten viciously, they are saddled with huge medical bills they're struggling to pay, their son is so disillusioned with the way he's been treated in the media he's dropped out, and they have to field death threats. I don't care if he was, to use your term "an ass" that's not right.
So what if he went to a ring ceremony later? That doesn't mean he wasn't hurt and the incident wasn't serious. I once went to a family function after one-day surgery, because it was important enough to me not to miss it. That didn't mean I wasn't in pain, or didn't still have injuries on my body.
Belle the kid was part of a group who'd previously attacked one of the black kids with beer bottles according to some reports. He struck first from what I've read (not in that fight but in a previous one).
I'm not saying those kids were right to beat him up. But he and several others weren't charged in their attack, when these kids are being charged. They should all be charged equally for their various parts in the many fights that seem to have lead up to this incident.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by AvidReader: Wouldn't it make more sense to get blacks out of the inner city than to put others back in to punish them? How dare you do well for yourself now go suffer with the drop outs? That's not very encouraging.
Personally I think the best thing we could do is reclaim our inner cities. I've seen efforts pick up somewhat in Detroit, but it's been stymied for years. The schools are crumbling and underfunded. Kids can't get into college when their schools suck so bad, so we throw them a bone with Affirmative Action to help level the playing field because we don't want to spend the money to REALLY level the playing field by making sure they have an education that matches what the suburban kids get. It wasn't so bad even 10 years ago, because all those kids who never made it into college could depend on getting a job in the auto industry (well not all of them, but a LOT of them). But with the auto industry crashing, and southeast Michigan in general not being the best place to get a job, they don't have that anymore.
Poverty breed violence. You eliminate the poverty, you go a long way towards getting rid of the violence. Detroit has seen a lot of revitalization in the last few years. New housing developments, new building, cleaning up the waterfront and knocking down abandoned buildings used by squatters and drug dealers. A lot of that land is even being reclaimed for farming, of all things, which provides income and jobs, to say nothing of being good for the environment. A lot of our landmarks are being restored or renovated too. All of this in spite of the mismanagement from Detroit's government (Mayor Kilpatrick is a thief and a crook), and apathy from Lansing.
Abandonding the inner city will just leave the poorest stuck to fend for themselves. Forcing suburbam whites into the city would be like throwing a spark into a coal mine, it's just ASKING for trouble. If you make inner cities into more liveable, vibrant, well taken care of spaces, people will WANT to move back in, and they will bring money, jobs, and a better quality of life with them.
I'm impressed by Detroit's comeback, though a little disappointed that it's taken a couple decades to do it.
And for whatever reason, to preempt any attack I might earn from Irami, I believe White Flight really happened, though I've only studied it in Detroit. Racist lenders wouldn't give out mortgages to black families, while they freely lended to white ones who flocked to the suburbs, and where they went, so went the jobs. Blacks were left in the inner city with no way out, and violence erupted and was unquenchable by the police at the time. Does that mean Detroit is 100% black and that all the kids in the suburbs go to private school? No, and that's absurd to even assume.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:There is also a special degradation that goes along with knowing that the supposed authorities are going to blithely ignore three nooses being hung from a tree.
They didn't ignore it. The principal wanted to expel the kids responsible. He was overruled. He shouldn't have been, they should have been expelled, but it was not ignored.
quote:Belle the kid was part of a group who'd previously attacked one of the black kids with beer bottles according to some reports. He struck first from what I've read (not in that fight but in a previous one).
Where is that information? I haven't seen it, though I've heard it mentioned. I'm not denying the kid was involved, and I hate sounding like I'm defending a racist, but where is the credible accounting of the beating with beer bottles? I've heard beer bottles, I've heard a gun was pulled, I've heard lots of things - so many different accounts all of them likely cannot be true.
My point, my only point, is that the media is painting this inaccurately, so we need to make sure we have FACTS not hysterical exaggerated accounts before we make judgments.
I am 100% against any type of racial violence - regardless of the direction of the violence. If he attacked a black kid with a beer bottle or pulled a gun on them, then yes he should have been punished and prosecuted. But nothing excuses what those six kids did to him.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
[Edit: Replying to Lyr] See, the poor I'm used to go the other way with the cause and effect. They're poor because they spend all their time trying to rip other people off instead of working.
It's interesting to hear about places that work differently. I'm glad the city's getting revamped.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:They didn't ignore it. The principal wanted to expel the kids responsible. He was overruled. He shouldn't have been, they should have been expelled, but it was not ignored.
I'm not sure that expelling the kids would have been the appropriate course. It doesn't fix the problem, it just moves it around in the appearance of justice. The principal wasn't the authority in this case, the authority was the overruling school board.
quote:Poverty breeds violence. You eliminate the poverty, you go a long way towards getting rid of the violence.
This is complicated. I think that strength of character is the way to go to eliminate violence. A little bit of money just makes it the case that one doesn't have to showcase strength of character. I'll be the first to say that racism goes two ways because I think that under those suburban lawns, white Americans, and their imitators, are one hot meal away from murder. Again, money won't solve the problem, it'll mask it, possibly offering the appearance, and maybe even the material rewards, of success.
Call it realpolitik, strategy, or healthy competition, but white people are a scary, untrustworthy bunch. After the WTC bombing, Card the "moderate" was ready lead a Sherman-style march up the cradle of civilization, more day-to-day examples are these white juries doling out convictions and going to work the next day without a care. The juries are all white because whites are more likely to sit in the jury box and follow letter of the law without compunction.
I take issue with the ridiculous and untoward facets of black culture, but it seems to me that its more tasteless aspects are the result of arising in contrast to deeply hypocritical passive/aggressive whites in denial.
There is a section in Henry Adams' book Democracy: An American Novel, where Senator Radcliffe explains "If virtue won't answer our purpose, then we must use vice, or our opponents will put us out of office." That sentiment showcases everything wrong white American public life.
[ September 20, 2007, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
quote:its more tasteless aspects are the result of arising in contrast to deeply hypocritical passive/aggressive whites in denial.
I take issue with never, ever taking responsibility for one's own crappy actions. Is anything EVER not white people's fault/responsibility?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:The juries are all white because whites are more likely to sit in the jury box and follow letter of the law without compunction.
I have never seen an all-white jury in my life.
Mind you, I know there are lots of all-white juries. Just as there are lots of all-black juries. But your statement that all (even taken as hyperbole to mean many or most) is manifestly wrong.
Most convictions by juries I've seen are not for behavior many people think should be lawful (such as drug use or peaceful drug distribution),* but for crimes that almost everyone recognizes as mala in se - that is, wrong in themselves: Assault, robbery, larceny (and the poor are stolen from far more often than the rich), murder, rape, arson, etc.
Moreover, most jury convictions are not moral wrongs nor are they deserving of remorse.
*In my experience, the vast majority of drug convictions are not before juries. They are pleas (most often) or bench trials.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Is anything EVER not white people's fault/responsibility?
It's one of the burdens of being a moneyed majority in a majority-ruled capitalist democracy. The flip-side is that you get to decide, execute, and interpret the laws and ethical principles. Whatever you say goes. You want Bush as President, Bush is President. You want Michael Vick to go to jail, Michael Vick is going to jail. We DID have our way with OJ, though. You all set the rules and it's up to everyone else in the US to decide whether they want to play and perish.
[ September 20, 2007, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
That's total baloney. Every word of it. I'll focus on the larger theme.
Being poor does not strip one of one's humanity. Your assumption that being black means one is responsible for nothing (and can therefore deserve neither credit nor blame) is more condescending, crippling and hateful than anything I've ever heard. You just infantalized a tenth of the population.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:The flip-side is that you get to decide, execute, and interpret the laws and ethical principles.
I do? Cool. People who cross against the light now have to either pay a $200 fine or wash and wax my car.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Being poor does not strip one of one's humanity.
I'm pretty sure I said that opposite. But if we are going to speak in these terms, having money doesn't absolve you of your humanity.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:But if we are going to speak in these terms, having money doesn't absolve you of your humanity.
Good think absolution from is the absolute last thing anyone needs.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
When you deny all responsiblity for everything, including your own actions, you deny your own adulthood and humanity. It's deliberately crippling yourself.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Sorry but, are you REALLY that proud of getting OJ off? Of all the black people I work with, I can't name a single one who doesn't think the guy is a joke and a useless human being.
quote:Originally Posted by Irami: This is complicated. I think that strength of character is the way to go to eliminate violence. A little bit of money just makes it the case that one doesn't have to showcase strength of character. I'll be the first to say that racism goes two ways because I think that under those suburban lawns, white Americans, and their imitators, are one hot meal away from murder. Again, money won't solve the problem, it'll mask it, possibly offering the appearance, and maybe even the material rewards, of success.
Call it realpolitik, strategy, or healthy competition, but white people are a scary, untrustworthy bunch. After the WTC bombing, Card the "moderate" was ready lead a Sherman-style march up the cradle of civilization, a more day-to-day examples are these white juries doling out convictions and going to work the next day without a care. The juries are all white because whites are more likely to sit in the jury box and follow letter of the law without compunction.
First of all, I find white people no more scary than black. A quick view of black history, and that's African as well as African American shows some pretty wretched acts of inhumanity. And black culture in America doesn't do a whole lot for itself when apparently it's visible super stars are people like OJ and Michael Vick, or Whoopie Goldberg, who said Michael Vick can't be blamed because he's from the deep south and down there they just smash dog's heads into the ground like its no big deal. Or any of a couple dozen rappers and hip hop artists who glorify thug lifestyles and the mistreatment of women. And I'm SURE that ALL of that is the fault of the white man, or at least you'll find a way to claim it so, but when do you own up to that "strength of character" deficiency?
And I'm not just talking about throwing money at the problem. I don't quite get what you're advocating, is it black people in the inner city pulling themselves up by their bootstraps? Sorry to say that for every one that wants to, there certainly seems to be three more that'll knock that first guy down and try to take what he has. I think if the inner cities were going to solve their own problems, they would have done it some time in the last 30 or 40 years, instead of steadily sliding down the drain.
And I'm not just talking about black vs. white or inner city vs suburb, I'm talking fairness and standardization. A student in the inner city deserves the same quality of education that a student in the suburbs gets. If it requires more money to do that, then it's fair, it's not trying to pay the situation off, as I think you're trying to pin it. Jobs have left the inner city leaving many unemployed. Money is required to invest in the city so businesses can start up and jobs can be created. Again, you aren't buying them off, you're giving them the chance to help themselves.
Buying them off, which is what I think you THINK I mean, would be something like sending them all paycheck every month to get them to shut u. I'm talking about investment and equality. I don't know what you could possibly find fault with in that.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: The Rev. Jesse Jackson criticized Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Tuesday over his reaction to the arrest of six black juveniles in Jena, Louisiana, on murder charges, accusing the Illinois senator of "acting like he's white," according to a South Carolina newspaper.
Should there be more outrage about Jackson's comment?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Jesse Jackson is a joke, if this was his first offense I'd be more outraged. Though his comment is one that is a core issue standing in the way of African Americans rising up as a group.
Obama has said many times that whenever he or another African American student tried to do well in school they were always accused of, "Acting white." It's a very unfortunate and terrible situation that exists today. As long as African Americans are told, "Academics, business, etc are a White man's world, go play sports." There is ALWAYS going to be a problem.
Do people with more money then they need have a responsibility to help those less fortunate, I believe they do. But you cannot help somebody who does not want to help themselves.
As much as it seems ridiculous to cite it, I love Samuel L. Jackson's (Zeus) Q/A session with the two little kids near the beginning of Die Hard With a Vengeance.
"Zeus: Now, where you goin'? Dexter: School. Zeus: Why? Raymond: To get educated. Zeus: *Why*? Dexter: So we can go to college. Zeus: And why is that important? Dexter: To get es-pect. Zeus: RE-spect. Now, who's the bad guys? Dexter: Guys who sell drugs. Raymond: Guys who have guns. Zeus: And who's the good guys? Dexter: We're the good guys. Zeus: Who's gonna help you? Raymond: Nobody. Zeus: *So who's gonna help you*? Dexter: We're gonna help ourselves. Zeus: And who do we not want to help us? Dexter, Raymond: White people. Zeus: That's right. Now get on outta here. Go to school. "
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote: The Rev. Jesse Jackson criticized Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Tuesday over his reaction to the arrest of six black juveniles in Jena, Louisiana, on murder charges, accusing the Illinois senator of "acting like he's white," according to a South Carolina newspaper.
Should there be more outrage about Jackson's comment?
From who? Outrage is his shtick.
--j_k
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
There seemed to be sufficient outrage that he backed off pretty quickly.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Sorry but, are you REALLY that proud of getting OJ off?
Not especially. I think he is worthless.
_________________________________________________
As to Obama, I do think that his agenda is unduly influenced by liberal whites.
quote:Obama has said many times that whenever he or another African American student tried to do well in school they were always accused of, "Acting white." It's a very unfortunate and terrible situation that exists today. As long as African Americans are told, "Academics, business, etc are a White man's world, go play sports." There is ALWAYS going to be a problem.
This takes the form of "I had agreed to go speak at a prison, but my handler says that I should draft another speech on Iraq instead." It has nothing to do with the quality of his education and everything to do with the issues he addresses. There was an enormous culture of fear in Obama's office, and it was geared toward making sure that he was not too offensive to whites. The rationale is that not only is he black, people were going to see him as inexperienced. This was a year ago, before the campaign, and from what I've seen, it's gotten worse instead of better. Nobody wanted to support Obama more than I did, and I'll still vote for him in the general, if he makes it that far, but now I'm a Kucinich guy. In my book, if you are a black politician and you don't have a pointed critique concerning education and the criminal justice system, I'd just as soon vote for the white guy.
__________________
quote: Zeus: Now, where you goin'? Dexter: School. Zeus: Why? Raymond: To get educated. Zeus: *Why*? Dexter: So we can go to college. Zeus: And why is that important? Dexter: To get Respect.
I'm not sure I agree.
[ September 20, 2007, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
I just saw the CNN coverage of the protests. I'm glad they were all peaceful. I'm especially proud of the police who didn't aggrevate the situation. I think everyone involved handled themselves like rational adults. Hooray for humanity!
The down side is that most of the signs wanted to free the Jena 6. I wish they'd called for the first three to be charged with something. (There's got to be a statute for hanging nooses out of the "white tree" to scare a black student, right?) People don't get to beat other people up when the system doesn't work. We don't have a society then, we just have anarchy.
Personally, if they really wanted to accomplish something, I think they should have held a rally looking for locals to replace the school board in the next election. They're the ones who failed in their moral duty. They should be the ones to go down.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Jeez, Jackson should be ashamed of himself. That's almost as bad as the comments Debra Dickerson made about Obama, when she was trying to say that he isn't really African American because only descendants of West African slaves are really true African Americans, and that Obama is actually African African American, and he's not really a "brotha" he's more like an "adopted brotha."
What the hell is that anyway? Obama can't win. Not only is he apparently acting white, but he has to act black too! Meanwhile his real life is what, somewhere in the grey?
I'd ask at what point this type of discussion becomes useless, but frankly I think it's useless before it even starts.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
The FBI did investigate the noose incident and determined that, while not good, it did not meet the requirements for a hate crime. I have been annoyed with this case because I feel like people are saying that these students shouldn't be punished for their crime because some one else wasn't punished properly. The white kids probably should have received a harsher penalty (I don't think I have enough information to make a judgement on that), but that doesn't make what the black kids did ok.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
scholar, that is how I feel about this case as well. Facebook groups such as "Free the Jena 6" bother me because it seems that people are saying that the kids aren't responsible at all for what they did.
-pH
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Irami: I personally go to school to better myself and in that way respect myself as an intelligent human being capable of great things.
The times I don't respect myself are the times I don't do what I know I should do.
But hey what's your disagreement with going to school to get respect? Honestly asking.
I can respect that for you if a black candidate does not put enough emphasis on the education system and the justice system you will vote for a white guy who does. That's certainly a stance I can understand if not endorse.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
ph,
Of course the kids are responsible for what they did, the problem is judging the severity of what they did. Assault is tricky. Fights between high schoolers happen every day, and since there are so many mitigated and sensitive factors, jail time, any jail time, seems like a blunt instrument that may not address the problem. There should be suspensions, I think, but more importantly, there needs to be dialogue, preferably involving the entire school and many different small group meetings involving trained counselors everyday for a few weeks, segregated groups and integrated groups. I imagine that the white parents just want to suspend or jail the guilty parties, white and black, and put the whole thing behind them, but this is a deep issue at a school no less, and unless its dealt with thoughtfully and not necessarily with blanket penalties, it will all be for nothing.
[ September 20, 2007, 08:50 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
If the everyone thinks the white kids who hung the nooses should be expelled, I think they'd all agree that the six who participated in the beating should also be expelled. If you should get expelled for threatening to hurt someone, you should certainly be expelled for actually hurting them. Many people on the news have been making light of the injuries, but reading what the actual damage was, it sounded pretty damned severe to me. From what I understand, even after the kid was beaten senseless, he was continually kicked and stomped in the face and head.
And I think that warrants some sort of criminal penalty, even if at worse all they get is community service, it shouldn't be overlooked. Someone else's crimes don't excuse yours. If we're settling for the "he started it" defense in this whole debacle, then I despair for the entire justice system, to say nothing of race relations.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I wouldn't expel anyone, a few days suspensions all around, but then back to figuring out together why all of this happened in the first place.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I want to point out how often the assumption that the south is the most racist part of the country was made in this thread. I think that's completely false. Please re-think that assumption.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Call it realpolitik, strategy, or healthy competition, but white people are a scary, untrustworthy bunch.
The funny thing about this sentence is that the word "white" is completely unnecessary.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
No it's not; if you take out the word 'white' then it's not racist anymore. Irami can't have that -- the black people would kick him out of the clubhouse.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I want to point out how often the assumption that the south is the most racist part of the country was made in this thread. I think that's completely false...
Note, I'm Canadian and have not done research into modern racism in the United States.
However, since the assumption is "completely false", I am curious as to what part of the country IS most racist and how you came to that conclusion.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
There are different expressions of racism. In Michigan, race relations doesn't make the national news but the black people live south of 8 mile and the white people live north of 8 mile and there is NO MIXING. Anything that might lead to mixing is resisted strenuously on both sides.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Anything more concrete/quantitative than one anecdote?
Also, where do the Latinos and Asians live in Michigan?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
You could be asking the same types of questions of those who expressed the opinions about the south, too.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Sure, consider my questions extended accordingly to the rest of the group.
Its just that my interest was aroused by Tatiana's assertion, and I figured it might be worth exploring, wherever it goes.
Posted by grammargoddess (Member # 10828) on :
I think the reason people think we're more racist in the South is that there are MORE black people here, and more mixing. As Javert pointed out, in many areas of the North and West, the people stick to their own neighborhoods. We lived in Indiana for awhile and (after growing up in NC), I was struck by how few black people I saw. The black people they did have acted like white folks because they had assimilated the culture. My husband is from Arizona, and he often claims I'm being racist when I point out that the black culture as a whole doesn't value education, or that they raise their children to value "toughness" over empathy or that they value sneakiness over hard work. I'm for sure not saying every black person is like that, and as I pointed out, I would say most of the people in my neighborhood are not like that, but growing up here, watching how they treat their children, a picture develops about their culture (not the individuals), that people growing up in mostly-white regions never see. They tend to think the only difference is skin color, but people from other cultures are raised differently.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
I will say that I found racism much more prevalent in Chicago, and I grew up in Florida and have lived in Louisiana for four years.
-pH
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
I wonder if the noose kids are going to get an additional retroactive punishment now. Surely a suspension isn't enough; they should each have to write a long report on something like "The White Male in American History" (as some students at my college had to after a racist stunt) to prove they're sorry.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I read (so take it with a grain of salt) that the largest chapter of the KKK is in Arizona. At the press clipping service I work at one of the things we look for in articles is white supremicist groups. There is a client that ONLY wants news of such groups in relation to Arizona. But that does not tell us much.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:They tend to think the only difference is skin color, but people from other cultures are raised differently.
If I'm reading you correctly, GG, you're saying that the reason the South seems more racist is that the races are around each other more, and thus have more informed opinions of each other...?
Posted by 0Megabyte (Member # 8624) on :
I'm sure that's what my southern aunt and uncle would say.
(Sorry to add that in, but that's their view, without a doubt.)
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
I think the south seems more racist because they're the ones who lost their minds when blacks expected things like equal rights. But I think it's telling that blacks demanded them here. In the south, they knew enough whites that it was important to be treated like real people.
White southerners may have been raised with a patronizing attitude towards blacks historically, but they also had a sense of obligation towards them. I think southern attitudes towards blacks were much more complicated than modern folks give them credit for being. It's easier to label people as cruel and evil than to actually find out why their reaction seemed reasonable to them at the time. What's the first rule of writing? Everyone thinks he or she is the hero of the story. Everyone thinks their actions are right or can justify them when they know they're wrong.
When I watched the PBS documentary narrated by Morgan Freeman, it was strongly implied that systematic, legal prejudice against blacks was stirred up by wealthy landowners in the 1800s to keep the slaves and indentured servents from banding together for working reforms. By making both elements of the plantation's working class ememies, the landowners kept their profit margin where they wanted it. Somehow I wonder if modern prejudice doesn't continue that purpose in some way. I'm not sure what the economic benefit would be, but I'd bet anything that if there was one for all races getting along, folks with money would be trying a lot harder to get eveyone to be color blind friends.
Posted by Luet13 (Member # 9274) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by pH: I will say that I found racism much more prevalent in Chicago, and I grew up in Florida and have lived in Louisiana for four years.
-pH [/QUOTE
Having grown up in Chicago, I take issue with that statement. The thing with Chicago is that it is self segregated to an extent. The North Side is where all the white folk live, the South and West sides are where all the Black and Hispanic folk live. Historically, the rich white folk lived on the South side, and then there was the great white flight when the Black folk moved to Chicago from the Southern states.
I am by no means stating that there is no racism in Chicago, 'cause there certainly is as there is, unfortunately, everywhere in this country.
I am white and attended a public grammar school that was very very mixed. We had people from all over the world in that school. And when I went to high school, I went to a magnet school on the Near West Side. The school was 80% African American. I never had trouble with racism. There were no separate proms, and no specific 'white' or 'black' areas. I have never known anyone to be excluded or denigraded simply because of their race.
Also, my mom's side of the family is from Mississippi, where I definitely experienced more racism than I ever did in Chicago. However, I find it annoying that people assume that if you're from the south, or have family in the south, that you are racist. That's absurd. I don't think there is anywhere in this country where racism is completely dead. And that is a sad state of affairs.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Anything more concrete/quantitative than one anecdote?
Also, where do the Latinos and Asians live in Michigan?
quote:Originally posted by Javert Hugo: There are different expressions of racism. In Michigan, race relations doesn't make the national news but the black people live south of 8 mile and the white people live north of 8 mile and there is NO MIXING. Anything that might lead to mixing is resisted strenuously on both sides.
Woah there sparky, NO mixing? 8 mile isn't a magic barrier. There are plenty of black people living north of 8 mile and plenty of white people living south of it, they are just a minority. And I question how much the 8 mile road barrier even matters anymore. The majority of those living south of 8 mile come north to work with white people during the day and then go home at night. I live at 11 mile, and I work at 16 mile, which is right in the middle of the richest part of the white suburbs, but my coworkers are an even mix of hispanic, black and white. So the idea that we're segregated with no mixing is absurd to me, and even though there is a sort of line in the sand, it's constantly being washed away as people move around much more freely now than they could a couple decades ago.
And really that's just Metro Detroit, it's not the whole state. There's a very large latino community in Grand Rapids, more on the north side. Detroit has MexicanTown, as well as a huge Chaldean (Arabic) community in Dearborn and elsewhere. There's no strict Asian community, they're mixed in everywhere.
Where in Michigan did or do you live JH?
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
The Rodney King incident and trial come to mind.
My personal experience from my visits around the western hemisphere is that the midwest is the most racist part of the country. A few quick anecdotes. My friend Jason told me that a child in the midwest said to his mother in the store "There's a black man!" and pointed to him, as though he'd never seen one. He said the southeastern US is the least racist part of the country in his experience. He's traveled all over for his job. My friend Josh said the same, and he lived in California for a long time, and also has traveled extensively in the rest of the country. When I was in Michigan, someone asked me if I liked the South and I said yes I loved it. He then asked, "aren't there an awful lot of black people down there?" and I blinked in shock. Two friends of a friend in Virginia harassed an interracial couple in the car next to us one night when we were driving in traffic. I was shocked and really horrified by that. Understand that nobody here would do that, make casual racist remarks to virtual strangers. Even the people who still believe it realize it's completely socially unacceptable to say it in polite company.
There are certainly racists here in the South, don't get me wrong. It's nothing to brag about that we're the least racist section of the country, considering how racist we still are. But the whole idea that racism is primarily a southern thing is completely false. It's much better here than elsewhere in the country, from everything I know.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
quote:Woah there sparky, NO mixing? 8 mile isn't a magic barrier.
Eminem agrees with you.
I think I started thinking of the south as more racist when, as a a child (maybe 10 or 11) I saw a news report on a controversy over displaying the Confederate flag. I don't even remember the exact nature of the controversy, but I do remember some people being really REALLY pissed off about it. We'd been learning about the civil war and I couldn't understand why someone would want to fly the flag of a bunch of racists and traitors.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by Luet13: [QUOTE]Originally posted by pH: I will say that I found racism much more prevalent in Chicago, and I grew up in Florida and have lived in Louisiana for four years.
-pH [/QUOTE
Having grown up in Chicago, I take issue with that statement.
Then I hope you can understand how weary those of us in the South are of people in other parts of the country pointing the finger our way whenever racism is brought up.
-pH
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
Just as a side note, I'm not sure people think of Florida when they think of the South. I don't.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
quote: I couldn't understand why someone would want to fly the flag of a bunch of racists and traitors.
Cause that's not how they see it. Just saying.
Also, it's not technically the Confederate flag. It's the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
quote:Originally posted by Juxtapose: Just as a side note, I'm not sure people think of Florida when they think of the South. I don't.
South Florida is not "the South." Northern Florida most definitely is.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Not that I do not find this interesting (I do on an anecdotal level, although I find the black/white focus a little disorienting), but does anyone have anything more compelling such as statistics/quantitative information?
Although I do see that the largest (maybe) KKK chapter is in Arizona, which is an interesting nugget.
I kind of have an idea where I would start looking in Canada for such information (Statscan) but I'm not sure about the US equivalent.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
quote: South Florida is not "the South." Northern Florida most definitely is.
I guess Central Florida is just kind of southern. My piece was an even mix of rednecks, farmers, retirees, and doctors.
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
EDIT: South Carolina and Georgia seem to be the worst from what I can see in terms of number of hate groups per 1 million people.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Those statistics are really suspect. They don't include the number of people who are members of these groups - some of those groups listed might have one or two members. Also, some of the incidents listed in their "Hatewatch" sound to me like they may not have had racism as a motivation. Then, they list hate group "incidents" and include everything from murder to the publication of a newsletter - each counts as an "incident" as if they were equivalent.
Then there's stuff like this:
quote:"About 16 members of the Mississippi White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan gathered at the county courthouse to distribute pamphlets with names, addresses and photos of local registered sex offenders and fliers about illegal immigration."
Ummm...I wouldn't think 16 is a huge turnout or anything the KKK wants to brag about. And this is Mississippi, a place that has a reputation of being a hotbed of Klan support.
Or this one:
quote:Tampa (Arson) Published on 04-12-2007 A building next to a mosque and educational center was set afire. [emphasis mine]
So, the mosque and educational center were NOT set on fire? How do they even know this was a hate crime? Maybe it was coincidence, or an insurance scam by the owner of the building?
And, if you skim "HateWatch" for 2007 without regard to what type of incident they were, I get these numbers for the "deep south" states:
AL - 4 - (one of which was a "legal development" and only a mention on a sentencing of a crime that took place years before, so I think it's unfair to include that in 2007 numbers - the crime didn't take place in 2007 - but I will put it here since this is representative of a total of the "Hatewatch" incidents)
GA - 2
MS - 3
TN - 3
SC - 2
In contrast, some other states that are not part of the deep south:
NJ - 9
NY - 14
CO - 6
OR - 6
CA - 35
Bottom line - no area of the country has a monopoly on racist jerks. They're everywhere. It's really unfair to characterize any people as being more or less likely to be racist based simpply on what regional accent they might have. Let's judge people by their actions, not what part of the country they hail from.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
The Civil Rights Era wasn't that long ago, the idea that some people believe racism is somehow dead after 50 or 60 years is just plain crazy to me. It's still around but it's more subtle, insidious even.
For instance in a study entitled "Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal?" some not so great results were discovered.
quote:Abstract We study race in the labor market by sending fictitious resumes to help-wanted ads in Boston and Chicago newspapers. To manipulate perceived race, resumes are randomly assigned African American or White sounding names. White names receive 50 percent more callbacks for interviews. Callbacks are also more responsive to resume quality for White names than for African American ones. The racial gap is uniform across occupation, industry, and employer size. We also find little evidence that employers are inferring social class from the names. Differential treatment by race still appears to still be prominent in the U.S. labor market.
You can imagine my dismay after reading that, my name is Jamal. Then I again I can't really be surprised at the results when I read a comment in this very thread
quote:Originally posted by grammargoddess: My husband is from Arizona, and he often claims I'm being racist when I point out that the black culture as a whole doesn't value education, or that they raise their children to value "toughness" over empathy or that they value sneakiness over hard work. I'm for sure not saying every black person is like that, and as I pointed out, I would say most of the people in my neighborhood are not like that, but growing up here, watching how they treat their children, a picture develops about their culture (not the individuals), that people growing up in mostly-white regions never see. They tend to think the only difference is skin color, but people from other cultures are raised differently.
Do you really think she'd ever give a call back to a person named Jamal?
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
Another interesting point about traditional vs. unusual names I've noticed is that it seems to correlate to marital status. Our paper publishes pictures of babies on their first birthday and lists the names of the parents. By and large, traditionally named babies have parents with the same last name while unusually named babies have parents with different last names.
I'm not sure I'd lump Jamal into the unusual category, but Ja'Mal or Jahmall I would.
Now, it could be that several of these parents have chosen not to be married or are married but the wife kept her last name. But my assumption with a large number of last names and odd baby names is that these are unmarried, poor parents. So while the study doesn't think socioeconomic assumptions are being made, that doesn't mean they aren't.
[Edit to add] I found the list of names at the end, and I don't find any of them to be all that unusual. Not by my criteria anyway. But the study was published in 2004, so I'm curious how much of Rasheed, Hakim, and Kareem's bad luck was based on their perceived religion instead of race.
[ September 23, 2007, 08:54 AM: Message edited by: AvidReader ]
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
This website has many implicit association tests that are supposed to test for biases towards one group or another. There is a Race IAT there that I found very revealing. It says that I show no automatic preference for europeans or african americans, however I feel that I just got lucky. I made two errors, both of which involved associating a good word with the african-american column, and I felt that I was hesitating longer on the european/bad and african/good test.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
There is an entire chapter of the book, "Freakonomics" devoted to why he thinks people choose the names they do. He even devotes pages to minority names
That book is pretty fascinating stuff. -----
That hate map was kinda interesting, Utah had the fewest groups and only hate group was some splinter religious group called "fundamental latter day saints," and they were listed under, "general hate." Do they just hate everything in general?
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
quote:Originally posted by AvidReader: [Edit to add] I found the list of names at the end, and I don't find any of them to be all that unusual. Not by my criteria anyway. But the study was published in 2004, so I'm curious how much of Rasheed, Hakim, and Kareem's bad luck was based on their perceived religion instead of race.
Sadly that might of had an impact on the study. All forms of discrimination are wrong.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
Wow. Great link, Threads. I tried a demo test about Judaism and got no preference one way or another. The test was pretty easy to keep straight. Then I tried their multicultural to unicultural feature test and shocked myself. I was strongly unicultural. I had a hard time keeping the categories straight.
It's got me second guessing some interactions I've had at work. I've been assuming I treat everyone as individuals, but now I wonder if the negatives I see in a couple coworkers are emphasised by their skin color. Maybe they have more good points than I've given them credit for.
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
I just took the skin tone test and despite the fact that I got no automatic preference on the race test, I just got "Your data suggest a moderate automatic preference for Light Skin compared to Dark Skin."
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
Excellent link Threads. I did the Arab one and as much as I'd like to say I'm not biased according to the test I am. Eye popping results. I'll have to examine my world view. :edit: I'm almost afraid to do the other test. I'm not sure I want to find out the results.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
I failed the test. It said you are unable to accurately distinguish between faces of African Americans and Western Europeans and so determination of bias can not be made. So, I can honestly say, that just like Stephen Colbert, I don't see races, only people. I know some very smart, very successful African Americans. However, I do think that in some regions there is a stigma to education in the African community. Many of those smart educated people I know have been persecuted by even their families for acting too white. So, I would give a call back to someone named Jamal, but if Jamal started blaiming all his life failures on someone else, I wouldn't buy it. (Of course, I wouldn't buy that from a white guy either so I am not sure if that is racism).
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:Many of those smart educated people I know have been persecuted by even their families for acting too white.
I have seen this in some of my African American friends as well. It makes me very sad, as if educating oneself and striving to better oneself should ever be considered a racial trait.
One friend has a daughter in the gymnastics class with my daughter, and said her aunt told her she should get her daughter out of gymnastics because it was a "rich white person's sport" and she'll spend so much time with "those white girls" that she'll "start acting white."
Fortunately my friend recognizes that for what it is - total bunk - and we are all continue being friends and teammates.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Hmmmm, I like the last set of contributions to this thread. Very interesting.
BlackBlade: Utah didn't have the least, some states did have 0 groups
General hate is described if you click on the legend on the first page, it seems to mostly be a "miscellaneous" category.
Belle: By contrast, I've heard that some Asian students that enter liberal arts rather than engineering, computer science, and other practical disciplines are joking referred to as being "too white" due to the liberal arts student's greater proclivity for drinking, partying, and whatnot Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Zeus: Now, where you goin'? Dexter: School. Zeus: Why? Raymond: To get educated. Zeus: *Why*? Dexter: So we can go to college. Zeus: And why is that important? Dexter: To get es-pect. Zeus: RE-spect. Now, who's the bad guys? Dexter: Guys who sell drugs. Raymond: Guys who have guns. Zeus: And who's the good guys? Dexter: We're the good guys. Zeus: Who's gonna help you? Raymond: Nobody. Zeus: *So who's gonna help you*? Dexter: We're gonna help ourselves. Zeus: And who do we not want to help us? Dexter, Raymond: White people.
I knew there was something else I didn't like about this dialogue. At some point, these kids are going to need letters of recommendation, either for college or for graduate school. Maybe they can get by without ever having to shuck and jive some white high school teacher or professor, but that's not been my experience.
[ September 24, 2007, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
"shuck and jive"? The Urban Dictionary seems rather contradictory on this one.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Wait....why is it bad to need a letter of recommendation? And how the heck is a college going to know if the person who wrote the letter is white, black, Asian, or Martian?
-pH
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
Irami is lamenting the impracticality of treating all white people with derision.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Mucus: I don't know how I did not see those 0s, sometimes I really do question what is wrong with my senses.
Irami: I don't think the point of the dialogue was to say, "Never let a white person help you," so much as, "Don't rely on white people to lift you up."
Indeed Samuel L Jackson spends the rest of the movie helping and being helped by Bruce Willis, a white man, save New York
Also not every person who writes these letters of recommendation are white you know.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
quote:Originally posted by grammargoddess: ... the black culture as a whole doesn't value education ...
But Wowbagger/Jamal, many black people agree with this statement, and see it as a failing of Black culture. Notably Bill Cosby, who has spoken often on the topic.
Not so much the sneakiness thing though. Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo:
quote:Originally posted by grammargoddess: ... the black culture as a whole doesn't value education ...
But Wowbagger/Jamal, many black people agree with this statement, and see it as a failing of Black culture. Notably Bill Cosby, who has spoken often on the topic.
Not so much the sneakiness thing though.
Yeah, I wasn't disagreeing with the education part of what she said. You only have to look at the national graduation rates for African American students especially the males. I'm at a loss to explain why that is.
The line about the being raised to be sneaky...that's what set my teeth on edge.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
[Guess I wasn't the only one, then.]
--j_k
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
An article by a local Jena journalist lays out 12 media myths in the case. It doesn't seem to be as one-sided as it first appeared.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
That's very interesting, Morbo.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I'm glad I didn't put much stock in the story as it was written in the periodicals I was reading.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
Wow. I wonder if this guy is the one making stuff up or if the traditional media was. It does make one pause to remember that most of the things we think we know are things we truely know nothing about.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
Yeaaah. Back when this was the big topic on progressive blogs, and some commentors such as myself suggested restraint and careful fact gathering, we were suspected of being racist.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Does the bit about the assembly and someone asking "Can anyone sit under the tree?" to be met with general laughter seem odd to anyone else?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Does the bit about the assembly and someone asking "Can anyone sit under the tree?" to be met with general laughter seem odd to anyone else?
Do adolescent teenagers saying dumb things that they think are hilarious seem normal to anyone else?
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I thought the article as a whole was interesting and kind of needed given the disproportionate uproar.
The only bit I thought was kind of lacking was:
quote: Myth 11: Jena Is One of the Most Racist Towns in America. Actually, Jena is a wonderful place to live for both whites and blacks. The media's distortion and outright lies concerning the case have given this rural Louisiana town a label it doesn't deserve.
Yeah, I can see that kind of label being somewhat of an irritant. However, in an article that is supposed to debunk myth, the author should really be prepared with more than just a personal assertion. Otherwise, everyone is always sympathetic to their hometown and I doubt many people would be prepared to say that their hometown is the "most racist."
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
Of course my hometown isn't. It's the town next door that is.
I probably shouldn't joke. My home county isn't exactly a bed of tolerance.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
You said it a lot better than I could have.![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)