Soapbox time…sorry...off topic not about basketball or Purdue. Mental toughness only…

[proudopete]

I am conservative., I always have been. This last election is the first that I didn't vote GOP. The difference I suppose is I turned off the propaganda and went outside and sought out those who thought differently than myself to find out the truth.

I suppose if you choose to watch stations that purposefully seek out soft kids to use as an example, you are going to hear what you want to hear. I would imagine if the same was done in 1962, then people would have said those kids were soft as well. All kids are confused at that age. It's a hard transition, even more so now than when you came of age. I am really not sure how that, my main point, is so hard to agree with?

I am not sure if you don't believe blacks are still being discriminated against in an institutional sense or if you just think they should suck it up and shut up? Nobody is trying to erase history, they are trying to remove items that support the unequal institutionallized and demoralizing discrimination that they still face today. Kids being raised to look up to those who become traitors to their country, whether it be for slavery or not, is worse than a kid whining about things being hard to me. Blacks still have less access to equal educational opportunities and employment opportunities, today, in 2017. Why do you care so much about them airing their grievances? Do they not have the right? Is it soft to want science to be taught to your children? Is it soft to want your kids to go out in public without having to worry about being shot due to another's preconceived fear?

I find it odd that people want to stand up and support the rebellion as if it was pulled off by Americans. They weren't and they even said as much, they were traitors who left an indelible stain on our history. We will always teach kids about this time. But we don't have to literally put the aggressors on a petistal and romanticize their actions. You don't see these statues in the north, they exist only in the same region that brought us slavery and Jim Crow laws. There is a correlation there and it doesn't have anything to do with heritage. Why is it an issue for those folks to stand up and demand change? That's not soft, they aren't simply offended, they want equality, is that too much to ask?

 

[tjreese]

I hate to lump a whole generation of people into a "they're mentally soft"classification. That line of thinking is mentally soft if you ask me. I graduated high school in 81, my kids 2011 and 2014. Talking to my kids buds, and thinking about the derelicts I graduated with, I can tell you with my unprofessional opinion that these kids are much more intelligent than high school grads of my time. Plus, I love these kids because they, again my unprofessional I'm not gonna link you an article or vid opinion is, are much more empathetic to the plight of others. They don't weasel to the slippery slope argument, the I'm gonna piggyback a hypothetical boogeyman to try to impede a progressive idea. Trust me, I'm old and therefore I possess wisdom, total hogwash! I'm 55 and I firmly believe that millennials will move this country forward, not backward like some old timers would like. Why am I talking about this on the basketball board again?

because I thought I would take a break from trying to teach a bit about some zone problems.
Can't speak to you or your personal children and your personal experience, but I can't recall a time so many were offended by words. Perhaps you do? When was it since THAT is how this got started.

 

[tjreese]

I am not sure if you don't believe blacks are still being discriminated against in an institutional sense or if you just think they should suck it up and shut up? Nobody is trying to erase history, they are trying to remove items that support the unequal institutionallized and demoralizing discrimination that they still face today. Kids being raised to look up to those who become traitors to their country, whether it be for slavery or not, is worse than a kid whining about things being hard to me. Blacks still have less access to equal educational opportunities and employment opportunities, today, in 2017. Why do you care so much about them airing their grievances? Do they not have the right? Is it soft to want science to be taught to your children? Is it soft to want your kids to go out in public without having to worry about being shot due to another's preconceived fear?

I find it odd that people want to stand up and support the rebellion as if it was pulled off by Americans. They weren't and they even said as much, they were traitors who left an indelible stain on our history. We will always teach kids about this time. But we don't have to literally put the aggressors on a petistal and romanticize their actions. You don't see these statues in the north, they exist only in the same region that brought us slavery and Jim Crow laws. There is a correlation there and it doesn't have anything to do with heritage. Why is it an issue for those folks to stand up and demand change? That's not soft, they aren't simply offended, they want equality, is that too much to ask?

Slavery is wrong even though it was a standard practice for many years across the world and as recently as half the timeline back to Antietam... in Germany. I have no issue speaking out against slavery. Unbeknownst to many , my deceased brother-in-law put it into the public sector contracts in Ohio to establish a MLK day and few knew at the time. The problem is people seem to want to tie the Civil War to slavery and there are several reasons why that shouldn't be an automatic opinion. Again, I can't recall so many people triggered by words and objects that just now are offensive that perhaps are not well founded on actual events? You want to call the confederates "traitors"...that is okay because THAT is what brought many from the North into a war that few wanted in the north. Course the many in the south saw it like the founding fathers with England a hundred years earlier. Lee himself asked by Lincoln to head the army felt state rights more important. I think a person can reasonably agree and disagree with what may have been in play in the civil war, but to automatically assume that an object or flag symbolizes slavery is just wrong...I mean the North had people that wanted slavery fighting for the north. How did this get so misconstrued...so recently?

 

[PUBV]

Slavery is wrong even though it was a standard practice for many years across the world and as recently as half the timeline back to Antietam... in Germany. I have no issue speaking out against slavery. Unbeknownst to many , my deceased brother-in-law put it into the public sector contracts in Ohio to establish a MLK day and few knew at the time. The problem is people seem to want to tie the Civil War to slavery and there are several reasons why that shouldn't be an automatic opinion. Again, I can't recall so many people triggered by words and objects that just now are offensive that perhaps are not well founded on actual events? You want to call the confederates "traitors"...that is okay because THAT is what brought many from the North into a war that few wanted in the north. Course the many in the south saw it like the founding fathers with England a hundred years earlier. Lee himself asked by Lincoln to head the army felt state rights more important. I think a person can reasonably agree and disagree with what may have been in play in the civil war, but to automatically assume that an object or flag symbolizes slavery is just wrong...I mean the North had people that wanted slavery fighting for the north. How did this get so misconstrued...so recently?

I guess it probably made many a noble Southern gentleman feel better about himself to say we fight for states rights as opposed to we fight for the control of our economy which flourishes only when we are allowed to deny other human beings their rights and own them like property.

 

[PUBV]

because I thought I would take a break from trying to teach a bit about some zone problems.
Can't speak to you or your personal children and your personal experience, but I can't recall a time so many were offended by words. Perhaps you do? When was it since THAT is how this got started.

I apologize, I thought you stated you didn't want this to get political, but then mentioned conservatives, tirading liberal sibling, Nancy Pelosi (I hear she favors a smattering of zone & full court pressure), etc. Again, yes times they are a changing. Are kids these days more apt to speak up against what they fill is wrong, I think they are. I also feel they are smarter and more empathetic to others. I'm alarmed that people seem to have more empathy for flags and statues as opposed to their fellow human beings. Heck, I remember growing up watching the Honeymooners with my family, chuckling with my pop & brother when Ralph would threaten to bust Alice in the chops if she got outta line. You know who didn't really appreciate that show, my Mom. Now I wish I was mentally soft enough to say, hey, why don't we watch something else?

 

[tjreese]

I guess it probably made many a noble Southern gentleman feel better about himself to say we fight for states rights as opposed to we fight for the control of our economy which flourishes only when we are allowed to deny other human beings their rights and own them like property.

No question THAT was an element for some and some probably thought of that as overreach due to the centuries before. I will not deny that the financial aspects were a consideration for "some", but most southerners didn't have slaves and so it wasn't for them. Also, the north did have slaves and they still fought for the north. Lincoln himself went to war to ONLY hold the country together. He was against slavery, but not to the point that it was a focus. John Adams (and his wife's influence) were instrumental in starting the dialog of ending what had been practiced for centuries. Don't pretend the war was a war on slavery. The north reluctantly went to war when fired upon. Lincoln only enacted the emancipation Proclamation after Antietam and all those lives lost in that battle...in the cornfields and in the sunken road...and to build the union forces with previous slaves.

Some fit your mold...many others don't. Are you aware Stonewall paid for the education of a black school from his war pay? My point...it is a LOT more complicated than slavery and people not wanting slavery fought for both sides as well as people wanting slavery fighting for both side.

 

[tjreese]

I apologize, I thought you stated you didn't want this to get political, but then mentioned conservatives, tirading liberal sibling, Nancy Pelosi (I hear she favors a smattering of zone & full court pressure), etc. Again, yes times they are a changing. Are kids these days more apt to speak up against what they fill is wrong, I think they are. I also feel they are smarter and more empathetic to others. I'm alarmed that people seem to have more empathy for flags and statues as opposed to their fellow human beings. Heck, I remember growing up watching the Honeymooners with my family, chuckling with my pop & brother when Ralph would threaten to bust Alice in the chops if she got outta line. You know who didn't really appreciate that show, my Mom. Now I wish I was mentally soft enough to say, hey, why don't we watch something else?

Well, the title said it was off topic and not basketball and you found it and wondered why it was on a basketball forum, whereas I wondered why you read it. The topic was not political but as it got into "empathy today" as an explanation for those melting by words I couldn't help but wonder why Pelosi only NOW has been offended. It wasn't that she was Lib it was that after her decades being aroung the figures...why did she just now get offended? You would wonder the same thing if a conservative was around statues for decades and just now got offended. You see...this has NOTHING to do with the overt impressions by those offended by words, flags or figures, but all to do with the lefts politics for the next election. None of this all of a sudden went from not being noticed and then where it is today by accident...and so I wonder how many are soft and how many are just pretending as far as destroying property like the brown shirts in 1938. I mean you do see a very similar approach don't you? Shut down freedom of speech with the reason that "words" offend and nobody has a right to be offended is the approach and some buy it.

 

[PUBV]

No question THAT was an element for some and some probably thought of that as overreach due to the centuries before. I will not deny that the financial aspects were a consideration for "some", but most southerners didn't have slaves and so it wasn't for them. Also, the north did have slaves and they still fought for the north. Lincoln himself went to war to ONLY hold the country together. He was against slavery, but not to the point that it was a focus. John Adams (and his wife's influence) were instrumental in starting the dialog of ending what had been practiced for centuries. Don't pretend the war was a war on slavery. The north reluctantly went to war when fired upon. Lincoln only enacted the emancipation Proclamation after Antietam and all those lives lost in that battle...in the cornfields and in the sunken road...and to build the union forces with previous slaves.

Some fit your mold...many others don't. Are you aware Stonewall paid for the education of a black school from his war pay? My point...it is a LOT more complicated than slavery and people not wanting slavery fought for both sides as well as people wanting slavery fighting for both side.

Some in the north and south opposed the war, of course. The next time there is a war with 100% support from both sides will be the 1st. Did some in the north still own slaves, yes. Had all the northern states either abolished slavery or halted its expansion by the early 1800s? Wasn't slave trade determined illegal before the civil war in the north, but still practiced in the South? Didn't Lincoln proclaim in the 1850s that a house divided between slave and non slave states could not survive. Wasn't the halting of the expansion of slavery part of the republican platform in 1860? I know the compromise of 1850 & the Kansas Nebraska act confused matters, but the south could see the writing on the wall, if more non slave states were admitted to the union, more abolitionists win congressional seats, buh bye slavery. Not everyone owned slaves in the south, but they gave those that did the power. Probably too mentally tough to speak out. You act like the move against slavery did not occur until after the battle of Antietam. What would you list as your reasons the civil war was fought? Which states rights do you think the south cherished the most that they were willing to go to war?
Are you aware stonewall Jackson considered slavery the will of God?

 

[PUBV]

Well, the title said it was off topic and not basketball and you found it and wondered why it was on a basketball forum, whereas I wondered why you read it. The topic was not political but as it got into "empathy today" as an explanation for those melting by words I couldn't help but wonder why Pelosi only NOW has been offended. It wasn't that she was Lib it was that after her decades being aroung the figures...why did she just now get offended? You would wonder the same thing if a conservative was around statues for decades and just now got offended. You see...this has NOTHING to do with the overt impressions by those offended by words, flags or figures, but all to do with the lefts politics for the next election. None of this all of a sudden went from not being noticed and then where it is today by accident...and so I wonder how many are soft and how many are just pretending as far as destroying property like the brown shirts in 1938. I mean you do see a very similar approach don't you? Shut down freedom of speech with the reason that "words" offend and nobody has a right to be offended is the approach and some buy it.

Same as some buy into it's all about politics when some find there voice to protest. You seem to have no problem shutting down these people's freedom of speech. Where the white supremacists protesting the removal of these statues because they honor the men, or they honor the idea of white supremacy?

 

[proudopete]

Slavery is wrong even though it was a standard practice for many years across the world and as recently as half the timeline back to Antietam... in Germany. I have no issue speaking out against slavery. Unbeknownst to many , my deceased brother-in-law put it into the public sector contracts in Ohio to establish a MLK day and few knew at the time. The problem is people seem to want to tie the Civil War to slavery and there are several reasons why that shouldn't be an automatic opinion. Again, I can't recall so many people triggered by words and objects that just now are offensive that perhaps are not well founded on actual events? You want to call the confederates "traitors"...that is okay because THAT is what brought many from the North into a war that few wanted in the north. Course the many in the south saw it like the founding fathers with England a hundred years earlier. Lee himself asked by Lincoln to head the army felt state rights more important. I think a person can reasonably agree and disagree with what may have been in play in the civil war, but to automatically assume that an object or flag symbolizes slavery is just wrong...I mean the North had people that wanted slavery fighting for the north. How did this get so misconstrued...so recently?

Well, number one. Many of the states filed causes of secession and each one that did, mentioned slavery and the abolitionist views of Lincoln as cause. Perhaps you just go against the widely held views here just as you do on climate, but their own words surely hold some eight with you.
Number two. No matter what the confederates felt at the time, their actions were the very definition of what the constitution regards as treason.
Number three. These issues have always existed, perhaps you didn't hear about them because of your locality or perhaps the internet had made it more visible thus promoting more awareness and more voices? But to address them now has zero to do with why they haven't been addressed before and everything to do with changing wrong, equal justice, rule of law. Now if you're okay with the redrawing of districts to gain a political advantage, the open intimidation and in some instances the physical abuse by those with power to silence groups of people, the existence of laws written in such a way as to be vague yet very clearly directed at certain groups, the lack of proper education that leads to less opportunity, etc, etc, etc, (I could write many more), then don't support the cause. But to label an entire group of people is probably part of the problem we have in communication amongst ourselves today.
It's odd to me that we live in a time where a differing opinion draws such ire. We immediately label people, democrat, republican, soft, racist, snowflake, nazi. There are many good causes that during another time, I think many people would wholeheartedly agree with, yet when we tag it with a label, they immediately feel as if they need to choose a side. "I can't care about the statues being removed because that's a liberal thing." It's ridiculous that an entire message can be ignored or silenced simply by targeting ones rhetoric to political groups and loyalty to a party.

I never voted for Obama, but I am not going to act as if what he did for the country in bringing us out of a serious economic issue didn't happen. I don't agree with all he did, but what he did do, the things he did that were good, I am not going to try and deny. Perhaps he did divide the country, or perhaps it is the folks who say the press all lies, all Muslims are terrorists, all refugees are terrorists, all immigrants are stealing jobs and committing crimes, and all liberal policies are bad and soft??? I don't know, but perhaps we can let the kids who are soft be soft and look at the kids who aren't and recognize the good things they are doing and at a much earlier age than our generation did? Once again, every generation was called something negative by the older generation when they were transitioning from teen to adult, every single one. It's a tough time, no matter when you were born.

I hope you have a great rest of your day. I have said my piece and really prefer to leave the politics aside. But you keep parroting political talking points such as erasing history, and it really seems you are choosing party over common everyday, easily researched, long held, scientifically supported beliefs.

 

[tjreese]

Some in the north and south opposed the war, of course. The next time there is a war with 100% support from both sides will be the 1st. Did some in the north still own slaves, yes. Had all the northern states either abolished slavery or halted its expansion by the early 1800s? Wasn't slave trade determined illegal before the civil war in the north, but still practiced in the South? Didn't Lincoln proclaim in the 1850s that a house divided between slave and non slave states could not survive. Wasn't the halting of the expansion of slavery part of the republican platform in 1860? I know the compromise of 1850 & the Kansas Nebraska act confused matters, but the south could see the writing on the wall, if more non slave states were admitted to the union, more abolitionists win congressional seats, buh bye slavery. Not everyone owned slaves in the south, but they gave those that did the power. Probably too mentally tough to speak out. You act like the move against slavery did not occur until after the battle of Antietam. What would you list as your reasons the civil war was fought? Which states rights do you think the south cherished the most that they were willing to go to war?
Are you aware stonewall Jackson considered slavery the will of God?

The "move" by Lincoln against slavery did not happen prior to Antietam. He needed a victory as the north was growing weary. Here are the points I attempted to make. Slavery was one of many issues on why peoplel went to war. As I said slave owners from the north fought the south. My attempted point is NOT to state a single reason for the war and paint the many families that sacrifice so much...complete families wiped out. Certainly in no instance would I condone slavery even though it was the norm throughout the world at the time with these 20th century eyes today. What I had hoped I might do was to give enough examples that we could clearly see there were many reasons why people went to war and slavery was certainly one, but not a defining one for others. My issue is NOT that an individual couldn't see a confederate battle flag and see slavery, but that another could see it overreach like the Founding Fathers years before or many other views. I think THAT gets left out and those that that believed it was over reach by the government obviously see something different in those objects. Who is to say who should have seen this or that from a historical perspective...and why NOW is it important? We should learn from history as much and accurately as possible. BTW, I'm aware of Stonewall's religious beliefs and his approach to war in line with them. I wrote somewhere about the world being Bowderized and think the term is worthy. I also think you might get a different view in explaining some of what we see now if you read The Language Police since few would have any idea and this guru on the history of education was shocked when asked to study biasing by Clinton as to what she found...much worse than she ever imagined. I also fear DIF (Differentuial Item Functioning) as an approach to testing. Anyway, this started out with a video I was sent that tried to logically explain "WHY" words and things shouldn't get people so riled adn then followed up with another video that most if not all the older people grew up with and gave credit to teh slave families in understanding this.

It is fine if you think the war was all about slavery...I'm not there. I do think The Language Police might create a view you haven't considered as it is an easy to read book that requires no previous background into educational topics. It does highlight a problem from an educational perspective in what we are seeing now as a result of wanting to Bowderize even more and more

Amazon product ASIN 0965496368

 

[tjreese]

Well, number one. Many of the states filed causes of secession and each one that did, mentioned slavery and the abolitionist views of Lincoln as cause. Perhaps you just go against the widely held views here just as you do on climate, but their own words surely hold some eight with you.
Number two. No matter what the confederates felt at the time, their actions were the very definition of what the constitution regards as treason.
Number three. These issues have always existed, perhaps you didn't hear about them because of your locality or perhaps the internet had made it more visible thus promoting more awareness and more voices? But to address them now has zero to do with why they haven't been addressed before and everything to do with changing wrong, equal justice, rule of law. Now if you're okay with the redrawing of districts to gain a political advantage, the open intimidation and in some instances the physical abuse by those with power to silence groups of people, the existence of laws written in such a way as to be vague yet very clearly directed at certain groups, the lack of proper education that leads to less opportunity, etc, etc, etc, (I could write many more), then don't support the cause. But to label an entire group of people is probably part of the problem we have in communication amongst ourselves today.
It's odd to me that we live in a time where a differing opinion draws such ire. We immediately label people, democrat, republican, soft, racist, snowflake, nazi. There are many good causes that during another time, I think many people would wholeheartedly agree with, yet when we tag it with a label, they immediately feel as if they need to choose a side. "I can't care about the statues being removed because that's a liberal thing." It's ridiculous that an entire message can be ignored or silenced simply by targeting ones rhetoric to political groups and loyalty to a party.

I never voted for Obama, but I am not going to act as if what he did for the country in bringing us out of a serious economic issue didn't happen. I don't agree with all he did, but what he did do, the things he did that were good, I am not going to try and deny. Perhaps he did divide the country, or perhaps it is the folks who say the press all lies, all Muslims are terrorists, all refugees are terrorists, all immigrants are stealing jobs and committing crimes, and all liberal policies are bad and soft??? I don't know, but perhaps we can let the kids who are soft be soft and look at the kids who aren't and recognize the good things they are doing and at a much earlier age than our generation did? Once again, every generation was called something negative by the older generation when they were transitioning from teen to adult, every single one. It's a tough time, no matter when you were born.

I hope you have a great rest of your day. I have said my piece and really prefer to leave the politics aside. But you keep parroting political talking points such as erasing history, and it really seems you are choosing party over common everyday, easily researched, long held, scientifically supported beliefs.

well, it shouldn't be political. That is why I thought the videos were not political and essentially discussing the power of the self to choose to be a victor rather than victim and then things went south. I thought it was a logical presentation that was amiss for many today. Then you took it to problems the youth face today such as jobs and such.

Now to your number one. I don't think the verbiage used was the same conversation that caused the south to rise. I don't know the "real" literacy rate at the time, but suspect the neighbor had more influence than any verbiage. You say "widely held views" but having discussed this issue with the lead guide at Gettysburg as a private guide he seemed to think it was more complicated as well...but hey he could be wrong. Here is a thought for you relative to words written. 60,000 various denominations of Christianity today all claiming to be bible based. How many go to a particular church because of its teachings and claim to be the pillar of truth? Do those that join that church know exactly the teachings? Even today some people will say it says that Jesus had brothers due to the use of brethren, but we know that was used for cousins as well since no word existed specifically for cousins. Hell, I wrote the covenants for a few houses and I can't even recall all I included...

Number two...I agree with you 100% and previously stated that. Treason was a valid accusation.

Number three...racism has existed for some time in one degree or another much more it seems than in the military. Another brother-in-law recants the times Red Auerbach pulled his team from the south with some of the treatment of the blacks on his team concerning hotel rooms and such and as I said another brother-in-law actually put MLK day on his own in MANY public sector contracts in Ohio and so yeah, I'm aware of racism...I just don't necessarily equate it with the Civil War like you. However, the destruction of public property and unprovoked violence in this scale is new...all starting from Michael Brown's shooting.

Now in the beginning the videos were about not letting "words" take power over you. When words do take power over you...I consider that mental softness...you apparently disagree and so another chasm exists. So, far nobody has stated the inaccuracy of the videos I posted relative to mental softness...nobody. Instead, we discussed everything except whether the videos were accurate or not, pulling one red herring down the lane after another. I thought the videos were harmless and a reminder of where we were in light of where we are today, but apparently that led to a whole host of topics outside of the videos. Now, I don't need to attempt to convince you or PUBV of anything..you two have your own understandings. Never did I think I would convince anyone of anything, but merely to address those items that grew from the videos in other posts. Once it got off the videos and the mental softness of those words for those afflicted, the three of us discussed things others may not care to read...even though I stated such in the title. Apparently the mental toughness in the title actually was a trigger word...and I still haven't got around to discussing some things with Mandeville or the various educational topics of interest.

 

[tjreese]

well, it shouldn't be political. That is why I thought the videos were not political and essentially discussing the power of the self to choose to be a victor rather than victim and then things went south. I thought it was a logical presentation that was amiss for many today. Then you took it to problems the youth face today such as jobs and such.

Now to your number one. I don't think the verbiage used was the same conversation that caused the south to rise. I don't know the "real" literacy rate at the time, but suspect the neighbor had more influence than any verbiage. You say "widely held views" but having discussed this issue with the lead guide at Gettysburg as a private guide he seemed to think it was more complicated as well...but hey he could be wrong. Here is a thought for you relative to words written. 60,000 various denominations of Christianity today all claiming to be bible based. How many go to a particular church because of its teachings and claim to be the pillar of truth? Do those that join that church know exactly the teachings? Even today some people will say it says that Jesus had brothers due to the use of brethren, but we know that was used for cousins as well since no word existed specifically for cousins. Hell, I wrote the covenants for a few houses and I can't even recall all I included...

Number two...I agree with you 100% and previously stated that. Treason was a valid accusation.

Number three...racism has existed for some time in one degree or another much more it seems than in the military. Another brother-in-law recants the times Red Auerbach pulled his team from the south with some of the treatment of the blacks on his team concerning hotel rooms and such and as I said another brother-in-law actually put MLK day on his own in MANY public sector contracts in Ohio and so yeah, I'm aware of racism...I just don't necessarily equate it with the Civil War like you. However, the destruction of public property and unprovoked violence in this scale is new...all starting from Michael Brown's shooting.

Now in the beginning the videos were about not letting "words" take power over you. When words do take power over you...I consider that mental softness...you apparently disagree and so another chasm exists. So, far nobody has stated the inaccuracy of the videos I posted relative to mental softness...nobody. Instead, we discussed everything except whether the videos were accurate or not, pulling one red herring down the lane after another. I thought the videos were harmless and a reminder of where we were in light of where we are today, but apparently that led to a whole host of topics outside of the videos. Now, I don't need to attempt to convince you or PUBV of anything..you two have your own understandings. Never did I think I would convince anyone of anything, but merely to address those items that grew from the videos in other posts. Once it got off the videos and the mental softness of those words for those afflicted, the three of us discussed things others may not care to read...even though I stated such in the title. Apparently the mental toughness in the title actually was a trigger word...and I still haven't got around to discussing some things with Mandeville or the various educational topics of interest.

I almost forgot a telling point of anecdotal evidence in where some view this country. For a few years I attended the MLK Doing the Dream.. dinner, fundraiser and listening to a guest speaker. I suggested Caleb would be a good one down the road as well. In two years (Ivy Tech) the speaker went from Wes Moore that was just really impressive to Lavar Burton (Kunta Kinte). Wes just impressed the hell out of me enough that I got two of his books and wrote him a letter in which he responded. Amazon product ASIN 0385528205 The next year it was Lavar Burton...and what a letdown after Wes Moore. You see it was celebration of MLK and as we all know his greatest quote was, " I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Instead, Lavar who had considered becoming a priest and during that process was asked to study the saints and find one that had the character he wanted to emulate. Lavar said he started studying the saints and soon noticed they were all white and dropped out of priesthood. 180 degrees from MLK on a MLK "Doing the Dream" celebration as he could not judge the content of their character, but instead the color of their skin! My mouth dropped...not so much that he said that or even said it in an event that he did, but that few if any noticed. I later recanted that and three other things that I have since forgotten to various heads of departments at Ivy Tech and they never caught it when it happened, but remembered him saying it when he did. I wonder how many were influenced by Wes and how many by Lavar...

 

[Mandeville LA]

I almost forgot a telling point of anecdotal evidence in where some view this country. For a few years I attended the MLK Doing the Dream.. dinner, fundraiser and listening to a guest speaker. I suggested Caleb would be a good one down the road as well. In two years (Ivy Tech) the speaker went from Wes Moore that was just really impressive to Lavar Burton (Kunta Kinte). Wes just impressed the hell out of me enough that I got two of his books and wrote him a letter in which he responded.

View embedded media

The next year it was Lavar Burton...and what a letdown after Wes Moore. You see it was celebration of MLK and as we all know his greatest quote was, " I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Instead, Lavar who had considered becoming a priest and during that process was asked to study the saints and find one that had the character he wanted to emulate. Lavar said he started studying the saints and soon noticed they were all white and dropped out of priesthood. 180 degrees from MLK on a MLK "Doing the Dream" celebration as he could not judge the content of their character, but instead the color of their skin! My mouth dropped...not so much that he said that or even said it in an event that he did, but that few if any noticed. I later recanted that and three other things that I have since forgotten to various heads of departments at Ivy Tech and they never caught it when it happened, but remembered him saying it when he did. I wonder how many were influenced by Wes and how many by Lavar...

I would love to jump into this topic but am sure I would get the thread deleated. I view and post as an unwind after work but I love to see the debate. BTW I know who is winning this one. I am out.

 

[BoilerAndy]

I apologize, I thought you stated you didn't want this to get political, but then mentioned conservatives, tirading liberal sibling, Nancy Pelosi (I hear she favors a smattering of zone & full court pressure), etc. Again, yes times they are a changing. Are kids these days more apt to speak up against what they fill is wrong, I think they are. I also feel they are smarter and more empathetic to others. I'm alarmed that people seem to have more empathy for flags and statues as opposed to their fellow human beings. Heck, I remember growing up watching the Honeymooners with my family, chuckling with my pop & brother when Ralph would threaten to bust Alice in the chops if she got outta line. You know who didn't really appreciate that show, my Mom. Now I wish I was mentally soft enough to say, hey, why don't we watch something else?

I'm curious. Do you think that violently shutting down a presentation that you disagree with on a college campus is an example of speaking up "against what they fill is wrong"?

And is declaring open season on cops an example of being "empathetic to others"?

I'm not making assumptions, which is why I'm asking. It's important in a discussion to make sure the definitions are consistent. I know people who would say "yes" to both of my questions. So I'm curious if you are one of them.

 

[PUBV]

well, it shouldn't be political. That is why I thought the videos were not political and essentially discussing the power of the self to choose to be a victor rather than victim and then things went south. I thought it was a logical presentation that was amiss for many today. Then you took it to problems the youth face today such as jobs and such.

Now to your number one. I don't think the verbiage used was the same conversation that caused the south to rise. I don't know the "real" literacy rate at the time, but suspect the neighbor had more influence than any verbiage. You say "widely held views" but having discussed this issue with the lead guide at Gettysburg as a private guide he seemed to think it was more complicated as well...but hey he could be wrong. Here is a thought for you relative to words written. 60,000 various denominations of Christianity today all claiming to be bible based. How many go to a particular church because of its teachings and claim to be the pillar of truth? Do those that join that church know exactly the teachings? Even today some people will say it says that Jesus had brothers due to the use of brethren, but we know that was used for cousins as well since no word existed specifically for cousins. Hell, I wrote the covenants for a few houses and I can't even recall all I included...

Number two...I agree with you 100% and previously stated that. Treason was a valid accusation.

Number three...racism has existed for some time in one degree or another much more it seems than in the military. Another brother-in-law recants the times Red Auerbach pulled his team from the south with some of the treatment of the blacks on his team concerning hotel rooms and such and as I said another brother-in-law actually put MLK day on his own in MANY public sector contracts in Ohio and so yeah, I'm aware of racism...I just don't necessarily equate it with the Civil War like you. However, the destruction of public property and unprovoked violence in this scale is new...all starting from Michael Brown's shooting.

Now in the beginning the videos were about not letting "words" take power over you. When words do take power over you...I consider that mental softness...you apparently disagree and so another chasm exists. So, far nobody has stated the inaccuracy of the videos I posted relative to mental softness...nobody. Instead, we discussed everything except whether the videos were accurate or not, pulling one red herring down the lane after another. I thought the videos were harmless and a reminder of where we were in light of where we are today, but apparently that led to a whole host of topics outside of the videos. Now, I don't need to attempt to convince you or PUBV of anything..you two have your own understandings. Never did I think I would convince anyone of anything, but merely to address those items that grew from the videos in other posts. Once it got off the videos and the mental softness of those words for those afflicted, the three of us discussed things others may not care to read...even though I stated such in the title. Apparently the mental toughness in the title actually was a trigger word...and I still haven't got around to discussing some things with Mandeville or the various educational topics of interest.

Well this has been interesting. I've probably spun this in the wrong direction, so I will check out. My main point being, just based on my own personal experience, I don't find millenials to be mentally soft. Maybe I've been "triggered," I don't know. I don't feel hurt, or mad, or outraged. In fact I nodded off while watching your 2nd vid! I don't know what kinda $$ that guy makes as a bullying expert, but its too much.One thing I did find interesting was the educators book on scrubbing things from textbooks based on far left and far right ideologies. That women would make a much better secretary of education than what we have now.

 

[PUBV]

I'm curious. Do you think that violently shutting down a presentation that you disagree with on a college campus is an example of speaking up "against what they fill is wrong"?

And is declaring open season on cops an example of being "empathetic to others"?

I'm not making assumptions, which is why I'm asking. It's important in a discussion to make sure the definitions are consistent. I know people who would say "yes" to both of my questions. So I'm curious if you are one of them.

Well, as I've stated above, I think I've had enough of this discussion. I guess I can tell you I'm not a violent person, 2 wrongs don't make a right, and my father was a police officer for 24 years before he retired after suffering a heart attack, and then subsequently dying several years later from a second heart attack. So, no I'm not a cop hater. Were you really just trying to make sure definitions are consistent? I apologize if you had some zinger argument you were going to spring after I answered those questions

 

[tjreese]

Well this has been interesting. I've probably spun this in the wrong direction, so I will check out. My main point being, just based on my own personal experience, I don't find millenials to be mentally soft. Maybe I've been "triggered," I don't know. I don't feel hurt, or mad, or outraged. In fact I nodded off while watching your 2nd vid! I don't know what kinda $$ that guy makes as a bullying expert, but its too much.One thing I did find interesting was the educators book on scrubbing things from textbooks based on far left and far right ideologies. That women would make a much better secretary of education than what we have now.

Here is a little background on Diane. She was asst. sec of education under Bennett for Bush. She was on the transition team to Clinton. Clinton wanted her to studying "biasing" in education and that led to her book. She has another book called Left-Back that is a very interesting read if you have interest in educational approaches over the years. It is around 530 pages I seem to recall... of intellectual heft...a tome of knowledge. IN that book you will see many retreads passed off as "new" educational approaches and a history of "education" going back to John Dewey and his 11??? visiting Prussia and determining that "social" change was the greatest benefit of education. I see much of society influenced by educational pedagogy as well as subject content and such. I spent too much of my life that I will never get back on educational subjects. Anyway, if you have an interest...those are two good books, but the language police is easy to understand for someone not particularly interested in educational topics as much as societal impact. A huge concern I have is the potential application of DIF...which has the power to fight against assimilation into the cutlure of this country. Amazon product ASIN 0684844176

 

[tjreese]

I am conservative., I always have been. This last election is the first that I didn't vote GOP. The difference I suppose is I turned off the propaganda and went outside and sought out those who thought differently than myself to find out the truth.

I suppose if you choose to watch stations that purposefully seek out soft kids to use as an example, you are going to hear what you want to hear. I would imagine if the same was done in 1962, then people would have said those kids were soft as well. All kids are confused at that age. It's a hard transition, even more so now than when you came of age. I am really not sure how that, my main point, is so hard to agree with?

...and WHERE do you not find propaganda? Rhetorical...we all know that answer...especially in light with proven propaganda from many outlets and teh realization that everyone writes from a perspective.

 

[tjreese]

I am right there with you. It's not political even if some will try to make it so. I grew up on the mean streets of Lafayette In (joke) but it was a different time. I played sports because I wanted to but my parents were not into it at all. I believe because I was doing everything I was doing was 100% on me it made me a harder and prepared my mental state that my success was going to be due to ME. Fast forward a few years and I spend half to three quarters of my free time running my kids all over the country, playing in tournaments, training, practice and buying the best equipment.

I am sure the reason I do this is beacuse I did not have anyone that would do it for me. Anyway before I get off track, I think you know where I am going with this.

I would consider both of my kids as mentally soft. It's a sign of the times to some degree. My kids like/love playing but they have not had to fight for anything.

It bothers me to no end. If you have any good reading material that might help me I would very much look into it.

Relative to your own children I don’t think there is any single particular thing you can do to grow mental toughness. In a team setting such as basketball you can help facilitate it (maybe) easier than facilitating it in your home…and even then as you know each child is different. Mental toughness is an ability to understand the situation as it is and to deal with it under the conditions you encounter. Navy Seals have to deal with mental toughness and I think we all can understand why Matt had the Seals work for a week with the Purdue team to alter the culture at Purdue. If mental toughness could not be improved…why bring in the seals? I know you are not suggesting it. Rapheal Davis dealt with jumping in water over his head…something that held him prisoner for some time. The team learned that they could fight through physical things they didn’t think were possible and to persevere. Anyway, I think collectively we have recognized that the “culture” has improved significantly. Biggie had enough mental toughness to deal in whatever manner he had to survive and sacrifice his wants. I saw that and wrote quite a few times on it relative to Biggie choosing Purdue and to make them a winner as opposed to going to a loaded team…where his role may not be as crucial.

In many areas of life it seems that whatever inherent situation is present, restraint through various forms of internal discipline to not lose sight of your goal is the difference in many lives. I think it is good for all of us to actually see others with many more obstacles than us effectively deal with hardship since there are always others fighting through the obstacles rather than just giving up. Part of what I like in a book I have mentioned at times (The Edge) has to do with mental toughness in various scenarios. Still, some children seem to adapt and others not so much…many times related to peer pressure and the direction of the leaders of that peer pressure. As you know the herd mentality can go in different directions. I know that every day in every way a choice is or many choices are presented to all of us and that is whether we choose to be a victor or a victim. All of us have battles we face and our ability to deal with them is crucial. Here is the reality for all of us…almost 100% of where we are in life is a function of choices we have made. Some were easy and others hard…some of us had many more hard ones…but there was always a choice. Some were what appeared to be good choices at the time, but later on were not. There is so much we cannot control, but dealing with it may be the salvation. I know none of this completely satisfies your question because I don’t think there is a single method to get there…I just know “whoa is me” won’t do it. Good luck since we all know how different our children are…and whether the spouse is on board to send a consistent signal as well.

As far as outliers...I think from a logical point of view "outliers" should be studied since by definition they don't fit the norm. However, a cursory review of the book leaves me wondering if the subjects were really outliers or just appeared so and I have so many books I want to finish and so little time it seems.

 

[Mandeville LA]

Relative to your own children I don’t think there is any single particular thing you can do to grow mental toughness. In a team setting such as basketball you can help facilitate it (maybe) easier than facilitating it in your home…and even then as you know each child is different. Mental toughness is an ability to understand the situation as it is and to deal with it under the conditions you encounter. Navy Seals have to deal with mental toughness and I think we all can understand why Matt had the Seals work for a week with the Purdue team to alter the culture at Purdue. If mental toughness could not be improved…why bring in the seals? I know you are not suggesting it. Rapheal Davis dealt with jumping in water over his head…something that held him prisoner for some time. The team learned that they could fight through physical things they didn’t think were possible and to persevere. Anyway, I think collectively we have recognized that the “culture” has improved significantly. Biggie had enough mental toughness to deal in whatever manner he had to survive and sacrifice his wants. I saw that and wrote quite a few times on it relative to Biggie choosing Purdue and to make them a winner as opposed to going to a loaded team…where his role may not be as crucial.

In many areas of life it seems that whatever inherent situation is present, restraint through various forms of internal discipline to not lose sight of your goal is the difference in many lives. I think it is good for all of us to actually see others with many more obstacles than us effectively deal with hardship since there are always others fighting through the obstacles rather than just giving up. Part of what I like in a book I have mentioned at times (The Edge) has to do with mental toughness in various scenarios. Still, some children seem to adapt and others not so much…many times related to peer pressure and the direction of the leaders of that peer pressure. As you know the herd mentality can go in different directions. I know that every day in every way a choice is or many choices are presented to all of us and that is whether we choose to be a victor or a victim. All of us have battles we face and our ability to deal with them is crucial. Here is the reality for all of us…almost 100% of where we are in life is a function of choices we have made. Some were easy and others hard…some of us had many more hard ones…but there was always a choice. Some were what appeared to be good choices at the time, but later on were not. There is so much we cannot control, but dealing with it may be the salvation. I know none of this completely satisfies your question because I don’t think there is a single method to get there…I just know “whoa is me” won’t do it. Good luck since we all know how different our children are…and whether the spouse is on board to send a consistent signal as well.

As far as outliers...I think from a logical point of view "outliers" should be studied since by definition they don't fit the norm. However, a cursory review of the book leaves me wondering if the subjects were really outliers or just appeared so and I have so many books I want to finish and so little time it seems.

It's been a while since last looking at the book Outliers. If I recall the term outliers has more to do with the tings that people don't think about or miss when trying to figure out how some end up excelling and others don't. The author does a good job of explaining that such things as birth month can play a huge role is success in athletics.

Of course, anyone with mutable children understand that they are all different in a lot of ways. To use my kids as an example, I don't think ether are soft or lack metal toughness. But when I look at their performance in the classroom, soccer fields, basketball and such I wish they were a little tougher. My daughter is a very positive kid that believes she is better than she actually is in everything she does. Quick example: took the family to play golf, once she realized she could not do what she thought she should be able to do (beat me, mom and her older brother) she became upset. She had only went with me to hit ball one other time. She does not practice very often and I think a little more mental toughness could take her where she wants to go.

Son just started 10th grade. I know that these are the years all kids have a lot to figure out and its not easy. He is the one, from an athletic standpoint, drives his mother and I crazy. His grads are fine even though he puts little time into his study's. This kid is crazy athletic and very skilled in soccer and basketball. He has always done great (made every top team that he has ever wanted to play for) but could be so much more. his problems are all metal. At times he seems to fade into la la land and we have never be able to put our finger on what the cause is. Afraid of failure? Lack of competitive drive? Does he not like to show other players up? The list goes on and on. I attribute his issue on mental toughness. I just can't figure out what to work on.

Anyway, I have been telling people for several years that I have learned more about people and what makes them tick by watching my kids grow up than I did in the 30+ years before they were around. I guess I just did not notice or did not care.

I will take a look at some of the reading material you suggested and keep searching for the answers. BTW this is not a big problem. My kids are and will be fine. I am just a "be the best that you can be" type person. Not the best, the best you can be.

 

[tjreese]

It's been a while since last looking at the book Outliers. If I recall the term outliers has more to do with the tings that people don't think about or miss when trying to figure out how some end up excelling and others don't. The author does a good job of explaining that such things as birth month can play a huge role is success in athletics.

Of course, anyone with mutable children understand that they are all different in a lot of ways. To use my kids as an example, I don't think ether are soft or lack metal toughness. But when I look at their performance in the classroom, soccer fields, basketball and such I wish they were a little tougher. My daughter is a very positive kid that believes she is better than she actually is in everything she does. Quick example: took the family to play golf, once she realized she could not do what she thought she should be able to do (beat me, mom and her older brother) she became upset. She had only went with me to hit ball one other time. She does not practice very often and I think a little more mental toughness could take her where she wants to go.

Son just started 10th grade. I know that these are the years all kids have a lot to figure out and its not easy. He is the one, from an athletic standpoint, drives his mother and I crazy. His grads are fine even though he puts little time into his study's. This kid is crazy athletic and very skilled in soccer and basketball. He has always done great (made every top team that he has ever wanted to play for) but could be so much more. his problems are all metal. At times he seems to fade into la la land and we have never be able to put our finger on what the cause is. Afraid of failure? Lack of competitive drive? Does he not like to show other players up? The list goes on and on. I attribute his issue on mental toughness. I just can't figure out what to work on.

Anyway, I have been telling people for several years that I have learned more about people and what makes them tick by watching my kids grow up than I did in the 30+ years before they were around. I guess I just did not notice or did not care.

I will take a look at some of the reading material you suggested and keep searching for the answers. BTW this is not a big problem. My kids are and will be fine. I am just a "be the best that you can be" type person. Not the best, the best you can be.

Very few every truly reach the best we can be. We all have virtues and vices with the ability to rationalize that which we want...we all want the easy way. My children run the spectrum as well and so we should all recognize that each has a different button to push. Sometimes it takes longer than we wish for the toughness to get instilled and many times it appears to just how comfortable a lifestyle that person has and the changes needed to get where they want vesus the effort. We are human. When I think of outliers...I again think of it statistically in that it is outside the general population of 3 sigma and so the idea of trying to understand that anomaly seems like a logical approach. Anytime you get into "social" statistics the correlation value (assuming we are talking a causal relationship) is usually less than flipping a coin and getting heads when you call it than the r**2 value for that model. Like you in learning from your children, I find more understanding when I know or see where in the spectrum a person may be relative to religion, educational background colored with pedagogical approahes in some respects, environmental experiences, work and how well can a person discern data since that many times is absorbed in a way that leads to a conclusion. Anyway, that book is good for an adult as well...just good reading. Take a few minutes and read on Howard Ferguson who compiled these stories and quotes as well as the reviews.

Amazon product ASIN 0940601044