Just let kids be kids
#21
(11-16-2018, 02:51 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-16-2018, 09:26 AM)GPnative Wrote: When I was in grade school, I remember NA's coming to perform at an assembly in the school gym, in full authentic garb and headdress, complete with drums, etc. It was amazing, it is not very often you can get 1st thru 5th grade to sit mesmerized and respectful of what they were watching. We were all also wearing headdress's that we created ourselves to be "part of the ceremony". Nothing at all disrespectful about that, quite the opposite. Afterwards, they mingled with us, let us ask questions, showed off their headdresses up close. I don't remember many specific days from elementary school, but that one has stuck with me. This notion that kids dressing up like an "indian" is disrespectful is beyond the pale in stupidity.

I'm sure by today's PC police standards, we were all a group of racist children in our disrespectful construction paper headdress's and the performers went on to suffer severe depression from seeing all those happy, smiling, children.

That's so good I want to repost your words on the FB page where I got this... OK? ... no name

yup, pull the name and let them have it...
Reply
#22
(11-16-2018, 11:15 AM)Juniper Wrote: I'm not sure what to say about this topic.  I've talked to, or been talked to by, and read stuff showing the NA point of view. Sometimes it's a bit ridiculous (to me) I think, but I know it's not to them.  One time, about 25 years ago I was working in a school and the kids were  playing with these little fisher price dolls and one was an Indian with a feather bonnet.  The kids were playing with them.  There was a supervisor in the room who happened to be NA. She got pretty pissy that this little doll was there and insisted it be removed.  (funny, that little doll is probably worth money now, because you can't buy them anymore). She was always very pissy about how NA was represented in American Culture.  She had other things she would have issues about also.  Now in a book or film you can get proselytized about what the issue is, but in real life, I often find NA's to be kind of obscure when you try to engage them in talking about it. They seem to kind of keep you at arms reach and it almost feels like "Because I told you so." kind of reasoning.  That's not inaccurate.  Many NA's seem to have an attitude like that. I think they feel it's pointless to let the average non NA into their culture to a degree. There's a kind of wall that goes up that keeps you out.  I'm not sure I even disagree with that.  I have mixed feelings about how things are handled at times, but it's a very complicated  issue fraught with high emotions and sentiments.  So I just kind of stay out. 

I think the main thing I've taken away from talking about it with NA's is they are very sensitive about White people having the audacity to do anything that represents NA's.  American's don't know anything about their people, their customs or their traditions and misrepresent them constantly. (Their pov) so just don't even try.  They can be exclusive in their attitudes and there is a kind of "stay away from me" kind of mentality. Even amongst themselves. For instance an NA will have zero respect for you if tell them you are Indian or NA. Are you listening Elizabeth Warren? The first thing they are going to say to you is 'who are your people?'  because just having NA blood in your DNA is not enough.  You have to know your people and be able to name them.  (individually sometimes). You can't just say you are Sioux. You have to name your branch, your clan, your matriarchal lines and on and on.  Which I find kind of funny, because what if you don't know but what like to know and are trying to learn?  But I also understand their defensiveness and wanting to protect their identity as a people. It's just super complicated. There are layers and layers of stuff going on and that can't be distilled down to just one sentiment of whether or not it's appropriate to dress your kids up in macaroni noodles and paper bag representations.  To us it seems simple. Their attitude towards that would be: "Of course you would."

I'm just saying that on the other side of the issue, it's anything but simple.  You may not agree with that. And that's why they aren't discussing it with you.

She was always very pissy about how NA was represented in American Culture

 
They have been represented in movies and television as good people who were oppressed by whites who killed them and took away the buffalo, broke treaties and all that since the 1950's 0r 60's.

I think the way they (some) act as you described sounds like they have a stick up their ass or they are very insecure.

For instance an NA will have zero respect for you if tell them you are Indian or NA. Are you listening Elizabeth Warren
That confirms my previous comment
Reply
#23
(11-16-2018, 12:37 PM)Scrapper Wrote: This was posted just this morning. They attend a private school in an upscale area.
[Image: 67240da4b9befe610d106e74c26d014d.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Racist little bastards Razz
Reply
#24
(11-16-2018, 02:59 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-16-2018, 11:15 AM)Juniper Wrote: I'm not sure what to say about this topic.  I've talked to, or been talked to by, and read stuff showing the NA point of view. Sometimes it's a bit ridiculous (to me) I think, but I know it's not to them.  One time, about 25 years ago I was working in a school and the kids were  playing with these little fisher price dolls and one was an Indian with a feather bonnet.  The kids were playing with them.  There was a supervisor in the room who happened to be NA. She got pretty pissy that this little doll was there and insisted it be removed.  (funny, that little doll is probably worth money now, because you can't buy them anymore). She was always very pissy about how NA was represented in American Culture.  She had other things she would have issues about also.  Now in a book or film you can get proselytized about what the issue is, but in real life, I often find NA's to be kind of obscure when you try to engage them in talking about it. They seem to kind of keep you at arms reach and it almost feels like "Because I told you so." kind of reasoning.  That's not inaccurate.  Many NA's seem to have an attitude like that. I think they feel it's pointless to let the average non NA into their culture to a degree. There's a kind of wall that goes up that keeps you out.  I'm not sure I even disagree with that.  I have mixed feelings about how things are handled at times, but it's a very complicated  issue fraught with high emotions and sentiments.  So I just kind of stay out. 

I think the main thing I've taken away from talking about it with NA's is they are very sensitive about White people having the audacity to do anything that represents NA's.  American's don't know anything about their people, their customs or their traditions and misrepresent them constantly. (Their pov) so just don't even try.  They can be exclusive in their attitudes and there is a kind of "stay away from me" kind of mentality. Even amongst themselves. For instance an NA will have zero respect for you if tell them you are Indian or NA. Are you listening Elizabeth Warren? The first thing they are going to say to you is 'who are your people?'  because just having NA blood in your DNA is not enough.  You have to know your people and be able to name them.  (individually sometimes). You can't just say you are Sioux. You have to name your branch, your clan, your matriarchal lines and on and on.  Which I find kind of funny, because what if you don't know but what like to know and are trying to learn?  But I also understand their defensiveness and wanting to protect their identity as a people. It's just super complicated. There are layers and layers of stuff going on and that can't be distilled down to just one sentiment of whether or not it's appropriate to dress your kids up in macaroni noodles and paper bag representations.  To us it seems simple. Their attitude towards that would be: "Of course you would."

I'm just saying that on the other side of the issue, it's anything but simple.  You may not agree with that. And that's why they aren't discussing it with you.

She was always very pissy about how NA was represented in American Culture

 
They have been represented in movies and television as good people who were oppressed by whites who killed them and took away the buffalo, broke treaties and all that since the 1950's 0r 60's.

I think the way they (some) act as you described sounds like they have a stick up their ass or they are very insecure.

For instance an NA will have zero respect for you if tell them you are Indian or NA. Are you listening Elizabeth Warren
That confirms my previous comment
Well, I think they are insecure whether they know it or admit it or not.  Because they are disenfranchised and had their cultural identities fractured.  At least that's my view.  To me it comes off similarly as you describe, but then I'm not NA so I can only view  it from my own lens.
Reply
#25
Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children
Reply
#26
(11-18-2018, 06:58 PM)GCG Wrote: Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children

Just one headmaster at one school.  It is interesting, because until the last 75 years or so, there really wasn't such a thing as "childhood" as we know it now.  Kids were expected to work and help and pull their weight starting at around age 5.
Reply
#27
(11-18-2018, 06:58 PM)GCG Wrote: Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children

Seems a good reason for school uniforms?
Reply
#28
(11-18-2018, 06:58 PM)GCG Wrote: Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children

the headteacher of Woodchurch High School in Birkenhead explained that the ban was coming in after Christmas as the school was "mindful that some young people put pressure on their parents to purchase expensive items of clothing."

I guess in London parents don't know how to say NO you can't have a 1200 dollar coat, so shut the fuck up about it before I slap you silly. Laughing
Reply
#29
(11-19-2018, 05:03 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-18-2018, 06:58 PM)GCG Wrote: Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children

the headteacher of Woodchurch High School in Birkenhead explained that the ban was coming in after Christmas as the school was "mindful that some young people put pressure on their parents to purchase expensive items of clothing."

I guess in London parents don't know how to say NO you can't have a 1200 dollar coat, so shut the fuck up about it before I slap you silly. Laughing

Birkenhead is not in London, silly. That's Merseyside.  And before you say there's no difference it's about the same as saying there's not much difference between New York and Birmingham Alabama.
Reply
#30
(11-19-2018, 06:44 AM)Someones Dad Wrote:
(11-18-2018, 06:58 PM)GCG Wrote: Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children

Seems a good reason for school uniforms?

Yep.  Though most British schools have them, it doesn't apply to coats apparently.
Reply
#31
Let me ask this simple question: If some little kid says, "neener, neener, you buy your shoes at Goodwill"... is that bullying? To me it not nice but it's not bullying. I think that today's definition of bullying is far too broad and it encompasses a lot of what is really just kids being kids.

As to school uniforms... I dunno.

I remember in jr. high a girl that wore a shear top with no bra. She might as well have been naked. Didn't bother me a bit... unless I had to stand up or something.
Reply
#32
(11-19-2018, 06:29 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-19-2018, 05:03 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-18-2018, 06:58 PM)GCG Wrote: Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children

the headteacher of Woodchurch High School in Birkenhead explained that the ban was coming in after Christmas as the school was "mindful that some young people put pressure on their parents to purchase expensive items of clothing."

I guess in London parents don't know how to say NO you can't have a 1200 dollar coat, so shut the fuck up about it before I slap you silly. Laughing

Birkenhead is not in London, silly. That's Merseyside.  And before you say there's no difference it's about the same as saying there's not much difference between New York and Birmingham Alabama.

OK , I'm not sure I would have said there's no difference. But since you brought it up why are you comparing a state to a city Laughing
Reply
#33
(11-19-2018, 06:59 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-19-2018, 06:29 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-19-2018, 05:03 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-18-2018, 06:58 PM)GCG Wrote: Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children

the headteacher of Woodchurch High School in Birkenhead explained that the ban was coming in after Christmas as the school was "mindful that some young people put pressure on their parents to purchase expensive items of clothing."

I guess in London parents don't know how to say NO you can't have a 1200 dollar coat, so shut the fuck up about it before I slap you silly. Laughing

Birkenhead is not in London, silly. That's Merseyside.  And before you say there's no difference it's about the same as saying there's not much difference between New York and Birmingham Alabama.

OK , I'm not sure I would have said there's no difference. But since you brought it up why are you comparing a state to a city Laughing

Last I looked, New York is a city and state.  Birmingham is a city in a state. I didn't want to confuse Birmingham with Birmingham England since we were talking about England.
Reply
#34
(11-19-2018, 07:08 PM)bJuniper Wrote:
(11-19-2018, 06:59 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-19-2018, 06:29 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-19-2018, 05:03 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-18-2018, 06:58 PM)GCG Wrote: Maybe this also falls under this thread title. A little different take on kids being kids. I copied this from a post that I made to a British site that I belong to.

I'll be the first to admit that no kid needs a $1,000 coat. But do the schools over there really get to decide? Will they soon force kids to eat lower quality meals because the poorer kids can't afford the good stuff? Where does this end?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/16/uk/povert...index.html

High school bans Canada Goose and Moncler jackets to protect poorer children

the headteacher of Woodchurch High School in Birkenhead explained that the ban was coming in after Christmas as the school was "mindful that some young people put pressure on their parents to purchase expensive items of clothing."

I guess in London parents don't know how to say NO you can't have a 1200 dollar coat, so shut the fuck up about it before I slap you silly. Laughing

Birkenhead is not in London, silly. That's Merseyside.  And before you say there's no difference it's about the same as saying there's not much difference between New York and Birmingham Alabama.

OK , I'm not sure I would have said there's no difference. But since you brought it up why are you comparing a state to a city Laughing

Last I looked, New York is a city and state.  Birmingham is a city in a state. I didn't want to confuse Birmingham with  Birmingham England since we were talking about England.

 Well I only was kidding and I knew what you meant. Smiling
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)