DescentBB

We need more mothers like her. She happened to see her teenaged boy on the news rioting, even with his hoody covering his face, and decided to go out to give him a good smacking to straighten him out. Go for it mama!

But the question is, if the father had done the same thing on camera, would he have been charged with child abuse?

[youtube]VRlmCf1Kj2o[/youtube]

She should also be charged with child abuse. She is a bad parent.

vision wrote:She should also be charged with child abuse. She is a bad parent.

That's ridiculous and you should be ashamed of yourself.

"Father".....lol

[youtube]MDCxuAbN9AQ[/youtube]

she's like a hero down there. Made it onto half the Bay area talk shows yesterday. When the kid is that age, it isn't abuse. Sure, she could have been charged with assault, but really?? Just got back from the safe side of the Chesapeake Bay and saw plenty of her just passing near a TV from time to time.

then again, this is just plain funny:

vision wrote:She should also be charged with child abuse. She is a bad parent.

discipline is abuse now?

LOL.

Spidey wrote:"Father".....lol

Amen to that!

'If Obama had a son....' oh, I guess he won't be going there this time huh?

It is truly sad that her actions can be characterized as 'heroic'.

She definitely was doing her job, fulfilling her responsibility.
That what she did was extraordinary is a sign of the terrible mess we created.

in the face of the climate on the streets of Baltimore right now, it WAS heroic, Will. Context, context, context. Speaking of which, is there any context that you encounter when you don't feel the need to whip out that big ole Obama-hate-on?

vision wrote:She should also be charged with child abuse. She is a bad parent.

No, hit your children. I was never hit as a child and look how I turned out.

callmeslick wrote:in the face of the climate on the streets of Baltimore right now, it WAS heroic, Will. Context, context, context. Speaking of which, is there any context that you encounter when you don't feel the need to whip out that big ole Obama-hate-on?

In the context of that climate you cite I'm sure not going to shy away from pointing the spotlight at the biggest player profiting from his role that perpetuates and exploits those who suffer most from those conditions.

You can characterize it anyway you want hoping to diminish the impact I may have but you won't make me afraid to speak out about the role he has in the problem. Your perspective and motives are so questionable as to cause that tactic to have absolutely no weight or bearing.

By the way, she wasn't in much danger from the crowd for her actions, as we all clearly saw, if that is what you intended to imply.
The 'heroic' aspect people are citing is in her going against the narrative, the accepted and expected allegiance to it.
Much in the same way you occasionally hear about young minorities, especially black children, who get targeted for 'acting white' and the details of the story reveal that 'acting white' is getting good grades...obeying teachers commands....etc. etc.

Cool. Now assault is considered good parenting. You guys are all ★■◆●ing idiots. You wonder why the world looks this way? Wars? Violence? You celebrate it. Enjoy your world where "good parenting" involves swinging your arms and hitting your children.

Yes, please let's have "more mothers like her." Morons.

Ferno wrote:

vision wrote:She should also be charged with child abuse. She is a bad parent.

discipline is abuse now?

LOL.

Abuse. Sometimes teenaged males NEED a little healthy slapping around just to keep them in line. I don't think she even left a mark on his covered face. All she was doing was slapping him around and asserting her authority, since he has no father present to do it fo her. How else is a mother going to discipline a teenaged male child? Obviously yelling at him ain't going to cut it since she'd already told him to NOT go to the riots (said in a later interview). IMHO, she should be given a medal for even giving a damn.

But to allude to vision's point, IF this kid DID have a father and HE was shown on camera slapping his kid around for the same reason, would he be arrested for child abuse? Is there a double standard?

vision wrote:Cool. Now assault is considered good parenting. You guys are all ★■◆●ing idiots. You wonder why the world looks this way? Wars? Violence? You celebrate it. Enjoy your world where "good parenting" involves swinging your arms and hitting your children.

Yes, please let's have "more mothers like her." Morons.

Yes, because smacking your teenaged son upside the head once or twice in order to prevent him from doing something that could easily get him arrested/killed is totally "assault."

vision wrote:Cool. Now assault is considered good parenting. You guys are all **** idiots. You wonder why the world looks this way? Wars? Violence? You celebrate it. Enjoy your world where "good parenting" involves swinging your arms and hitting your children.

Yes, please let's have "more mothers like her." Morons.

I'm sorry, but context matters. The kid was throwing bricks at cops and trying to get his riot on! For all I know she could be the worlds worst parent off camera, but what that video captured was not bad parenting.

Who's gonna charge her with child abuse? The cops her masked kid is throwing bricks at?

vision wrote:Cool. Now assault is considered good parenting. You guys are all ★■◆●ing idiots. You wonder why the world looks this way? Wars? Violence? You celebrate it. Enjoy your world where "good parenting" involves swinging your arms and hitting your children.

Yes, please let's have "more mothers like her." Morons.

The only thing you know about child abuse is what you read from a book. As far as I'm concerned; you have zero right to judge that parent on anything.

not to be harsh, but the above is correct. No one who hasn't parented can know what is proper. It isn't like that kid was a little tyke, he was what, 16 years old. I sort of view it as Mom's way of saying, "you weren't raised this way, and you aren't going to start now....". In that meme pic I posted, you can see in the kid's eyes that he was listening to Mom.

Trying to find out who the father is may be a little hard. The mother has six children...by six different fathers. I do applaud her actions in this case though.

Slapping someone in the face to try and snap them out of a hysterical fit is accepted practice and it is probably still in the medical books today!

And that is what that kid was doing. He was acting out in a hysterical state. A state that is maintained at a high simmer so it can be brought to a quick boil-over on demand.

There is no time to reason with a hysterical person when they are about to go off a cliff.

Where are the Fathers? If black lives matter so much why do the black fathers care so little?

[mod-hat] I've already removed two posts from this thread. The "apeish" shots are uncalled-for. [/mod-hat]

----------

I'd like to go back and explore this:

"That what she did was extraordinary is a sign of the terrible mess we created."

Was it really extraordinary (I'm assuming the "out-of-the-norm" definition is meant here), or is it just gaining attention because it happened to be caught on film?

After all, the rioters were a very small minority, compared to the 10,000+ peacefully protesting in the preceding days. And there were far more community volunteers who came out to clean up the next morning, as well.

There have been plenty of stories about the good folks who never rioted (and a number who even actively stood against the rioters), but none of those are getting the attention that this mom and her son are. Are we getting a sensationalism-skewed perspective?

I don't think the mention of "apes" was racial. In context, it looked like it was applied to humanity as a whole. To that point, I think we should be trying to push past our primal, violent lineage, but it's folly to think that use of force along the way is never appropriate. This ladies violent actions could very well have prevented further and greater violent actions.

Foil wrote: Are we getting a sensationalism-skewed perspective?

Absolutely.

woodchip wrote:Trying to find out who the father is may be a little hard. The mother has six children...by six different fathers. I do applaud her actions in this case though.

you know that for a fact? Like I say, she was covered near to death down in the Chesapeake region when I was down this week, and zero mention of the fathers at all, let alone 6 different fathers.

just did a quick google search on this 'fact' and found NOTHING. Should I be shocked? Hardly. Now, the question becomes why float BS?

edit--seems the source for the claim is Bill O'Reilly, fountain of manure and spokeperson for the Faux News lie machine. Utterly no one else is confirming that assertion, and I have read where there are 4 different fathers involved. It would seem to me that since she knows that fact, locating them should be easy, and given the nature of the criminal justice system in the US, if they are adult black males, several are likely in some jail for minor charges that would never get a white man in prison.

"extraordinary" as you suspected...literally extra- ordinary...beyond the norm. It seems to me every time some talking head mentioned she was a hero they were citing how her actions were abnormal for... (here they usually bite their tongue before offending anyone)...

I think we as a society have made too many excuses for bad behavior. Now we have a Mom being cited as hero for doing what was totally normal, expected Mom behavior 50 years back.

The rate of unwed black mothers from that time to now has jumped a couple hundred percent.
This stuff matters and the impact is like a snowball down the hill effect that is measured in generations.

'Black lives matter'?
If you are a black man saying that the odds are really good that you are a hypocrite and have no moral high ground from where you can say it. To only come out and ponder it in the context of it being an opportunity to riot and steal is not doing the black children any good...but then you probably never were doing them any good anyway...

What is really terrible is the national discourse on this topic has to be filtered through the 'opportunity spectrum' of the OneParty-Disguised-as-Two. With full support for that requirement from our mainstream media. If your contribution to that conversation blurs the designated rhetorical lines of battle you are marginalized or outright dismissed. UncleTom....RINO....etc.

Will Robinson wrote:The rate of unwed black mothers from that time to now has jumped a couple hundred percent.

as has the rate of white ones, except the white ones have jumped up at 5 times the rate of increase.
This stuff matters and the impact is like a snowball down the hill effect that is measured in generations.

'Black lives matter'?

yeah, they do. And, for far too long, black lives come cheaply both within and outside the community.

slick, I'm not sure if you are missing it on purpose, simply looking for a stat to try and hide the elephant in the room behind...., or you are genuinely missing it.

First, our culture is changing for the worse with regard to the family unit. So, yes, the white unwed mother rate is also up.

There is a tipping point, since peers do have an impact on the development children. Neighborhoods have an impact. Etc. etc.

And in the black child's neighborhood...among his peers...he is 3 out of 4 times fatherless. Obviously then so are his peers. That is a very large vacuum in shaping of the sub-culture that shapes his future. How many times among a group of friends about to do something stupid does one of them think about the lesson his father taught him and stop the group from going forward...

Contrast it to the sub-culture influencing the white children where, even though unwed motherhood rose over the last 50 years also, 2 out of 3 of them have fathers.

That is a huge swing in the effect of two parent household versus one parent household. Most white kids, a solid majority, have two parents. Most black kids, a profound majority in fact, DON'T.

Your invoking the ratio change, citing it as some counter to my point by highlighting the relative change in ratios among the two groups is completely irrelevant and dishonest if you did it to imply whites actually have a worse unwed mother situation. They have a 2:1 ADVANTAGE now, even after the increase among whites. And are passed down the sub-cultural benefit of coming from even greater benefit from previous generations of extremely high two parent foundations. Snowball again.

Or did you think you had some important, relevant reason, to attempt to steer us down your fun-with-irrelevant-stats rabbit hole?

Will Robinson wrote:slick, I'm not sure if you are missing it on purpose, simply looking for a stat to try and hide the elephant in the room behind...., or you are genuinely missing it.

First, our culture is changing for the worse with regard to the family unit. So, yes, the white unwed mother rate is also up.

There is a tipping point, since peers do have an impact on the development children. Neighborhoods have an impact. Etc. etc.

And in the black child's neighborhood...among his peers...he is 3 out of 4 times fatherless. Obviously then so are his peers. That is a very large vacuum in shaping of the sub-culture that shapes his future. How many times among a group of friends about to do something stupid does one of them think about the lesson his father taught him and stop the group from going forward...

and you describe a viscious cycle. You see, Will, a good deal of WHY those kids end up being fatherless is that in some cities in the US, black males under the age of 35 are incarcerated at close to 15 times the rate of young white men. Leading to more generations of broken, dysfunctional households, on and on. There is NO reason beyond prejudicial application of justice for that difference.

Slick you are just grasping at straws.
The percentage of fatherless families does not parallel the percentage of fathers in jail.

75% incarceration rate to match the fatherless family ratio?!? No, it's more like 30% chance of a black male becoming incarcerated during his lifetime.

I'll agree that a father being in jail is a factor behind some cases. But how many of those fathers were absent before they were arrested?

If the real numbers are that only 30% of all black men are in jail how many are also fathers? Less than 30% I imagine....

And of that less than 30% how many were also absentee fathers before being jailed?

And out of that less than/less than 30% how many were jailed for a righteous justified charge?

Less than/less than/less than.....

The 75% rate of fatherless children can't be caused simply by your weak assertion of 'prejudicial justice'!

You are playing fast and loose with the raw numbers with nothing solid to base your claims on.

You are doing it in an attempt to obfuscate and filter the discussion through that prism of approved partisan rhetorical argument I mentioned.
Out of habit or necessity or loyalty or any combination of the three you always go there but you don't help the ones who suffer the most by poisoning the debate that way.

End the drug war. Change the culture that incentivizes lawlessness, adversarial relationships with authority, and militarized policing.

It's failed policy, and a significant contributor to the unrest we currently see.

Vander wrote:End the drug war. Change the culture that incentivizes lawlessness, adversarial relationships with authority, and militarized policing.

It's failed policy, and a significant contributor to the unrest we currently see.

Amen to all of that but good luck getting the people in power to approach it without strings attached to their scruples.

***************

Let me clarify my perspective a bit to head off the predictable mischaracterization of it by others.

Yes historically black people have suffered injustice and it has been a long slow fight to where we are now.
Does that create conditions that contribute to higher levels of dysfunction and poverty? Of course it does/did.

However, the current dynamic at work isn't just residual bigotry.

There is a seriously flawed practice of enabling and excusing really bad policy and a lack of personal responsiblity that serves the politicians at the expense of the people it is supposed to help.
The victims of the residue of past and lingering bigotry are also victims of exploitation.

Will Robinson wrote:

Vander wrote:End the drug war. Change the culture that incentivizes lawlessness, adversarial relationships with authority, and militarized policing.

It's failed policy, and a significant contributor to the unrest we currently see.

Amen to all of that but good luck getting the people in power to approach it without strings attached to their scruples.

right with you here, Will(and Vander). Way too much money is being made throughout the criminal justice system by too many influential people. That will make for a really tough battle.

***************

Let me clarify my perspective a bit to head off the predictable mischaracterization of it by others.

Yes historically black people have suffered injustice and it has been a long slow fight to where we are now.
Does that create conditions that contribute to higher levels of dysfunction and poverty? Of course it does/did.

However, the current dynamic at work isn't just residual bigotry.

I'm certainly not arguing that it is. I'm just saying that we're seeiing a complex dynamic that still includes the after affects of 300 years of abuse heaped upon a group of people. Just as bigotry is not removed from a society in any way other than gradually, so too the effects of centuries of victimization.

The victims of the residue of past and lingering bigotry are also victims of exploitation.

can't disagree with this statement at all. That exploitation comes at them from all sides, and frankly is to be expected from human nature. They are the most easily exploitable segment of the populace, thus easy marks. That is where government has a role to play in protection, although you'd perhaps disagree.

Anyone see Wormhole “Are we all Bigots” A must see.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:...Let me clarify my perspective a bit to head off the predictable mischaracterization of it by others.

Yes historically black people have suffered injustice and it has been a long slow fight to where we are now.
Does that create conditions that contribute to higher levels of dysfunction and poverty? Of course it does/did.

However, the current dynamic at work isn't just residual bigotry.

I'm certainly not arguing that it is. I'm just saying that we're seeiing a complex dynamic that still includes the after affects of 300 years of abuse heaped upon a group of people. Just as bigotry is not removed from a society in any way other than gradually, so too the effects of centuries of victimization.

That's funny. I was responding to you having said exactly that!

callmeslick wrote:... You see, Will, a good deal of WHY those kids end up being fatherless is that in some cities in the US, black males under the age of 35 are incarcerated at close to 15 times the rate of young white men. Leading to more generations of broken, dysfunctional households, on and on. There is NO reason beyond prejudicial application of justice for that difference.

You said "There is NO reason beyond...."

I'm telling you that there ARE REASONS BEYOND what ever the actual degree of biased law enforcement is at work after we peel back the hyperbole of your characterization of it.

It's maddening having a discussion with you when you make assertions like that and then blatantly deny having made them when they are challenged!

It is as if you don't really mean what you say so you don't realize when you then contradict your own 'position'. You just spontaneously make a declaration of 'fact' that suits your need in the moment to counter something that was presented.

Vander wrote:IThis ladies violent actions could very well have prevented further and greater violent actions.

Great, but don't ever say this is "good parenting." This is barely a notch above shitty parenting. Violent, emotional, and uncivilized. Calling this sort of ★■◆● good is lowering the bar much too far for society.

vision, even mother animals will sometimes cuff their cubs when they become unruly. Sometimes a little slap or two is all that's needed to make a point. I'm not talking about a good bruising, bone breaking beating either, which IS child abuse. That mother did not beat her teenager.

When I was a kid, I decided it would be a great idea to steal the coin change off of my father's dresser he left there at night after work. Pretty stupid idea on my part, eh? I was going to get caught because I took ALL the change, not just some of it. Well, once they caught me, and they had their suspicions because I was a greedy little thief, my father decided that I needed a good belt spanking and some TV privileges removed as punishment. I can tell you that the belt spanking made more of a lasting impression than the loss of some TV privileges. I never stole any money ever again. I was never spanked again either because I learned my lesson.

callmeslick wrote:
and you describe a viscious cycle. You see, Will, a good deal of WHY those kids end up being fatherless is that in some cities in the US, black males under the age of 35 are incarcerated at close to 15 times the rate of young white men. Leading to more generations of broken, dysfunctional households, on and on. There is NO reason beyond prejudicial application of justice for that difference.

I suggest you look elsewhere for reasons that 70% of black moms are single. Try a welfare system that would not pay ADc unless there was no father/husband in the home. Thanks to the Democrats there is now a self replicating system of keeping black children fatherless, poverty as a given and a segment of voters more securely chained to the plantation than ever before.

In the 50 years the war on poverty has been established, 22 trillion has been spent on it and today the percentage of people living at poverty levels is still the same as 50 years ago...15%. so tell me what we have accomplished?

Vision, you do realise that punishment only works if it hurts, right? The original latin word that led to 'punishment' means 'pain'. Pretty telling, I think.

My parents beat the hell out of me as a kid. Did they go overboard? Yeah, probably, but in some ways I think I turned out better than I would have if they'd just given me a slap on the wrist and 'punished' me with sitting in the corner or 'grounding' me or whatever it is people seem to think the acceptable thing to do is these days. Merely talking it out with a selfish, rebellious, immature little **** is not going to have the impact it should, and neither is taking their favourite toy for a while. Kids are sneaky, they'll get their phone back when you aren't looking or play games at their friends' houses or find some other way around your sanctions. Sometimes you have to hurt the ones you love to get the message across, even if that means breaking out the belt or switch or an open palm. I think that's part of the problem with today's society, all this pampering and refusing to hold people accountable for their actions. If a small pain and inconvenience now saves my kid from a large pain and inconvenience later, which do you think I'm going to choose?

If you find a sure-fire way to punish someone without inflicting actual pain or discomfort on them, let me know, because you'll have been the first to discover it and will probably win a Nobel or something.

woodchip wrote:I suggest you look elsewhere for reasons that 70% of black moms are single. Try a welfare system that would not pay ADc unless there was no father/husband in the home. Thanks to the Democrats there is now a self replicating system of keeping black children fatherless, poverty as a given and a segment of voters more securely chained to the plantation than ever before.

hmmm, how come my daughter got welfare bennies for 3 months, with husband in household?

vision wrote:

Vander wrote:IThis ladies violent actions could very well have prevented further and greater violent actions.

Great, but don't ever say this is "good parenting." This is barely a notch above shitty parenting. Violent, emotional, and uncivilized. Calling this sort of ★■◆● good is lowering the bar much too far for society.

My mother would read this and laugh. My sister would, too. (she's a parent now.)

tunnelcat wrote:vision, even mother animals will sometimes cuff their cubs when they become unruly.

Great analogy if you only want to be as civilized as a bear.

MD-1118 wrote:Vision, you do realise that punishment only works if it hurts, right? The original latin word that led to 'punishment' means 'pain'. Pretty telling, I think.

Great advice, if you want to be restricted to a world where morality is defined by physical pain. Lake of Fire anyone? How's that biblical morality working out for us?

MD-1118 wrote:If you find a sure-fire way to punish someone without inflicting actual pain or discomfort on them, let me know, because you'll have been the first to discover it and will probably win a Nobel or something.

My friend already has. He is a single dad, a black male from DC who is raising a beautiful, polite, well-mannered seven year old daughter. He's never laid a violent hand on her. Not even once. He, of course, wasn't so lucky. His dad beat the ★■◆● out of him until he was a grown man. My friend was able to break a cycle of violence passed down from generations. Can you be that strong? I know I can.