Schools, Shootings, Children and Adulthood

In reply to oldopelguy :

You may have something there. My father bought a new car every other year and a good used one for his wife. He had a nice house in the suburbs 10 minutes from downtown on the new freeways 

The family went on vacation for two weeks in the summer and a week At Christmas he sent us through college and had a vacation home on the lake along with putting money away for retirement. Health insurance covered everything. 

To do the same today he’d need to earn $150,000 a year.  But not on a high school education like he had.  

The home in the suburbs is now more than an hour drive. Each way. You can’t take a vacation or you’ll be replaced.  And you’d need at least an MBA to earn that sort of income unless your wife works. And then you’d need to make a second house payment a month for daycare for your kids. 

While I generally agree with the previous sentiments from the last few posts, I take some issue with a young white boy not being allowed to "celebrate his heritage." Being white is not a heritage in the same way being black is. It is perfectly acceptable for a white person to celebrate their Irish, Italian, French, German or whatever cultural background. But for many blacks in America, that cultural history is lost.  They don't know what country they are from. Many can only celebrate being black from Africa.

Fueled by Caffeine said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/03/us/central-michigan-shooting.html

 

If only a good guy with a gun was there...  ohh... wait..

It does happen.  

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/?utm_term=.649e8b39684b

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2007-06-29/news/0706280729_1_two-men-plantation-police-gun

frenchyd said:

In reply to oldopelguy :

You may have something there. My father bought a new car every other year and a good used one for his wife. He had a nice house in the suburbs 10 minutes from downtown on the new freeways 

The family went on vacation for two weeks in the summer and a week At Christmas he sent us through college and had a vacation home on the lake along with putting money away for retirement. Health insurance covered everything. 

To do the same today he’d need to earn $150,000 a year.  But not on a high school education like he had.  

The home in the suburbs is now more than an hour drive. Each way. You can’t take a vacation or you’ll be replaced.  And you’d need at least an MBA to earn that sort of income unless your wife works. And then you’d need to make a second house payment a month for daycare for your kids. 

As someone who has BTDT and lives pretty much the above life, large part of this is pretty much wrong.

You can do any of the above as a HS dropout. You just have to be willing to work for it. 

Toyman01 said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to oldopelguy :

You may have something there. My father bought a new car every other year and a good used one for his wife. He had a nice house in the suburbs 10 minutes from downtown on the new freeways 

The family went on vacation for two weeks in the summer and a week At Christmas he sent us through college and had a vacation home on the lake along with putting money away for retirement. Health insurance covered everything. 

To do the same today he’d need to earn $150,000 a year.  But not on a high school education like he had.  

The home in the suburbs is now more than an hour drive. Each way. You can’t take a vacation or you’ll be replaced.  And you’d need at least an MBA to earn that sort of income unless your wife works. And then you’d need to make a second house payment a month for daycare for your kids. 

As someone who has BTDT and lives pretty much the above life, large part of this is pretty much wrong.

You can do any of the above as a HS dropout. You just have to be willing to work for it. 

 

 

First, that didn't happen recently, and second, survivorship bias. I know a ton of people with good post-secondary educations working E36 M3 jobs for E36 M3 pay in a few different countries. You don't get that education in the first place by being a slacker - one has a MSc in microbiology. She's a Starbucks barista.

(Edit: Another fun fact, her grandfather was a Nobel prizewinner.)

oldopelguy said:

Just to circle back to the PC culture not being part of the school problem, and tie that in to why you are seeing white males committing these mass shootings: Being a young white male has to be terrible today.

Before you poo-poo, or worse yet comment that somehow these children deserve their hell somehow because they were born white, hear (read) me out. What was the primary message of the last election? Vote for the white guy and you are a deplorable, hateful bigot? What about the diversity movement? We want more diverse opinions, and less white guy opinions. What about racial tensions? Those evil white guys again.

At least it's OK to be a young man, right? Nope, it's their fault there's a rape culture. How does a boy even tell a girl he's interested these days when anything he says can be used against him before, during, or any time after he says it without context? Every movie first date kiss the kid ever sees looks the same as date rape, purely at the whim of the girl. Try it: Watch the an 80's John Hughes film and ask yourself if the teenage boy trembling his way into that kiss could be construed as him forcing himself on the girl, and what zero tolerance punishment he could expect these days.

But it's all good, at least he has good grades, right? Only because of his white privilege. Maybe he can put his head down and work hard? Nope, damn lazy kids these days, taking jobs from the uneducated washouts of the decay of American industrialism.

The poor kid isn't allowed to be proud of his heritage. After all it doesn't matter what his family story is if he's white it's all about the terrible colonial past and surely he is descended from some bad guys in history, right?

The guy wasn't a deplorable, hateful bigot because he was white, that was because of the things he said (says). The fact that he's a white guy isn't terribly relevant to that, hateful bigots can come in any color. The diversity movement might mean that a white guy has less of an unfair advantage than in the past, sure.

Getting consent really isn't rocket science and I can't think of any '80s teen film that portrays an encounter as acceptable that would seem rapey today, other than Revenge of the Nerds.

That white kid won't have it any harder than any minority kid in the workforce unless perhaps he's super-dirt-poor, in which case he might have it roughly as hard? Yes white kids don't have so much leeway in being proud of their heritage. They can be proud of their nationality but not just their race. Any white kid who feels wronged by this has probably fallen in with a bad crowd already.

So being a young white guy is not particularly bad today. It's not as super-awesome as it was in the past, and it's pretty E36 M3ty to be young at all these days, but he'd be very unlikely to gain anything if he were of any other ethnicity.

Many certainly have feelings along the lines of what you describe because they're less privileged now than in the past, even if they're still relatively privileged. It feels like sliding backwards. So you're onto something there:

https://weeklysift.com/2012/09/10/the-distress-of-the-privileged/

STM317 said:

93EXCivic said:

Second I don't buy the whole there is such a big culture difference in other countries that we can't look at them as inspiration. I lived in England for a short time, have visited 11 times and my dad is from there. I don't see the culture of England as all that different from the US. Sure there are differences but many of the problems I see mention in relation to mass shootings happen over there. They get the same movies, video games and music. There are broken homes. There is 24 hour media. There is a "PC movement". But yet they don't have mass shootings like we do. Two big differences I notice are the health care system and the lack of easy access of guns.

I don't think there's any question that access to guns makes doing terrible things easier. However, I think there are some pretty large cultural differences between the US and England, especially as it relates to firearms. Less than 250 years ago the US was born through forcefully declaring their independence, and then used guns to achieve that independence. England has never done that. The men who stood up to GB and fought are still hailed as heroes in our history books. England doesnt really have that in their history books. For goodness sake, Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr were prominent politicians that settled an argument with a duel. Hamilton is still heralded enough to be on our money.

After the war for independence There was vast open territory to be settled, and that wouldn't have happened without firearms. England hasn't had territory to settle (on their home turf) for a very very long time, and it will never be the size of the US.

That settlement of The West is romanticized in media, and has been for over 50 years. Kids grow up idolizing gun slingers like Wyatt Earp and the actors that played them like John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, etc. Do English kids grow up playing Cowboys and indians? What percentage of US TV shows are cop shows Compared to English TV? I'm guessing it's much higher in the US.

For better or worse, guns have played a huge role in the development of our country, and have become engrained in the culture much more deeply than other countries as a result. The US came to be at a unique time in history. No other country has had to fight for it's independence and settle/develope this amount of land since the invention of firearms.

I am going to disagree with a lot of that. It may have been a further back in time but the English used guns heavily in the English Civil War to start to establish the rights of the people more so. They used guns to defend the nation from the Spainish armada and establish their country as a world power. They used guns to create an empire one which at one point the sun never set. They equipped the civilians in WWII with firearms to defend against one of the most evil men that history has ever know. 

Also there are quite a few cop and investigation shows in England and the world's most famous fictional spy is British.

In reply to 93EXCivic :

English hero:

American hero:

Finger off the trigger until you're ready to fire.  Way to mess it up, Bond.  

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Everything you typed might be 100% correct, but you still missed my point.

One presidential candidate didn't just call the other one deplorable, she called anyone who would vote for him (or against her) deplorable. When in history has that ever been acceptable? No matter why or how you get there, only someone disgraceful, shameful, dishonorable, unworthy, inexcusable, unpardonable, or unforgivable could do that. It's one thing to attack someone's decision and another to attack the person.

As to the rape culture, when it comes to he said she said 100% of the time the boy will be crucified these days. Even if he does everything right, all it takes is an accusation to ruin a young man.Ask that lacrosse team from Duke. It's not about the action, it's the perception, and young men have zero power over perception anymore.

Similarly, it doesn't matter how successful the kid can be. The point is for the kid who isn't successful what can he do? The minority kid can tell himself that he didn't get the job because of white privilege, but what can the white kid say when he doesn't get the job and white privilege should have been helping him get it? When he doesn't make enough to pay his bills but everyone tells him he makes 20% more than the women he works with who seem to be getting by just fine?

Who does the poor white boy get to blame, when everyone tells him that he should be getting ahead and he can't?

In reply to oldopelguy :

I think the fact that the poor white boy in your example is looking to blame anybody else is a critical issue. One of the defining traits of these mass shooters is that they feel everything bad that happens to them is somebody else's fault. It's somebody else's fault that they don't fit in, or that girls don't pay attention to them, or that they didn't get a nice car on their 16th birthday. We have to stop blaming others for our own choices or shortcomings. We also have to understand that life is harder than it's portrayed to be in entertainment media, or other people's perfect looking social media account, and that's ok. It's ok to struggle. It's ok to work hard. It's ok to fail from time to time.

I completely agree, but we have an entire generation who doesn't work that way. For everyone else it's OK because ultimately they can blame the evil white man for holding them back, but for a young white man blaming anyone else is bigotry. That message is pervasive and there is no way out for that young boy.

It's a culture problem: Someone has to be the good guy and someone has to be the bad guy. Our polarized society won't accept the middle ground.

jmabarone said:

Finger off the trigger until you're ready to fire.  Way to mess it up, Bond.  

Bond is always ready to fire.

GameboyRMH said:

I know a ton of people with good post-secondary educations working E36 M3 jobs for E36 M3 pay in a few different countries. You don't get that education in the first place by being a slacker - one has a MSc in microbiology. She's a Starbucks barista.

(Edit: Another fun fact, her grandfather was a Nobel prizewinner.)

Availability heuristic

I just read though the last few pages. It seems that there's a lot of  misunderstanding about what PC really is.

oldopelguy said:

It's a culture problem: Someone has to be the good guy and someone has to be the bad guy. Our polarized society won't accept the middle ground.

Bingo. This falls back to W's speech about with us or against us. From that point forward it has been a battle cry across all races/socioeconomic classes/sexes/political parties. We went from a melting pot, with shades of gray to bold black or white ONLY. That's never a good solution. 

oldopelguy said:

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Everything you typed might be 100% correct, but you still missed my point.

One presidential candidate didn't just call the other one deplorable, she called anyone who would vote for him (or against her) deplorable. When in history has that ever been acceptable? No matter why or how you get there, only someone disgraceful, shameful, dishonorable, unworthy, inexcusable, unpardonable, or unforgivable could do that. It's one thing to attack someone's decision and another to attack the person.

If you really think it's so incredibly bad to attack a person with words, what would you think about someone who attacked people with words (and laws) not for a decision they made, but for their nationality, religion, or disability? Hypothetically speaking, of course.

In reply to Bob the REAL oil guy. :

Well said Bob.  America is a melting  pot.  I’m proud that I can see the good points either party offers and don’t have to listen to others vilifying the opposition  to justify my vote. 

I’m not so sure about post baby boomers. I think that we may have failed them somehow in teaching them nuances.  Could it be we were the first two income families and thus didn’t have the time it takes to teach them such subtlety?   

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Look, I didn't vote for the guy and I am not going to defend him. Just stop that kind of baiting. In fact you can hate his decisions and comments all you want, it's your transferring that hatred of his actions to the man and then to a whole group by extension that is the exact same bigotry that you think you are fighting against.

Try it out: I don't like that an Iraqi citizen bombed something so I don't like that Iraqi citizen and I don't like all Iraqis. Or maybe I don't like what that Muslim said so I don't like that Muslim and I don't like all Muslims. Both of those statements are bigotry.

So is: I don't like what that Republican said so I don't like that Republican and I don't like all Republicans.

Pot, meet Kettle in a glass house and all that.

oldopelguy said:

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Look, I didn't vote for the guy and I am not going to defend him. Just stop that kind of baiting. In fact you can hate him all you want, it's your transferring that hatred of one man to a whole group by extension that is the exact same bigotry that you think you are fighting against.

Not baiting, I just think that there is indeed something egregious about supporting a racist in attempts to do racist and otherwise bigoted things, and as such it's not that terrible to attack people with words for making the decision to do so, especially when they've made their exact views known in other venues. There are issues I can merely respectfully disagree with people on, but support of racism isn't one of them.

I don't hate one man so much as I hate what he stands for. Anyone who supports him stands for the same things.

In reply to frenchyd :

You know what they say.... only a Sith deals in absolutes.

oldopelguy said:

Just to circle back to the PC culture not being part of the school problem, and tie that in to why you are seeing white males committing these mass shootings: Being a young white male has to be terrible today.

 

Before you poo-poo, or worse yet comment that somehow these children deserve their hell somehow because they were born white, hear (read) me out. What was the primary message of the last election? Vote for the white guy and you are a deplorable, hateful bigot? What about the diversity movement? We want more diverse opinions, and less white guy opinions. What about racial tensions? Those evil white guys again.

At least it's OK to be a young man, right? Nope, it's their fault there's a rape culture. How does a boy even tell a girl he's interested these days when anything he says can be used against him before, during, or any time after he says it without context? Every movie first date kiss the kid ever sees looks the same as date rape, purely at the whim of the girl. Try it: Watch the an 80's John Hughes film and ask yourself if the teenage boy trembling his way into that kiss could be construed as him forcing himself on the girl, and what zero tolerance punishment he could expect these days.

But it's all good, at least he has good grades, right? Only because of his white privilege. Maybe he can put his head down and work hard? Nope, damn lazy kids these days, taking jobs from the uneducated washouts of the decay of American industrialism.

The poor kid isn't allowed to be proud of his heritage. After all it doesn't matter what his family story is if he's white it's all about the terrible colonial past and surely he is descended from some bad guys in history, right?

All anyone wants and deserves is the chance to be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin, or any other physical characteristics beyond their control due to the accident of birth. Sadly, for a young white male even asking for that much of a fair shake is tantamount to declaring themselves a hateful bigot in our polarized society. It amazes me that more don't lash out.

On a different tack, remember when in the 80's Postal workers who couldn't stand the pressure cooker of their jobs lashed out at those they felt had made their lives miserable? Those people didn't target terrorist style, they went to the place where they were made miserable and took out their frustrations on the people and places they perceived to have caused it. The kids are doing the exact same thing, going where they are miserable and taking out their frustration. Postal jobs changed to reduce the pressure; what are we doing about the schools?

Wow. I never realized how hard white kids have it these days, not getting a fair shake and all.

oldopelguy said:

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Everything you typed might be 100% correct, but you still missed my point.

One presidential candidate didn't just call the other one deplorable, she called anyone who would vote for him (or against her) deplorable. When in history has that ever been acceptable? No matter why or how you get there, only someone disgraceful, shameful, dishonorable, unworthy, inexcusable, unpardonable, or unforgivable could do that. It's one thing to attack someone's decision and another to attack the person.

As to the rape culture, when it comes to he said she said 100% of the time the boy will be crucified these days. Even if he does everything right, all it takes is an accusation to ruin a young man.Ask that lacrosse team from Duke. It's not about the action, it's the perception, and young men have zero power over perception anymore.

Similarly, it doesn't matter how successful the kid can be. The point is for the kid who isn't successful what can he do? The minority kid can tell himself that he didn't get the job because of white privilege, but what can the white kid say when he doesn't get the job and white privilege should have been helping him get it? When he doesn't make enough to pay his bills but everyone tells him he makes 20% more than the women he works with who seem to be getting by just fine?

Who does the poor white boy get to blame, when everyone tells him that he should be getting ahead and he can't?

You are seriously arguing that a class of people the continues to have a chance of success many times greater than a minority class due to institutionalized racism and again greater than white females due to institutionalized sexism should be pitied for the rough road they need to travel?

When the playing field gets anywhere near level you might have an argument, but I'm sure I'll be dead by then.

STM317 said:

In reply to oldopelguy :

I think the fact that the poor white boy in your example is looking to blame anybody else is a critical issue. One of the defining traits of these mass shooters is that they feel everything bad that happens to them is somebody else's fault. It's somebody else's fault that they don't fit in, or that girls don't pay attention to them, or that they didn't get a nice car on their 16th birthday. We have to stop blaming others for our own choices or shortcomings. We also have to understand that life is harder than it's portrayed to be in entertainment media, or other people's perfect looking social media account, and that's ok. It's ok to struggle. It's ok to work hard. It's ok to fail from time to time.

I'll add that this should apply to everyone, not just the theoretical boy in discussion.

In reply to Bob the REAL oil guy. :

'Do or do not' are also absolutes, so Yoda was a Sith? 

ThunderCougarFalconGoat said:

In reply to Bob the REAL oil guy. :

'Do or do not' are also absolutes, so Yoda was a Sith? 

That's actually a theory that has been floated around. He at least had knowledge of the dark side.