The improvements of our enlightenment.

[SweetWitch]

HIGH SCHOOL --1959 vs. 2009​

Scenario 1:
Jack goes quail hunting before school and then pulls into the school parking lot with his shotgun in his truck's gun rack.

1959 - Vice Principal comes over, looks at Jack's shotgun, goes to his car and gets his shotgun to show Jack.
2009 - School goes into lock down, FBI called, Jack hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for traumatized students and teachers.

Scenario 2:
Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.

1959 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up buddies.
2009 - Police called and SWAT team arrives -- they arrest both
Johnny and Mark. They are both charged with assault and both expelled even though Johnny started it.


Scenario 3:
Jeffrey will not be still in class, he disrupts other students.

1959 - Jeffrey sent to the Principal's office and given a good paddling by the Principal. He then returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.
2009 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin He becomes a zombie. He is then tested for ADD.. The school gets extra money from the state because Jeffrey has a disability.

Scenario 4:
Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1959 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college and becomes a successful businessman.
2009 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to
foster care and joins a gang. The state psychologist is told by Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mom has an affair with the psychologist.


Scenario 5:
Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school.

1959 - Mark shares his aspirin with the Principal out on the smoking dock..
2009 - The police are called and Mark is expelled from school for drug violations.. His car is then searched for drugs and weapons.

Scenario 6:
Pedro fails high school English.

1959 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English and goes to college.
2009 - Pedro's cause is taken up by state. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that teaching English as a requirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuit against the state school system and Pedro's English teacher. English is then banned from core curriculum.. Pedro is given his diploma anyway but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.

Scenario 7:
Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from the Fourth of July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle and blows up a red ant bed..

1959 - Ants die.
2009 -ATF, Homeland Security and the FBI are all called. Johnny is charged with domestic terrorism. The FBI investigates his parents --and all siblings are removed from their home and all computers are confiscated. Johnny's dad is placed on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.

Scenario 8:
Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary hugs him to comfort him.

1959 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.
2009 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in State Prison. Johnny undergoes 5 years of therapy.

Now, don't you feel better about how enlightened and intelligent we've become?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

True.

In 1959 I rode around on my bike with a shotgun laid across the handlebars. The cops laughed at my cheapo Western Auto shotgun and made fun of it.

The sheriff came to school and told our assembly that there was nothing wrong with two boys fighting so long as no one used a weapon, and both boys were about the same age and size.

 

[3113]

I'm sorry, SweetWitch, but I've seen this propaganda before and it just pisses me off. Allow me to illustrate:

Scenario 2:
Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.

1959 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up buddies.
1959- Unless Mark is black. Then he gets jumped and beaten up by all the other white boys after school while their parents cheer the kids on, yelling at them to "give that nigger the lesson he deserves!" That night, A cross is burned out front of Mark's house. There is no going to the police, they're part of the ones who did this.

Are you still sure 1959 was more "intelligent" than 2009?

Scenario 3:
Jeffrey will not be still in class, he disrupts other students.

1959 - Jeffrey sent to the Principal's office and given a good paddling by the Principal. He then returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.
1959--Jeffery is taken to a new-fangled shrink at the local hospital who says he has the perfect cure-all for such boys. A lobotomy! (Hey, it's true. In the mid-to-late 50's many troublesome kids were given lobotomies.)

Do you still think 1959 was more intelligent than 2009?

Scenario 4:
Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1959 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college and becomes a successful businessman.
1959--Actually, Billy grows up beating his wife with a belt, and causing her to miscarry their child. When she does have a child, he beats the kid, breaking bones and sending him to the hospital over and over again. Child abuse can and does lead to child abuse. If you watch any of the Nanny shows, you'll see that children really can be taught very well with time-outs rather than whippings.

Are you sure 1959 was more intelligent than 2009?

Scenario 6:
Pedro fails high school English.

1959 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English and goes to college.
1959--Actually, Predo goes on to work out in the fields with his family picking grapes for almost no money because in 1959 very few of his ethnic group were welcomed into college, and even if they were, they didn't get respectable jobs once they were out. White men did.

Are you sure 1959 was more intelligent than 2009?

Scenario 8:
Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary hugs him to comfort him.

1959 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.
1959 - Actually, Johnny is called a sissy by his teacher and friend, reminded the men don't cry, and takes this to heart. He never cries again. Unfortunately, he's gay and will be accused of being a sexual predator as an adult, because all gay men are considered sexual predators up through the 60's and 70's.

Do you really think we were more intelligent in 1959?

In the end, these scenarios are all bogus. They're made up, not facts. Facts are a bit more uncomfortable. For example, these facts, Sweetwitch, of what your life would have been like in 1959 and through the 60's being a girl instead of a man (and the same can be said for minorities. I assure you that there's not a single minority or woman or GLBT person with any true understanding of that time believes we were more intelligent then than now).

Don't preach this propaganda. It's shamefully ignorant, historically inaccurate, and transparent in its bias agenda. All it does is disseminate false information and Disneyland stereotypes--meaning myths and lies.

 

[rgraham666]

That's not how I remember it. And I was in school not too far from those days.

Beating me up was a fun way to spend recess. I learned not to say anything because although the bullies did get paddled they made sure I got an extra dose of pain next time so I didn't do that again.

I was disruptive in class. Because I was bored to tears. At nine I could read at a university level. School was dull and I acted out to relieve that boredom.

Due to a learning disability I couldn't write fast enough to finish the tests. So I was declared 'uneducable'. In front of me because they thought I was too stupid to understand that word.

Sorry Molly, but as far as far as I'm concerned when people talk about 'The Good Old Days' it's because they were either lucky enough to be normal or because their looking back through rose colored glasses.

 

[JamesSD]

I realize this list is somewhat tongue-in-cheek and not meant to be entirely accurate. Still, it's hard not to critique some of its examples.

We live in a Post-Columbine world. There was a time young men settled disagreements with their fists, or worst case, knives. Handguns were once relatively expensive and difficult to obtain. Now you hear cases of young people being shot over sneakers or a snide comment. There were certainly some aspects of the past that were better, but the past is impossible to return to.

Scenario 1: You have to live in a pretty rural area to be able to hunt quail with your shotgun before school. I'm going to allow this only adding that I don't think it's unreasonable to keep loaded firearms banned from school property.

Scenario 2: Bullshit. If two students get in a legitimate, one-on-one fist fight they likely will face at most a week's suspension for a first offense. A kid who constantly gets into fights may face expulsion or police action, but the swat team isn't going to be called in for two unarmed kids getting into a scuffle; my friend is a teacher and fist-fights happen daily at her school without police intervention.

Scenario 3: Usually the ADHD diagnosis comes before the Ritalin, and only with parental input and counseling. However, I do agree that too many parents and administrators are a little too quick to go to drugs before exhausting other behavior options.

Scenario 4: An obvious exaggeration. Assuming child services was called, it's unlikely they would put the child in foster care for an isolated, provoked incident. The Foster system is overwhelmed as it is, and social workers make every effort to leave a child with their parents as long as they aren't in serious danger. Spanking still falls into a legal gray area in a lot of states, and the most I would realistically expect would be court mandated anger management for the father.

Scenario 5: Bulllllshit. Aspirin and Ibuprofen are not regulated by most high schools. Try getting high on either of them. There's a reason you don't hear about anyone being addicted to Advil. Again, the most restrictive private schools would probably just confiscate it, and most would give it back at the end of the school day.

Scenario 6: A gross simplification of a complicated issue many school districts are facing. Still, it's a legitimate issue/concern.

Scenario 7: Again, Bullshit. If the child sets them off on private property he has permission to be on, police would not get involved. Public property? Police might be called, maybe a slap on the wrist and some community service, depending on the legal status of the fireworks in the state in question. If he was trespassing that's a separate legal issue.

Scenario 8: Bullllshit. Teachers who have inappropriate relationships with students are first scolded by the vice principal, and typically only face serious repercussions when actual charges are brought. I don't think any teacher has ever been fired for coddling a first grader with a scraped knee.

 

[amicus]

I suggest Sweetwitch made a valid, if exaggerated point, to make an even wider observation.

Twice now, I have watched a news program concerning school text books, the industry, controlled by three huge bookmakers, all influenced by, 'content editors', who control the content and the verbiage in all school books available at all levels of education in the US.

In none of those thousands of textbooks will you find reference to, Postman, Fireman, Policeman, or Mailman. You get the drift, I am sure, 'gender equality' has been imposed on terms used in all textbooks.

There are two 'Thanksgivings' celebrated in the State of Texas, one is the traditional American Holiday, the other is the Spanish or Mexican celebration, which takes place in April and is based on other events than those of the American one. Somehow, this 'book', ended up being taught to children in New England, who questioned the 'Mexican' Thanksgiving.

Sweetwitch points out the onslaught of, 'politically correct' speech and behavior that has dumbed down American school children and destroyed whatever American culture there was and diluted it to include a 'world culture', that presents a picture of total equality between all things, cultures, ethnic groups, gender, political systems and most importantly, ethics and morals.

They are taught there is no 'right or wrong', only differences between peoples, all of which should be tolerated and accepted as expressions of personal choices.

The movement can be seen as, 'feminist' in nature as all violence and disruptive behavior, typically the province of young males, is described as unacceptable.

There is so much on this subject that could be illustrated; the 'drug' direction that professional psychiatry has taken since the 1970's, wherein all human behavior can and should be modified by medication. This is a dangerous, if effective, means to 'somatize' an entire population to accept the politically correct behavior 'expected' of them by those in positions of authority.

Ah, well, that is my take, like it or not...

Amicus

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Scenario four's refutation is more bullshit. Many a abused child grows up to be a gentle person who would never harm another. Likewise many an abuser was not abused. There is no one-to-one correlation.

 

[Gavionn]

This is a great thread. I have so far agreed and disagreed with everone.

Sweetwitch started with an (as amicus pointed out) exaggerated comment about the differences between 1959 and 2009.

And while I wasn't yet born in '59 - many of the same childrearing techniques that Sweetwitch is so fond of were still in practice when I was born in 1970.

No one has yet pointed out the true difference between '59 and '09. It has little to do with whether the authorities are called in. It has virtually nothing to do with whether Johnny has a fight on the playground or is caught with a firecracker.

The difference is parental involvement. When I was a child, parents and school administrators were on the same side. Same with parents and cops. If the school called your parents about misbehavior or substandard performance, the call was appreciated. A common comment was "thank you for letting me know... I will address this at dinner tonight." These days the more common response is: "Not my child! How dare you speak in such a way about my perfect little darling! I'm hanging up now to call my Lawyer and the ACLU!"

But this doesn't mean that every practice in child rearing from '59 to '70 should be recommended. Spanking does nothing to curb behavior, it just teaches a kid to be a better liar. Trust me - I speak from experience.

While I agree that far too many kids are being diagnosed with learning disorders and ADHD, I also see many parents advocating year-round schooling. There is only one possible reason why ANY parent would do so - they want someone else watching their kid during the day and they don't want to pay for it.

Stop blaming the schools and the police and the government and the media for your children's behavior, and start taking responsibility for the lives you chose to create!

<above paragraph not intended for anyone on this thread, just a general rant to the world at large>

 

[voluptuary_manque]

As one who was there then, 1959 was neither the Heaven the originating post implies nor was it the Hell alleged by professional victimologists. Can we just let this drop without any further psychobabble?

 

[TxRad]

As one who was there then, 1959 was neither the Heaven the originating post implies nor was it the Hell alleged by professional victimologists. Can we just let this drop without any further psychobabble?

Yeap, I was there also and have to agree with you. I was an abused child and have bent over backwards not to be my dad. Enough said on that.

 

[amicus]

A couple, perhaps three recent posters, maybe inadvertently, obliquely referenced the un-named 800 pound gorilla in the thread....half of the children in school have no fathers at home, no masculine influence in their lives, and no one at home when school is out for the day.

To suggest that this 'fact', has no bearing on the issues at hand, is to miss the point entirely.

Amicus

 

[SweetWitch]

Sometimes I put on my evil grin and enjoy stirring things up. It's just fun to see everyone's take on everything. Yes, the article in question is exagerated. Yes, there are many aspects with which I disagree. As someone already pointed out, this bit has been floating around for some time.

Still, it bears some thought.

I realize this list is somewhat tongue-in-cheek and not meant to be entirely accurate. Still, it's hard not to critique some of its examples.

We live in a Post-Columbine world. There was a time young men settled disagreements with their fists, or worst case, knives. Handguns were once relatively expensive and difficult to obtain. Now you hear cases of young people being shot over sneakers or a snide comment. There were certainly some aspects of the past that were better, but the past is impossible to return to.

Scenario 1: You have to live in a pretty rural area to be able to hunt quail with your shotgun before school. I'm going to allow this only adding that I don't think it's unreasonable to keep loaded firearms banned from school property.

Scenario 2: Bullshit. If two students get in a legitimate, one-on-one fist fight they likely will face at most a week's suspension for a first offense. A kid who constantly gets into fights may face expulsion or police action, but the swat team isn't going to be called in for two unarmed kids getting into a scuffle; my friend is a teacher and fist-fights happen daily at her school without police intervention.

Scenario 3: Usually the ADHD diagnosis comes before the Ritalin, and only with parental input and counseling. However, I do agree that too many parents and administrators are a little too quick to go to drugs before exhausting other behavior options.

Scenario 4: An obvious exaggeration. Assuming child services was called, it's unlikely they would put the child in foster care for an isolated, provoked incident. The Foster system is overwhelmed as it is, and social workers make every effort to leave a child with their parents as long as they aren't in serious danger. Spanking still falls into a legal gray area in a lot of states, and the most I would realistically expect would be court mandated anger management for the father.

Scenario 5: Bulllllshit. Aspirin and Ibuprofen are not regulated by most high schools. Try getting high on either of them. There's a reason you don't hear about anyone being addicted to Advil. Again, the most restrictive private schools would probably just confiscate it, and most would give it back at the end of the school day.

Scenario 6: A gross simplification of a complicated issue many school districts are facing. Still, it's a legitimate issue/concern.

Scenario 7: Again, Bullshit. If the child sets them off on private property he has permission to be on, police would not get involved. Public property? Police might be called, maybe a slap on the wrist and some community service, depending on the legal status of the fireworks in the state in question. If he was trespassing that's a separate legal issue.

Scenario 8: Bullllshit. Teachers who have inappropriate relationships with students are first scolded by the vice principal, and typically only face serious repercussions when actual charges are brought. I don't think any teacher has ever been fired for coddling a first grader with a scraped knee.

1. Seriously, I come from a very rural area. Trucks bearing gun racks with shotguns were often parked in the student lots, and even teacher lots--especially this time of year. Hey, it's deer season.

Still, I don't condone taking a weapon of any kind onto school grounds.

2. My daughter's school has a zero-tolerance policy. Last week a child was suspended for slapping another child. The fact that he called her mother a whore was glossed over. Second offense will see the child before the board's disciplinary council for possible expulsion. And that's just a simple slap. I don't like violence, and I think it should be dealt with, but suspending a 9-year-old for defending her mother is a bit far to go. Just my opinion.

3. Have to disagree with that one. When I was 9, I was having a rough patch at school. After one dr apt, I was put on Ritalin. It's a terrible drug. It didn't turn me into a zombie. It made me want to die.

There was no diagnosis. Hell, there weren't even tests. No one bothered to ask me why I wasn't paying attention in class. If they had they would have found out that I was sleep deprived. It's the family curse.

And I see this happening more than ever these days. If the kid doesn't conform, they prescribe drugs "to get them through it.

4. Can't agree with this, either. Not totally. I've seen too many things in this town.

5. Absolutely no aspirin, tylenol or other OTC meds are allowed in my daughter's school system. Sharing same could result in criminal charges.

6. Language skills are the backbone of society. It must be learned. Period.

7. Fireworks of any kind in this area carry a stiff fine and possible jail time, even on your own private property.

8. Gotta agree on that one. Never heard of anyone who shows compassion to a child going to jail.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

8. Gotta agree on that one. Never heard of anyone who shows compassion to a child going to jail.

Uh-huh! I hug kids all the time. So long as you make sure that you touch nothing below the shoulders, no one minds. Understand this: Children need physical contact. If they don't get it from a responsible person, they will get it one way or another. Don't let the hysteriacrats tell you otherwise.

 

[Bianca_Sommerland]

Sometimes I put on my evil grin and enjoy stirring things up. It's just fun to see everyone's take on everything.

This made me smile.

I think mostly everyone's got some good points. Won't say who But what I will say is this. There were good things about the fifties, sixties and seventies I'm sure people miss, things that would be nice to still have. I won't add the eighties, I was young and everyone was weird

This decade has some good points too, but it seems so many things have gone to extremes. I heard about the father in New York (too lazy to find the article...sorry) who lost custody of his son for refusing to put him on meds for ADD. He got him back, but the issue was that the school wouldn't take his son back until he was on meds.

Some rules, made for necessity, get out of hand and it seems like the end result is people get pitted against one another. Kids vs Parents. Parents vs Teachers. Cops vs everyone. Everyone is nervous about what's right and wrong and it's not always just based on personal values and beliefs.

What to do? Damned if I know.

 

[lisa123414]

Glad to hear from a teacher I respect - kudos to VM - but, as a Mom, I am conflicted. I have four kids, two of which will stand up for and work out their differences, the other two have been unfairly bullied. What I would wish for would be the teacher that is paying attention and knows the aggressive actions when they see them. The zero tolerance policies bother me also, in that they take away intelligent discussion and decision from school personnel.

 

[penandpaper]

So apparently what everyone agrees on is - it takes a village. WOW!

 

[amicus]

Please, P&P, don't include me in your, 'village scenario'.

A child's behavior comes directly from its' home environment, from day one, if not before birth.

Without the polarities of a 'masculine male', and a 'feminine female', and the imposition of a strict set of rules, morals and demonstrations concerning unacceptable behavior, you have the 'Lord of the Flies'(I hope memory serves), in turning these little animals loose among their peers. They will each fight for their own, 'pecking order', regardless, or submit to whatever if necessary.

Blame it on the times we live in, as I think you must, but recognize the root of the problem, parents raise children, institutions only house them.

Amicus

 

[Gavionn]

A couple, perhaps three recent posters, maybe inadvertently, obliquely referenced the un-named 800 pound gorilla in the thread....half of the children in school have no fathers at home, no masculine influence in their lives, and no one at home when school is out for the day.

To suggest that this 'fact', has no bearing on the issues at hand, is to miss the point entirely.

Amicus

That "fact" is crap.

My father was virtually non-existent from the time I was 8 years old. My mother was a full-time student for several years after my parents split, and she worked her butt off. I was what is now commonly called a "latch-key kid" for years.

I was also emotional, quick to anger and easily distracted.

Fortunately for me, I wasn't a child today. If I were, the above descriptions would mean I had abandonment issues, ADHD, and possibly sociopathic tendencies.

The truth is, I was just friggin' bored as hell in school. I ended up graduading a year and a half early.

We need to stop pigeonholing children and we need to stop medicating the ones we don't understand.

And we DEFINITELY need to stop making statements like yours.

Paternal, Maternal or both - it doesn't matter. Parental influence is the key, not the gender.

There are Lesbian couples raising children as we speak who I am sure are doing a better job than Hetero couples who're unhappily married and staying together "for the sake of the children".

In my opinion, that fact alone nullifies your arguement that a "father figure" is the Key to raising a well-adjusted child.

 

[lisa123414]

Nevermind, I will not argue with a closed mind

 

[Stella_Omega]

Amicus! Hello, have you not read the posts? Are you really saying the presence of a "masculine male" who abuses is better than none? Give me a break and get with this century, please.

Every three or four months I delete my ignore list, just to see if anyone has changed.

The first person to go right back on ignore-- is Amicus. Every time. Just saying.

 

[Gavionn]

Please, P&P, don't include me in your, 'village scenario'.

A child's behavior comes directly from its' home environment, from day one, if not before birth.

Without the polarities of a 'masculine male', and a 'feminine female', and the imposition of a strict set of rules, morals and demonstrations concerning unacceptable behavior, you have the 'Lord of the Flies'(I hope memory serves), in turning these little animals loose among their peers. They will each fight for their own, 'pecking order', regardless, or submit to whatever if necessary.

Blame it on the times we live in, as I think you must, but recognize the root of the problem, parents raise children, institutions only house them.

Amicus

What a load of crap.

It's almost 2010, Amicus. The "barefoot and pregnant" BS is gone. Along with the housecoats and aprons.

To suggest that all one needs to raise a child is a "masculine male" vs "feminine female" polarity is simplification to an exaggerated degree. What children need is consistency and resiliency, along with love and affection. Both genders are capable of providing all of the above.

The "Nuclear Family" ideal is just that. It isn't a necessity.

 

[amicus]

C'mon ladies, holster the claws, I responded in an 'objective' manner, not a sexist one.

I suggest the freeing the slaves and the women was a natural occurence of events and had to happen sooner or later. What I ask is that you not view either or both as unmitigated successes, because it is apparent that neither are.

I am astonished at how difficult it seems to be for those of you who are, 'emotional and fly off the handle', to divorce your objective opinions from your personal subjective ones?

Seventy-five percent of black children are raised without a father in the home and the mothers, black mothers, are seldom Lesbians, blacks have a thing against homosexuality in most cases.

Over all, all ethnic groups included, half of all children in America, do not have the biological father in the household. Now you may minimize that all you wish or you can consider the causes and effects of such statistics.

Amicus

 

[Gavionn]

C'mon ladies, holster the claws, I responded in an 'objective' manner, not a sexist one.

I suggest the freeing the slaves and the women was a natural occurence of events and had to happen sooner or later. What I ask is that you not view either or both as unmitigated successes, because it is apparent that neither are.

I am astonished at how difficult it seems to be for those of you who are, 'emotional and fly off the handle', to divorce your objective opinions from your personal subjective ones?

Seventy-five percent of black children are raised without a father in the home and the mothers, black mothers, are seldom Lesbians, blacks have a thing against homosexuality in most cases.

Over all, all ethnic groups included, half of all children in America, do not have the biological father in the household. Now you may minimize that all you wish or you can consider the causes and effects of such statistics.

Amicus

I'm guessing that you're talking to Lisa and Stella when you say "ladies", because I'm a guy.

And your numbers aren't exactly accurate. 40 percent (decidedly less than half) of American children are currently (as of 10/7/09) being raised by single mothers, a discrepancy of 10 percent by you. To specify the Black community (not sure why you decided to go there) you're off by 5 percent.

I was raised in a very diverse community, and have been surrounded all my life by people of every race, creed and sexual orientation. I've never noticed a lack of Gay black people in the mix. Where do you get your statistics from?

 

[Gavionn]

Holy crap!

It just occured to me!

Amicus, you're not even a parent - are you?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Holy crap!

It just occured to me!

Amicus, you're not even a parent - are you?

He once complained that his children are completely uninterested in his opinions on anything.