Sports and Social Justice

Without the names, just the idea which is much easier and simpler to address -

individuals, having witnessed via the media, actions toward African Americans across the United States over the last couple months, could stand the behavior no longer, and decided to stand up, or rather sit down for the national anthem.  This was their protest.  This was their way of showing solidarity with any number of African American males and several females who had been victimized by police.

There has been bad behavior by police for many months, years ... and apparently no one thought it necessary to act at that time, but now is the time.

Evidence suggests that Black youth ages 12 to 19 are victims of violent crime at significantly higher rates than their white peers.  Black youth are three times more likely to be victims of reported child abuse or neglect, three times more likely to be victims of robbery, and five times more likely to be victims of homicide. In fact, homicide is the leading cause of death among African American youth ages 15 to 24.
Living in urban environments also increases the risk of exposure to violence and one-quarter of low-income, urban youth have witnessed a murder. In one study of inner-city 7-year-olds, 75 percent had heard gunshots, 60 percent had seen drug deals, 18 percent had seen a dead body outside, and 10 percent had seen a shooting or stabbing at home. In a Chicago study, approximately 25 percent of Black children reported witnessing a person shot and 29 percent indicated that they had seen a stabbing. After one of the children participating in this study described the violent deaths of seven close family members, an eight-year-old remarked that "just" three people in her family had died violently. Such family and community violence is most often perpetrated by persons known to the youth, and is likely to be reoccurring—creating potentially greater harm to a developing child than would a one-time incident of victimization.
Youth exposure to victimization is directly linked to negative outcomes for young people, including increased depression, substance abuse, risky sexual behavior, homelessness, and poor school performance. Youth victimization increases the odds of becoming a perpetrator of violent crimes, including felony assault and intimate partner violence, doubles the likelihood of problematic drug use, and increases the odds of committing property crimes.
Despite the far-reaching impact of crime and violence exposure on children and teens, our nation’s youth do not receive the support and guidance needed to cope with these traumatic experiences. One estimate finds that only between two and fifteen percent of victims of all ages ever receive any victim assistance, and another indicates that among African American victims, only about nine percent of people sought help from non-police agencies that provided services.

There is a problem.  A real problem.  One that threatens not just some, but all, and is more insidious than bad policemen or a bad court ... it threatens the family, the children ... it threatens generations of black children, and that threat will perpetuate a cycle of violence and bad behavior by the police, illegal, and violent as it may be and is presently.

I assume those athletes are doing something about a danger that threatens to destroy the black community.  They feel strongly enough to sit down for the national anthem, collect their $100 million pay checks ... I am sure they are providing millions in aid, their time, and support.

They don't care what I think, and that's fine because I have no interest in what they think, but until such a time as we hear them speak up and do more publicly to deal with the real issues listed above affecting every African American ... I have no interest in following any sports team.  It's a waste of my time.  When they are able to understand perspective, the differences between what the police do and the magnitude and scale and .... what we, the people are and have done to make changes for all Americans ... until then I will sit on the sidelines, when they grow up and act responsibly, I will rethink my choice.

How Many of Us Are there or Have There Ever Been

Once again, another article from FOCUS magazine.



September 2002

Page 56

Is it true that more humans are alive now than have ever lived?


Robert Matthews, physicist from Aston university.

There are currently (in 2002) 6,100 million people living on planet Earth; almost four times the number just a century ago in 1900, and 12 times the estimated figure for 1650.  Such a dramatic increase does seem to suggest that today's population could indeed exceed the total number of humans who have ever lived.  But this ignores the slow but steady accumulation of numbers over the millenia.  By analysing populations and their growth rates using historical data, demographers have come up with estimates for the total number of humans who have ever lived ranging from 60 to 100 billion.  So, roughly speaking, even today's population represents only 5-10% of all the lives that have been lived in history.






people

The lies we tell - Part A

FOCUS, an English magazine has some very fascinating articles in it.

I have several articles from some time ago.



August 2002

The lies we tell, page 18
American scientist's findings prove that you really can't trust anyone

Amazingly, 60% of people tell lies in everyday conversation, a psychologist has revealed.  When attempting to appear likeable and competent, those that do lie tell two or three fibs every 10 minutes

These are the findings of Robert S. Feldman of the University of Massachusetts, who filmed 121 pairs of students in conversation with one another.  The students were told that the researchers were studying how we meet new people, but were secretly filmed instead.

Afterwards, when they watched the footage, the students revealed their porky pies.  Lies ranged from falsely agreeing with the other person to pretending to be in a rock band. "Women were more likely to lie to make the person they were talking to feel good, while men lied most often to make themselves look better," explained Feldman.  http://www.umass.edu/

Mr. Obama must surely be clicking away at a lot more than three every ten minutes!







lies

People

People are as complicated as they are simple. We are told as children how special we are, how unique we are. Our educational/social system has decided we are all unique, special, and in need of warm fuzzys. heaven forbid we get a cold prickly - our self-esteem might just melt away. We believe we are unique, and along with being so unique and special comes the feeling of deserving more, feeling entitled to something more than just what we have at any given moment. We feel ...

Feelings are the realm of the emotional cripple - if that is the entirety of an argument - We feel, we believe ... and should be relegated to the closet, rather than being given the prominence we oblige emo today.

We are not unique nor are we all that special, and certainly we are not better human beings than most other people we know, even if we are convinced that we are.

I walked into a space with another person, someone was already sitting down - there were three of us. I mentioned that I did not read, at any time, the paper version of any newspaper. I did not elaborate on the fact I have a subscription to pressdisplay.com. I don't feel the need to defend myself to people who are the mental equivalent of a sheepdog. One of the two people blurted out 'he gets his news from the Drudgereport.' I responded with a so what, it is a compendium of news sources and I usually visit about five such sites regularly for all sorts of news. The individual who blurted it out said it with such relish, like the were revealing a dirty secret, or that by visiting said site, my facts were immediately questionable versus their facts which came directly from the LA Times (the altar of truth). Petty. So what do you do.


Digression -
Mohammad al Fayd, father of the late Dodi Fayd, who was involved with Princess Diana - is a very very rich man. he has, quite possibly, more money than nearly any Englishman (but the Queen /Royals), yet he cannot get into the same circles - is not allowed invited to the aristocracy shindigs, doesn't get called to the palace for tea. Some people said at the time Fayd and Diana were killed, that the father wanted his son to marry her to gain access to English society. Wealth alone does not make you nor does it grant you access to culture and society. One is born with it, even if one does not have the wealth, or one is not. One does not spend a decade collecting bits to become ... one is or is not, one does not become.


We can be raised in the lowliest of places, yet possess more class than some people who are born into extreme wealth. Class is not defined by economic status, yet some people who grow up poor, resenting those who have, believe it is, and live their lives in a constant state of us versus them. It plays out in all facets of ones life from something as simple as going to the dump to be rid of trash, to comments made to a grocery store clerk, to ad nausea commentary about how everyone else has fucked up their life in some form or another, or why other people are screwed up. You grow up wanting, never getting, always being made to feel like you are worth less even if no one actually says or does something to define as you as being worthless, it comes across in behavior, and you grow up resenting. You learn a trade to become useful and you become one of the masses, but you always loathe your position in society and want to find a way up - to be something you were not born into, to become someone respected.

I see it often, and unfortunately, more often than I care to consider.

When you grow up wanting, desiring, and resenting others who have, you develop a personality that compensates for whatever it is you do not have - you use your skill in your trade to provide some degree of knowledge about something, an edge of sorts. Yet the better question is not the fact we feel worth less, it is how we live that defines class, not how angry or resentful we are, how much we overcompensate for what we don't have ... class is not something you can buy, nor is it something you gain as you get more money. It is something you are born with, or not.

Spitting out the drudgereport comment, or stubbornly refusing to open discussion on the various possibilities of a question - refusing to even court alternative views because it flies in your face and forces you to accept the fact you are not the top dog - class, or rather in those two cases - lack of class.

I have seen the resentment and compensation, the desire to have, to become, and it is very sad. In the United States, we can all be whatever we want, for we do not hold to the class structures as defined as they are in Europe - we are free of titles, as Michel Guillaume Jean de Crevecoeur, wrote in: Letters from an American Farmer (1780s) - Who was this New Man.

He is an American, who, leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys, and the new rank he holds... Here individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men, whose labors and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world. Americans are the western pilgrims who are carrying along with them that great mass of arts, sciences, vigor, and industry which began long since in the east; they will finish the great circle... The American ought therefore to love this country much better than that wherein either he or his forefathers were born. Here the rewards of his industry follow with equal steps the progress of his labor; his labor founded on the basis of nature, self-interest; can it want a stronger allurement? Wives and children, ... gladly help their father to clear those fields [which] feed and clothe them all. … The American is a new man who acts upon new principles; he must therefore entertain new ideas, and form new opinions. From involuntary idleness, servile dependence, penury, and useless labor, he has passed to toils of a very different nature, rewarded by ample subsistence. - This is an American. [The abundance of land, and lack of feudal traditions, said de Crevecoeur, had molded this new man:] Where is that station which can confer a more substantial system of felicity than that of an American farmer, possessing freedom of action, freedom of thought, ruled by a mode of government which requires but little from us?

[An enlightened Englishman visiting these shores would rejoice to see an almost ideal society:] Here he beholds fair cities, substantial villages, extensive fields, an immense country filled with decent houses, good roads, orchards, meadows, and bridges, where a hundred years ago all was wild, woody, and uncultivated! ... He is arrived on a new continent; a modern society offers itself to his contemplation, different from what he had hitherto seen... The rich and the poor are not so far removed from each other as they are in Europe... We are a people of cultivators, scattered over an immense territory, ... united by the silken bands of mild government, all respecting the laws, without dreading their power, because they are equitable. We are all animated with the spirit of an industry, which is unfettered, and unrestrained, because each person works for himself. If he travels through our rural districts, he views not the hostile castle, and the haughty mansion, contrasted with the clay-built hut and miserable cabin, where cattle and men help to keep each other warm, and dwell in meanness, smoke, and indigence. A pleasing uniformity of decent competence appears throughout our habitations... Lawyer or merchant are the fairest titles our towns afford; that of a farmer is the only appellation of the rural inhabitants of our country... There, on a Sunday, he sees a congregation of respectable farmers, and their wives, all clad in neat homespun, well mounted, or riding in their own humble wagons. There is not among them an esquire, saving the unlettered magistrate. There he sees a parson as simple as his flock, a farmer who does not riot on the labour of others. We have no princes, for whom we toil, starve, and bleed: we are the most perfect society now existing in the world. Here man is free as he ought to be; nor is this pleasing equality so transitory as many others are. Many ages will not see the shores of our great lakes replenished with inland nations, nor the unknown bounds of North America entirely peopled. Who can tell the millions of men whom it will feed and contain?

Europe remains locked into a social caste system that breeds anger and resentment, and worse - it breeds complacency and ambivalence.

I very much appreciate the history of Europe, but there is nowhere on earth I could ever be as happy as I am, here, for we are the best of all the rest, and despite what Obama says about cultures and American uniqueness not being all that special - we are, not because people are unique or special, but because our country and what it represents is better than all the rest.

We have our nitwits who relish criticisms about petty and inane things, just as they have their pettiness - overall, we are the best of all the nations, for our history is one where we have embraced people from around the globe. We are the world in its truest and most simple form.

people

TV, Strikes, Programming

During and after the strike - it was clear television was losing and the American people were not going to just forgive and forget - return to the TV when it was all over.

I recall reading one TV exec in one online Hollywood magazine say something to the effect that the audience would return, just because.

Apparently not.

Now - produce quality programs. Stop with whining and strikes. Spend your time acting not commenting on social issues. You are all paid to act/produce/direct NOT to be the social conscience of America. When your programs stink and you spend your time trying to be the social conscience - you will fail as you have.

I know I do not watch any TV on any network. I watch HBO and SHOWTIME and very little of that. Had you not gone on strike, I would have spent 2-3 hours per week watching TV.

Now, 1/2 that.

Ha.


No one is watching ... not anymore ... goodbye programming ... au revoir.

Where did they go???

For many years I have been annoyed with television. Well, not exactly television. A television is just a box of some form or another, but rather the programs on television, actors on television, executives at the networks that produce programs for television. All are responsible.

There were several programs I would watch only to turn on one week and find rerun or not find anything. Some weeks it would run in pairs - two weeks of no new shows, or two weeks of re-runs. It was a serious turn-off and did result on several occasions in my turning the television off and not returning for 3-4 weeks. The net result of this - the American people lost interest in top rated shows and they dropped in viewership.

Then the executives at the networks fell out of the stupid tree and decided to revamp the way seasons were constructed. When I was young, the new 'Fall Season' began around Labor day and or very near the day I started school. While I did not enjoy returning to school, there was a silver lining - new programs.

A number of years passed and I paid little attention to television and when I again turned the TV on in the 1990s, seasons began in October and November and by 2005, several began their seasons whenever ... no rhyme or reason - just random.

This assumes people pay attention to schedules, watch at random times and do not care about structure or order in their lives. they have nothing better to do than tune in on March 11 to watch a new season or January 8 or June 21. But in the real world we live our lives quietly with structure and do not have time to monitor random television schedules.

The net result of this - the American people lost interest in top rated shows and they dropped in viewership.

Then we throw out shows that appeal to the lowest common denominator, shows intended for the severely stupid, and or mentally handicapped. In fact, that is unfair to individuals who have mental handicaps - they appreciate programs that appeal to the greatest ability of people not programs that mock or denigrate.

Then the strike ... and now, according to an article in Times Online, January 31, 2008:

American TV networks have lost almost a quarter of their audiences because of the Hollywood writers' strike, according to new figures, and executives fear that “orphaned” viewers may never return.
The Nielsen ratings organisation found that US viewership for last week's opening of the 2008 TV season was down 21 per cent compared with the same week last year, when new episodes of hit shows such as Desperate Housewives and Grey's Anatomy were aired.

Bad news, yet again.

Dear Executives:

I appreciate the suffering you have endured as you smacked your head on every branch as you fell from the stupid tree, but if you want to save yourselves (long term) you need to make radical changes to your programming. You can most likely get some viewer interest back - should there be a war or an attack on the US or some other country, but short of that great programs will lose and have lost an audience. You think you can get it back - that is unfortunately one effect of all the tree whacking you suffered as you fell from the tree. No, you will never get it all back. A few more times like this and you will be paying advertisers to advertise on your programs.

Signed:
Unhappy

The Lie

Someone asked me a question / posed a statement concerning the seemingly (for some) age old statement of fact, agreed upon by 3/4 of humanity - he lied. My response: The biggest lie is that he lied.

It stands.

There are moments when I would like to fly off to Amsterdam (before they ban all their drugs) and get drugged up for the rest of my life to avoid dealing with the most irrational, illogical, emotionally draining nonsense.


People who believe he lied TEND to be (generalizing) liberal. They tend to believe he has implemented a police state, violated our civil liberties and believe that big business is controlling the government and or media in his favor, or at the very least, in the favor of big business. The notion of brainwashing and kidnapping, torture, and lies is so pervasive ... and so bloody simple. Simpletons.

Follow me here ... assume for one second he did not lie (which he did not) then you have been lied to and you believe a lie, spread a lie, and argue using that lie as your evidence. That lie is spread by the media and by other simpletons to the point now where someone too busy with their personal life to spend hours and weeks reading news clips, statements, and the facts, will believe the lie. They have been brainwashed.

The greatest fear the left has is self-created, and they are now living in a world of their creation with boogeymen they have created, and they are terribly afraid.

Whats Sexy? Whats on TV?

After watching several social-dramas / love stories on HBO or On-Demand, a few points become clear.

For whatever it is worth, the following gets added because, believe it or not, in some form or another, it is relevant.

Sexy is honesty. Sexy is truth. Sexy is direct and straight forward answers. Sexy is being considerate and treating others with respect.

It is not very passionate - granted. It is not exciting - granted. It is healthy. It is better for you and will bring you more happiness than all the rest of that crap combined.

Playing games, lies, obfuscation, half truths, refusing to answer questions, indirect and vague answers - NOT sexy. In fact, people who make it a habit to do more than one of the above listed deserve ignominy. I understand public ridicule may be a little extreme for someone who tells half truths, but (generalizing here) they are most likely to do more than just one hence the satisfaction of my requirement for ignominy.

It has nothing to do with the physical age of the person - that behavior is learned and it is unhealthy to get involved with those people. My suggestion - listen to them, talk to them, and put off ever being alone with them for fear they could turn mad as a hatter. Never let them know you will never meet them anywhere except at church and in public with hundreds of people around. Never let on because they will become easily offended and call you a hypocrite or worse.

Do not waste time on such people. Walk on the other side of the street when you see them. If Catholic, make the sign of the cross to ward off evil tendencies that may creep your way. Do not try to fix them or accept them - simply let them go off and drown in their miserable lives.

It may not seem that they are miserable BUT in most cases they are even if by all appearances the facade they show everyone is anything but unhappy.

Only they can help themselves and until they realize that games and lies will never make them happy nor will it attract the right people to them, until then - let them drown. The day will come when most of them will wake up - they may be too old, or used up, or thrown away, but many do wake up. You are permitted to pray they wake up sooner than later.

When they grow up (and I do not mean their physical age) be willing to give them the chance to prove it.

Some indications they have grown up:
1) they will not raise the names of people from their past.
2) they will not place demands on you, if they do not meet the smallest requirements you have asked of them (call on the phone or be willing to acknowledge feelings or mistakes)
3) when plans are mentioned, they keep their word or contact you when they cannot.

Those 3 points would be a start. Even if they get offended and claim you are at fault consider the following: if you have analyzed your comments and actions, perhaps consulted with 1-2 people, and provided them with the comments and consulted them for opinions, and if after all of that you seem to be the one who is less of a problem - stick to your requirements and do not give in. They may huff and puff and hiss - let them and say goodbye. One day if they are honest with themselves, they will understand what happened and will return and apologize. Until then you really do not need them near you. All of the above suggestions DO NOT MEAN, INTIMATE, SUGGEST, IMPLY, CONNOTE that you are not madly head over heels for them and may always be - rather - you do what you do because you must, for your own sanity.

Let them be angry, calm down, and get back to you when they feel better - or switch channels.

Leave it to the English

The cover page of the Daily Mirror (http://www.mirror.co.uk/) from January 21, 2005, Friday is quite interesting on several levels.

3 stories on the front page. And before anyone suggests the Daily Mirror is a tabloid/rag, forget it, I am aware, but it is also one of the most read papers in England so forget whether it is quality stuff, that ain't the point.

Story 1, far left column - something about Jennifer Aniston - Is the Strain getting to Jen. I don't care if she is stressed.

Story 2, the major story along the top of the page (above the fold) - Mr Un-Credible ... and Bush is still on the warpath.

I suppose I should look up the news of the day to find out what they may be refering to, but given the fact there is no credibility issue, if one is intellectually honest and not a beacon for retarded rodeo clowns.

The third article - Drink Drive Girl, 12 ... and her family don't care. The story goes - A girl of 12 was nearly twice the drink limit when she was stopped at the wheel of her father's car.

The English prefer their stories tainted by politics to dealing with what I would consider a far more serious issue for them - their social system is collapsing. And before you jump around like stupid from the stupid tree, I understand one case does not a social collapse make else the US would implode for we have Jerry Springer and his band of retarded rodeo clowns. No, it is a more serious issue for the English - girls at 14/15 who have had more than a dozen abortions and the state (county government) is more concerned with STDs than with an issue that slaps them everytime they turn around.

No, they have some very serious issues and they would prefer to play up idiotic nonsense with such witless commentary as Mr Un-Credible.

It is their choice, but then when they fail and someone is called to pull their butts out of the oven, again, why should we. What you witless wonders will accomplish with all this bashing of yours is not a regime change (made you smile) but a very defiant attitude to never help you again, when the time comes, and bank on it, it will come.