Sex in the stairwell at a school in Philly led to a boy being suspended and the girl? She's still there:
The mother in the article says this has happened before and girls get off scott-free while boys are punished. If true, this unfairness will lead to some consequences at some point for the school, if not now, then in the future.
Veronica Goss is the first person to admit that her son, Walter Ransome, made a big mistake in the stairwell of Francis Pastorius Elementary School the week before Thanksgiving.
Walter, a tall, lean boy with a shelf full of trophies from a Christian Youth Basketball Association, agrees that he was foolish that afternoon.
Before going to the after-school program at his Germantown school, Walter, 13, and an eighth-grade female classmate stopped in the stairwell.
It was there that that they briefly had sexual intercourse. Walter got kicked out of school for the incident. The girl stayed in school. Now, Goss is demanding to know why.
The mother in the article says this has happened before and girls get off scott-free while boys are punished. If true, this unfairness will lead to some consequences at some point for the school, if not now, then in the future.
posted by Helen at 7:38 AM
82 Comments:
The boy’s mother needs to go around to the other parents in the school, specifically the parents of boys. They should plan a “walk out”, where for one week none of the boys go to the school. It probably would have a bigger impact if it happened during some sporting event as well.
During the week the parents should have some extra-curricular “education” for the boys, probably about the impact of unprotected sex, STD’s, appropriate PDA, etc.
After the impact of the boycott (snicker) is seen then the school will probably change its tune. It may even ripple up to the school board for that district.
I would not suggest a walk-out of the boys. That would send the message that the parents are condoning what this boy did. The parents need to handle this like mature adults. As a society we have to send a strong message to children that an elementary school (or any public school) is not a place for sexual intercourse. What is needed is a strong showing at the next city-wide board of education meeting and a demand for a punishment policy that doesn't discriminate through gender.
It is not condoning what the boy did. Quite the opposite, the boys who are "guilty" should be punished; actually they were by being expelled.
This has more to do with drawing attention to prejudice in the school. The best way that I can think of to stop it would be to draw the most attention to it as possible, which would be a weeklong boycott.
Nopt tp be a spoil sport, but what does it mean that they "briefly had intercourse"--does time matter? was it stopped short before climax? a quickie at his age?
What is the after school program? perhaps they ought to be both kept in school and suspended from after hours program if it is fun thing rather than learning program.
And the girl remains anonymous. Let's designate her as ScarletA.
Now, Goss is demanding to know why.
No mystery here. He's MALE.
I would not suggest a walk-out of the boys. That would send the message that the parents are condoning what this boy did.
No, not necessarily. The message is boys and girls are subject to the same rules, punishments, etc. The message is equality under the law according to gender.
"The message is boys and girls are subject to the same rules, punishments, etc. The message is equality under the law according to gender."
-------------------------
That's NOT how it is out in real life either.
It's probably better that the boy learns what the deal is now. Mistakes out in "real life" - i.e. naively believing that men and women will be subject to the same rules - can be far more costly.
The school is "educating him" as to how things really work and is preparing him for life later on. That's what a school is supposed to do.
JG, I would say that the school is doing an excellent job of introducing Ransome to the idea of the female sentencing discount.
Also note the differing surnames between mum and son. She's divorced or was a baby mamma. What a shock then that this happened (her son doing something stupid, that is).
Lastly I note the PS run-around that she's gotten, and that the conditions at that school are deplorable. What you get I guess when you voluntarily sacrifice your kids to the gummint-school Molech.
What's the news?
It is always the male's fault.
It is the law.
These girls will grow up in a generation where they wear "boys are stupid, throw rocks at them" shirts, will be taught in school that "girls are pure, boys are hybrid" (like my sister so self-righteously preached after school one day), will grow up on entertainment where men are inferior and in schools where boys are punished for everything and women for nothing. They'll get married with fairy tale notions they learned in soaps and romcoms in their mind, and after the boyfriend (always a great guy in the movies) turns to husband (always an idiot in the movies), they will treat him with almost reflexive disdain. Yet, in the face of her unwaivering hostility, she'll still blame him 100% for all the problems. And people will wonder, where oh where, did she get it in her head that everything is his fault and nothing is hers.
Gee, I wonder where.
If he wasn't accused / incarcerated for rape, it was consenting between the two. If it is against the rules (duh) punishment should be equally applied. The inmates are running the asylum. As if this were news.
Helen:
...this unfairness will lead to some consequences at some point for the school, if not now, then in the future.
Having been reading here for.. I think years now, I'm not sure how you can believe this to be true.
It's certainly an optimistic sentiment and I sincerely hope it pans out. But I certainly don't have any faith that there will be any consequences whatsoever.
JG: A grim but logical notion. Sadly we're at a point where that education needs to take place, perhaps even explicitly.
As is typical, school authorities are issuing contradictory " boilerplate" responses and refusing to release information, under the self-serving " we are protecting their privacy rights" when they are covering-their-ASS.
1. Note the age of the girl is not mentioned-- an 8th grader, she is probably also 13 or 14. The girl's age is omitted so one might conclude she is a victim of an older boy. The Mother knows the name and age of the girl-- the paper will not release it.
2. The official response is classic-- stonewalling by citing the "privacy rights" of the students... stating that they are "investigating" which is inconsistent with expelling the boy for 10 days , because that means the "investigation" (" Who was the boy ?) has concluded and the boy alone suspended... then smearing the boy by stating that punishment depends on " case history and background"-- implying that the boy has a bad background and the girl doesn't, and thats why he was expelled and she wasn't. I thought the "investigation" was still on-going ?
The mother has a list of three other cases where boys were suspended-- and the girls weren't.
I have heard feminists are picketing the school and demanding equal treatment of the sexes.... because feminism is all about "equality" and "fairness" and is equally concerned with the rights of men and boys ...
If one moves down past the story, there is a link to a woman killing her husband and getting 1-2 years for "involuntary manslughter"... she stabbed him to death, went to bed.. and a friend called 911 the next afternnoon... after his body lay there all that time.
Women are the only group who can kill people ( well, men ) and their bodies are found in their home and they admit killing them-- and get off with essentially no punishment... of course, if the man is poor and/or black, the authorities really don't want to waste time investigating the murder of someone no one cares about...thats the reality.
This just in--- NOW has issed a press release condemning the school and the sentnece in the manslaughter case...Feminists are also picketing the courthouse demanding to know why the sexes receive different punishment for the same crimes because, as we all know, feminism is just about "equality" and "fairness"....
Wouldnt expect anything different from a politically-correct school administration.
[sarcasm]
One can relax in the assurance that such utterly discredited approaches as segregation by gender shall not be tried.
[/sarcasm]
Well, I think the fundamental question missing in this case is: How hard is it for a teenage boy to get laid? Or rather, how easy is it for a teenage girl?
What is being created here is an environment and a culture in which any girl can offer herself up to any boy, and then have him punished for accepting her offer.
I've always said that men do not pick up women. Women pick out men. It's called sexual selection.
But in this case the male is punished for the female selecting him! Go figure.
Anyone else notice that story in the news last week about a teenage girl who attacked and stabbed her boyfriend after he declined sex?
So let me get this straight. If he accepts, he gets suspended and condemned. If he declines, he gets assaulted and stabbed.
Like that's going to work for the well-being of the society and the culture as a whole.
The entire world has gone insane.
Look at the bright side. The boy will return to school at sometime and be hailed a hero by all the other boys in school. Most young teen boys can only dream about it.
About every kid in school already knows who the girl is. You can bet on that.
Those who don't will soon have her pointed out by those who do.
And not that this is rocket science, but the whole thing should have been handled differently.
The high school I went to in the mid to late 60's had a huge student parking lot. Teacher's avoided it like the plague. We all know why.
Elusive Wapiti --
She's divorced or was a baby mamma. What a shock then that this happened (her son doing something stupid, that is).
And you know she's not a remarried widow how?
It's things like this that make me very glad I'm still quite single.
BR549:
It's no longer 1968. This girl isn't going to feel shame for one millisecond.
Girls are entering puberty earlier these days, studies seem to show it has to do with obesity and other factors. The boys are also entering puberty earlier.
Kids are inundated with sexualized messages, through TV, radio and the Internet. Sooner or later, some kids are going to be tempted to try out the equipment, regardless of how much sex education (or lack thereof) that we throw at them.
The schools need to send a really strong message to kids and parents that sex in the schools will not be tolerated. It's not funny, it's not something to be proud of and it isn't allowed period....girls or boys.
My fear is that girl who was involved is going to start bragging to her friends, and the other students will think this is something they should try themselves. I'd hate to see peer pressure for sex start as early as middle school, it is bad enough that sex in now mainstream in high school.
As a general rule I'm not a fan of lawsuits, but this seems to be a crystal clear case of sexual discrimination.
Get a lawyer (if they can't afford one maybe they can find one willing to do it probono) and sue.
Sue?
Of value only to the lawyers.
The male is a male, he loses.
It is the law.
Cham,
I'd hate to see peer pressure for sex start as early as middle school, it is bad enough that sex in now mainstream in high school.
Too late. Back in, I think 1992, I was volunteering for Planned Parenthood and 12,13 year olds were coming in for pregnancy tests.
I was amazed to hear girls spouting the same lines from my own high school days: "But he said I couldn't get pregnant the first time!" So much for sex education.
There is surely even less shame attached to sexual activity in that group by now. (Though I don't seem to recall much then.)
Females are not held accountable by our legal system because they are not and have never been considered human. If you study law & legal history you will have a deeper understanding of this.
In some regards I agree with our legal system. I have never met a female in my 45 years who was ever accountable for anything. A woman can read the definition of the word 'accountable' in a dictionary & she can demand it in others, but a female doesn't know what it is LIKE to be accountable. This is why women do not grow as people and hve such horrible personalities.
If true, this unfairness will lead to some consequences at some point for the school, if not now, then in the future.
From whom would those consequences flow? I can't think of any candidates.
This comment has been removed by the author.
The girl was exploring her sexuality, but the boy was a pig for helping her. Thats the PC version, right?
Cham: agreed. It's not funny, and it's not something to be proud of, if you are the mortified parent(s). Like you have pointed out, a majority of the kids don't see it that way and haven't for a very long time.
But consequences should be equally passed out if it does occur. The girl got a pass. That's what she learned from this. Those passing out the punishment are more screwed up than the kids. The girl is on the road to an abortion clinic or the welfare roll. Our tax dollars at work.
If it happens with this same girl's involvement a second time, what will be her punishment then?
Love balloons, given out by the school system without the parents' knowledge? Wait - they're already doing that. Gee, where oh where does this mixed message come from?
The only thing known for sure is the kids got caught. Was this the first time? First time in school? Are they the only ones who have done so in that school? Any school? We all know better. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if it were but a truth or dare stunt.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oligonicella-
"And you know she's not a remarried widow how?"
By no mention whatsoever of a father-figure or a husband in the source article. And by the fact that she's black. Just playing the odds...
So now that that's out of the way, you know that she's not a divorcee or a single-mom-by-choice how?
Whither chastity?
Elusive Wapiti --
I drew no conclusions from the lack of mention.
Reality### --
"This is why women do not grow as people and hve such horrible personalities."
It's a shame when men think this of their own daughters.
The original suggestion of a week long "boycott" of school is a good one. Schools are paid according to attendance. Hitting them financially is one sure way to get their attention.
the boy should count his blessing. In some states being less than 15 means you cannot give consent for sex, thus the state can charge the boy with statutory rape. why the boy and not the girl, i guess it comes down to the question of whether a female can force a male into intercourse.
Huan - I understand your point, but I hate hearing someone being an apologist for bigotry. It's like a someone 100 years ago saying a black man in New York should be glad he only went to jail for an action a white man wouldn't have because in the South he would have been lynched.
I have just one word : Islam
Coming soon to a neighborhood near you. Enjoy it while it lasts, feminists, because a religion beyond anything the feminist's worst nightmares can imagine will soon take control.
Why?
Because Muslims reproduce. Feminists do not.
Oligoncella --
You use nun tactics to reproach reality2008. As a father, I try very hard to keep my grown daughter from succumbing to the horribleness that most of her peers exemplify. She's done great so far.
If you don't think American women are problematic, then you're not paying attention. Female-American enculturation is to be stupid, lazy, entitled, self-deceiving, randomly pregnant, and amoral.
Oligonicella, you're an enabler if not a perpetrator. You help these girls continue to refuse how awful they are.
Great job!
But back to the topic...
A lot of men are seeking revenge by demanding that women be held to the same standards as men. A 13 year old girl giving a 13 year old by a blowjob in a stairwell is 50/50ing it, right? Wrong.
Yes, there are 13 year old predatory Lolitas. I wish I'd met a few of them, but evidently they are rare in the wild.
Truth is a 13 year old boy will do anything that holds still and doesn't have thorns, and a 13 year old girl will do anything she needs to do to retain status. These days, that includes banging and blowing boys in stairwells.
Male and female sexual agendas are different.
The notion that boys and girls are identical creatures, and thus should be treated identically is crass stupidness.
Most of the people calling for this girl's head don't really believe she's an equal sexual participant in what happened, but they want to rub some ugly feminist's nose in it. Stop it.
There are some points that you shouldn't make.
So the takeaway message here is that if a girl has sex with another girl in the stairway, there are no consequences, right?
@Larry J: “The original suggestion of a week long "boycott" of school is a good one. Schools are paid according to attendance. Hitting them financially is one sure way to get their attention.”
I didn’t think about attendance being a direct monetary thing (more below) though I was thinking about a “round about” monetary impact… negative visibility. Not so much against the school (or school district) itself, as against those who promote or otherwise tolerate this prejudice. For the school district, Bad press = government intervention. First rule of government intervention due to bad press, fire those involved.
@Michael Lee: I don’t know that I fully accept this statement “Female-American enculturation is to be stupid, lazy, entitled, self-deceiving, randomly pregnant, and amoral.” My personal view is that the hardened roles that were in place in the past are not present now, so that with a lack of “when X do Y” simplistic response to situations are absent the influence of peer pressure increases. The Occum’s razor approach to me would be to re-invoke “when X do Y” to all concerned (anyone involved with a sexual act at school gets the same, and harsh, punishment). It would almost be considered a “zero tolerance” view of things (ie drug policy), but hopefully executed in a more realistic approach (holding hands is OK, putting a xxxx in your yyyy, that’s bad).
As to the non-monetary impact of a boycott; if the parents involved were to draw negative attention onto the boys as well as the school, it would have a better chance of keeping them from becoming dead-beat (or teenage) fathers. If I had been pulled out of school for a week and spent the time with a parent (mother in the case here) talking about my sexual activities, I would definitely think about that the next time I even considered something sexual where there was the least bit chance of being caught. What guy (at that, or any, age) would want to talk to his mother about sex? A week of it? UGH!
Hmmmm..... He was black? Was she white?
So the takeaway message here is that if a girl has sex with another girl in the stairway, there are no consequences, right?
They probably wouldn't have been suspended, if that's what you mean, nor could they argue that they have no responsibility for what happened because they were held in thrall to a boy's super mind control powers.
Micheal Lee --
You're apparently unfamiliar with either Reality#### or myself. He makes blanket statements about "all" women. Can't do that and not have it apply at home, can you?
"You help these girls continue to refuse how awful they are."
I iterate, you are obviously unfamiliar with me and my views.
Yes, it's unfair that the boy should be punished and not the girl, but I wouldn't make more of it than it really is. This is nothing more than a stupid decision by an incompetent administrator at a broken and chaotic inner-city school.
All of you old dried-up folks are just jealous of young hot teens having sex. Let's be honest here.
Actually, the double standard may be worse than it first appears. I'm willing to bet that somewhere in this case, lies the mentality that believes the girl was more "shamed" than the boy.
Whore vs. stud, tramp vs. stallion anyone?
Or as the old joke goes, a whore is just a girl with the morals of a man...
Also does anyone believe that the short nerdy guy with pocket protector would have ever nailed hot babe on stairwell? This goes to look-ism as well....
Perhaps it's too soon, but where the heck is Glenn Sacks on this? Is he on vacation? Has he not heard of this story (I know that I sent him a link to it)? Where is the calling campaign targeted at the school administrators and teachers in that district to find out why the boys at that school are being punished for sex and not the girls? Heck, why do we even need Glenn? The people here can engage in a nice little bout of civil telephone terrorism (is the Lurch over at the Department of Homeland Security gonna come get me now?) against the principle and secretaries of that school (the phone is 215-951-4008). Who's with me?
This is nothing new.
Belfort Bax, a writer from 100 years ago at the time of the suffragettes, wrote about 14yr old boys being convicted of sex crimes with 16 year old girls who got off scott-free even when the evidence showed the girl was the sexual aggressor.
We surely give leftists too much credit to insinuate that their ideology is effecting an evolutionary change upon humans.
A far more likely explanation is that society has always been this way, and "traditional values" were likely put into place to protect MEN and SOCIETY from the more sinister aspects of the feminine (and society's historical illogic in defending it).
I don't know how anyone can seriously expect to talk intelligently about the issues of the sexes when they only choose to look at research/articles from the last couple of heavily socialist decades, while ignoring the centures and millenia of information humans have contributed to the study of "gender issues."
It was the feminists that had all of that knowledge drummed out of libraries and universities, you know. They said it was because it was too misogynist.
Doesn't that raise a little suspicion amongst those who have been railing about gender issues for years?
I have no love for the Philly schools...and, as much as I agree that there is a double standard and a bias against boys...I think most of you missed a relative passage, which I'll paste here:
In an e-mailed statement, Fernando Gallard, the district's director of media relations, said:
"Pastorius Elementary School is actively investigating an incident involving inappropriate sexual contact between students at an afterschool program at the school. All students involved in the incident will face disciplinary action in accordance to the district's Code of Student Conduct.
"The disciplinary process is executed relative to each student's case history and background and in accordance with the law. Due to students' privacy rights under the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the district cannot provide further details on this incident."
Read between the lines. Walter Ransome had a record, so he was suspended. The girl likely did not, so she was punished in some other way.
The school is prevented, by law, from disclosing information about students, so the reporter here essentially bought Veronica Goss's whining about her son's treatment.
The Daily News isn't known for its comprehensive reporting. Or, "Commenter protests one-sided reporting"
Alex, nobody is jealous. Get real.
michael lee: I read your post three times. I'm not sure I understand you. But I am on my first cup of coffee still.
In the article, the boy does hint at the fact he may have "asked" her for the "favor". Depending on how he "asked" does raise a few questions in my mind. One of my daughters was approached in a similar manner in middle school (9th grade) when we lived in Columbus, Ohio for a year. The response did not go well for the boy.
Rather than there being some points that should not be made, perhaps there are more questions that should be raised. Perhaps an article will appear in that paper with the girl's point of view.
There may not be a father figure in her life either.
yes there is a double standard when it comes to sex between men and women, boys and girls. The double standard is to punish the boy for his action, so that other boys might learn a lesson. It is far more likely a boy would be the sexual aggressor than the girl, especially with rape. In this instance, it isn't so much about this particular boy, it is about boys in general. clearly the lesson for boys is to be smart where and when you stick it.
but as already mentioned, there is a double standard against the girl as well. her reputation is besmirched.
suspension with a stud reputation vs. continuation with a whore reputation. which is worse.
this is what our society has decided on as punishment.
The sexism displayed in these comments is outrageous.
However, assuming that there is nothing else to this story than the boys mother described, she should also have been suspended.
However, I question that.
1. Her judgment is clearly lacking as demonstrated by her putting her adolescent son's sexual escapades on exhibition like this.
2. The school district hinted that the boy has a prior record of discipline problems. This would have impacted his punishment.
3. The boy said this, "Yes, I think I should be suspended, but I think she should be suspended too because she was in it too. All she had to say is she didn't want to do nothing, then it just would have been over" Did he ask her or just start touching her? Because his statement implies that he didn't ask... he just kept going as long as she didn't explicitly refuse. That doesn't sound consensual to me.
4. Then there is this... Walter noted that two other boys who engaged in "touching" another girl on a different part of the stairwell the day of his incident were also suspended, while the girl was not. Again, that doesn't sound mutual.
Begin with the rather simple idea that preaching chastity does not work...then move on from that
Hmm, so the boy had a record, huh? Was this his second or third "sex offence"? How many times can you officially have sex in the stairwell in Philly before expulsion? So, did the girl get detention? Don’t forget, this happened during an “afterschool program” – so detention (after school) might not be the best plan. I mean, does she get sex-ed credits for the detention?
Seriously, the boy is a 13 year old, “with a shelf full of trophies”… I think we all know the type – tall for his age, confident due to his success in sports. A lot of people find this type very threatening; and feel the need to knock him down a peg or two. Call me a misogynist… but we all KNOW the girl cried her eyes out in the principal’s office… right? The result was never in doubt.
It isn't really that complicated.
And it doesn't need any psychobabble or legal mumbojumbo.
A boy and a girl were engaged in an "illegal" act.
The boy gets punished.
It's th3e law.
And I'm out of this silly thread--send me email if there is something you really want to me to see.
Biology is what is unfair.
Their roles and responsibilities and actions and consequences of sexual contact are necessarily different.
The school should have the power to investigate any individual circumstance of misbehaviour and punish parties according to their individual culpability.
And it's just ridiculous to treat the sexes as exactly the same with regard to their greatest distinguishing differences.
"Begin with the rather simple idea that preaching chastity does not work"
Meaning what, exactly? Obviously, handing them condoms and telling them to go screw their brains out and get an abortion if they get pregnant, which is the "sex ed" alternative loved by liberals, isn't preventing any pregnancies.
Chastity works. Don't put out, and you don't get pregnant (unless you happen to be the Mother of God).
SarahW,
Their roles and responsibilities and actions and consequences of sexual contact are necessarily different.
Huh? Could you elaborate on this?
If the sex is consensual, the roles, responsibilities and actions are the same. And the consequences should be too.
Boys and girls, men and women differ greatly in many ways, including but not limited to their views of sex. This has nothing to do with their behavior. Or shouldn't.
Fred wrote: "Begin with the rather simple idea that preaching chastity does not work...then move on from that"
Why should we begin there? I do not know where the unmarried birth statistics were in 1955, but I know they were not hovering at around 50%.
Trey
I feel like we're missing pieces of the story.
K-12. Liberal bastion. Females are a liberal-approved victim group and as such not responsible for much of anything, as is true for all liberal-approved victim groups - when convenient.
13 years old? Both of them ?? Oooh.
And it's just ridiculous to treat the sexes as exactly the same with regard to their greatest distinguishing differences.
This flies directly in the face of the concept of "equal justice under the law." If the "crime" is the same, then so should be the punishment.
Kids are inundated with sexualized messages, through TV, radio and the Internet.
I was under the impression they were inundated with hormones which is supposed to work even better.
Why should we begin there? I do not know where the unmarried birth statistics were in 1955, but I know they were not hovering at around 50%.
You are not taking into account shotgun weddings.
Estimated to be at least 1/3 in the 1700s.
You are not taking into account shotgun weddings.
Estimated to be at least 1/3 in the 1700s.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the research show that the reason for why kids are better off living in a two-parent household where the parents are married is because married people tend to bring in more money and have more time to spend with kids and not for any moral issues that would have probably been the deciding factor for people in 1700s America, with its state-supported churches that were, at the time, the social safety net for many colonial Americans, to get married when the woman got pregnant?
SaraW wrote, Biology is what is unfair. Their roles and responsibilities and actions and consequences of sexual contact are necessarily different.
Sure. But women like SaraW always interpret this as giving women less responsibility than men, when the exact opposite is true. Women get pregnant, men don't. Therefore, women have more responsibility than men. Their body, their baby, their choice --- their responsibility.
So then why do guys get punished, when women should have more responsibility? Both should get equal unishment, but if there is to be any unequal just, then the girl should have been expelled and not the boy.
Women often seek special exemption from legal and moral responsibility. It's like women believe they are morally inferior to men or something. Judging by SaraW's comments, maybe they're right.
The more interesting question is why do we have children having sex in an elementary school?
If you look at the picture provided at the web site, what do you see is missing? There is no father mentioned.
This was the subject of my video blog today. Without fathers, we see the breakdown of civilization.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcPCg9gnC-8
...a bit of history of the black "family" (quotes because it was not really a family for slaves) and present day realities would help understand the problem of fatherhood in black America. begin with the extended family (for which, read The Color of Water), and look at the percentage of black young men dead (drugs, violence, jail) free to marry. The ratio of black men to women makes it difficult for young black men to stay with one woman when there are so many available because of the lives of black men in America today...just look at white Am. families and see under better conditions there are so few men/women families.
Oligonicella--
You're right--I don't know you, I don't care about you, and the fact that you think I should have to know more about you than what you've posted here before daring to contradict you makes my point.
There are reasons most American men don't listen to most American women: The ones who aren't vapid oscillate between pretentiousness and self-righteousness.
Fred:
The ratio of black men to women makes it difficult for young black men to stay with one woman when there are so many available because of the lives of black men in America today...just look at white Am. families and see under better conditions there are so few men/women families.
Sure, hon, whatever you say. All those black women out there attending college, getting jobs, moving up in the world are all excited about having a relationship with the black men on the corner dealing drugs and committing crimes.
No, black women are making rational decisions that unless a man has two feet on the ground they aren't going to waste their time with an unhealthy person. Unfortunately, in the African American culture, having children is very important part of it, hence the number of children being raised by single mothers.
Let's also not get all racist in here either. White and Latino women do the same thing. If baby daddy has a drug problem or is in and out of prison, they are just as likely to raise junior on their own too, with potentially similarly disastrous results.
My friend just got out of prison. He did an informal poll while there. Just about everybody there didn't have a father present in their home growing up. He also mentioned the ratio of inmates was 95% black, 5% white and latino.
Here's an idea, if you become a father quit dealing the drugs and get a job. If you don't want to be a father, buy condoms or don't have sex.
Please note that the women to man ratio I mentioned in my comment above is from studies done and not from that wonderful group of minority women who are indeed going to college and making fine lives for themselves. I suspect that the percentage of black women (or Latino women) going to college is not nearly as high as the percentage of white women going to college at this point, or as yet. I will stand by what I have seen in studies as opposed to some general but none statistical observation based on unsubstantiated view.
Of course women of all races want to have and raise children, with or without a father in the home. I am merely trying to suggest the difficulties that exist within the black community. and I am hardly being racists about it. Ps: my son's black friend spent hours at our home last evening. His mother and his father are both physicians, his brother an attorney in NY, and he is at an ivy league college. My granddaughter is part black and part American indian. My son 2nd oldest son is married to a Korean woman. So I get a bit sensitive when casually pointed at as racist.
I love it, Fred. You can't be racist or have racist attitudes. You ate dinner with a black person last night. Just argue the facts.
I know a guy who took a young black boy under his wing 15 years ago. He treated him like his own sons. (He has two.) He is probably more responsible for that black boy having a college degree and working in law enforcement than anyone except the boy himself. The black young man will now stay with this man during holidays rather than his own family. Yet, if you talk with this guy about blacks, it's obvious he has some racist attitudes.
'She's still there' - where, in the stairwell?
M. Simon wrote: "You are not taking into account shotgun weddings."
And you are correct. I wonder what percentage of those were toxic?
Trey
i cannot belive i am the only one applauding this mother for saying that she agrees with the punishment her son was given. she just wants to see the little girl punished as well. she is not decrying her son's innocence only seeking equal justice
My friend just got out of prison. He did an informal poll while there. Just about everybody there didn't have a father present in their home growing up. He also mentioned the ratio of inmates was 95% black, 5% white and latino.
Here's an idea, if you become a father quit dealing the drugs and get a job. If you don't want to be a father, buy condoms or don't have sex.
In his informal poll, did he ask the inmates about the nature of the crimes that they committed? Did he come to the conclusion that many well-educated people came to; that many people are in prison because of drugs (whether it was production, distribution, or usage)? If he did ask them and did, which he probably would have had he did, find that many black men are in prison for crack-related crimes (production, distribution, and usage), did he ask them if they knew any white men who received lighter sentences for cocaine-related crimes?
The government and the blithering morons who support the government are putting men in prison for long sentences and destroying their families in the process all in the name of protecting people from themselves. The government has created a huge black market that attracts many low-income people; low-income people who, because of one reason or another, and many of which are directly related to or the consequence of governmental policies aimed at either helping or hurting blacks, happen to be black males.
Instead of castigating men, and black men in particular, for engaging in economic behavior that, by itself, violates absolutely nobody's rights, perhaps you ought to be castigating the government and those who support it for implementing terrible policies that provide criminal penalties for doing things that violate nobody's rights and that, absent such criminal penalties, might enable those same men to be productive members of society and remain a part of their children's lives.
It's just a thought.
It takes two to tango, or to be blunt, to have intercourse. If the school rule is to have a certain punishment for breaking the rule both sex partners should be treated equally.
Period.
Glad I'm homeschooling...
And boy have things changed since I was in 8th grade in the 1980s...
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
Post a Comment
<< Home