Never Again (For Now)
I have this really bad habit-- a mood-killer, something that brings me down into the dumps almost every single time. Even though I know better, I still do it too. Terence calls it my "crack"-- I just can't leave it alone, despite the fact that I know I'm likely to spend the next few hours in a depressing gray or energy-sapping black mood as a result.
"Steve, since the young man's mother is moving to Chicago I was surprised that you did not offer him 1. to move to Chicago 2. set him up in an apartment rent paid 6 months 3. offer him a entry level position job at your show. Some may think this is too much, but with your connections, I am sure you could have gotten a rental mgmt. company to foot the bill in exchange for a "shout out" on the show. This is what Oprah would have done. Just saying. I watched Oprah for 25 yrs. and she always went "above & beyond" to help people. You have that same power Steve with your show, use it to the fullest ! It would be nice since Chicago is now your adopted city to start a mentoring program for young men in Chicago. Suggestion: Get ALL the Chicago sports teams to HELP & VOLUNTEER ! Chicago sports teams DO NOT do enough for inner city youth. Just saying."
Well, if anything illustrates the ideological divide that exists between certain segments of this society, this is it. Steve Harvey has his own morning show, he's written books, and he's in the entertainment industry, so by default, he must be obscenely wealthy. You know, like Oprah. And it's not enough for him to try to teach young men skills that will help them go out and get a job-- no, because of his success, he really should just give out jobs, find someone an apartment and pay the bills, and pay to relocate them. Oh, and by the way . . . you really need to do something personally about those slacker pro athletes. The losers aren't pulling their weight, just like you talk show hosts who are resting on your laurels!
I happen to fall on the other side of the divide.
You've heard the fish proverb, right? "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." In my view, that is exactly what we are talking about. Teach someone the skills so he can go out and achieve something on his own and become independent and capable. Don't just give him a handout.
I think what bothers me most about this comment is the sense that I get from her that certain segments of society really OWE more to the "needy." However she is defining needy. Young men who need a job, I guess. Is she getting involved herself in mentoring young men? If she really thinks the sports teams can make a difference, has she contacted them herself?
Maybe she's dedicated her life to helping at risk young men and so it's only fair of her to expect the same of others. But this whole comment smacks of "you are better off so YOU must do things for others." It's the 99% vs. the 1%.
Yeah. I take issue with people demanding that other people provide charity. I take issue with people focusing on giving handouts rather than helping people become self-sufficient.
And yes, this kind of stuff then either raises my blood pressure or depresses me for the next five hours. Which is why I've sworn off reading comments. Again.
What is this pernicious practice?
Reading the comments on emotionally-charged blog posts or articles. I may have mentioned it before. I always swear I'm going to quit. The trouble is that in some cases the comment are more enlightening or interesting than the original article. So I'm always dropping down at the bottom "just to quickly check."
Well, sometimes one of the comments manages to make my head ache in sheer disbelief, even while providing entertainment value. I had one of those unexpectedly the other day from an article talking about a segment from the Steve Harvey Show. (Not sure how long the link will work or how long the site keeps this stuff up, but there it is.) A friend of mine had linked to it on Facebook-- it was a snippet about Steve Harvey teaching young black men some common sense stuff that would help them land a good job. (Wear a shirt & tie to an interview, give a firm handshake, actually answer the questions the interviewer asks, and listen carefully to what the interviewer says. Good, practical, basic advice.) This is the kind of stuff that seems like a no-brainer to me so I was curious what the commenters had to say. Most of it was quite complimentary to Steve Harvey, about how he is a great example and help to young men that need a mentor, someone to show them the ropes. However, one lady's comment really made my jaw drop (copied and pasted exactly as she wrote it):
Well, if anything illustrates the ideological divide that exists between certain segments of this society, this is it. Steve Harvey has his own morning show, he's written books, and he's in the entertainment industry, so by default, he must be obscenely wealthy. You know, like Oprah. And it's not enough for him to try to teach young men skills that will help them go out and get a job-- no, because of his success, he really should just give out jobs, find someone an apartment and pay the bills, and pay to relocate them. Oh, and by the way . . . you really need to do something personally about those slacker pro athletes. The losers aren't pulling their weight, just like you talk show hosts who are resting on your laurels!
I happen to fall on the other side of the divide.
You've heard the fish proverb, right? "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." In my view, that is exactly what we are talking about. Teach someone the skills so he can go out and achieve something on his own and become independent and capable. Don't just give him a handout.
I think what bothers me most about this comment is the sense that I get from her that certain segments of society really OWE more to the "needy." However she is defining needy. Young men who need a job, I guess. Is she getting involved herself in mentoring young men? If she really thinks the sports teams can make a difference, has she contacted them herself?
Maybe she's dedicated her life to helping at risk young men and so it's only fair of her to expect the same of others. But this whole comment smacks of "you are better off so YOU must do things for others." It's the 99% vs. the 1%.
Yeah. I take issue with people demanding that other people provide charity. I take issue with people focusing on giving handouts rather than helping people become self-sufficient.
And yes, this kind of stuff then either raises my blood pressure or depresses me for the next five hours. Which is why I've sworn off reading comments. Again.
Comments