Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
eavesdropper
Participant[quote=scaredycat]maybe not. maybe america is kind of about such provocative cantankerousness…[/quote]
I love it! “Provocative cantankerousness” sums it up perfectly.
Participant[quote=Eugene]The plot thickens. 200 Live Oak High students walk out of class, waving Mexican flags:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Flag-T-shirt-Controversy-Day-Two-92988244.html%5B/quote%5D
I sincerely hope that tomorrow’s headline reads “200 Live Oak students given 3-day detention for walking out of class”.
As I mentioned in another post, I don’t believe that any of the Live Oak High students are suffering deleterious effects to their psyches as a result of the events of May 5. However, if I am incorrect in my assumption, and the result was the need to participate in a two-hour protest walk on City Hall, it should have been scheduled for after-school hours. Public schools districts have a duty and obligation to provide the means for an elementary and secondary school education to the children of this country. However, said same children are obligated to follow the rules and guidelines, and fulfill the requirements of the school at which they are enrolled students. This includes attendance on the proscribed days and hours of instruction.
In the words of the student protesters, they walked out of class, en masse, and were marching to “show their Mexican-American pride”. This was not an event planned, executed, or endorsed by the school or the district. The student-protesters left their classes and the school in the middle of the scheduled school day, without the permission of their teachers or administrators, in direct violation of school policy.
An march to demonstrate ethnic pride could have been held at any time, and there was no need or excuse for the participating students to leave their classes. By all accounts, many of these same students were supportive of the school’s decision to discipline the students who had violated the school’s newly-instituted Cinco de Mayo dress code. I would hope that the student protesters are as open to the prospect of discipline resulting from their deliberate flaunting of the rules.
Participant[quote=Eugene]The plot thickens. 200 Live Oak High students walk out of class, waving Mexican flags:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Flag-T-shirt-Controversy-Day-Two-92988244.html%5B/quote%5D
I sincerely hope that tomorrow’s headline reads “200 Live Oak students given 3-day detention for walking out of class”.
As I mentioned in another post, I don’t believe that any of the Live Oak High students are suffering deleterious effects to their psyches as a result of the events of May 5. However, if I am incorrect in my assumption, and the result was the need to participate in a two-hour protest walk on City Hall, it should have been scheduled for after-school hours. Public schools districts have a duty and obligation to provide the means for an elementary and secondary school education to the children of this country. However, said same children are obligated to follow the rules and guidelines, and fulfill the requirements of the school at which they are enrolled students. This includes attendance on the proscribed days and hours of instruction.
In the words of the student protesters, they walked out of class, en masse, and were marching to “show their Mexican-American pride”. This was not an event planned, executed, or endorsed by the school or the district. The student-protesters left their classes and the school in the middle of the scheduled school day, without the permission of their teachers or administrators, in direct violation of school policy.
An march to demonstrate ethnic pride could have been held at any time, and there was no need or excuse for the participating students to leave their classes. By all accounts, many of these same students were supportive of the school’s decision to discipline the students who had violated the school’s newly-instituted Cinco de Mayo dress code. I would hope that the student protesters are as open to the prospect of discipline resulting from their deliberate flaunting of the rules.
Participant[quote=Eugene]The plot thickens. 200 Live Oak High students walk out of class, waving Mexican flags:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Flag-T-shirt-Controversy-Day-Two-92988244.html%5B/quote%5D
I sincerely hope that tomorrow’s headline reads “200 Live Oak students given 3-day detention for walking out of class”.
As I mentioned in another post, I don’t believe that any of the Live Oak High students are suffering deleterious effects to their psyches as a result of the events of May 5. However, if I am incorrect in my assumption, and the result was the need to participate in a two-hour protest walk on City Hall, it should have been scheduled for after-school hours. Public schools districts have a duty and obligation to provide the means for an elementary and secondary school education to the children of this country. However, said same children are obligated to follow the rules and guidelines, and fulfill the requirements of the school at which they are enrolled students. This includes attendance on the proscribed days and hours of instruction.
In the words of the student protesters, they walked out of class, en masse, and were marching to “show their Mexican-American pride”. This was not an event planned, executed, or endorsed by the school or the district. The student-protesters left their classes and the school in the middle of the scheduled school day, without the permission of their teachers or administrators, in direct violation of school policy.
An march to demonstrate ethnic pride could have been held at any time, and there was no need or excuse for the participating students to leave their classes. By all accounts, many of these same students were supportive of the school’s decision to discipline the students who had violated the school’s newly-instituted Cinco de Mayo dress code. I would hope that the student protesters are as open to the prospect of discipline resulting from their deliberate flaunting of the rules.
Participant[quote=Eugene]The plot thickens. 200 Live Oak High students walk out of class, waving Mexican flags:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Flag-T-shirt-Controversy-Day-Two-92988244.html%5B/quote%5D
I sincerely hope that tomorrow’s headline reads “200 Live Oak students given 3-day detention for walking out of class”.
As I mentioned in another post, I don’t believe that any of the Live Oak High students are suffering deleterious effects to their psyches as a result of the events of May 5. However, if I am incorrect in my assumption, and the result was the need to participate in a two-hour protest walk on City Hall, it should have been scheduled for after-school hours. Public schools districts have a duty and obligation to provide the means for an elementary and secondary school education to the children of this country. However, said same children are obligated to follow the rules and guidelines, and fulfill the requirements of the school at which they are enrolled students. This includes attendance on the proscribed days and hours of instruction.
In the words of the student protesters, they walked out of class, en masse, and were marching to “show their Mexican-American pride”. This was not an event planned, executed, or endorsed by the school or the district. The student-protesters left their classes and the school in the middle of the scheduled school day, without the permission of their teachers or administrators, in direct violation of school policy.
An march to demonstrate ethnic pride could have been held at any time, and there was no need or excuse for the participating students to leave their classes. By all accounts, many of these same students were supportive of the school’s decision to discipline the students who had violated the school’s newly-instituted Cinco de Mayo dress code. I would hope that the student protesters are as open to the prospect of discipline resulting from their deliberate flaunting of the rules.
Participant[quote=Eugene]The plot thickens. 200 Live Oak High students walk out of class, waving Mexican flags:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Flag-T-shirt-Controversy-Day-Two-92988244.html%5B/quote%5D
I sincerely hope that tomorrow’s headline reads “200 Live Oak students given 3-day detention for walking out of class”.
As I mentioned in another post, I don’t believe that any of the Live Oak High students are suffering deleterious effects to their psyches as a result of the events of May 5. However, if I am incorrect in my assumption, and the result was the need to participate in a two-hour protest walk on City Hall, it should have been scheduled for after-school hours. Public schools districts have a duty and obligation to provide the means for an elementary and secondary school education to the children of this country. However, said same children are obligated to follow the rules and guidelines, and fulfill the requirements of the school at which they are enrolled students. This includes attendance on the proscribed days and hours of instruction.
In the words of the student protesters, they walked out of class, en masse, and were marching to “show their Mexican-American pride”. This was not an event planned, executed, or endorsed by the school or the district. The student-protesters left their classes and the school in the middle of the scheduled school day, without the permission of their teachers or administrators, in direct violation of school policy.
An march to demonstrate ethnic pride could have been held at any time, and there was no need or excuse for the participating students to leave their classes. By all accounts, many of these same students were supportive of the school’s decision to discipline the students who had violated the school’s newly-instituted Cinco de Mayo dress code. I would hope that the student protesters are as open to the prospect of discipline resulting from their deliberate flaunting of the rules.
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]The word “tolerance” is bandied about regularly these days.
Clearly those who are insulted by a USA t-shirt on any day have the lowest levels of tolerance imaginable and are just looking for a fight where none exists. To me, that is the real problem. The administrator gave-in to the wrong side here, for sure.
How about telling everyone that whoever starts a fight over a shirt is going to jail?
Perhaps they did wear the USA shirts to get under the others’ skin. Really? A red/white/blue shirt is going to get under their skin? Is it too much to ask that you just deal with the other guy’s shirt? Is it so hard? Imagine the stories they’ll tell their children about the persecution “Yeah. and this one guy wore a shirt with a flag on it. It was hell, man. Hell. So I threatened to beat him up.”
It’s just stupid.[/quote]
sdduuuude, your post appears to be a reaction to what I wrote earlier. Yes, I did suggest that the possibility that the “offenders” had worn the shirts to get under the skin of the school administrators, and perhaps even the other students. My point, that I thought I made clear, was that kids thrive on undermining school administrators, especially when they believe that retrictions placed upon them are idiotic in nature. The Cinco de Mayo dress code was a prime example of such idiocy, compounded by the administration’s reactions to the students’ revolt against the order.
The administrator(s) responsible for the “holiday” dress code may have believed that they were acting with the best of intentions. But they simply affixed another “victim” label to a select group. You’re correct: no one should be offended by an American (or any other) flag shirt. But, by creating and enforcing this dress code, the administrators set up the school’s Hispanic population as victims: the message to the Hispanic students was that THEY were being violated, not a school policy. It was an incredibly stupid and insensitive thing for the school to have done. If there are ongoing ethnic tensions at the school, or if they simply want to broaden cultural sensitivity among their students, there are far more effective solutions that are non-polarizing . When trying to ensure equal rights for all, you do not strip rights from some.
So, no, a shirt shouldn’t be an issue. Until someone in authority makes it an issue. And then it becomes THE issue. Yes. It’s just stupid.
But this is what’s been happening in America for years, and it’s been ratcheted up exponentially in the past couple, aided and abetted by a rabid press. People have anger control issues. Their response to just about everything is to adopt a loud, angry affect. It’s a widely-accepted fact that Americans watch a LOT of television. On any given evening, turn yours on and see how people deal with each other. With anger. With insults. With threats. I’m assuming, perhaps erroneously, that the example of dialogue at the end of your post was satirical, but have you watched any MTV lately? It’s a steady stream of “entertainment” where young men AND women communicate via texting and sex. On the rare occasions that they engage in verbal exchanges, it’s primarily a steady stream of invective punctuated by frequent threats to kick the other’s ass. And why not? We were raised on “Mr. Rogers” and “Sesame Street”, but these kids were brought up in front of “Jerry Springer” and “Cops”. Ridiculous as it sounds, your dialogue would fit right into the MTV lineup. People threatening serious bodily harm to others for minor, mostly imagined, slights.
My problem with what happened at Live Oak High, and what’s happening in this country, is that people are using “patriotism” as an excuse to both play the victim and to bully others. Our forefathers’ names are being attached to words they never uttered – statements of bigotry and ignorance – in an effort to lend legitimacy to the sentiments. Quite honestly, I don’t believe the Hispanic students were, in any way, traumatized by the events of May 5th. Likewise, I seriously doubt that the American students truly felt that their honor as Americans was at stake. Sit either group down, and grill them about the histories of their countries, the pivotal events, the sacrifices, and what it MEANS to be a citizen, and you might end up agreeing with me. But, thanks to the attention and headlines given the episode, we now have an excuse to become even more polarized.
I stick to my opinion that this dress code issue was a misguided boneheaded move by administrators that would have been best handled internally by the school district, and treated like the minor incident it was. Kind of like the way mature, responsible, and reasonable citizens should handle situations of this nature. As for the bandying of the word “tolerance”, please re-read the entire last sentence of my post for illumination on how the word “tolerance” was actually employed.
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]The word “tolerance” is bandied about regularly these days.
Clearly those who are insulted by a USA t-shirt on any day have the lowest levels of tolerance imaginable and are just looking for a fight where none exists. To me, that is the real problem. The administrator gave-in to the wrong side here, for sure.
How about telling everyone that whoever starts a fight over a shirt is going to jail?
Perhaps they did wear the USA shirts to get under the others’ skin. Really? A red/white/blue shirt is going to get under their skin? Is it too much to ask that you just deal with the other guy’s shirt? Is it so hard? Imagine the stories they’ll tell their children about the persecution “Yeah. and this one guy wore a shirt with a flag on it. It was hell, man. Hell. So I threatened to beat him up.”
It’s just stupid.[/quote]
sdduuuude, your post appears to be a reaction to what I wrote earlier. Yes, I did suggest that the possibility that the “offenders” had worn the shirts to get under the skin of the school administrators, and perhaps even the other students. My point, that I thought I made clear, was that kids thrive on undermining school administrators, especially when they believe that retrictions placed upon them are idiotic in nature. The Cinco de Mayo dress code was a prime example of such idiocy, compounded by the administration’s reactions to the students’ revolt against the order.
The administrator(s) responsible for the “holiday” dress code may have believed that they were acting with the best of intentions. But they simply affixed another “victim” label to a select group. You’re correct: no one should be offended by an American (or any other) flag shirt. But, by creating and enforcing this dress code, the administrators set up the school’s Hispanic population as victims: the message to the Hispanic students was that THEY were being violated, not a school policy. It was an incredibly stupid and insensitive thing for the school to have done. If there are ongoing ethnic tensions at the school, or if they simply want to broaden cultural sensitivity among their students, there are far more effective solutions that are non-polarizing . When trying to ensure equal rights for all, you do not strip rights from some.
So, no, a shirt shouldn’t be an issue. Until someone in authority makes it an issue. And then it becomes THE issue. Yes. It’s just stupid.
But this is what’s been happening in America for years, and it’s been ratcheted up exponentially in the past couple, aided and abetted by a rabid press. People have anger control issues. Their response to just about everything is to adopt a loud, angry affect. It’s a widely-accepted fact that Americans watch a LOT of television. On any given evening, turn yours on and see how people deal with each other. With anger. With insults. With threats. I’m assuming, perhaps erroneously, that the example of dialogue at the end of your post was satirical, but have you watched any MTV lately? It’s a steady stream of “entertainment” where young men AND women communicate via texting and sex. On the rare occasions that they engage in verbal exchanges, it’s primarily a steady stream of invective punctuated by frequent threats to kick the other’s ass. And why not? We were raised on “Mr. Rogers” and “Sesame Street”, but these kids were brought up in front of “Jerry Springer” and “Cops”. Ridiculous as it sounds, your dialogue would fit right into the MTV lineup. People threatening serious bodily harm to others for minor, mostly imagined, slights.
My problem with what happened at Live Oak High, and what’s happening in this country, is that people are using “patriotism” as an excuse to both play the victim and to bully others. Our forefathers’ names are being attached to words they never uttered – statements of bigotry and ignorance – in an effort to lend legitimacy to the sentiments. Quite honestly, I don’t believe the Hispanic students were, in any way, traumatized by the events of May 5th. Likewise, I seriously doubt that the American students truly felt that their honor as Americans was at stake. Sit either group down, and grill them about the histories of their countries, the pivotal events, the sacrifices, and what it MEANS to be a citizen, and you might end up agreeing with me. But, thanks to the attention and headlines given the episode, we now have an excuse to become even more polarized.
I stick to my opinion that this dress code issue was a misguided boneheaded move by administrators that would have been best handled internally by the school district, and treated like the minor incident it was. Kind of like the way mature, responsible, and reasonable citizens should handle situations of this nature. As for the bandying of the word “tolerance”, please re-read the entire last sentence of my post for illumination on how the word “tolerance” was actually employed.
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]The word “tolerance” is bandied about regularly these days.
Clearly those who are insulted by a USA t-shirt on any day have the lowest levels of tolerance imaginable and are just looking for a fight where none exists. To me, that is the real problem. The administrator gave-in to the wrong side here, for sure.
How about telling everyone that whoever starts a fight over a shirt is going to jail?
Perhaps they did wear the USA shirts to get under the others’ skin. Really? A red/white/blue shirt is going to get under their skin? Is it too much to ask that you just deal with the other guy’s shirt? Is it so hard? Imagine the stories they’ll tell their children about the persecution “Yeah. and this one guy wore a shirt with a flag on it. It was hell, man. Hell. So I threatened to beat him up.”
It’s just stupid.[/quote]
sdduuuude, your post appears to be a reaction to what I wrote earlier. Yes, I did suggest that the possibility that the “offenders” had worn the shirts to get under the skin of the school administrators, and perhaps even the other students. My point, that I thought I made clear, was that kids thrive on undermining school administrators, especially when they believe that retrictions placed upon them are idiotic in nature. The Cinco de Mayo dress code was a prime example of such idiocy, compounded by the administration’s reactions to the students’ revolt against the order.
The administrator(s) responsible for the “holiday” dress code may have believed that they were acting with the best of intentions. But they simply affixed another “victim” label to a select group. You’re correct: no one should be offended by an American (or any other) flag shirt. But, by creating and enforcing this dress code, the administrators set up the school’s Hispanic population as victims: the message to the Hispanic students was that THEY were being violated, not a school policy. It was an incredibly stupid and insensitive thing for the school to have done. If there are ongoing ethnic tensions at the school, or if they simply want to broaden cultural sensitivity among their students, there are far more effective solutions that are non-polarizing . When trying to ensure equal rights for all, you do not strip rights from some.
So, no, a shirt shouldn’t be an issue. Until someone in authority makes it an issue. And then it becomes THE issue. Yes. It’s just stupid.
But this is what’s been happening in America for years, and it’s been ratcheted up exponentially in the past couple, aided and abetted by a rabid press. People have anger control issues. Their response to just about everything is to adopt a loud, angry affect. It’s a widely-accepted fact that Americans watch a LOT of television. On any given evening, turn yours on and see how people deal with each other. With anger. With insults. With threats. I’m assuming, perhaps erroneously, that the example of dialogue at the end of your post was satirical, but have you watched any MTV lately? It’s a steady stream of “entertainment” where young men AND women communicate via texting and sex. On the rare occasions that they engage in verbal exchanges, it’s primarily a steady stream of invective punctuated by frequent threats to kick the other’s ass. And why not? We were raised on “Mr. Rogers” and “Sesame Street”, but these kids were brought up in front of “Jerry Springer” and “Cops”. Ridiculous as it sounds, your dialogue would fit right into the MTV lineup. People threatening serious bodily harm to others for minor, mostly imagined, slights.
My problem with what happened at Live Oak High, and what’s happening in this country, is that people are using “patriotism” as an excuse to both play the victim and to bully others. Our forefathers’ names are being attached to words they never uttered – statements of bigotry and ignorance – in an effort to lend legitimacy to the sentiments. Quite honestly, I don’t believe the Hispanic students were, in any way, traumatized by the events of May 5th. Likewise, I seriously doubt that the American students truly felt that their honor as Americans was at stake. Sit either group down, and grill them about the histories of their countries, the pivotal events, the sacrifices, and what it MEANS to be a citizen, and you might end up agreeing with me. But, thanks to the attention and headlines given the episode, we now have an excuse to become even more polarized.
I stick to my opinion that this dress code issue was a misguided boneheaded move by administrators that would have been best handled internally by the school district, and treated like the minor incident it was. Kind of like the way mature, responsible, and reasonable citizens should handle situations of this nature. As for the bandying of the word “tolerance”, please re-read the entire last sentence of my post for illumination on how the word “tolerance” was actually employed.
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]The word “tolerance” is bandied about regularly these days.
Clearly those who are insulted by a USA t-shirt on any day have the lowest levels of tolerance imaginable and are just looking for a fight where none exists. To me, that is the real problem. The administrator gave-in to the wrong side here, for sure.
How about telling everyone that whoever starts a fight over a shirt is going to jail?
Perhaps they did wear the USA shirts to get under the others’ skin. Really? A red/white/blue shirt is going to get under their skin? Is it too much to ask that you just deal with the other guy’s shirt? Is it so hard? Imagine the stories they’ll tell their children about the persecution “Yeah. and this one guy wore a shirt with a flag on it. It was hell, man. Hell. So I threatened to beat him up.”
It’s just stupid.[/quote]
sdduuuude, your post appears to be a reaction to what I wrote earlier. Yes, I did suggest that the possibility that the “offenders” had worn the shirts to get under the skin of the school administrators, and perhaps even the other students. My point, that I thought I made clear, was that kids thrive on undermining school administrators, especially when they believe that retrictions placed upon them are idiotic in nature. The Cinco de Mayo dress code was a prime example of such idiocy, compounded by the administration’s reactions to the students’ revolt against the order.
The administrator(s) responsible for the “holiday” dress code may have believed that they were acting with the best of intentions. But they simply affixed another “victim” label to a select group. You’re correct: no one should be offended by an American (or any other) flag shirt. But, by creating and enforcing this dress code, the administrators set up the school’s Hispanic population as victims: the message to the Hispanic students was that THEY were being violated, not a school policy. It was an incredibly stupid and insensitive thing for the school to have done. If there are ongoing ethnic tensions at the school, or if they simply want to broaden cultural sensitivity among their students, there are far more effective solutions that are non-polarizing . When trying to ensure equal rights for all, you do not strip rights from some.
So, no, a shirt shouldn’t be an issue. Until someone in authority makes it an issue. And then it becomes THE issue. Yes. It’s just stupid.
But this is what’s been happening in America for years, and it’s been ratcheted up exponentially in the past couple, aided and abetted by a rabid press. People have anger control issues. Their response to just about everything is to adopt a loud, angry affect. It’s a widely-accepted fact that Americans watch a LOT of television. On any given evening, turn yours on and see how people deal with each other. With anger. With insults. With threats. I’m assuming, perhaps erroneously, that the example of dialogue at the end of your post was satirical, but have you watched any MTV lately? It’s a steady stream of “entertainment” where young men AND women communicate via texting and sex. On the rare occasions that they engage in verbal exchanges, it’s primarily a steady stream of invective punctuated by frequent threats to kick the other’s ass. And why not? We were raised on “Mr. Rogers” and “Sesame Street”, but these kids were brought up in front of “Jerry Springer” and “Cops”. Ridiculous as it sounds, your dialogue would fit right into the MTV lineup. People threatening serious bodily harm to others for minor, mostly imagined, slights.
My problem with what happened at Live Oak High, and what’s happening in this country, is that people are using “patriotism” as an excuse to both play the victim and to bully others. Our forefathers’ names are being attached to words they never uttered – statements of bigotry and ignorance – in an effort to lend legitimacy to the sentiments. Quite honestly, I don’t believe the Hispanic students were, in any way, traumatized by the events of May 5th. Likewise, I seriously doubt that the American students truly felt that their honor as Americans was at stake. Sit either group down, and grill them about the histories of their countries, the pivotal events, the sacrifices, and what it MEANS to be a citizen, and you might end up agreeing with me. But, thanks to the attention and headlines given the episode, we now have an excuse to become even more polarized.
I stick to my opinion that this dress code issue was a misguided boneheaded move by administrators that would have been best handled internally by the school district, and treated like the minor incident it was. Kind of like the way mature, responsible, and reasonable citizens should handle situations of this nature. As for the bandying of the word “tolerance”, please re-read the entire last sentence of my post for illumination on how the word “tolerance” was actually employed.
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]The word “tolerance” is bandied about regularly these days.
Clearly those who are insulted by a USA t-shirt on any day have the lowest levels of tolerance imaginable and are just looking for a fight where none exists. To me, that is the real problem. The administrator gave-in to the wrong side here, for sure.
How about telling everyone that whoever starts a fight over a shirt is going to jail?
Perhaps they did wear the USA shirts to get under the others’ skin. Really? A red/white/blue shirt is going to get under their skin? Is it too much to ask that you just deal with the other guy’s shirt? Is it so hard? Imagine the stories they’ll tell their children about the persecution “Yeah. and this one guy wore a shirt with a flag on it. It was hell, man. Hell. So I threatened to beat him up.”
It’s just stupid.[/quote]
sdduuuude, your post appears to be a reaction to what I wrote earlier. Yes, I did suggest that the possibility that the “offenders” had worn the shirts to get under the skin of the school administrators, and perhaps even the other students. My point, that I thought I made clear, was that kids thrive on undermining school administrators, especially when they believe that retrictions placed upon them are idiotic in nature. The Cinco de Mayo dress code was a prime example of such idiocy, compounded by the administration’s reactions to the students’ revolt against the order.
The administrator(s) responsible for the “holiday” dress code may have believed that they were acting with the best of intentions. But they simply affixed another “victim” label to a select group. You’re correct: no one should be offended by an American (or any other) flag shirt. But, by creating and enforcing this dress code, the administrators set up the school’s Hispanic population as victims: the message to the Hispanic students was that THEY were being violated, not a school policy. It was an incredibly stupid and insensitive thing for the school to have done. If there are ongoing ethnic tensions at the school, or if they simply want to broaden cultural sensitivity among their students, there are far more effective solutions that are non-polarizing . When trying to ensure equal rights for all, you do not strip rights from some.
So, no, a shirt shouldn’t be an issue. Until someone in authority makes it an issue. And then it becomes THE issue. Yes. It’s just stupid.
But this is what’s been happening in America for years, and it’s been ratcheted up exponentially in the past couple, aided and abetted by a rabid press. People have anger control issues. Their response to just about everything is to adopt a loud, angry affect. It’s a widely-accepted fact that Americans watch a LOT of television. On any given evening, turn yours on and see how people deal with each other. With anger. With insults. With threats. I’m assuming, perhaps erroneously, that the example of dialogue at the end of your post was satirical, but have you watched any MTV lately? It’s a steady stream of “entertainment” where young men AND women communicate via texting and sex. On the rare occasions that they engage in verbal exchanges, it’s primarily a steady stream of invective punctuated by frequent threats to kick the other’s ass. And why not? We were raised on “Mr. Rogers” and “Sesame Street”, but these kids were brought up in front of “Jerry Springer” and “Cops”. Ridiculous as it sounds, your dialogue would fit right into the MTV lineup. People threatening serious bodily harm to others for minor, mostly imagined, slights.
My problem with what happened at Live Oak High, and what’s happening in this country, is that people are using “patriotism” as an excuse to both play the victim and to bully others. Our forefathers’ names are being attached to words they never uttered – statements of bigotry and ignorance – in an effort to lend legitimacy to the sentiments. Quite honestly, I don’t believe the Hispanic students were, in any way, traumatized by the events of May 5th. Likewise, I seriously doubt that the American students truly felt that their honor as Americans was at stake. Sit either group down, and grill them about the histories of their countries, the pivotal events, the sacrifices, and what it MEANS to be a citizen, and you might end up agreeing with me. But, thanks to the attention and headlines given the episode, we now have an excuse to become even more polarized.
I stick to my opinion that this dress code issue was a misguided boneheaded move by administrators that would have been best handled internally by the school district, and treated like the minor incident it was. Kind of like the way mature, responsible, and reasonable citizens should handle situations of this nature. As for the bandying of the word “tolerance”, please re-read the entire last sentence of my post for illumination on how the word “tolerance” was actually employed.
Participant[quote=Eugene]The plot thickens. 200 Live Oak High students walk out of class, waving Mexican flags:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Flag-T-shirt-Controversy-Day-Two-92988244.html%5B/quote%5D
You know, I’d feel a lot better if many of these students, on both sides of the argument, would put this kind of energy into learning, and getting good grades.
Does that make me insensitive?
On the other hand, I don’t really give a rat’s ass.
Participant[quote=Eugene]The plot thickens. 200 Live Oak High students walk out of class, waving Mexican flags:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Flag-T-shirt-Controversy-Day-Two-92988244.html%5B/quote%5D
You know, I’d feel a lot better if many of these students, on both sides of the argument, would put this kind of energy into learning, and getting good grades.
Does that make me insensitive?
On the other hand, I don’t really give a rat’s ass.
Participant[quote=Eugene]The plot thickens. 200 Live Oak High students walk out of class, waving Mexican flags:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Flag-T-shirt-Controversy-Day-Two-92988244.html%5B/quote%5D
You know, I’d feel a lot better if many of these students, on both sides of the argument, would put this kind of energy into learning, and getting good grades.
Does that make me insensitive?
On the other hand, I don’t really give a rat’s ass.
-
AuthorPosts