|
| + Visit Rotherham United FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Thanks John and Kerr for a couple of great detailed posts that set out the detail and complexity of individual v societal responsibility.
For me John is correct that individual responsibility cannot be completely diminished and parents of whatever background are ultimately responsible for their choices. However, to only focus on that, and expect any kind of change for the positive in affected areas is simply unrealistic. It isn't going to happen. It is largely human nature: children will learn most of their behaviour from their parents and immediate environment and in most cases will repeat the same patterns of behaviour that they were subject to. As has been pointed out, this isn't always the case, and different factors can intervene including great school intervention, other role models that affect behaviour and simple nature of the individual child to 'rise above it'. But largely, if you look at studies of the 'poverty cycle' in different places, all over the world, black white and all inbetween, you see the same patterns: poor parenting behaviour/lifestyle choices, lack of child success in education, violence, gang behaviour from young children and these behaviours will persist from generation to generation unless there is intervention. John I think nailed this in focusing on adapting school delivery in affected areas and adjusting models of delivery to kids that come from poorer demographics. It's largely too late to intervene with the parents, and as John says even by the age of 11, much behaviour is set in stone, but I agree with him that parenting skills, relationships, social skills, assertiveness training and indeed personal responsibility can be built into the curriculum or support curriculum for affected areas. We can go on about personal responsibility until we're blue in the face and make it all about blaming poor life decisions of parents, but it won't improve anything going forward. If parents are caught in that cycle, in most cases (and I repeat, not all) their behaviour is set and it will pass on and repeat with their kids unless there is social intervention.
If he pulls this off with what's coming down the road and it does level up and it's not just a short term vanity project then fair play to him despite his many flaws .
I'll give him a fair go on this aspect of his Premiership .
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...of-coronavirus
Looks like some people like Keir Starmer are now rowing back on there support for BLM, if only they'd taken 10 minutes to read their manifesto.
With the Premier League footballers finally stop kneeling?
I've just read a BBC article of people saying that they don't like to be classed as BAME. One person said it's a white term for White people who don't want to say anything classed as racist. I can't recall ever using this term in a conversation by the way.
I remember the days when BAME people were called coloured. That was offensive so everyone stopped saying it. I can see why people would be offended by that to be honest as we are all coloured. Now I hear lots of Black people identify themselves as a 'person of colour'. Everyone must have heard people talk about themselves in this way over the last few years?
Where are we going with all this? Are white people trying too hard not to offend but end up offending? Does everyone have to have a GCSE in geography before they can describe someone who looks Pakistani or Filipino?