• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wussification of America

lizzie said:
You sedem have it backwards. One of the causes could very well be the divorce rate and single-mom households, which is why children get coddled and pampered, and not taught the realities of life, and how to deal with the normal stress of living.
Click to expand...

I can't believe you're really making an argument that mothers can't be as strict (if not more so) disciplinarians as fathers.

Kids need stability which can be supplied with two differing parental types. The mother figure to nurture and meet specific needs, and a father figure to teach the child how to deal with life as it is, and not how the child wishes it to be.
Click to expand...

Or, you know, we can stop clinging to tired old tropes about how fathers are all stern and mothers weak and nurturing, and instead accept that people can be multifaceted and act in both capacities - as nurturing and stern, alternating the approach where required.
 
Here's a question for the left. I'll wait for some of your responses before I explain how this relates to many Americans being wussies.

For those who make excuses as to why the ghetto kids get crappy grades, how about you try and explain why Dr. Carson and I were able to go from the crappy areas of Detroit and Baltimore, respectively, to respected positions requiring more than 8 years of higher education? Heck, we both even had single mothers.

This should be entertaining...
 
babilfish said:
I can't believe you're really making an argument that mothers can't be as strict (if not more so) disciplinarians as fathers.

Or, you know, we can stop clinging to tired old tropes about how fathers are all stern and mothers weak and nurturing, and instead accept that people can be multifaceted and act in both capacities - as nurturing and stern, alternating the approach where required.
Click to expand...

One of the issues with your argument is your naivety with respect to the study of statistics. Saying that mothers can be as stern as fathers is focusing on the range of data and ignoring important characteristics such as the mean and median.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Mike Rice's firing has nothing to do with wussification and everything to do with abuse of power. There's a fine line between being tough on your players and being an abusive egomaniac. Eric Bolling is talking out of his ass.

Phil Jackson, Pat Riley, Gregg Popovich didn't have to throw basketballs and verbally abuse their players to become winners and build their players into becoming winners.

I'm not saying "wussification" isn't happening, but this isn't an example of it.
Click to expand...

If treating each other with respect is wussification than I am all for it.
 
Mathematician said:
The funny thing is that you think I did. See that tiny little darkened word up there? I'll let you hire an English tutor to teach you the difference between "a" and "the" preceding a noun.
Click to expand...

That...That's your defense?

You finally admit that you indeed made a connection between political correctness, divorce rates, fatness, etc., but add that you only termed this a major cause of these unfortunate maladies, not the only (or primary) cause?

Have you simply given up?

Also, this has done nothing to refute my point that thinking political correctness a cause of divorce, out-of-wedlock children, and fatness is ridiculous in and of itself. It's a bold claim with no verifiable evidence to back it up, the type of non-intellectual musing certain conservatives seem to base their entire political philosophy on.
 
Carleen said:
If treating each other with respect is wussification than I am all for it.
Click to expand...

Have you considered that sometimes a coach needs to keep the players' egos in check?

 
Mathematician said:
One of the issues with your argument is your naivety with respect to the study of statistics.
Click to expand...

What statistics?

lizzie made an unsupported claim, that women are naturally less stern (and less capable of being stern) than fathers.

No statistics or studies have been presented, all we have it on is the good word of lizzie.

Saying that mothers can be as stern as fathers is focusing on the range of data and ignoring important characteristics such as the mean and median.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's just a claim that providing being stern is not a characteristic that manifest differently in men and women, there is no reason to believe women cannot be as stern as men.
 
babilfish said:
That...That's your defense?

You finally admit that you indeed made a connection between political correctness, divorce rates, fatness, etc., but add that you only termed this a major cause of these unfortunate maladies, not the only (or primary) cause?

Have you simply given up?

Also, this has done nothing to refute my point that thinking political correctness a cause of divorce, out-of-wedlock children, and fatness is ridiculous in and of itself. It's a bold claim with no verifiable evidence to back it up, the type of non-intellectual musing certain conservatives seem to base their entire political philosophy on.
Click to expand...

All I can say to that is I nominate you for the group led by Mr. head of joaquin.

Here's your initiation tattoo:
:eek:uch:
 
Mathematician said:
Here's a question for the left.
Click to expand...

Oh goody.

I'll wait for some of your responses before I explain how this relates to many Americans being wussies.
Click to expand...

I just can't imagine what sort of responses they'll be...

For those who make excuses as to why the ghetto kids get crappy grades,
Click to expand...

Who are you speaking of, at this point? Are you actually arguing against imaginary caricatures who spend their days pontificating on the poor educational habits of urban youth?

how about you try and explain why Dr. Carson and I were able to go from the crappy areas of Detroit and Baltimore, respectively, to respected positions requiring more than 8 years of higher education? Heck, we both even had single mothers.
Click to expand...

Your true grit, no doubt.

This should be entertaining...
Click to expand...

Let me assure you, it hasn't been.
 
Being stern and having an emotional outburst are two different things
Sent from my Nokia Lumia 920 using Board Express
 
Mathematician said:
*snip*
Click to expand...

What a mature response.

I'll just chalk this up as you conceding that you never had a real defense, because you never had a real argument to begin with.

Ciao.
 
StillBallin75 said:
I think most children who grew in a single parent household would disagree with that. I believe the opposite - kids who grow up in a mother-only household tend to have to fend for themselves sooner than most.
Click to expand...
I hadn't had time to read anything more than the headlines regarding the Rutgers coach and his firing. My initial reaction was...gosh...coaches verbally abusive? SHOCKING! :lamo Then I saw the video. Never mind. There isn't really all that fine a line between aggressive and even verbally abusive coaching and straight up abuse. That coach didn't tiptoe across the line...he stomped across it. The first image I saw was him kicking one of his players in the ass. In that moment I said...oh...never mind. Dood should be toast, no questions asked.

I was a LITTLE disappointed when I saw some of the ESPN commentators on the issue. Their expression of mock outrage was pretty disgusting. Seriously? Anyone that has played organized football has seen it in some capacity. Anyone that HASNT been grabbed by a facemask by a coach...raise your hand. OK...those of you that didn't raise your hand...you were third string scrubs that your coach didn't waste any time with. Everyone else gets it. You get the verbal harassment. You may not agree with it...but you at least get that it happens on an every day basis. SO for some of the former players to say "well gosh...that is just something I don't think should ever be tolerated..." dood that is as dishonest as expressing mock outrage that baseball players since the mid 80's were using steroids.

Tedi Bruschi came closest to being honest. he said he didn't WANT his kid on a team coached by a Kumbaya singing 'everyone is a winner' marshmallow. He said that coaches sometimes need to push to drive, to motivate, and sometimes that might come across as abusive.

OH...and btw...spot on re the coaches record. Had he been a strong winning coach and taken the team to a few final fours and maybe a championship, he would have been seen as "maybe crossing the line and by golly...we insist he apologize and attend an anger management course...preferably before recruiting season"
 
Lutherf said:
So, like I said before, you choose to be a victim.
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate on the connection you're seeing?

Mathematician said:
Have you wondered why it was public reaction to video and not the players complaining to superintendents that decided when he got fired? I expect a player on that team who has a problem with it to speak up, given that they're adults. If the players don't mind it then who cares what others think?
Click to expand...

Well given that it was said Rice would act completely differently if practices were watched, it would end up being Rice v. the player. What do you think the outcome would be? Don't you think Rice might acted even more aggressively to the player that claimed it? Sure, the kid could leave the school but, again, he'd lose his scholarship.
 
Mathematician said:
I agree with Bolling's point yesterday about Americans becoming wussies and political correctness being a major source.

There's the sense of entitlement since we don't let kid's experience failure nowadays. That includes things from not letting kids fail at school when their results are insufficient to handing out participation trophies. Some schools are even banning sporting activities to prevent anyone from feeling like a loser.

We surrender to just about any complaint, rather that seeing if any of the responsibility falls on the complainant. For example, schools are removing a cross or picture of Jesus if one or two people complain, even if a hundred want it there. Someone needs to speak up and tell them to ignore it if they don't like it.

You might say "the older generation always says the younger is worse." However, the upward trends for the numbers in divorce, kids born out of wedlock, government handouts, obesity, average age people live with parents until, etc. speak for themselves.

What will it take to get society to acknowledge these mistakes and fix them? Feel free to add more.

Eric Bolling: Mike Rice Firing Symbol Of 'The Wussification Of American Men' (VIDEO)
Click to expand...


If the coach was fired for simply yelling at a player then I think you would have a point. Mike Rice went above and beyond that. He deserved the fines. He deserved the firing. This is not a good example of the "wussification" of America.
 
Manc Skipper said:
The right constantly whines about PC yet complains bitterly about speech that is offensive to Christians. Hypocrits.
Click to expand...

QFT. Look at how the conservatives went off on O'Reilly when he said 'Bible-thumpers.'
 
Taylor said:
I'd say that chances are good he wasnt fired because the school feared his behavior but because the school feared what would happen if they didn't fire him.
Click to expand...

And what is wrong with that? Rutgers is a public university that receives public money. If the public is upset about how the school handled the issue then the school better listen up!
 
Mathematician said:
Here's a question for the left. I'll wait for some of your responses before I explain how this relates to many Americans being wussies.

For those who make excuses as to why the ghetto kids get crappy grades, how about you try and explain why Dr. Carson and I were able to go from the crappy areas of Detroit and Baltimore, respectively, to respected positions requiring more than 8 years of higher education? Heck, we both even had single mothers.

This should be entertaining...
Click to expand...

It appears that the factors uniting people who manage to be successful via academics despite poverty and being surrounded by other poor people is having a parent, relative or other mentor who cared about the child and encouraged, taught and guided him/her to consider education important, provided an environment that enabled the child to learn to concentrate and work on their studies, and an expectation that the child will succeed. This may be easier in a two parent household, but that is not a requirement. It does require someone who is caring and stable enough to invest the required time and energy.

The reality is that not every child is that lucky. That is a fact that schools must address, Ideally, schools should provide the required guidance and environment for students to succeed even when they don't get much help at home. I agree that children need to be pushed and encouraged to be successful, that does not mean that labelling them as losers or treating them harshly is likely to be effective. Yes, a parent angry about bad grades motivates some kids to do better, but when it is excessive and it isn't backed up with encouragement and an environment that facilitates concentration and work, it just creates hostility and rebellion. In general, poor kids are exposed to plenty of anger, violence, and insults at home. There are many good reasons why informed educators are trying to eliminate old fashioned hostility, anger, abuse, rote learning, and stereotyping from the education system, one is that those tactics never actually worked that well.
 
clownboy said:
ZZZZZZZ. Yeah, we've only been conveying tone in our written communications since there were written communications. But I'm sure you can come up with a number of studies that show we can't. Hilarious.
Click to expand...
Didn't you know you are not allowed to know anything for yourself? Everything has to be the result of a survey or a study regardless of your personal experience. I ma very wooried for my son growing up in a world like this. He has no reason to think for himself.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Oh for ****'s sake. What happens to you in life and your circumstances greatly influence "how you feel about and react to" events and circumstances. So yes, the things that happen to you in life and the circumstances you are dealt are just as if not more important than how one reacts to them.

I am honestly so sick of this uneducated argument that comes almost exclusively from conservatives. It's as if you guys think people's choices come out of nowhere - completely untouched by their experiences and circumstances.
Click to expand...
I don't think you understood what he posted. Yes things happen but it how the person deals with it that is important. For example 2 kids that come from an abusive home handle things differently between themselvs. One might get depressed and the other might get angry. Again it is not as important what happens tan how that person handles it.
 
Taylor said:
The left is obsessed with "hypocrisy" - it's as if cognitive development froze in adolescence.

Nonetheless, some know a good basketball program when they see it. Believing that you'd get more out of a Duke team by screaming at it is like believing you'd get more flavor out of a fine filet mignon by covering it with Heinz 57.
Click to expand...

So you're an apologist for hypocrisy??:shock: I mean is there something to defend in that?? Actually I think the right is obsessed with it. They practice it to the point of making it an art form and then fools like your actually try to defend it. The point regarding Duke is that Coach K doesn't appear to need fits of rage to coach young men. His program obviously produces better results that maybe the coaches at Rutgers could learn from.
 
Taylor said:
The left is obsessed with "hypocrisy" - it's as if cognitive development froze in adolescence.

Nonetheless, some know a good basketball program when they see it. Believing that you'd get more out of a Duke team by screaming at it is like believing you'd get more flavor out of a fine filet mignon by covering it with Heinz 57.
Click to expand...

So you're an apologist for hypocrisy??:shock: I mean is there something to defend in that?? Actually I think the right is obsessed with it. They practice it to the point of making it an art form and then fools like yourself actually try to defend it. The point regarding Duke is that Coach K doesn't appear to need fits of rage to coach young men. His program obviously produces better results that maybe the coaches at Rutgers could learn from.
 
Taylor said:
The left is obsessed with "hypocrisy" - it's as if cognitive development froze in adolescence.

Nonetheless, some know a good basketball program when they see it. Believing that you'd get more out of a Duke team by screaming at it is like believing you'd get more flavor out of a fine filet mignon by covering it with Heinz 57.
Click to expand...

So you're an apologist for hypocrisy??:shock: I mean is there something to defend in that?? Actually I think the right is obsessed with it. They practice it to the point of making it an art form and then fools like yourself actually try to defend it. The point regarding Duke is that Coach K doesn't appear to need fits of rage to coach young men. His program obviously produces better results that maybe the coaches at Rutgers could learn from.
 
Adagio said:
So you're an apologist for hypocrisy??:shock: I mean is there something to defend in that?? Actually I think the right is obsessed with it. They practice it to the point of making it an art form and then fools like your actually try to defend it. The point regarding Duke is that Coach K doesn't appear to need fits of rage to coach young men. His program obviously produces better results that maybe the coaches at Rutgers could learn from.
Click to expand...

Adagio said:
So you're an apologist for hypocrisy??:shock: I mean is there something to defend in that?? Actually I think the right is obsessed with it. They practice it to the point of making it an art form and then fools like yourself actually try to defend it. The point regarding Duke is that Coach K doesn't appear to need fits of rage to coach young men. His program obviously produces better results that maybe the coaches at Rutgers could learn from.
Click to expand...

Adagio said:
So you're an apologist for hypocrisy??:shock: I mean is there something to defend in that?? Actually I think the right is obsessed with it. They practice it to the point of making it an art form and then fools like yourself actually try to defend it. The point regarding Duke is that Coach K doesn't appear to need fits of rage to coach young men. His program obviously produces better results that maybe the coaches at Rutgers could learn from.
Click to expand...

Third time's the charm, right? :2razz:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom