Rochester IMC : http://rochester.indymedia.org
Publish Your News

Re: Rochester's Anti-Racist Movement Visits WHAM

How is it erroneous to claim that everyone in society is better off when unmarried teenagers are not having intercourse and getting pregnant?

Unplanned pregnancies by girls who are not mature enough to be raising children by themselves nor the unspoken reality that it is typically older men who are "fathering"/abusing the mothers is the NUMBER ONE cause of cyclical poverty.

For all the claims of speaking truth to power, you seem to be ignoring the real truth. Listen to the actual broadcast rather than hate-filled anti-freedom rants by the self-serving social action community.

I didn't know that it was classist to believe that young girls should be able to become adults without being used and impreganated by an older man who has no intention of fulfilling his responsibility to care for his own children.

All the social programs in the world will not (and have not) made one bit of difference until self-destructive actions cease.

Listen to the ENTIRE segment. Black, White, Brown, Yellow, you'll see that Bob Lonsberry is calling for everyone to reach their potential by not participating in actions that a youth is completely unprepared for and incapable of excelling.

And ALL scholars should be celebrated.

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"

Read the speech, and then tell me we haven't made progress AND that your feelings should determine if someone is fired instead of realizing the First Amendment protects ALL speech, including that critical of a government school as well as speech you may disagree with.
 
Add a new comment
Title
Author
Please enter your name or an alias. This helps keep discussions understandable when many people comment.
  Create a new account
Text Format

Comment

Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.

Comments

Re: Re: Rochester's Anti-Racist Movement Visits WHAM

You have called for a boycott of Lonsbury sponsors. I would like to join this boycott, but I never listen to his show, so I don't know who they are. There are probably many others like me. Do you have a list of the sponsors? Be sure to tell everyone that when they go to a store and do not buy that product, they tell the store manager WHY they are not buying it. This makes it much more effective.
Carl Romeo
247-1543
 

Re: Re: Re: Rochester's Anti-Racist Movement Visits WHAM

Hi Carl-

Thanks for your interest. If you would like more information about the Bob Lonsberry boycott, please contact fireboblonsberry (at) rocus.org

We will be making a website shortly, as well.
 

Re: Re: Rochester's Anti-Racist Movement Visits WHAM

1) Let's get the 1st amendment issue out of the table right now. No one is trying to take away Lonsberry's 1st amendment rights. We are demanding he be fired because, as a talk show host, he holds a *privileged* position in terms of his views. Broadcasting your (hate-filled, divisive, ignorant) views to a large segment in western NY is not a right.

2) You really should read the position paper. Then you would have understood the most glaring fallacy in your argument: not all of the girls at the young mothers program *chose* to have sex. Furthermore, no one is celebrating or encouraging teenage pregnancy. People are celebrating the hard work and dedication the women have given.

3) Again, read the position statement. It explains why ARM believes Lonsberry's statements were racist, sexist and classist. If you don't agree with the statements, then explain why. When you say, "I don't know what is classist...", I see that as being willfully ignorant, because the paper lays things out pretty clearly. Maybe I'm reading into things too much though, please prove me wrong.
 

Re: Re: Rochester's Anti-Racist Movement Visits WHAM

"How is it erroneous to claim that everyone in society is better off when unmarried teenagers are not having intercourse and getting pregnant?"

I'm going to try to unpack this a little bit. It sounds like you're saying you think having sex means someone is going to get pregnant. If I'm wrong, please tell me. Of course, having sex gives a chance of getting pregnant, but wearing condoms, and using hormonal birth control make it much less likely. Yes, these girls would not be getting pregnant if they were not having sex, but lots of people have sex without getting pregnant. So, the problem isn't unmarried teenagers having intercourse. On top of that, there is an assumption that all of these women chose to have sex, which is factually incorrect.

I don't think you're going to find anybody arguing that during high school is not the most choice time to get pregnant. However, to shame women who are getting pregnant, (I didn't hear him say one word about the men behind the pregnancy, mind you), by telling them to keep their legs closed, and continuing with far worse statements, is not the same as saying "It would be better for people if they did not get pregnant in high school." I think if he made that statement, there wouldn't be a call for his firing.

"I didn't know that it was classist to believe that young girls should be able to become adults without being used and impreganated by an older man who has no intention of fulfilling his responsibility to care for his own children."

I really think you're being fooled by Lonsberry if that's what you're hearing from him. He never mentioned men's responsibility. He doesn't care about holding men accountable, he cares about shaming women. And let me tell you, from what I understand, there is at least one case of a woman who was raped, decided to keep the child, and continued high school through it all. And he is putting her down for not keeping her legs closed. He doesn't know these girls! He doesn't know their stories! He is making assumptions and talking about things he has no knowledge of.

Finally, people keep mentioning freedom of speech. He has a right to say whatever he wants, true. He doesn't have a 'right' to be on the radio. That's a choice a company is making: they're choosing to hire him, and they can choose to fire him. Please don't confuse this as someone saying he doesn't have the right to speak his mind. We're just exercising our right to speak our minds, and moreso, to make it so people's racist, classist, and sexist assumptions are not validated over the airwaves. And we will continue to work until it happens.
 

Account Login

Watch IndyTV!

Current Show Online:
Show #29:Attorney for AU, Richard Katskee Discusses Greece Lawsuit over Sectarian Prayer

Watch Indy TV on City Cable 15 Mondays and Thursdays at 6:30pm (New Times).

Ongoing Local Events

Rochester Indymedia
2nd and 4th Thursday
of the Month, 7PM
Anti-war Storefront
658 Monroe Ave.
Critical Mass
Last Friday of the Month
Liberty Pole (Main/East) 6:00pm
Queer Friendly Needle Exchange
Monday–Friday 1pm–4pm
Health Outreach Project
416 Central Ave
Food Not Bombs
Every other Saturday
4pm
St. Joe's, 402 South Ave.
Next meeting: Nov. 29
Industrial Workers of the World - Rochester
1st Monday of the Month, 7pm
Anti-War Storefront
658 Monroe Ave.
Next meeting: Dec. 1st
Anti-War Crisis Center
Tues-Fri noon-8pm
Sat.-Sun noon-5pm
658 Monroe Avenue
(585) 271-2620

Media Centers

Syndication feeds

 

This site made manifest by dadaIMC software