[email protected]

In a message dated 8/1/04 6:49:47 AM, danielle.conger@... writes:

<< All men weren't, in fact, created equal. >>

Still aren't, never could be.

The best they can hope for is equality under the law. But even then, when
Kirby went to court he was dismissed to go home by a clerk, without even having
to stand up in front of the judge. Why? Because he was anglo, some would
say, without hesitation, I bet. There were only two other anglos in that batch
of 30 some people at traffic court that day, the rest were hispanic. But
Kirby was dismissed because his offense was small (forgot to turn his headlights
on, crossing a street going three blocks from home), and... He wore dress
pants, a shirt and a tie. Nobody else came close. They dressed like they were
dressing to work in the yard or stand on a street corner and see and be seen
(the young girls, short sleeveless tops over low hiphugger jeans as though the
summons had said "Please, dress in crop tops and hiphuggers" instead of
"appropriate dress is required" or whatever it said.

Just a little respect goes a long way in legal situations.

But even before that, some are born smart, rich and good looking. Some are
born base and mean, in the Shakespearean-era sense. Poor, angry, bad genetics.
Those things aren't equal.

A 5'4" man will have to have more charisma, skills, and desire to succeed
than a 6', broad-shouldered, pleasant-faced man of lesser intelligence and
ability. Does that make the other humans around them horribly ignorant and

There are instincts beyond reason. There are biological impulses, and if we
deny them entirely (as some people pressed others to do for a long LONG time
in this culture, claiming humans possessed no instincts) we pretend to live
instead of living our own real lives from our own real selves.

-=- For me rights and respect need to be

mutual. I don't feel my kids gain anything by learning that they can coerce

those around them because no one will step in to coerce them out of it. I'm

much more of a "your right to extend your fist stops at my face" kind of



Me too. But I want their fist quite out of my personal space, so that I
don't even flinch.

If we think we shouldn't be coercive or bullying, how can we condone bullying
in, of or among our children? The principle that coercion isn't right would
(for me, in the logic that has worked for me) mean that as a parent I should
try to rid my home of coercive elements, and if one of my children were become
a really excellent spin-doctor/politician/leader/dictator, I would (and this
is not theoretical in our family) counsel him/her on benevolence and
generosity and not hogging the air.

I wouldn't try to extinguish the behaviors, just refine them. Those might be
what takes that child far in life, when they're in an appropriate venue and
channelled for good.

Most people are followers, not leaders. They want to think for themselves
only insofar as they can choose their own leader to follow blindly.

Not all are born leaders, and so not all are created equal.

But mythology (and the U.S. is steeped in eagle/flag/frontier/cowboy
mythology) has its uses and its own realities, and destroying it completely is as bad
as believing it all to be objective reality.