It's A Different World

[skeptic]

Arizona;

 

While I found the report/research interesting, and to have valid considerations, I am not sure that it is basically flawed.  By ONLY surveying those "perceived" to be minorities or "non-white", you are bound to arrive at skewed perspectives to some extent.  Also, I wonder how much their findings were affected by the possible prejudice of those responding, especially since apparently less than 50% (Over 4,800 students of color completed the online survey, yielding a 45% response rate.) of the target group even chose to be part of the study.  Now, we obviously do not know why those that made that choice did so, but it seems to me that we automatically end up with a group predetermined to be more sensitive to the issue.  

 

One cannot help but wonder a bit about how much of the perceived microaggression is more a projection of the responder's personal belief, insecurities brought with them, and their cultural heritage.  Some of the examples given could just as easily occur with other individuals that do not fit these ethnic and racial categories.  Certainly I have felt left out, segregated, or otherwise marginalized at times in various group interactions.  Some of it was my own lack of confidence because of unfamiliarity of various types, and some was simply normal initial reticence in a new environment or experience.  It is a reality that ethnic/racial groups tend to band together naturally in large populations; but they will mix  to a large extent while involved in the dynamic of the activity.  Still, as soon as the class or whatever is over, they will recongregate in their previous preferred groups of friends, often again ethnically/racially segregated, by their choice.  This has been my personal experience in the service, 3 large universities, and even in smaller group settings much of the time.

 

Again, while I fully understand that sociologists and psychologists contribute much to the better understanding of numerous societal problems, including those related in this study, I wonder how much they may exacerbate things at times by inventing new, purposefully slanted, terminology, such as microaggressions, microinsults, microinvalidations and microassaults.  

 

To some extent in our society today it is these types of studies that lend credence to the anti-intellectual attitudes by a considerable percentage of of our population.  How much different would this study's result have possibly been if it had had an equal amount of responses from perceived majority students, e.g., white?  

 

We need to be aware of our tendencies to stereotype and to extend our personal prejudices from our upbringing and cultural background.  On the other hand, we need to be very careful to not focus so much on perceived slights that we over-react and in turn respond in similar fashion.  

[CalicoPenn]

 

 I believe the Golden Age of America has passed and therefore I don't expect things to get better over time.  The past 15 years have been quite a downward spiral and I don't see it turning around in my lifetime.

 

 

 

This same sentiment has been expressed throughout US History and yet the US still perserveres.  When the first president was elected that could not be said to be a founding father, the Golden Age of America passed.  When Lincoln was elected president, the Golden Age of America passed.  When the great depression of the late 1800's happened, the Golden Age of America passed.  When the Great Depression of the 1930's started, the Golden Age of America passed.  When JFK was elected president, the Golden Age of America passed.  How many "Golden Ages" can we have?  In 30-40 years, the Millenials will be looking on at what is happening in the post millenial generation and be declaring that the Golden Age of America has passed.  That's the thing about golden ages - there will never be universal agreement of when the US has had its golden age - those in the older generations are likely to believe that the golden age of the USA was the period when they were in their late teens to mid 40's while the generation that is living through their teens, 20's and 30's now are thinking that now is the golden age - and I suspect that, in some future time, when the geopolitics of the world has completely changed, that historians will look at the entire time period of the United States and declare that all 500...800...1500 (whatever that number might be) years of it's existence was a golden age in its entirety.

[Stosh]

With the American Dream ever present in our culture for many generations, it was always assumed that one's children lot in life would be an improvement over their parent's generation.  I don't think one can guarantee that today.  Medical science has already stated that children born after 2000 have a life-expectancy less than their parents.  

 

As great as any empire has ever been, they all decline and decay over time.  So if every generation says they lived in the Golden Era, there are a lot of the people fooling themselves along the way.

 

The Roman Empire lasted "a thousand years."  Hitler's Third Reich last a mere 10.  A case can be made that the ideals that American was founded on have been under attack for some time now.  It's just a matter of time.

[Hedgehog]

But yeah, one wishes there were more enclaves where one could avoid the craziness of modern culture.  

 

Honestly, it is called Scouting.  Spending a weekend sleeping out in the wilderness, cooking over a propane stove, seeing boys of all ages get along because they live the Scout Law, observing what happens when there are no electronic devices to play with, watching boys do things they never thought they would do, sitting around a campfire exploring the lost arts of conversation and story telling, noticing the joy of kids playing with fire and knives, seeing how kids with helecopter parents function perfectly fine without them and truly enjoying letting boys be boys. 

Edited May 17, 2015 by Hedgehog

[TAHAWK]

And some argue that there is a hole in the bottom of the glass and it will soon be entirely empty.

[AZMike]

Honestly, it is called Scouting.  Spending a weekend sleeping out in the wilderness, cooking over a propane stove, seeing boys of all ages get along because they live the Scout Law, observing what happens when there are no electronic devices to play with, watching boys do things they never thought they would do, sitting around a campfire exploring the lost arts of conversation and story telling, noticing the joy of kids playing with fire and knives, seeing how kids with helecopter parents function perfectly fine without them and truly enjoying letting boys be boys. 

 

Hedgehog is correct.

[Twocubdad]

"... this is nature's way of making the old not fear death so much."

 

 

 

I'm having t-shirts printed.  Who's in?

[Rick_in_CA]

<<

I agree with you, it would be nice if the BSA never got in the middle of the culture wars in the first place. Then we could focus on what matters, helping scouts grow into men of character. It's should be about service to others, personal character, and the golden rule. Not about vilifying others or telling then their religious faith is wrong or doesn't cut it to be "one of us".

 

As for the loss of innocence, I also agree with you. While I'm not sure as children we were ever that innocent, nor do I think it's healthy to keep kids ignorant, but kids today are pushed to "grow up" so fast now days. My friend has a young daughter, and trying to buy her a Halloween costume that didn't make her look like a pole dancer was a challenge. In what world is "sexy nurse" an appropriate choice for a six year old??? And it's not just Halloween costumes. When I was a kid, young girls were encourage to be cute maybe, but not sexy. Now you see six year old girls wearing tight shorts with "tasty" written across their crotch (I was completely floored when I saw that. It made me feel really sad). What parent thinks that is a good idea??? What company makes and markets shorts like that for six year olds??? I too wish kids has a chance to be kids.>>

 

 

I find it amusing that you bemoan the culture war in paragraph one and then complain that you don't like the results of the culture war in paragraph two.

Hey, I never claimed to be completely consistent!

But to be clear, my first paragraph was not complaining about the culture war (that would be another post), but about having the BSA dragged into them (which hurt it all round).

[NJCubScouter]

In reading the exchange between Rick_in_CA and Seattle Pioneer, it occurs to me that this is what happens when we use vague terms like "culture war" instead of talking about what we are really talking about. That kind of labeling lumps issues together that are really separate issues. It is possible to believe that gay people should not be discriminated against (including by the BSA) while also believing that there is too much emphasis on sex in "popular culture", in products being sold to (or for) children, etc. As one major example, it is impossible to turn on the tv or radio without hearing about the sexual escapades of some celebrity - many of whom are "celebrities" merely because they have managed to get a "reality show." Usually these stories involve some sort of behavior that most people would regard as inappropriate - but it seems to me that about 95 percent of the time, the behavior in question is of the heterosexual variety, which makes sense because about 95 percent of people are heterosexuals. Which brings us back to the BSA. "Inappropriate behavior" by a heterosexual leader is dealt with on a case by case, unit by unit basis. Meanwhile, a gay person can be in a monogamous relationship, and can be married in states where that is legal, never bother anybody, and live a "lifestyle" that is exactly the same as the stereotypical family (except for their sexual orientation), but that person is considered a "bad role model" by the BSA and a unit cannot have that person as a leader even if it wants to. That's the issue. We should not confuse the issue by lumping it together with other issues under vague labels like "culture war."

[packsaddle]

I agree completely with NJ on this, regardless of my status as either insect or omnipotent entity from the 'Q' continuum. The first step of any problem solving process is "PROBLEM DEFINITION". And that is something that is woefully lacking in many of these discussions. But I DO get what is going on most of the time...[deleted for obvious reasons]

 

In other news, I'm fairly certain that the things I'm hearing spoken on one radio station here would not be allowed on the air in the USA. Even the students were disgusted. 

[Stosh]

If a jerk walks into my place of business and starts ordering me around, security escorts him out the door.  End of discussion.

If a homosexual walks into my place of business and starts ordering me around, security escorts him out the door. It makes national news.

 

Where's the equality in that?  

 

What one will eventually have to admit that it's not an issue of equality, it's an issue of who's ox is getting gored on what day.

 

I may have to someday defend my family in my home from an intruder.  If I kill a white intruder, that's one thing, if the person is not white, then I have problems.  If there wasn't a "culture war" there wouldn't be sides to choose.  

 

Too often we view the minute details while ignoring the big picture.  Even if I fix one of the minute details, the big picture is still there.

 

I'm not trying to pass any judgment here, just point out the hypocrisy of the double standard as the issue, not the particular situation.  It's kinda like the gardener who takes all week long to mow the lawn.  What does he do the next week?  Yep, mow the lawn.

 

It's kinda like certain words that were once inappropriate have now become okay.    The dynamics are all the same for activities.

[moosetracker]

Usually the news is about the homosexual asking for a service the business is in the business of supplying.. Or some law that would give businesses the right to deny this group equal treatment, simply for being homosexual without taking the time to decide if the individual is a jerk or not..  If you sell cakes would you call all customers jerks if they came into your business to order a cake, and threw them out?.. If so you would not be in business for long.. A jerk is not someone asking for equal service that you provide everyone else.

 

I personally have not heard of an outcry of anyone killed while defending against an intruder, unless the homeowner shot an innocent person who was not intruding but perhaps knocking on their door to ask for help or something..  So just don't be trigger happy in or out of the house.. It is true though if you want to be trigger happy if you are white and run around shooting innocent whites, their skin color will not be as big a story equal to the incident itself.. But, it you target blacks, then skin color will be in question of if it was a reason you targeted them.

 

This does not mean that we are all for children growing up too fast, and becoming sexual way too early.. Teaching them to treat homosexuals the same as everyone else does not force them to grow up to be sexually aware any faster then normal.. I know my husband had a Aunt Margret who was homosexual with a life long partner.. Growing up they would visit for a weekend or longer every now and then because it was a great vacation spot for his family.. He loved the farm and the dog kennels and remembers how his Aunt could start out planning dinner for 6 and somehow magically stretch it to feed 10 or 12 as people started showing up unexpected..  Sometime while he grew up and he matured to understand sex he noticed that Aunt Margret shared a bedroom with her friend.. It was recognized by him in his own time, and was accepted about the same as acknowledging your parents share a bedroom, and figuring out that your parents had to have sex in order for you and any siblings you have to be born.. I would say my husbands parents were ahead of their time on acceptance as my husband grew up in the 60's..

 

Treating homosexuals equally means not making a big deal out of their sex lives any more so then others make of your heterosexual life.

[LeCastor]

 

Treating homosexuals equally means not making a big deal out of their sex lives any more so then others make of your heterosexual life.

 

I agree with this statement.  In my opinion, treating homosexuals and heterosexuals as equals in society doesn't mean making any deal about sex.

[qwazse]

..., but that person is considered a "bad role model" by the BSA and a unit cannot have that person as a leader even if it wants to. That's the issue. We should not confuse the issue by lumping it together with other issues under vague labels like "culture war."

I'm not so sure, NJ. There seem to be parts of the country more comfortable with atheists as scouts, and others wanting to use the BSA as a means to discourage atheism.

There seem to be folks who think that scouts should move to a co-ed model at every level, and folks who want it to link sex segregation to our "traditional values."

 

In all these cases, it seems the majority of scouters are stuck somewhere in the middle. So, they go looking for a National policy ... just to have something beyond themselves to settle the matter.

 

Maybe "culture war" is too strong a term. How about "great divorce?"

[Stosh]

I had a homosexual roommate in college,  There were homosexuals living in the boarding house I lived in for a while.  I have no problem with that.  However, I do have a problem with people telling me how I should believe about things especially when they are promoting a hypocritical double standard I don't agree with.  Now that could be in the area of sexuality, gender, religion, race, age or any one of a number of issues.  No one is privileged over another in this country that's what equality is all about in the long run.  And if something's not fair?  Get over it, life is not meant to be fair, it's only what we have made it to be. People don't negotiate life anymore, they just make demands and expect the world around them to just roll over and do their bidding.  When that doesn't happen bad things happen.  Just pick up a newspaper, you'll see what I mean.