- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Was Rosa Parks was selected for her role after Claudette Colvin deemed not a good icon?
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:01 am to The Spleen
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:01 am to The Spleen
quote:
Yes, this is pretty common knowledge.
Nope. It isn't. If it were, we wouldn't talk about Rosa Parks. We'd talk about Claudette Colvin.
1
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:03 am to Joshjrn
quote:
I'm not sure why
I think it just shows that a lot of the supposed misery was manufactured. If black people were so oppressed, why did it take smart kids from Brooklyn telling them how oppressed they were for anything to happen?
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:05 am to Tiger1242
quote:
1. She was a pregnant teenager and the NAACP didn’t want to put her through the difficulties of being in the national spotlight and all of that while being a teen mom.
So instead they just let her face a racist prosecution alone.
quote:
Like most things the truth is probably a mix of the two of those
Nah, it's only this one:
quote:
2. The NAACP didn’t think she was a good image for the movement.
If your number one had any truth to it, they would have still assisted her with her case.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:05 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
Nope. It isn't. If it were, we wouldn't talk about Rosa Parks. We'd talk about Claudette Colvin.
Considering how many people take the "Rose Parks just sat her arse on a bus" tack, I can't fathom why it would reduce Parks' shine for people to find out that she was actually kind of a badass who put herself in harms way intentionally.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:06 am to Joshjrn
quote:
Considering how many people take the "Rose Parks just sat her arse on a bus" tack, I can't fathom why it would reduce Parks' shine for people to find out that she was actually kind of a badass who put herself in harms way intentionally.
Hey no doubt it's still admirable on her part, but if you have kids in school each February you know that Claudette Colvin is never mentioned. I'm not trying to diminish Rosa Parks, I'm just saying she is presented as the pioneer of this movement and Colvin isn't presented at all.
This post was edited on 3/6/22 at 9:08 am
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:08 am to USMEagles
quote:
I think it just shows that a lot of the supposed misery was manufactured. If black people were so oppressed, why did it take smart kids from Brooklyn telling them how oppressed they were for anything to happen?
Are you really taking the tack that black folk in America weren't openly and actively mistreated prior to the civil rights movement in the 60's? And that their "oppression" was simply manufactured?
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:09 am to Dr RC
quote:
That is not common knowledge. It’s not taught in schools when kids learn about Rosa Parks
Only reason I knew about it was because Drunk History covered it a few seasons ago.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:10 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
Hey no doubt it's still admirable on her part, but if you have kids in school each February you know that Claudette Colvin is never mentioned. I'm not trying to diminish Rosa Parks, I'm just saying she is presented as the pioneer of this movement and Colvin isn't presented at all.
She's not mentioned because there's limited classroom time and she didn't really play a role, beyond being the catalyst for the idea. Not that I have an objection to her being discussed as well, and I think that would actually be a good thing, but if you're only going to discuss one, it makes vastly more sense to discuss Parks, in my opinion.
This post was edited on 3/6/22 at 9:11 am
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:11 am to The Spleen
quote:
Yes, this is pretty common knowledge
It really wasn’t taught in high school until the last few years.
For as much as folks shite on women’s history courses, it’s where I learned about it in my undergrad elective. It got mentioned in an HBO show (can’t remember which one) a few years back.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:15 am to Upperdecker
quote:
That is not common knowledge. It’s not taught in schools when kids learn about Rosa Parks
Was in my school.
Maybe your school wasn’t as good?
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:19 am to Napoleon
quote:
Parks did not originate the idea of protesting segregation with a bus sit-in. Those preceding her included Bayard Rustin in 1942,[48] Irene Morgan in 1946, Lillie Mae Bradford in 1951,[49] Sarah Louise Keys in 1952, and the members of the ultimately successful Browder v. Gayle 1956 lawsuit (Claudette Colvin, Aurelia Browder, Susie McDonald, and Mary Louise Smith) who were arrested in Montgomery for not giving up their bus seats months before Parks.
Parks also tried it a few times before it stuck with an arrest. her being arrested was a culmination of Montgomery city officials getting tired of the bus seat confrontations and protests and clamping down.
Rosa Parks is more legend than fact, but her arrest got its intended response nationally and did lead to awareness of what was going on in the South
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:20 am to Joshjrn
quote:
I'm not sure why. I guess it's a nice fairy tale that entrenched power structures can routinely be toppled by dumb luck and chance, but that's not really reflective of reality. If anything, this is a great example of why organized, intentional campaigns are necessary.
I’m learning that more and more every day.
It’s a weird thing, I’m obviously happy with the results of Rosa Park’s story and agree with the intent.
But then we have the poop swastikia and Jussie Smollett combined with numerous other false flags and you wonder how much is organic vs forced change.
I think it goes back to the fact that a progressive always feels like they have to be moving things forward and when they run out of “bad things” to fix, they have to start making them up.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:29 am to Joshjrn
quote:
Are you really taking the tack that black folk in America weren't openly and actively mistreated prior to the civil rights movement in the 60's? And that their "oppression" was simply manufactured?
It would be difficult to objectively say black people are better off today than they were prior to the civil rights movement. That is unfortunate, for sure.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:34 am to Joshjrn
quote:
She's not mentioned because there's limited classroom time and she didn't really play a role, beyond being the catalyst for the idea. Not that I have an objection to her being discussed as well, and I think that would actually be a good thing, but if you're only going to discuss one, it makes vastly more sense to discuss Parks, in my opinion.
We devote an entire school month to black history. Put simply, there isn't enough of that history to pretend there isn't enough time to cover it all.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:39 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
It would be difficult to objectively say black people are better off today than they were prior to the civil rights movement. That is unfortunate, for sure.
From a current outcome and state of the family, that could be an accurate statement. But that’s the result of cultural/moral shifts that unfortunately began at the same time.
From a treatment from the government perspective:
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:47 am to Joshjrn
quote:
Are you really taking the tack that black folk in America weren't openly and actively mistreated prior to the civil rights movement in the 60's? And that their "oppression" was simply manufactured?
IDK about all that. I think it'd be fair to say that the wholesale changes to black life in the South made in the 19th and 20th Centuries have failed because they were not organic, but imposed by outsiders backed by force of arms.
Black people are still largely segregated and comparatively poor. Yeah, the Yankees came down and pushed around our ancestors and rearranged some things, but they've proven nothing better than destructive bumblers.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:25 am to Napoleon
Yes.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:43 am to 3nOut
quote:
From a treatment from the government perspective:
I think it's pretty clear that government coddling of people results in worse results for all involved.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:48 am to LRB1967
quote:Let's not just skip over the fact that unmarried pregnant teenagers might be a societal problem in general. In fact, the 70% single parent household of Claudette's group is rearing its ugly head to this day and beyond.
At the time pregnant teenagers didn't have the acceptance that they do now.
This post was edited on 3/6/22 at 10:49 am
Posted on 3/6/22 at 11:04 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
We devote an entire school month to black history. Put simply, there isn't enough of that history to pretend there isn't enough time to cover it all.
I don't necessarily mean the time to rattle off names, but time for emphasis. Especially if you're teaching young kids, there are only so many discrete data points you can convey before you overload them. Now, I absolutely think that this level of nuance should be taught come the high school level. Possibly junior high. Any earlier than that and you're probably losing the forest for the trees.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News