Do kids judge others based on skin color?

Posted by Ria, 16 Sep 09

How many White people are nice? (Almost all) (A lot) (Some) (Not many) (None)

How many Black people are nice? (Almost all) (A lot) (Some) (Not many) (None)

These are the questions that Birgitte Vittrup of the Children's Research Lab at the University of Texas asked Caucasian children between 5 and 7 years of age as a Racial Attitude Measure. Other 20 adjectives used to replace “nice” were adjectives like "dishonest," "pretty," "curious," and "snobby."

Vittrup sent a third of the families home with multiculturally themed videos for a week, such as an episode of Sesame Street in which characters visit an African-American family's home, and an episode of Little Bill, where the entire neighborhood comes together to clean the local park… a second group of families got the videos, and Vittrup told these parents to use them as the jumping-off point for a discussion about interracial friendship…The last third were also given the checklist of topics, but no videos. These parents were to discuss racial equality on their own, every night for five nights.

Of the last group, 5 families quit the study and two pointed out clearly that they weren’t ready to have such conversations with their children. “We don't want to point out skin color," they said. Much as they knew the study was about children’s racial attitudes, parents started quitting once they were aware that the study required talking openly about race.

Your perfect partner could be online right now...

What are you looking for?

Parents claim to embrace multiculturalism, but according to Vittrup's entry surveys, most of these Caucasian parents hardly ever talked to their children directly about race. “They might have asserted vague principles—like "Everybody's equal" or "God made all of us" or "Under the skin, we're all the same"—but they'd almost never called attention to racial differences.”

Parents wanted their children to grow up ‘colorblind’, but the initial test showed they weren’t.

Asked how many white people are mean, these children commonly answered, "Almost none." Asked how many blacks are mean, many answered, "Some," or "A lot." Even kids who attended diverse schools answered the questions this way... More disturbing, Vittrup also asked all the kids a very blunt question: "Do your parents like black people?" Fourteen percent said outright, "No, my parents don't like black people"; 38 percent of the kids answered, "I don't know."

However much we want our children to grow in a race-free vacuum, clearly, children do draw their own conclusions about race. Apparently, according to child-development researchers, children notice racial differences as much as they notice the difference in other colors.

University of Texas, Rebecca Bigler thinks its important to talk to children about race as early as 3 because even if we don’t, children are prone to form their own preferences and favoritisms based on the group they think they belong to. Below is the experiment she carried out:

…4- and 5-year-olds were lined up and given T shirts. Half the kids were randomly given blue T shirts, half red. The children wore the shirts for three weeks. During that time, the teachers never mentioned their colors and never grouped the kids by shirt color.

The kids didn't segregate in their behavior. They played with each other freely at recess. But when asked which color team was better to belong to, or which team might win a race, they chose their own color. They believed they were smarter than the other color. "The Reds never showed hatred for Blues," Bigler observed. "It was more like, 'Blues are fine, but not as good as us.' " When Reds were asked how many Reds were nice, they'd answer, "All of us." Asked how many Blues were nice, they'd answer, "Some." Some of the Blues were mean, and some were dumb—but not the Reds.

Bigler says differences in skin color, weight or hair color are kinda like differences in gender – clearly visible. Even when we refuse to point them out, just like children used t-shirts colors, they will use skin color in the same kind of way.

Bigler contends that children extend their shared appearances much further—believing that those who look similar to them enjoy the same things they do. Anything a child doesn't like thus belongs to those who look the least similar to him. The spontaneous tendency to assume your group shares characteristics—such as niceness, or smarts—is called essentialism.

So when do children begin to notice race? When 100 black children and 100 white children were shown photos of faces, Phyllis Katz, then a professor at the University of Colorado found that at 6 months, babies “stare significantly longer at photographs of faces that are a different race from their parents indicating they find the face out of the ordinary…children's brains are noticing skin-color differences and trying to understand their meaning.”

When the kids turned 3, Katz showed them photographs of other children and asked them to choose whom they'd like to have as friends. Of the white children, 86 percent picked children of their own race. When the kids were 5 and 6, Katz gave these children a small deck of cards, with drawings of people on them. Katz told the children to sort the cards into two piles any way they wanted. Only 16 percent of the kids used gender to split the piles. But 68 percent of the kids used race to split the cards, without any prompting. In reporting her findings, Katz concluded: "I think it is fair to say that at no point in the study did the children exhibit the Rousseau type of color-blindness that many adults expect."

We talk openly to children about pink being for girls and blue being for boys. So, if babies notice differences in skin color as early as the tender age of 6 months, why do we leave the “white" and "black" issue for them to figure out on their own? Do we make things better? REALLY? Should parents call attention to race when with their children?

77 responses to "Do kids judge others based on skin color?"

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  1.   Wonka says:
    Posted: 18 Feb 10

    KIM and BALLARA ARE FINE!!!!!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  2.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 24 Nov 09

    Bellara ; Thank you for the intelligent comment / I agree with your thoughts .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  3.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 24 Nov 09

    deewhizz ; Thank you for the response , those extras make it so much Better . I hope you were able to Share your meal with some children . LOL at the Last comments or so was claimed ???? of the Political Wizards at a Date Ting site . whurr ; Yellow color in skin means one is smoking way to much . I voted for President Nixon and you still openly show Disrespect for the Former Presidents in online comments / shown thoughout the World .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  4.   deewhizz says:
    Posted: 23 Nov 09

    @observer; LMAO at repairing the Death star! Totally and his daughter is riding shotgun haha..! @homesteader; I DID have the ham sandwich and you're right it was good:) I went for the cheese(melted swiss) and added a lil turkey , Dijonnaise, lettuce, tomato, banana peppers and black olives. I don't eat much so when I eat I EAT LOL Yummalicious! :)

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  5.   Bellara says:
    Posted: 22 Nov 09

    nope kids don't judge kids are followers! they act based on what they see, what they hear or what they are taught. they don't judge till adults (fam or non-fam members) feeds it to their little minds. its a pity :(

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  6.   WHURR says:
    Posted: 20 Nov 09

    Back to the topic.... My kids know that purple/black might be tuberculosis or a bad case of melanoma. My kids also identify the round pink skin coloring known as ringworm. They really scared of skin-color from eczema too! I'm sorry for teaching my kids to avoid certain colors. Its very 'medical-ist' of me.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  7.   WHURR says:
    Posted: 19 Nov 09

    And before anyone says anything... Thats 380 and 363... I am aware of that.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  8.   WHURR says:
    Posted: 19 Nov 09

    @Glock.. I love stats dude! You said Clinton signed more executive orders than anyone in history, actually Reagan did! Reagan signed 12287-12667 Thats 680 Clinton signed 12834-13197 Thats 663 Should I start attacking Reagan for signing all of them. I have heard Rush Limbaugh saying that same thing over and over about Clinton. If I had used that same argument about Reagan, people on the right would go ballistic and talk about the events needing them. Just to clarify it with you, I voted for Reagan! All I know is that when I ened information on executive orders, I run the the government site that lists them. http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  9.   WHURR says:
    Posted: 19 Nov 09

    Glock Glock Glock... you assume I voted for Obama? I will just mention only things that I felt were personal, leave out the political attacks. You left out the names of Michael Moore and Al Franken I see. Notice, I didn't just mention right-wingers I cringe at the left-wingers as well. I didn't make a mistake when I said the 'unemployment rate doubled' I didn't say that the unemployment rate 'went up 100%'. That would be 104%. You can refer to the rate as a standard or an actual number. The number doubled the actual standard did not get a 100% increase. I just wanted to say that mathematically you can talk about a rate doubling or tripling, but you don't refer to the rate increasing by 36% unless it went from 4% to 40%. I don't want to kill the subject, but believe me when I tell you that its mathematically correct to refer to the rates in that manner, and not by a percentage increase unto themselves. You are referring to the number doubling when you actually say the rate doubled. You still have to use that number against the base that it is being referred to. To put it gently, you could say that 'the quantity of people on unemployment has increased by 36% since Obama took office'. Now that...I will give you kudos for saying correctly....if its true. I am well versed in the constitution, I have read it. There was no need for that remark. I never said anything regarding constitional writings until I mentioned Ron Paul. I have no clue why you ended it with 'you should try to read it' . I never praised Obama, or Bush for that matter, as being great constitutionalists. As I said earlier, you definitely are assuming I voted for Obama. Hmmm Just for the record, my mother ran the entire Lowell Weicker Senate campaign in CT. He is the only Republican that stood up against Nixon during the Watergate hearings and said 'If he is guilty as hell, he needs to go!' He definitely was a maverick before John McCain even know what one was. Governor Jodi Rell(R) was the JP for my neices backyard wedding. I think you might have my 'devils advocate' role confused with some of the left wing socialists that have been coming out of the woodwork. I think the people are officially bored..no more comments.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  10.   Glock says:
    Posted: 18 Nov 09

    Whurr whurr whurr, sigh... I guess since that was your "last" post on this I guess I get the last word then huh? You contradict yourself over and over. Look at your previous posts.....go ahead scroll up. You take exception to my pointing our under Obama's watch unemployment increased about 36% from 7.6% to 10.2%, yet in the same post you say that under Bush unemployment "Doubled" from 4.00% to 7.6!! What gives? Double standard? Using your math an increase in unemployment from 4.00% to 7.6% is a 100% increase but when the president is Obama, an increase from 7.6% to 10.2% isn't 36% it's just an increase of 2.6% LOL Stem cell research? If you read my post I AGREED with you on what he signed (just about everything in front of him)I just pointed out one thing he didn't. You took that one point as though I'm defending Bush! Please! I am by no means a Bush "defender" or a republican. As much as you want to blame the president for the unemployment numbers I will still disagree. Just because you say it's because of his "policies" doesn't mean a thing. All laws have to come from congress, period. Now, Obama's own personal "policy" may be something different than what comes out of congress and he may choose to not sign it, but his "policy" can't be enacted without coming from congress. Otherwise, why bother with going through congress in the first place? Of course he could do like Bill Clinton who, when he didn't get his way in congress, signed executive order after executive order (more than any president in history) LOL, just because people may be asking "What is Obama doing to bring the unemployment rate down"? Doesn't mean Obama is responsible for it. Are you serious when you say that?? Most people have no clue about economics or what causes economic downturns. Economic downturns can usually be traced back to government intervention including ours. We have a transition going on right now from a capitalist system to a European socialist system which has the business community what will be next. Uncertainty rules in America. Just for the record, I do not have nor have I read any of Ann Coulter's books. I do however agree with much of her opinions, as well as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. And no I don't have any of their books either. But then I guess if I agreed with someone from the left then for you my opinions would be "acceptable" because they are from the "right" source. If having a "straight constitutional debate" is what you want, then try reading it. Where in the constitutional does it give the power to Obama to do the things he wants to? Where does it give congress the power to nationalize healthcare? I could go on and on as well. But I think you want your opinions to be "accepted" by those here on this site as well as in your inner circle so you spout the party line instead of coming up with your own thoughts on this topic.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  11.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 17 Nov 09

    Reading these blog topic comments / I see where some are attempting to Lower the intelligent of Our other readers . Whurr ; I fail to be able to sleep with worry you boys could be elected to office / that is the American way . Hehe . Children Behave / Thank you for your last message .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  12.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 17 Nov 09

    Yes the old political Bigots with no Respect for our President and Former Presidents did not read the Blog Topic . As children they were knot taught to play together .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  13.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 16 Nov 09

    Hurricanes Rita 2005 and Ike 2008 / Look to God for these , he creates the weather and destroyed the Facade of our local church at his will [ God's will be Done , Amen ] . Katrina hit New Orleans which is under sea level during stormsurges . These other two about the same time damaged Texas and points North . Heard people died from Hurricane Ike as far North as Ohio . Our alligator population in Southeast Texas suffered because of the salt water being pushed so far inland . Our Presidents in no way cause these Hot Air Storms , Let them eat cake and Personally a Ham sandwich sounds good at this time . Children ; Which of you wants cheese on your sandwich ? Here is some fresh water and Chips . Let's sit together and watch a movie while we eat them ,LOL .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  14.   Observer says:
    Posted: 16 Nov 09

    ditto Deewhizz on your comments about GWB and Pres O! Darth Cheney indeed - he is still insistent on trying to repair the death star and have it operational prior to the next election... lol

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  15.   WHURR says:
    Posted: 15 Nov 09

    @Glock We could do this all day... this is my last message on this because I think everyone will fall asleep. Bush replaced the stem cell funding bill with an alternative that spent the same amount. So if you want to point out the ONE spending bill he didn't allow, please make it clear that he still wanted to spend the money, but for his stem cell beliefs. He wasn't doing it to be fiscally conservative by any means. He had a back up plan with Sen. Isakson from Georgia. He wasn't doing it to save us money, he wanted to continue spending. A president IS responsible for the unemployment rate because their economic policies guide the business practices within the US and dictate our standing in the world economy as well. So I know that you are aware, that YES a president is responsible for the unemployment rate. If they weren't responsible, we wouldn't start asking the question, 'What the hell is Obama doing to get the unemployment rate down?' If Bush and Obama are not responsible for the rate getting to that point, then everybody needs to stop asking that question. Its not worth discussing the unemployment rate and Obama if Obama's policies don't influence the rate tremendously. They do... and we do! I know he is not the sole reason, but he is the major reason, as Bush was and he should be responsible as well. My points are neither here nor there in terms of labels, those being liberal or conservative. I could play devil's advocate and conterpoint each and every thing you said. I am not going to do that because we would turn this board into a political commentary. You post replies straight from Anne Coulter's 'trash a liberal' ideals. I have never been one to vote on party lines. I took a very long hard look at Ron Paul, due to his constitutional writings. Someone producing pieces worthy of academia, gets my interest before a political pundit who makes a living of publishing facts that are half-truths. The only thing that I will say to close this point is that the unemployment figures can be 'imagined' or we can use the Dept of Labor. You clearly have to state the truths and if you want what is reported, you have to use the Dept of Labors stats. The unknowns are clearly that. We tried to get a number of illegal aliens for the immigration debate and undocumented is just that, undocumented. Pundits love increasing or decreasing those numbers for their own benefit. http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=LNS14000000 Bush did inherit a 4% unemployment rate. The rate doubled during his tenure. Obama's rate has not gone up 36%. Under Obama, the rate has gone up 2.6%. The quantity of people, now thats another issue. I am wondering if you meant 3.6%. You can't quantify a percent with a percent increase of the percent. I am aware of the uncounted people. I think it is ironic that conservatives have decided that those 'uncounted' should have a voice from them... somewhat liberal idea! They would make FDR proud! If the ideas you have posted are your own, Glock more power to you for actually caring. If they came from an Anne Coulter book, they sound like sound bites and can be destructive. All of the political commentary books are so biased and create 'political hatred' and that includes Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken, Michael Moore etc. I am sick and tired of books pushing political beliefs instead of straight constitutional debates. I refuse to lower my intelligence by reading any more books based off political party allegiance. As for my views, I challenge and show no favoritisms to one party or another. I show favoritisms to a belief system. I do believe, that from your past writings, we share the common belief that most of where we are at with this country is due to a lack of following what the forefathers started, which is a government run off a moral fiber based on Christian values. For that one belief, we can disagree on all the others and smile. My bantering on this topic is done!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  16.   deewhizz says:
    Posted: 15 Nov 09

    As far as Obama and Bush, Bush was the worst prez ever because he was an idiot, not because he was white. Too many specifics to list, I knew it would be disaster but I greatly underestimated how much damage he was capable of. And some things, such as 9/11 and Katrina almost made it seem as though he had a jinx on him that he passed to us during the eight yrs and then took off. I mean, a once in a century storm while we had him behind the wheel? There was no one behind the wheel. When the storm hit(after 3 days of forecasting a Cat5 direct hit he claimed he didn't know about and was briefed on by "Brownie") GWB was at a fundraiser in CA. When the Superdome was all over the news, floating bodies et al and I was actually considering going to Sam's, getting all the cases of water that would fit in my truck and hitting I-10(I lived in Tucson which is on I-10), Bushie was just north of me in Phoenix at John McCain's b-day party having cake. I mean seriously?) Obama can only go up from there. He has GWB to thank for leaving such a mess that the country freaked out and elected a man of mixed-race whose middle name is Hussein, what great timing!:) After those 8 yrs, I would have considered electing a ham sandwich had it been on the ballot. If GWB had only listened to his own father instead of Darth Cheney we wouldn't be in half this mess. Bush Sr. was not my cup of tea but he was no moron. He sent the collection plate around the world 1st for cash(instead of charging it like jr.) and got us in and out of Desert Storm FAST. Lord why not Jeb, why? Its so obvious he's the smart brother:) I certainly wouldn't vote for BO because he was blk, how could I? He's only half, which half am I voting 4? On Topic; Yes of course children do notice skin color and I don't know if someone mentioned this but there was a "doll test" in which children of different races were shown white and black dolls and the majority of the children(including the blk ones sadly)preferred the white doll, and if questioned further were more likely to have use negative language in describing how they felt about the blk doll. I have 3 children of mixed race and I must say I have been surprised by how many strangers approach to tell me how beautiful they are. I dont talk to my children directly about the color of their skin except to say that it's perfect:) They are 5 and under but very bright and its quite clear Mommy, Daddy, and kiddies all have different shades of skin although amazingly all 3 of them are the exact same golden caramel tone. But the compliments are nice 2 hear, and I think attitudes are changing. I'm not sure so many people would have been comfortable approaching me in the past.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  17.   Glock says:
    Posted: 15 Nov 09

    Homesteader,...um, ok.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  18.   Glock says:
    Posted: 15 Nov 09

    Whurr, when I used the example of Katrina, (I perhaps wrongly assumed) people would know I was referring to if the races of the people living in NO were white and Obama was president at that time. I didn't know I'd have to spell everything out. As far as Bobby Jindal, in some corners of the Republican party I suppose he is lauded as some kind of a "savior" as sorts, however among conservatives, he is not. He quite frankly is a horrible public speaker and really has pretty much the same message as most republicans (more government). As far as "think tanks"....there are always "think tanks" from both sides trying to figure out how to "dethrone" whoever is in office. That is not just a republican think. Move-on, Acorn are a couple examples. As far as recessions go, yes I'm aware of how a recession is calculated, however, I'm also aware the mainstream press were calling the economy a recession WELL before it technicaly was. Think they would do that for Obama? NOT! In fact they are saying the economy is in recovery! Unemployment: Neither Bush or Obama is "responsible" for unemployment per se. They happen to occupy the white house and are 1 branch of the federal government. So you cannot say that Bush was "responsible" for both, it simply is not true. Bush did not sign the stem research bill that congress put in front of him, but as far as the rest of your assertion of signing everything else, you're pretty much right on, that INCLUDES the bills the democrats put in front of him to sign!! Don't forget that! Only to be lambasted BY the democrats for spending so much!! LOL Also Bush was not given a 4.00% unemployment rate by Clinton, the lowest rate during the Clinton years was 4.10%, but not when the torch was passed to Bush. In fact, the media mostly ignored the fact that Bush inherited a recession from CLINTON when he took office. The unemployment figures are also quite askew, since many people who are out of work are not counted as part of the unemployment data. Those who's unemployment has run out are not counted in the figure. In Michigan, the unemployment is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the national average, well over 15%. We have a heavily democratic state government to thank for that. The unemployment rate during Obama's tenure so far has risen about 36% not "2.6%" as you state. I would also say that the national average under Obama has doubled as well despite what the "official" government report is. The reason people are suffering is because we've had a government that believes when there is a problem with the economy that government is supposed to "Do something", that is totally wrong. The government's job under the Constitution is NOT to do anything because they don't have the power to. Whurr, when it comes to government and economics, I'm not ignorant as unfortunately most Americans are. Most Americans quite frankly don't pay attention or even care about political matters even though it affects them tremendously. There is more loyalty to a party rather than a principle in this country (both parties are equally guilty) As far as Obama's "success", if he continues down this road, which quite frankly is socialism, then yes, I hope he fails and fails miserably. If he changes his stance and starts to embrace a free market, capitalist system then I would be totally behind him. I don't see it happening. He has in his cabinet and pool of "czars" devout communists! Where was the uproar over that? The press never batted an eye like it was no big deal. This is where Obama's mind is at.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  19.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 14 Nov 09

    Glock ; Former President William Clinton had sexual affairs with the help in his own house during his administration . He had balanced books on his watch / he was on the phone with the Russian Leader , when Monica showed Appreciation for his job Well done . God Bless the man and Hillary stayed with him and I admire her for that . Quit constantly complaining about what important things people do and get a Positive outlook on their Accomplishments in Life . Probably his business / alas he still Earned the title of President and all Former Presidents should be Recognized in print by their proper titles by American Citizens . Lack of Total Respect for these men show ignorance in my eyes . When President Bush was in office I wrote President prior to his name / now I address him as Former President Bush because this title was duly Earned by him . I even call our garbagemen by the title " Sir " when I talk to them . Meanwhile children taught at a young age to Respect all others / will in older years never forget . We are all just people and at these younger ages in these surveys only learn what our parents feel we need to learn , They do knot need Negative thoughts of old Bigots . We are try ing to Change this world for the Betterment of all people . Thus as told earlier in this blog / it is the parents who create and have the problems .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  20.   whurr says:
    Posted: 14 Nov 09

    @Glock Would Obama have gotten the same treatment about Katrina? Being called a racist, obviously not! With Bobby Jindal in place right now, you know as well as I do that there would have been a conservative 'think-tank' wondering what could possibly be used to thwart Obama in the next election. Jindal is a 'golden child' of sorts for the Repubs. As far as your unemployment and recession comments, a recession is generally 2 quarters of negative GDP or a 1.5% increase in unemployment over 12 months ( all depends which side you want to listen to). Bush was responsible for both. The man is the only president EVER in the history of the United States to pass EVERY single spending bill that came before him. He was supposed to be fiscally conservative, McCain was massively embarrassed. Now you have Obama doing the same thing but in condensed form. Maybe he is jealous that Bush signed it all, so he figured he would get it done in a shorter period of time. The unemployment rate in Jan 2008 was 4.9% and in Jan 2009 when he left it was 7.6% . That is a HUGE 2.7% in 12 months. ALL of that was on his watch, considering that he owned the rates for the 8 years prior without any intervention from Obama. Bush was given a 4% rate from Clinton. If you want to play numbers, the unemployment rate doubled during the BUSH era, from 4% to 7.6% There is no doubt that Obama's current deal with 10.2% is a nightmare. The unemployment has gone 2.6% higher in a short period of time. Do you want to blame the 2.6% in 10 months on Obamas policies ( I would answer... 'What are they exactly?') or are you bold enough to say that this is a continuation of the increase that was started in Bush's last year in office? If you don't believe that Bush had anything to do with this rate, then if it goes down to a reasonable number within 3 years, will you be saying it was 'All because of Obama' or will you be saying that 'Bushs policies from 06-07 finally kicked in' I get so sick of pointing fingers and using misleading statistics. I want Obama to be successful, not because he is a democrat ( thats just like saying 'only because he is black') , but because there are so many people suffering right now. Unfortunately, not everyone is willing to sacrifice time and efforts because of fears that they may be next on the 'chopping block'. We have all become defensive of our 'own'. As far as your constitutional comments, there are checks and balances in place, I know you know that. Its currently skewed to the left with some teeter-tottering happening state to state. Isn't that why Ron Paul was such a hot commodity for a bit? Anyway, my political bias is neither here nor there just like my church affiliation. 'This is not a paid political commentary and in no way was I on drugs or alcohol when I created this. Send all money for WHURR for Prez 2012 to ME!' Isn't there anybody moderate (willing to change views if someone has valid points) anymore with an incredible sense of fiscal conservatism?? Oh yeah..ME ! ME for PREZ 2012

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  21.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 13 Nov 09

    P.S. and you can rest Assured / that She is constantly talking with Our President Obama as he Listens to her about the affairs of the World . The United States of America is just a small part of an ever changing world of today . Glock when you hold the post of President / Your words will be Listened to also . I can see it now , Elect Glock / Whurr for Change of the way this country has Failed them . Heck , I will be your Campaign Manager . Alas I can Knot get you a Noble Peace Prize / you have to Earn that .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  22.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 13 Nov 09

    " First Lady " and she was elected by the President of the United States of America / There is No Greater Position in this country . He has the Last word . My Last words on this subject and my Position remains under the Love of the Greatest Woman in my World . Will be ; Love it or Leave it .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  23.   Glock says:
    Posted: 11 Nov 09

    Smiletellsit, as far as commenting about the president, there is a double standard here. For example, Bush was accused for being racist for not doing enough after hurricane Katrina. Think Obama would have got the same treatment? Hardly, in fact there wouldn't have even been a story about how Obama didn't "do much to help". When Bush was president we have unemployment of 4.7% and the media talked about what a recession we were in. Today, the unemployment rate is MORE THAN DOUBLE that at 10.2% and all we hear is how the economy is RECOVERING!!! Holy cow! Hell Obama even got a NOBLE PEACE PRIZE for doing what? The voting took place in February and they talked about his work as president and at that time he had been in office for 11 DAYS!!! Change? What has he done that is good? Go ahead name something, but when you do, tell me and explain to me how what he did was constitutional. That is how I judge every president. I used the same standard for all the presidents not just Obama. So many people want to accuse whites of being racist when they disagree with or criticize Obama, simply unture. As far as Mrs. Obama, what "office" exactly does she hold? Being married to the president is not an office.

    Like or Dislike: or 1 (-1)
    Reply to this comment
  24. Posted: 23 Oct 09

    Noplayer on 10-6-09, good point. Couldn't have said it better.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  25. Posted: 23 Oct 09

    Glock on your 10-4-09, I agree with what you said about black men, and it's true, but remember, my focus is just white men and black women. And since I'm the women and experience what these white guys are saying, I know from where I speak. I disagree with your presidential comments. All the change has been good, IMHO, because it is creating the very dialogue we are having, which ultimately creates a better understanding for all. I understand what you're saying about being able to criticize the President, and you still can. What people are calling racist is the subtext of the comments by those who are truly racist. Comments that clearly don't make sense and are loaded with resentment that now the most powerful office on the planet is held by a mixed person who looks black. I'm sure you've been on the other end of racism, when someone hated you just because you are white and criticized you from that mindset. It's that. Your comment about "none of it good" is one of those comments that seems loaded. Is NONE of it good, are are there some things that are good? There have been a lot of good things that came about of President Obama being elected by the American people. And there have been some bad things. But really, the change is what so many people are uncomfortable with. When it was a white male president, there were things we had to just accept. Now, we have to apply the same entitlements of a white male president to this presidency. Note how the First Lady is ridiculed and even called an ape!! They would have never said that about Nancy Reagan or Laura Bush. Come on, be honest. That's just mean and highly disrespectful to the lady who holds the highest office in the land. So please consider that. Thanks for your comment.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  26.   NOPLAYER says:
    Posted: 19 Oct 09

    The election of an AA president, promoting a few AA's to CEO positions and a few AA's holding office in majority white districts are positive signs of progress within certain areas but the progress in the mentality of both BLK and WHT still has a way to go. This Justice of The Peace in Louisiana and his refusal to marry the IR couple proves that despite advancement in the fields of business, politics and academia, there's still alot of work to be done. With so much going on in the world, I'm not too much worried about the hang-ups of a few people and their twisted ways of thinking. MSNBC? What a joke!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  27.   shotgun007 says:
    Posted: 19 Oct 09

    What makes you say that, lizzy2005?

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  28.   lizzy2005 says:
    Posted: 16 Oct 09

    Why oh why do idiots have to use these topics to posture and pose, instead of just discussing the subject sensibly?

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  29.   Glock says:
    Posted: 16 Oct 09

    NOPLAYER, you say that ( paraphrasing) "we can't overcome 300 years of racial injustice in just 50 years." Well, last time I checked we have a man who is considered to be black sitting in the white house. What exactly does this count as, a "stepping stone"? It seems that no matter how much "progress" is made such as more and more black CEO of major companies, black politicians who are elected to major offices (sometimes in predominately white districts), etc, etc, that we continue to hear the mantra that "more progress is still needed"! Yes the label of racist is a convenient tool that sits at the bottom of the bag to be pulled out when an obstacle appears that someone doesn't want to deal with. The accusation of racist is then flung out to put people on the defensive. Many of the things that have been accused of whites saying about the president often times are unfounded, they're just made up. Case in point, that evil guy Rush Limbaugh who has been accused of making very racist remarks about slavery being a good thing because it kept the streets safer at night. That has been the accusation, yet NO ONE has been able to find the statement anywhere to have been said by him. But still is doesn't matter people that hate him because he's a conservative will still act as though he said it. I don't like Obama as president, but it has nothing to do about his race but soley because of his agenda and socialist ideals. I had a hard core socialist at work the other day (who's white) say to me, "You know why people don't like Obama as president", I said "why's that Bob"?, he screams "BECAUSE HE'S BLACK!" He heard that over and over on MSNBC.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  30.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 15 Oct 09

    For those of Limited Intelligence ; Youth of America = Children

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  31.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 15 Oct 09

    P.S. THIS IS ABOUT CHILDREN ENJOYING OTHER CHILDREN / without the Unnecessary influences of the Prejudice of the Old folk still holding on to the ways people acted in the Darker ages of our existance . Five familys - [ " We don't want to point out skin color " ] In the earlier study showed intelligence enough not to Influence their children with Mistakes made everyday in society by the actions of Adults /who are set in their ways of Dislike and Stereotyping of others . Change !!!!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  32.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 14 Oct 09

    WHURR ; I was talking of the Stagnation of Ideas of two other Glorious Debaters and how they are still living in a old world of Senseless Debates / With Totally nothing to do with the Topic at hand . " Retire Aged People Early " was my point and allow the youth of America to prosper in our New World of Changes / did knot think much about my needless short form as I sometimes see similiarity of Structure in their comments. Alas I openly Apologize if I hurt anyones feelings / we are all grown individuals here are we not ? The Racial Motivation they are Continuously Showing in all these Blog topics . Makes me Sick .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  33.   WHURR says:
    Posted: 14 Oct 09

    LIZZY2005: I have 3 bi-racial children. I too was in the dilemma that you were in. As you have said, when they were old enough to talk (maybe 3-4 years old) I too was asked why they were the color they were. The answer I provided was: The alleged properties of melanin, mostly unsupported, irrelevant, or distortions of the scientific literature, are then used to justify Afrocentric assertions. One of the most common is that humans evolved as blacks in Africa, and that whites are mutants (albinos, or melanin recessives) (Welsing 1989; King 1991). No one disputes that humans evolved from Africa, but the rest of the statement profoundly distorts genetics. Afrocentrics treat skin color as if it was governed only by one gene, and thus subject to absolute Mendelian dominance / recessiveness. If this were true, humans could only be black or white. However, skin color, like intelligence or height, is controlled by several genes, which explains why humans exhibit a wide color spectrum. Whites do not exhibit a total absence of melanin, but only a lesser amount. That is why whites can increase the amount of melanin in their skin by exposure to the sun. There is also no evidence that the amount of melanin in internal organs correlates with the amount of melanin in the skin. For example, the amount of melanin in the substantia nigra is normal in albinos MY CHILDREN ARE NOW ON 4 DIFFERENT BEHAVIOR MEDICATIONS BECAUSE OF MY RESPONSE. I SUCK AT THIS 'FATHERING' THING!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  34.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 14 Oct 09

    P.S. Uncle Earl was the Expert Mechanic in the comedy movie " Johnson Family Vacation " . A movie children may watch together and Laugh about . You two Debaters that show constant comments on this Topic that do knot even have anything to do with the original Blog Topic . Sure nuff have no idea about what you say - as there are Millions of Voters that are neither Black or White who voted in the last election . This country is made up of Citizens of many diverse Heritages of which your Bigotry even thinking that only two races rule is ignorant in the Nature of you two never acknowledging that the Majority of voters were neither of these two colors . Yet I never read anything about these other Heritages / Bipartisan you are , open your eyes and look around you at the World today . I have read what both of you write / You two are Racially Motivated in all your debates . Bigotry shows rampantly in all your comments . This is a Date Ting site and a very successful one if I may say / Get your heads out of your Butts and try to talk of Happiness . " Ingorance is Bliss / May you both be Happy in the Bull Manure that you try to convince educated people on this site is True statements . " I feel sorry that neither one of you sees what Positive changes have happened in the years of your lives .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  35.   WHURR says:
    Posted: 14 Oct 09

    I had something really deep to say, nearly on an educated level...I was actually going to try and use a gerund in my first sentence.... but then...Earl...and the lawnmower....this is about skin color yet we talking about R.A.P.E...... Let me see... "Do kids judge others based on skin colors?" ? I give up! YOU WIN!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  36.   lizzy2005 says:
    Posted: 14 Oct 09

    I have two daughters aged 17 and 6 years respectively. Both are bi racial. One of the first questions they asked when they were old enough to talk was why they were the colour they were. (They have regular contact with their father before anyone jumps to the comclusion they were asking this because I was a white single parent.) I answered their questions by simplifying the subject of genetics. My older daughter who is at college has had to contend with racism, mainly in the form of ignorance from her peers. My younger 6 yr old if you asked her if colour has anything to do with being good or bad would answer no. She believes it is do do with an individual's behaviour. Will this change as she gets older? I hope the gap in my children's ages also signifies a change in the attitudes of people in society who need to alter them.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  37.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 13 Oct 09

    It's like Uncle Earl says ; This thing will run on lawnmower fuel / but if will only run 16 M.P.H. , it's take you 5 days to get back to California .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  38.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 13 Oct 09

    P.S. ; I think people voted for President Obama because they thought he was Qualified to hold the Position .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  39.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 12 Oct 09

    The new Label is called R.A.P.E. ; " Retire Aged People Early " . Mainly because there are too many young Qualified vibrant willing family men and women / who see the Stagnation of the Government workers that sit in their comfortable chairs and are doing totally Nothing to improve others lives because they wait for their Retirement . With their Large Pensions / win loose or draw . Because they have what I will call a Vested Interest in their long standing seat or position . Only Death shall shake their lazy butts from those soft chairs and allow the youth of America to find employment . In ranks of the Pipe fitters union / when you have worked 20 years they have mandatory retirement to enable a younger workforce to exist . Children Love to play together / until Old people show them that there are Rules of Existance that have to be carried from one generation to the next , Foolish as they may be . People voted for Our President Obama / it was not Heritage or political party that put him in office . It was becauise People were Sick of the way their Lives were in this United States of America . It is called Change and it took many years to get this Bad - Please allow the Man time to work with it / Support his efforts and there is a possibility things will improve . This Texas Redneck Loves , Old dogs Ford trucks Willie Nelsons and ZZ Tops music and Rain at the present time . Also I Realize that complaining about what one cannot change is a Large waste of time . Enjoy the day , Rain is in the Forecast for tomorrow also / My Mother-in-Law up North said it was snowing a couple days ago . God , Please allow all children to Laugh and play together as this world is changing every minute of everyday .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  40.   NOPLAYER says:
    Posted: 12 Oct 09

    Glock - I believe you cant trust the main stream media to present a balance view of things. It's all about the agenda of the media outlet and it's owners and stock holders. There's no doubt many white people voted for Obama. I don't believe that all whites who criticize President Obama are racist, I understand some of their reasons for disagreement. A politician is just that, a politician! Obabma is a American politician and that speaks for itself! LOL I also believe that there are some whites who are upset at the fact that we do have a black President(notice I said some whites, paticulary many of them old southerners from the deep south)! I asked the question, "could it be", I didn't state "it was a fact", that due to historical opposition of black leadership, many blacks view whites criticism of the President as being racial. I'm not acting as though many who criticize the President is due to the "Historical", I only posed a question! I'm not not too quick to lable folks racist because most are like "reclining chair boxers" they only talk a good fight but don't have the power to throw a solid punch. I'm more concerned with those who have the power to reap havoc apon me in the name of what they believe in. Racism is an attitude or a belief and I don't take issue with a man's beliefs as long as he doesn't violate me, he and I don't have a problem. I can peacefully disagree with anybody! I didn't bring up the slavery thing you did! Africans have enslave Africans, Europeans have enslaved Europeans and they've both enslaved eachother but that's besides the point. I was referring to a system of racial inequality that existed in America for over 300 years, that still has an effect on the way people(both blacks and whites) view and perceive things. I wasn't shocked by the number of blacks but by the number of whites who I've heard state that they believe some whites have a problem with the President because he's black! This wasn't Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton talking the people who were saying this were white. According to popular belief blacks are always crying racism but what about when whites start throwing racial "penality flags"? Could this lend creditabilty to what many blacks feel? ROTFLMAO

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  41.   Glock says:
    Posted: 10 Oct 09

    NOPLAYER, you're one of the few people who I can honestly say I can have a reasonable and respectful debate with on this website. We may disagree on many things but I like the fact you don't resort to a bunch of ignorant statements. For that, I thank you. Now to the deabte... Yes you did say "Not too many blacks holding protest rallies calling Bush racial names." But then you contradict yourself later saying some blacks came to a rally had "Texas Cracker" signs etc. What's the difference? Just because you don't see it in the news and other media doesn't mean it doesn't happen. The main stream press rally ever reports negative things about democrats of any significance. Hell Charlie Gibson from ABC didn't even know there was any controversy about Van Jones!! Now if you disagree with me about the main stream presses protection for democrats, I really don't know what to tell you. There is a blatant double standard. Now lets consider the fact that if every single black in America voted 100% for Obama and nobody else did....Obama would not be president. That means a hell of alot of white people voted for him. I predicted last year when it was clear that Obama was going to be the front runner that if he were elected, whites and republicans (and no I am NOT a republican) will be lambasted each and everytime they resist, disagree, fight, or denounce any proposal by Obama as "racists", "rednecks", "bigots", etc, etc,etc.., this has come true. ALL of the whites I know who don't like him as president, disalike him on pure political reason, not one of them dislike him because he's not white. They just don't like the road toward totalitarianism he's taking us. As far as your assertion about the "history" of white men who don't like black men in position of power....come on, are we going to do the "history" thing again? For peets sake, alot of white people put him in office!! So Obama gets criticized for his policies...can't it be just because people disagree with him?? Come on, you're acting as though everyone who disagrees with him is because of the "historical" ...... Well how about the people who voted for Obama SOLEY because he is black?? Steve Harvey even admitted it in his comedic concert recently. Is that in any way less of a racist vote? Come on, if someone white voted for McCain just because he's white he would have been labled a racist. There will always be racists of all races. There is nothing anyone can do about it. But the number of them is always dwindling. Although when I see Louis Farrakhan I have to wonder.. And please don't bring up the "300" years thing. Slavery was going on in Africa way way before the white man stepped foot there and it was NOT just an "indentured" servant type either.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  42.   NOPLAYER says:
    Posted: 09 Oct 09

    Glock - you're correct bad policies are bad policies regardless of who they come from. I didn't say, "I didn't see any signs at protest calling Bush racial names, I said I didn't see TOO MANY blacks holding protest rallies calling him racial names. Oh yeah many blacks dogged him out but I personally didn't see too many blacks carrying signs that were racially offensive, there was some name calling but none of the (now I gotta cut cha! LOL)kinds of names, if it was it was small scale because I didn't see it in the media. To carry signs depicting Obama as a monkey or showing him as an African tribesman with a bone in his nose is hitting below the belt, if you will. I attended a war protest in D.C. just before the war kicked off and a group of black guys were carrying signs showing Bush as Klansmen and a few others signs calling him a Texas Cracker. A larger group black attendees told the smaller group that, they didn't want those kinds of depictions at the rally because it took away from the real goal of trying to stop a war and they had two options: put away those signs or leave the rally and the smaller group complied. Strenght does come in numbers! Could a reason some whites at times are unfairly called racist when they critize President Obama due to the historical track record of many white always opposing blackmen in various leadership positions. This problem is not just a problem of the past but a problem that exist even today in many arenas of American life. One of the draw backs to living in a country where racism had a strong hold for over 300 years is the tendency for many people to believe, " as it was. so it is", and why reinvent the wheel arguing the obvious (so they think)! That's not a correct way of thinking but we would be foolish to think less than 50 years of gradual racial progress will alter a condition that existed for over 300 years overnight. Man it wont happen as fast as we'd like but I think it will get better as time goes on. This craziness is like athlete's feet, there's no vaccine against it, only a treatment and preventive measures.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  43.   Glock says:
    Posted: 07 Oct 09

    NOPLAYER, you didn't see any signs calling Bush racial names or any names at all? Really? Are you serious?? Not only that but he was hung in effigy. I can't believe you never saw that! Wow! I totally agree that other presidents have screwed things up in the past. I will be the first person to tell you I have not agreed with to many presidents on anything- including Bush (couldn't stand him either) But Obama is going down the EXACT sme road as the ones in the past- only he's on steriods. "Hope and Change" has got us the same thing as the past, just a different president. The problem I have with Obama AND the other presidents is none of them follow the constitution! None of them. The things Obama has criticized Bush for are the same problems that he is making worse...alot worse. But of course when whites criticize Obama for it, it's because "we're racist". LOL It's much easier to lable someone a racist than to debate the issue with an intelligent argument. To say "Well, Bush did it too" is not an argument.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  44.   homesteader says:
    Posted: 07 Oct 09

    P.S. ; The Congressmen and Senators write the Laws / The President can only Veto them . Yet he takes all the blame for what others have Created .

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  45.   NOPLAYER says:
    Posted: 06 Oct 09

    @ Glock - One of the good things about the U.S. is the freedom to criticize elected officials and their policies. I agree, if you're going to disagree with someone, you should be able to back up your position and not resort to labling people because they don't see things as you do. As a BM I have no problem with anybody critcizing the President, in truth you have a responsibility as a citizen to criticize policies that you feel don't represent the best interest of the country as a whole. I know what it's like to have people brand you because you criticize the President. I've been called a cry baby, been told to go back to Africa, and labled un-patriotic for no other reason than my speaking against the policies of President Bush. Many blacks didn't agree with the policies of President Bush but I didn't see too many blacks holding protest rallies across the country calling him racial names. Glock, I think most people defend President Obama more, not only because he is "black" but because they've watched those who've came before him make a mess of things, one president after another. Yes, they've done some good and have made decisions that have benefitted the country but they also made decisions that have negatively impacted the country and it's citizens. Is it wrong for those who voted for him to be wiliing to give him a chance, look at those we gave a chance before him and what condition did they leave the country in? Man, the only thing I take issue with, are those who act as if his 10 months in office has screwed up the country, these problems were there prior to him taking office. Trust me, the same way he was elected into office on the promise of making much needed change, he'll be removed from office if he fails to deliver on that promise. That's what makes America America, the people can put you into office and if you mess up they can fire your ass and send you home! Na na na na! Na na na na! Hey hey hey! Good Bye!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  46.   fixitright says:
    Posted: 05 Oct 09

    Babies are born into this world innocent without a care in the world.Polluted parents come along and turn a child's mind upside down.Adults are the major problem why our kids play in groups and encounter peer pressure.When babies become kids and teens they asked questions."Whats wrong with me or why i'm so diifferent?" If you notice babies and kids can play together all day but if one of those parents point out why they shouldn't play together.That's another story!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  47.   Glock says:
    Posted: 04 Oct 09

    Thanks for the compliment Smiletellsit, however I have something to say regarding the rest of your statement. As far as white men coming to this site for dark "white" women, there are many black men that are here looking for black women as well...so it's not just white men... As far as the president is concerned, I will agree that his being there is prophetic. However I don't mean that in a positive sense. Yes things will change, and have done so tremendously in the past 10 months. None of it good. In this country, we are used to being able to, and often do, criticize the President. However, now when you criticize the president, you are labled a "right wing extremist", a "racist", and generally someone who just can't accept the fact that we have a "black" president. As a white man, I certainly am used to being called a racist or whites being referred to as racist. But it certainly doesn't hold the accusers in a positive light since they spit the racist term out of their mouths so fast that in fact it tells more about them than it does the accused. I have found that most people who defend Obama, defend him more because he is "black" than in any substantive Constitutional arguments. Those same people are so quick to accuse others of being racist if they disagree with Obama. That is neither an intelligent or logical reason.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  48.   Glock says:
    Posted: 04 Oct 09

    Ahh... Homesteader, I realize neither David or Goliath spoke english.....which was exactly my point if you would have read my statement. I was not referring to the English text (which says "thou shall not kill") but rather the original text which was written (either in aramaic or hebrew) which spoke about shedding INNOCENT blood. Goliath was not innocent and stood against God.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  49. Posted: 30 Sep 09

    Ooops, forgot... That's why you should talk to your kids as frankly and honestly as their age and experience will allow. IMHO of course.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  50. Posted: 30 Sep 09

    The pic is disturbing from one point of view but on the other hand (cause I love mixed metaphors too) even as toddlers you have to be pretty comfortable to sit on the pot across from someone. As for the topic, my opinion is share with your children in an age and/or experience appropriate format. For example, as a general rule I wouldn't discuss the details of lynching with a child in the primary grades - unless they were exposed to it and now needed the information to set the topic straight in their mind. Basically I would share it is murder, it is bad, it used to happen a lot but is rarer now though it still happens, it is very often racially motivated and needs to be stopped. At the same time I also would not let a child enter middle school or junior high without a solid basis of knowledge. It's incredibly naive and a bit embarrassing but things were a lot different in the 70's and 80's so maybe it isn't so rare. As I grew up my parent's scrimped, scrounged, finagled and hustled to get us to the suburbs before I started school and suceeded. It almost seems silly, since Cleveland was incredibly segregated at the time, with the exception of some of our eastside neighborhoods and suburbs. Be that as it may, we moved and I was raised to believe in equal rights, the unique and priceless nature of each individual,...(etc.). We've all heard it before right? Now the neighborhood being 99.99% white and a boys lack of interest in the news coupled with lot's of American history about the civil war and civil rights movement led me to believe that we had dealt with all of the racial issues and life was cool in that regard. My only evidence though was what my family told me, school taught me and the single black family in the neighborhood was nice, accepted and well regarded by all appearances. Then the late 80's arrived and I'm in high school taking classes with some of those "activist" teachers you hear about and man we're they spreading around some stuff around that I didn't like hearing about the US. It made me angry. But not nearly as angry as I was to become when, after a little more life experience - meeting people, seeing and hearing racist b.s., reading, etc., I found they were right and I had largely been sold a bill of goods. Sad huh? Basically fair-minded parents (perhaps a little fearful about a subculture that was unknown to them in a social setting?) that could have taught us to expect to see and hear these people and encouraged us to stand up and say your wrong instead of being shocked and mute didn't. I still shake my head when I think about it. And! As wonderful as we have done in trying to address this issue and all of the vestiges it has left us with (including the achievements of Pres. Obama) we still have not even begun to approach what I would have sworn up and down was true, as a child, in the 70's.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment