Ask Me Help Desk - It's come to this

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuttyd

But that's the whole idea. There is a lack of interest because it is not something that certain ethnic groups would consider.

In a similar way people who live in the poorer areas of the inner city would probably not consider a course in becoming a greenkeeper or a golf professional.

Then there really is no issue then if there is a lack of qualified black lifeguards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

then there really is no issue then if there is a lack of qualified black lifeguards.

I am sure it would be an issue. But I don't have a problem with on the job training. Provided of course it is supervised on the job training until qualifications are obtained

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuttyd

I don't think anyone is forcing anyone to become a lifeguard. Are they?

Did I say they were? No, I'm referring to ensuring the city has enough minority lifeguards when they already had qualified white lifeguards... is there a problem with lifeguards being white? The question is why does color matter? I say it doesn't, the left says it doesn't, so why do they need minority lifeguards?

Quote:

I would have seen this as being a role model.

White lifeguards can't be a role model to minorities?

Quote:

A large number of people might want to claim to be at "ease with the other" but I suspect that only exists on the surface.

I would suspect that's true for a lot of people, but I believe conservatives are more at ease than liberals. We aren't the ones making everything about race and denigrating minorities who dare step outside the liberal box.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuttyd

I am sure it would be an issue. But I don't have a problem with on the job training. Provided of course it is supervised on the job training until qualifications are obtained

On the job training is not the issue.

All this over one guy who isn't white but wants to be a life guard??

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Why does diversity have to forced? I think it's a silly and divisive exercise. I don't care about skin color, ethicity or whatever until some liberal says something about being "too white." How much white is too white and why does it matter? Is there such a thing as too black or too brown?

Should we really care if the person rescuing us from drowning is a certain color? After all that was one the city's justifications, the swimmers can relate better to someone that looks like the and that's ridiculous. I thought the end goal was to be at ease with other in spite of that, it's a designed segregation. Forcing diversity on one hand while engineering segregation on the other seems rather silly.

I have reread the posts on this thread and I think I know what you are getting at when you point to the fact that diversity is being forced upon everyone.

This particular pool seems to be favoured by certain ethnic groups. So why would it be desirable to replace what little diversity there is with ethnic life guards? In other words, by employing ethnic lifeguards we are pushing segregation even further.

I think this is what you are saying with the above comment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

All this over one guy who isn't white but wants to be a life guard?????

No, all this over what liberal policy has wrought.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuttyd

I have reread the posts on this thread and I think I know what you are getting at when you point to the fact that diversity is being forced upon everyone.

This particular pool seems to be favoured by certain ethnic groups. So why would it be desirable to replace what little diversity there is with ethnic life guards? In other words, by employing ethnic lifeguards we are pushing segregation even further.

I think this is what you are saying with the above comment.

You're on the right track.

Hello again, Steve:

Quote:

No, all this over what liberal policy has wrought

Yeah, Republican policy has done SOOO much for the black man... They made him stand in line for 6-8 hours to vote... Who do those uppity people think they are, wanting to vote like a white man?

Excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, Republican policy has done SOOO much for the black man... They made him stand in line for 6-8 hours to vote... Who do those uppity people think they are, wanting to vote like a white man??

excon

That's already been debunked but you keep on pushing that narrative if it makes you feel better. The question is how does one reconcile practicing both diversity and segregation simultaneously? A rather confusing message wouldn't you say?

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

You're on the right track.

Yes, I though this was the problem. At least we have something concrete to work with now.

One way of looking at the problem is segregation versus integration. This approach has important historical implications that might be helpful as well.

It can be argued that these "liberal policies" are pushing for segregation of ethnic groups. However, the important point is that this form of segregation is done on the ethnic groups own terms. In other words, despite the policies being implement the choice to integrate or not to integrate into the wider culture is still a matter for the individual.

There is no doubt that many people who belong to ethnic groups choose to embrace the dominant culture of the society they live in. In other words, they choose to be integrated. On the other side of the coin there would be people who feel ( for what ever reason) uncomfortable with the dominant culture. Instead they choose segregation, but segregation on their own terms.

In the end it is an attempt to provide alternatives for what has historically been a single choice problem. Only having one choice is not a choice.

So one ethnic lifeguard at one pool is forcing diversity, down whose throat? NO wait my bad. Its perpetrating segregation. Have I got that right? That's a back handed way of saying there should be no ethnic life guards at all.

If you feel that way about ONE ethnic kid, I guess 10 would be a complete disaster.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuttyd

Yes, I though this was the problem. At least we have something concrete to work with now.

One way of looking at the problem is segregation versus integration. This approach has important historical implications that might be helpful as well.

It can be argued that these "liberal policies" are pushing for segregation of ethnic groups. However, the important point is that this form of segregation is done on the ethnic groups own terms. In other words, despite the policies being implement the choice to integrate or not to integrate into the wider culture is still a matter for the individual.

There is no doubt that many people who belong to ethnic groups choose to embrace the dominant culture of the society they live in. In other words, they choose to be integrated. On the other side of the coin there would be people who feel ( for what ever reason) uncomfortable with the dominant culture. Instead they choose segregation, but segregation on their own terms.

In the end it is an attempt to provide alternatives for what has historically been a single choice problem. Only having one choice is not a choice.

Yes, self-segregation is one thing and it's increasing here. But that also goes back to my earlier question on the left's narrative in this regard, it's only an issue if they label something as "too white." What is "too white" and is there such a thing as too black?

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

So one ethnic lifeguard at one pool is forcing diversity, down whose throat? NO wait my bad. Its perpetrating segregation. Have I got that right? That's a back handed way of saying there should be no ethnic life guards at all.

If you feel that way about ONE ethnic kid, I guess 10 would be a complete disaster.

I believe I've already said I don't care who gets the job, race/color/ethinicity does not matter to me. I'm trying to figure out if it matters to liberals or not, they send a very mixed message.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Yes, self-segregation is one thing and it's increasing here. But that also goes back to my earlier question on the left's narrative in this regard, it's only an issue if they label something as "too white." What is "too white" and is there such a thing as too black?

That's a difficult question to answer. I don't really know people's thinking about race and ethnicity.I guess that the implication here is that ethnicity has something to do with the physical characteristics of the individual.

I would also guess that most of us don't make the distinction between biology and sociology for this purpose.

Other than that I don't really know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I believe I've already said I don't care who gets the job, race/color/ethinicity does not matter to me. I'm trying to figure out if it matters to liberals or not, they send a very mixed message.

I personally don't see the problem as "they" are dealing with a very specific local issue. I say the more people who try to make good the better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I believe I've already said I don't care who gets the job, race/color/ethinicity does not matter to me. I'm trying to figure out if it matters to liberals or not, they send a very mixed message.

I don't think it matters or doesn't matter to many because some people don't consider the wider implications. However, for the reasons I have outlined earlier the result of such policies provides choice.

I say it's ridiculous. Again from the article:

Quote:

After noticing that most of the lifeguards at the public pools used by Latino and African-American kids were white, the Phoenix aquatics department decided to try to recruit minorities.

More than 90 percent of the students at Alhambra High are black, Latino or Asian. On a recruiting effort there over the winter, the city's Melissa Boyle tells students she's not looking for strong swimmers. Like many under-resourced schools, Alhambra doesn't have a swim team.

"We will work with you in your swimming abilities," Boyle says.

Boyle's colleague Kelly Martinez takes on the delicate task of explaining the scenario the city is trying to correct.

"The kids in the pool are all either Hispanic or black or whatever, and every lifeguard is white," she says, "and we don't like that. The kids don't relate; there's language issues."

I have no problem recruiting minorities, but reverse the situation and put those words coming out of a conservative's mouth. "Every lifeguard is black, and we don't like that." That wouldn't disturb anyone would it?

On from lifeguards to much more disturbing stuff. MSNBC is actually saying what I suspect many on the left have have been thinking for a long time. In a new promo, they're telling us, "We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents”

Excuse me? Have you people lost your freakin' minds?

Hello again, Steve:

Quote:

We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents

What do you think the FEMA camps are for?

Excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

What do you think the FEMA camps are for?

excon

Parents who believe their children belong to them and not the "village"?

Quote:

We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents”

"you didn't make that on your own!"

Link please for context. I would hate to think they meant "no man is an island" without proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oa9t...layer_embedded

She talks of kids belonging to the "collective " .

In the liberal's world you can choose to kill your baby but you can't choose how to raise the child.

As usual I didn't get the threat from this clip as you did.

"We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents”

Agree or disagree?

Either put the whole thing up, or take down that partial statement. That's a BS tactic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

Either put the whole thing up, or take down that partial statement. That's a BS tactic.

Tal, I linked to the video in full and so did tom so don't give me that "BS tactic" crap, I hid nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oa9t...layer_embedded

she talks of kids belonging to the "collective " .

This is clearly within the context of public education. The reference is to the collective responsibility of public education.

Collective that is communist ideology

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

collective that is communist ideology

The article is quoting out of context even though it proved a full transcript of the interview at the bottom of the article by way of the video This has obviously been missed by the author or he is trying to create a beat-up

This idea of community responsibility in education has been in even when my kids went to school. Back then I think it was called community partnerships in education.

Ah yes trying to pass the buck

"Community" has a role, but saying we have to discard this idea that children don't belong to their parents is beyond the pale. That is how the left in this country justifies undermining parental authority in this country and that's a problem. Parents have rights.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

"Community" has a role, but saying we have to discard this idea that children don't belong to their parents is beyond the pale. That is how the left in this country justifies undermining parental authority in this country and that's a problem. Parents have rights.

I agree Speech, parents are the primary care givers and if doing their job properly, the primary educators and they should have the ability to both guide and discipline, it is all this namby pamby nonsense that has our societry in the mess it is in

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

"Community" has a role, but saying we have to discard this idea that children don't belong to their parents is beyond the pale. That is how the left in this country justifies undermining parental authority in this country and that's a problem. Parents have rights.

Quoting out of context is usually an easy option because it can portray a persons views as being extreme.

This particular lady may well have extreme views on many social issues. But the quote is clearly a reference to public education. On this basis it can only be considered in these terms. It cannot be taken as a general endorsement of undermining parental authority in general.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I say it's ridiculous. Again from the article:

I have no problem recruiting minorities, but reverse the situation and put those words coming out of a conservative's mouth. "Every lifeguard is black, and we don't like that." That wouldn't disturb anyone would it?

This would depend on who the spokesperson is. Criticizing ones own race is not usually regarded as racism. I can be, but in this case it doesn't seem to be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

ah yes trying to pass the buck

I like that. I never thought of that angle.

Tut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuttyd

Quoting out of context is usually an easy option because it can portray a persons views as being extreme.

This particular lady may well have extreme views on many social issues. But the quote is clearly a reference to public education. On this basis it can only be considered in these terms. It cannot be taken as a general endorsement of undermining parental authority in general.

There is more than a minor difference in "justification" which is what I said and "general endorsement." The reality on the ground supports my view.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuttyd

This would depend on who the spokesperson is. Criticizing ones own race is not usually regarded as racism. I can be, but in this case it doesn't seem to be.

Again, I base this on the reality. The reality is my example would lead to an explosion of outrage.