<p>In all fairness, razorsharp- there is a difference between discussion, debate and antagonism. Choosing ones words makes a big difference. Diplomacy is not a lost art. I am curious- just where did you get your information about the 15 yr old in this case? I read the local paper here and I have seen nothing about her race, her current marital situation, her offspring or anything. Where is this stuff coming from? It gets presented as fact. Is it?</p>
<p>I have to laugh. I feel like a moderator here. You guys have each toned down, edited and modified your posts so it is a little hard to follow. But don’t get me wrong! You got the stuff about the “bad neighborhood” thread outta here, and , gosh, I forget what else, but if my comments made you think about what you said, and made you think that not everything needs to esclate into a huge battle with namecalling… well then maybe we have all learned something from this case, directly and indirectly.</p>
<p>
I guessed on the girl’s race. I couldn’t figure out why datdude saw this case as a racial issue when it pretty clearly is not. I figured the girls must have been white. </p>
<p>Who knows whether the other stuff is true. It appears in a newspaper, however. I have to assume they are accurate some of the time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2007/10/26/genarlow_1026.html[/url]”>http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2007/10/26/genarlow_1026.html</a></p>
<p>I don’t know the girl’s marital status but if she was married at the time her child was born, she would have had to have married before reaching 18. I don’t think that is likely, but anything is possible. </p>
<p>The 15 girl had oral sex with all of the boys while being videotaped. I don’t have the cite right now but can find it if you wish. I think I read it in one of the Court’s opinions or in a statement from the Attorney General. Possibly I find the girl’s actions outrageous because so few others seem to find her behavior outrageous.</p>
<p>Well, now that I’ve been portrayed as someone who pulls the race card, just look at the first few pages of this thread and they may shed some light (posts 10 & 12 to name a few). </p>
<p>For the record guys, you can consider me whatever you want, but I am not naive and I am no dummy. How the hell is this case not about race? Are you guys serious? C’mon already, that’s why this site is so awful, because of all the hidden agendas.</p>
<p>Did it ever dawn on any of you that the digital divide really does exist? There are so many people who post on sites like this that will never give credit to a black person who speaks the truth about such incidents. I must be outnumbered 200-1 on this site, but I remain undeterred from speaking the truth. </p>
<p>I post very rarely here these days, because those who mean to antagonize are always pushing buttons and I’ve found myself too eager to engage in defense of what I feel is covert racism. Nobody is that stupid to be too blatant (well, there is bullwinkle) on this site because they could easily get flagged or banned. At times I have engaged in back-and-forth that is negative, but do you think I do this not knowing that I’ll be attacked by many? Do you think it is enjoyable having to defend your race so often, just to have someone say to you, “It’s not about race, why are you always pulling the race card.” Do you know the difficulty in engaging in communication where people’s differing points of view often reveal some scary realities? Even more, do you think I look to antagonize or seek confrontation? The posts speak for themselves often times. We don’t always have to agree, but there is a point when it becomes clear what a person’s mindset and intent is.</p>
<p>Sorry- gotta disagree again. This case wasnt about race. It was about a kid without a record rightly refusing to take a plea and getting caught up in some outdated laws. It was also, IMO, about the haves and the have nots. He finally got a good lawyer ( caucasian jewish female-- ) and justice was served… it just took a very long time. Ironically, one of the dissenting judges who did not want to release him, following the law, was African-American. So unfortunately he got labelled by some as an “Uncle Tom” and a “Lawn Jockey” on an A-A blog site. <a href=“http://www.afrochat.net/frontpage-news/14939-genarlo-wilson-injustice-overturned-but-appealed.html[/url]”>http://www.afrochat.net/frontpage-news/14939-genarlo-wilson-injustice-overturned-but-appealed.html</a> Who exactly is playing the race card??? Some also incorrectly assumend on that blog that the young girl was white. Someone corrected that error. </p>
<p>By the way, alking about posters that haven’t even posted in a thread is another recipe for thread disaster. Please follow the TOS.</p>
<p>Ohhh how I wish I could believe that America isn’t 100 percent purely race-driven. </p>
<p>My comment about the case being about racial injustice stands. I think the facts surrounding the case are supportive of that. </p>
<p>Your specs on the lawyer (caucasion, jewish, female) be it true or not, are a perfect example of what I’m talking about. Why must those be the traits of a good lawyer?</p>
<p>
Sorry dat- but you misunderstand my point. It doesn’t matter whether the atty was a he or she, and whether she was green or purple, muslim or unitarian. They are not what make her a good lawyer. I was just describing who she is, so that there arent any other misperceptions or inaccuracies portrayed yet again in this thread.</p>
<p>I am truly saddened to see that you believe America is “100% race driven”. I am sorry you feel that way, but it is not my place to try to change your perception. People have their own agendas and biases that they bring to these forums. From my perspective, you “bit” when another poster made comments that seemed purposely meant to stir up trouble. Some of the comments were inaccurate, and some were meant, IMO, to cause a stir and perhaps engender conflict. As I mentioned, this has happened in many threads of many diffferent, potentially “hot button” topics. That may make him a ■■■■■, but not a racist.</p>
<p>That you are right about jym, I did bite - an admitted fault on my behalf. </p>
<p>But you bring up some interesting points. I can honestly say that no matter how many misunderstandings I’ve had on this site, none of them has been ‘puposely meant to stir up trouble,’ but to identify negative undertones on a racial level. It is particularly troublesome to me that anyone would antagonize on such touchy subjects when race is obviously an issue. On more levels than just a website, these issues need to be dealt with accordingly, and one of the ways they can be dealt with is with truth and exposure. Like I said before, there is a point when it becomes clear what a person’t mindset and intentions are. </p>
<p>This is not the sort of thing I expect to simply have to deal with without firing back. I’ll speak my mind on issues like this, and it won’t just be me ‘dealing with it.’ Media antagonism towards blacks is very real jym…I’m sure you’re aware of what I’m talking about.</p>
<p>If someone is a ■■■■■, they don’t care who they annoy, as long as the burners are turned up. That said, oftentimes “racial undertones” are percieved only by those looking for them. IMO, the way to make progress in these areas is not to fuel antagonism. It doesn’t solve anything. If one wants to fight for sport, there are other venues in which to do it.</p>
<p>You’ll get no argument from me there. Trust me when I say I try, but it is far from easy when your instinct is to fight back.</p>
<p>You may not believe this, but some of us have to fight everyday…at our jobs, in school, ignoring the negative media about us…these things take a toll. The world will be a better place when many of the real agitators that keep the pot stirred are either dead, out of power and less influential, or miraculously change their mission of controversy and negativity. It may never come to pass in our lifetimes, but that is still the ultimate goal.</p>
<p>Maybe you’ve hit on an important point, dat. If one’s instinct is to fight back, then one is all too often mobilized to take a defensive posture and to look for that need to fight. Sometimes the better thing to do is to lead from behind, to discuss, to educate, not to come out swinging. It is equally important to think about not only what you say, but how you say it. You will feel better about it in the long run. Anger only engenders anger.</p>
<p>I am truly sorry if you feel you have to “fight every day”, dat. You might want to consider the possibility that the world isn’t as globally hostile as you may think. Just a thought…</p>
<p>After all, it does take 2 to fight. Even ■■■■■■ will go away and take their behaviors elsewhere if no one rises to their challenge.</p>
<p>While my instinct is to fight back, I look for the need to not have to fight instead of looking for the need to fight. Whenever I decide to go all smiles, that’s when racial bias hits me a lot closer to home than just reading about it or seeing it on the news. I’d rather be aloof than smiling in people’s faces while they get their little digs in because they don’t think I care.</p>
<p>As far as leading from behind, discussing and educating, the progress seems to have gone soooo slow with those methods. I’m sure you follow the issues in society. People don’t publicly agree on anything, especially issues of race and discrimination. There’s usually a great divide when we talk about Barry Bonds, Michael Vick, Jena 6, OJ and the list goes on and on. When are we going to march together instead of different races standing on different sides of the street on these issues. And I’m not considering the few, I’m considering the vast majority.</p>
<p>Either way, if it means anything, you don’t appear to be nasty or negative. I admire your input and advice…although some of it is purely optimistic. As far as the poster who I engaged with prior, your advice has been well-taken and now that I’ve been heard, I don’t think I have to engage in that manner again. Probably only til the next time I feel someone’s comments have gone by unchecked for a while.</p>
<p>These things unfortunately do take time, dat. Societal change doesn’t come with a sledgehammer to the head. Not sure where you are coming from with your “all smiles” comment, but it sounds like you are saying you need to keep your guard up all the time. Not sure what to say to that. That’s your call. Just not my choice.</p>
<p>That is what I meant about the “smiles” comment, and yes, I do feel like I have to perpetually keep my guard up. I don’t expect you to provide the answers to my problems because I can’t blame what’s in my head on you. You’ve actually done me some good, just by being rational and reasonable.</p>
<p>Consciousness and happiness for black men don’t coexist easily.</p>
<p>"ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) – Genarlow Wilson, freed last week from a Georgia prison, said he’s glad he rejected a plea deal from prosecutors, even if it would have sprung him from prison months earlier.</p>
<p>The 21-year-old, who served two years of a 10-year sentence for aggravated child molestation, said the prospect of being labeled a sex offender drove him to turn down the deal. He had to think about his 9-year-old sister and having a family of his own one day, he said Sunday …</p>
<p>"I wouldn’t be able to stay with my mother because I have a little sister. You know, when you’re a sex offender you can’t be around kids. " …</p>
<p>Wilson said, he is focused on the future and hopes to soon immerse himself in his college studies.</p>
<p>He wants to major in sociology, he said, “because I feel like I’ve been living my major .”</p>
<p>Though he called his sentence “absurd,” Wilson said he understands that prosecutors "were doing their job and they felt they were carrying out the law.</p>
<p>Wilson also said he knows what he did was foolish…"
<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/29/wilson.released/index.html[/url]”>http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/29/wilson.released/index.html</a></p>
<p>Thanks for your comments, dat. I am glad I’ve been of some help, and that this discussion (which appears to have bored others to tears because there isn’t any hot conflict going on right now) has been beneficial. Having been on this forum for many years, I certainly have gotten caught up in a few verbal tug-of-wars from time to time. Sometimes the verbal banter is downright entertaining. Quick, clever, oftentimes funny chatter. But when they deteriorate into hostile nastiness, well, I try to take my toys and go home.</p>
<p>Hi NSM!
Yes, that article has it pinned correctly. He (Genarlow) didn’t want to get labelled as a sex offender. As I mentioned several posts up (probably previous page) the law as it was recently amended in GA seems to want to give sex offenders a one-way ticket to neighboring states by making it impossible to live almost anywhere. Yesterday’s paper had several vignettes of people who got caught up in this as teens and who now have serious housing problems. One is a woman who was convicted 10 yrs ago. Now she and her husband can’t live in the house they own yet have to make morgage payments on it until they can sell it (in this awful housing market).I think it was too close to a bus stop or something. Maybe it was a church. I forget. I’ll have to find the articles. Another is a teen who has to live in a trailer in his backyard without plumbing (I believe) because the house itself is too close to a childcare center. All absurd. So Genarlow was right to fight the plea that would have labelled him a sex offender. Unfortunately, it kept him incarcerated for a ridiculously long time.</p>
<p>And, while I think the stupid riders on the law that made for these overly restrictive housing rules are extreme, I am glad they caused that loony tune who claims to have been with JonBenet Ramsey at the time of her death to move out of state. Horray for the small victories???</p>
<p>Here’s the reference I was mentioning <a href=“http://www.ajc.com/search/content/wilsoned10281.html[/url]”>http://www.ajc.com/search/content/wilsoned10281.html</a></p>