Rhode Island Girl Violence - A Deceptive and Despicable Act of Young Violence and Evil.

If this was me a couple years ago, I would fantasize about forcing them into a couple of bags with their heads sticking out, and after securely tying it so they wouldn't fall out, hang them over the Gand Canyon until they were pleading for mercy as punishment. As of now, I would tie them to chairs and let the victim exact whatever punishment that she thinks they deserve, aside from killing them.

When we are born, we are 100% animal.... As we age, we aspire to the more devine, more heavenly...

I think it's the opposite. We are born innocent, and become bigotted and perverted overtime. Nowadays kids seem to become bigotted younger and younger.

I don't know if you remember your childhood much, but in mine, it took about 30 seconds for a (kid) stranger to become my new best friend.

Thats right... in that first 10 seconds, if they bit you, they prolly werent your friend (fetishes aside...)

Children act, then get yelled at for not thinking first... Animals act, and if the act didnt get them killed, they would act on the next impulse, and if that didnt get them killed, etc...


As we get older, we should be wanting things that our higher intelligence grants us, easy old age, our children to be able to take care of themselves, better self discpline, the list is long and varied...

I'm not sure kids are any more bigoted than they were ten, twenty, a hundred years ago. Kids are both mean and nice just like their parents and peers.

Wendaline wrote: I'm not sure kids are any more bigoted than they were ten, twenty, a hundred years ago. Kids are both mean and nice just like their parents and peers.

In other words, I think what Wendaline is trying to say is that we should not define or unfairly discriminate against people due to their age - we should not be "ageist".

Rather, we should understand that each person, regardless of age, has a specific, determining character.

So:
Nice kids.
Nice adults.
Mean kids.
Mean adults.


And everyone in between

Also, let me remind you that we shall not unfairly discriminate based on age - according to our Jedi Beliefs.

"Jedi believe...In working towards a culture that is relatively free of discrimination on the basis of gender, race, sexual orientation, national origin, degree of ability, age, etc."



(It's good to back up opinions with strong supporting factors.)

I think you are confusing making an observation and discrimination...

"black people are balck" = observation
"black people are over-represented in the prison population" = observation
"We don't hire people who are black" = discrimination

Jestor say he has observed older people are more enlightened. I say I have observed older people are more bigoted. Both observations are probably true.

I'm not sure kids are any more bigoted than they were ten, twenty, a hundred years ago.

I can tell you 20 years ago little girls were NOT concerned about waxing, shoes or handbags.

ren wrote: I can tell you 20 years ago little girls were NOT concerned about waxing, shoes or handbags.

I very much disagree. They might not have been concerned with waxing but they were definitely concerned with shoes and handbags. I can speak from experience. Playing with Mom's and Grandma's shoes and handbags was a highlight of childhood. Purses brought to school were shared and admired. Anyways, just because the objects may change doesn't mean the attitudes do. Today it's waxing and purses. A hundred years ago it was paper dolls and marbles. "Look I've got a cats eye, nananananana!" If one kids doesn't have any paperdolls do you think the other little girls will share and be oh so super nice? Or will they ignore her until she gets something they can admire too? Kids haven't changed too much. As we get older we just think they do. "Gosh, look at the kids today." *headshake*

Wendaline wrote:

ren wrote: I can tell you 20 years ago little girls were NOT concerned about waxing, shoes or handbags.

I very much disagree. They might not have been concerned with waxing but they were definitely concerned with shoes and handbags. I can speak from experience. Playing with Mom's and Grandma's shoes and handbags was a highlight of childhood. Purses brought to school were shared and admired. Anyways, just because the objects may change doesn't mean the attitudes do. Today it's waxing and purses. A hundred years ago it was paper dolls and marbles. "Look I've got a cats eye, nananananana!" If one kids doesn't have any paperdolls do you think the other little girls will share and be oh so super nice? Or will they ignore her until she gets something they can admire too? Kids haven't changed too much. As we get older we just think they do. "Gosh, look at the kids today." *headshake*

This is probably one of the smartest things I've read today.

ren wrote: I think you are confusing making an observation and discrimination...

"black people are balck" = observation
"black people are over-represented in the prison population" = observation
"We don't hire people who are black" = discrimination

Jestor say he has observed older people are more enlightened. I say I have observed older people are more bigoted. Both observations are probably true.

This is true. I agree with you that not everything related to race is necessarily racist. You can make observations, targeting a specific race, and still not be racist.


What I meant was that, in response to Jestor and you, People shouldn't define a person based on a discriminatory AND deragatory factor. For example "all black are inferior to whites". That is discriminatory AND deragatory because it both TARGETS a specific race and puts them DOWN.

In this case, "kids are ALL innocent"...."adults are ALL enlightened "...."adults are ALL bigoted" are ageist statements, in my opinion, because they do target a specific race AND possibly show them in a negative light, based on a person's certain perspective.