kevin r schmidt
01/22/02 - 02:32:12
IP: 22.214.171.124 Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; AOL 6.0; Windows 98; DigExt)
On Saturday I went over to Concord to see the Olympic Flame being carried. It was fun to be with happy people excited about something good. Later that night when I signed on A-Deck to catch up on the latest and greatest, I was taken back by the postings made that afternoon. I knew my response to Jay was not racist or even attacking her. It was challenging her but it was not attacking her and that is how I see it. I also felt that a day or so should pass before I even try to respond. After reading what has happened over the last few days I feel that I made a wise decision. Perhaps some of what I have to write below will stir emotions up again. But so does poetry, stories, movies, music, and the opinions we share. Some of its good and some not so good or even pretty. |
I knew Jay had a feminist leaning from earlier postings. In the beginning her politics were irrelevant as far as I was concerned. So I went about my way. But the tone of her response to Paul's initial post raised several concerns for me. First, I reasonably believed she was a member of the faculty. But more importantly I was concerned because the student's e-mail address that was copied and posted. If Jay was a member of the faculty, would she report the student to the administration for disciplinary action for using the university e-mail system for sending an offensive e-mail to another student?
Corporations are monitoring, disciplining, and firing employees who consentingly exchange between each other politically incorrect jokes, ribald comments, and other nonbusiness communications. The courts are upholding such termination's as valid. Would Jay want to make a political point at the expense of this students academic career? This is a real question and not science fiction. I have always held extremely strong opinions about why educators should not use the class room to perpetrate political views. They don't belong in the classroom unless your taking political science as a major.
Your an educator Ethel and you know there are many special interest groups in Sacramento trying to push agendas that are trying to shape the public school system in California. Some of those agendas include textbooks that are trying to expand and redefine what some people believe to be the new definitions of family and morals in this state. Why is it that public schools are being used as a battleground by political activist to perpetrate special interest and political agendas? Why is it that some educators are adamantly opposed to athletic competition and support noncompetitive athletic activities? Why can't children go to school and learn how to read and write, become proficient in math and science, and participate in sports, arts, and music programs, etc.? Why are they being taught definitions of family and marriage that go against a parents right to teach their children what the definition of family is based on their own personal or religious beliefs? Why do people argue for separation of church and state. Yet, Activist will argue that the public benefit has a right to intrude on a parent's right to teach their children what they feel is proper. Is it because what some parents teach their children stands in direct opposition of the new and expanded definitions and standards?
Those are very tough questions to answer. Special interest groups and activist with political agendas know that in order to replace the current objective standards in place that they oppose. They have to sanitize the children of their parents views in order to have their subjective standards put into place. So they take it to the public school system. On the university level educators are even determined to expound their personal views at the expense of relevant subject matter. Furthermore if you disagree with them you will be given a failing grade or they make it harder for you to pass. They had no tolerance for views that were at variance to their own. Is teaching a student to be prejudice acceptable if is to further the professor's personal political views?
Police officers and teachers are taught to control people and the situations they are in at all times. What were you thinking when you were condescendingly asked me to apologize? You didn't even try to frame anything remotely persuasive or intelligent for any reasonable person to consider your position. You made yourself the self appointed thought police, judge, and jury with your ultimatum. It was if you were trying to negotiate with an eight year old. You only left me with one viable alternative. That was to reiterate what I originally posted and my basis to believing Jay was a member of the faculty. I knew that nothing that I wrote was racist, sexist, prejudicial, or sanctioned such abhorrent behavior. It was only after a few days pass did the calmer voices realize what said.
So Jay, what makes me prejudice? Is it because I categorized Jesse Jackson as Black racist? Which he is! Is it because I say [Black] and do not use the politically correct African American? Is it because I didn't sanitize the SNL skit and used the actual word [nigger]? Did I disturb you with sarcastic satire asking you if you teach some of the many topics that the politically correct use to criticize Western Male European Civilization? Is it because you failed to emasculate me with your feminist doctrine that wants me to feel guilty? You were not attacked but you were challenged.
As for allegations of my being a White Supremacist and for being prejudice. I never said anything on this board that implied or admitted to such beliefs. For some, was it easier to follow than to think for yourself? All I did was ask Ethel to reread my original post objectively.
Last fall, Paul made a post criticizing everyone on A-Deck for not thinking and being complacent. Ethel, your response was asking him what to do and how to do it. He posted a verse from America as his reply. The reason why there are no maps and roads is because your dream is the map and you have to build the road yourself. It is everyone's responsibility to build the kind of road you want. And that road is your personal frontier. Like I keep saying if you want it, work for it. No special preferences for anyone.
The other day when Paul invited us to delve into politically incorrect humor and asked us to take it as far as we could go with it. We didn't get derailed at all. None of us failed at all. My initial response to Jay was everything and more Paul invited. Given the personalties of this board, the experiment went to the bleeding edge, and succeeded in going as far as it could. Humor can tow a close line to mean and cruel. Laughing gives us the same emotional release as crying. It lets us release something inside of us that is causing us pain. Sometimes we have to laugh at pain in order to heal our souls because we cannot cry.
For Further Reading
Jefferson Starship Message Board Main