Glad I Don't Live In America.
English accents are very complicated - I definitely don't understand people with very thick Yorkshire, Geordie, Brummie, Scouse, East Anglian or West Country accents, and I have trouble with the London equivalent of AAVE (which these days is more common than Cockney).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTVwdv9Pzo8 <- good video on East Anglian accents.
And that's before you get onto Scots, which is so different that it is hotly contested whether it is a dialect of English or a language in its own right. I tend to hear Scots much more than I hear East Anglian or West Country, despite the geographic distances, so I have less trouble with it than with the strongest regional accents of England, bit thare is a lot o' vocabulary that juist flies ower mah heid. (Scots is a separate issue to Welsh, Scots Gaelic, and Irish Gaelic, which are entirely separate minority languages and sound nothing like English)
To me as a visitor, most parts of NYC are nice. Some long time residents aren't thrilled with the gentrification though. If you've heard of Alexandria Ocasio Córtez, she represents some of the not so nice parts of NYC. But they aren't necessarily "bad" neighborhoods.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTVwdv9Pzo8 <- good video on East Anglian accents.
And that's before you get onto Scots, which is so different that it is hotly contested whether it is a dialect of English or a language in its own right. I tend to hear Scots much more than I hear East Anglian or West Country, despite the geographic distances, so I have less trouble with it than with the strongest regional accents of England, bit thare is a lot o' vocabulary that juist flies ower mah heid. (Scots is a separate issue to Welsh, Scots Gaelic, and Irish Gaelic, which are entirely separate minority languages and sound nothing like English)
Possibly the result of a fusion of native and invaders languages?
THAT’S a nice part of NYC.
I live not far from Cunningham Park. Most of Northern Queens is suburban-like.
City Island is an interesting part of the Bronx. I've never been there but I once saw a movie about it.
My mother used to live in Astoria in the 1930s. I think it was more Italian than Greek. She wasn't Italian but her boyfriend was.
My hope is that “affirmative action” becomes unnecessary. It’s a paradox, in that it both helps and hurts its recipients.
I generally agree with the principle of "Affirmative Action".
Some community groups are disadvantage through no fault of their own.
Consider autistics brown and white skunks, as an example.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,509
Location: Right over your left shoulder
Hucksters have told them CRT is being taught, that's all it takes.
_________________
Watching liberals try to solve societal problems without a systemic critique/class consciousness is like watching someone in the dark try to flip on the light switch, but they keep turning on the garbage disposal instead.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
The trouble is is that no one would be able to understand my northern English accent so I'd have to repeat myself quite a lot and then I'd end up just coming back home and after that I would decide that I'm actually glad that I don't live in America.
Firstly, learn proppa American Inglish before you emigrate.
It would be nice to live in a country that isn't under the dark shadow of a jingoistic China.
Last edited by Pepe on 02 Oct 2021, 6:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
My hope is that “affirmative action” becomes unnecessary. It’s a paradox, in that it both helps and hurts its recipients.
This leads to an interesting point:
Should we "lift a finger" regardless of the "black folk"'s situation, so those in the higher classes receive the same assistance as those who are in the "lower class"\poor?
or
should we "lift a finger" only for those "black folks" who need it, and not those who are already at a certain level, ignoring the equal needs of those of other races in that same (or lesser) position?
or
Should we ignore the person's "race" and instead focus on the individual's needs, so those most needy (regardless of "race") receive the assistance?
Over here our governments set aside assistance for the Aboriginal people - "lifting a finger" for them. Sounds good until you realise that this assistance goes predominantly to those middle-class Aboriginal people in the cities who are already at an equivalent position to those of other races, whilst those who really need the support in the outback communities see much less of the "assistance".
Or take Canada, where "assistance" is set aside for the "first people", yet many of those people are still without clean drinking water because the assistance is directed to more "publicly visible" areas rather than those "out of the way" people with much greater need.
Firstly, affirmative action should be colour blind.
Secondly, people should be treated as individuals, rather than political footballs.
But you have no trouble understanding "Cockadoodledoo", do you, my little chick-a-dee?
That's a bit of a strawman, nobody is claiming that schools are teaching CRT the legal theory, what is being claimed, accurately, is that schools are teaching a form of racial essentialism that is largely derived from CRT or its progeny (e.g. Ibram X. Kendi), and doing things like segregating classrooms based on oppression matrices, teaching the white kids that they are born oppressors and the non-white kids they are born victims, etc. There is volumes of evidence of this going on out there, but you need to abandon this "well it's not literally CRT so it's not happening" position, which feels like an almost willful misunderstanding of the facts on the ground at this point. The term CRT is being used as a short hand because it's easier than explaining the whole host of objectionable practices every single time, not in its precise academic meaning.
_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson
That's a bit of a strawman, nobody is claiming that schools are teaching CRT the legal theory, what is being claimed, accurately, is that schools are teaching a form of racial essentialism that is largely derived from CRT or its progeny (e.g. Ibram X. Kendi), and doing things like segregating classrooms based on oppression matrices, teaching the white kids that they are born oppressors and the non-white kids they are born victims, etc. There is volumes of evidence of this going on out there, but you need to abandon this "well it's not literally CRT so it's not happening" position, which feels like an almost willful misunderstanding of the facts on the ground at this point. The term CRT is being used as a short hand because it's easier than explaining the whole host of objectionable practices every single time, not in its precise academic meaning.
I appreciate the clarification because it has honestly confused me. If that is the case, they need to stop calling it CRT. The term has a specific meaning, and not adhering to that specific meaning is a misuse of the term. I worry "CRT" has become the straw man.
The extremely liberal schools my kids attended did not teach what you describe. If they didn't teach it, I have to wonder who does. I can only think of the super rich and privileged ones that try too hard to teach their students empathy, maybe? If that is the case, it kind of backfires, though, because the kids in super rich and privileged schools here tend not to see those who start with less privilege as their equals; they tend to see them as charity.
_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Telling someone where you live! |
10 Apr 2024, 1:18 pm |
I need a job and a place to live |
13 Apr 2024, 7:54 pm |
We All Live in a Yellow Submarine |
03 Apr 2024, 1:37 pm |
Advice on how to break away from my brother to go live with |
30 Jan 2024, 2:27 am |