The Measure of a Man

Sunny said:
Break
"Buried in that inspiring-sounding rhetoric, heavily "borrowed" from Rudyard Kipling's poem, is a message that is ugly and downright scary. And it is not the message of the country that I know and love."
Break
Click to expand...
Whatever you can find to be scared about in Rudyard Kiplings poem "If", (did you mean to suggest there is something there to worry us all?).

I've just checked and found the students at Manchester University chose to deface the poem placed in one of their building for the same reason you may support, but continues to baffle me as I've said, (I accept I haven't read other works by Kipling that may have more problematic aspects):

Quote:
"He is regarded as one of England’s greatest writers, whose poems were praised as the nation’s favourites and whose books were lauded as classics of children's literature.
But it appears that Rudyard Kipling has fallen out of favour with today’s generation of students, after it emerged that his “If” poem has been scrubbed off a building by university students who claim he was a “racist”.
Student leaders at Manchester University declared that Kipling “stands for the opposite of liberation, empowerment, and human rights”.
The poem, which had been painted on the wall of the students’ union building by an artist, was removed by students on Tuesday, in a bid to “reclaim” history on behalf of those who have been “oppressed” by “the likes of Kipling”.
In lieu of Kipling’s If, students used a black marker pen to write out the poem Still I Rise by Maya Angelou on the same stretch of wall."
"Today, as a team, we removed an imperialist’s work from the walls of our union and replaced them with words of the maya angelou - god knows black and brown voices have been written out of history enough, and it’s time we try to reverse that, at the very least in our union"
Click to expand...
 

Graham, if you go back and reread my note, you will see that I am not objecting the slightest bit to Rudyard Kipling's poem. I was objecting to the fact that the poem was "borrowed" and twisted into an ugly, distorted explosion of hate. There is nothing wrong with the poem itself, it should have been left alone!
 
grahamg said:
Are you completely unable to assess men as men, and women as women? Would it be completely wrong to comment someone was a good mother, and expect the term to be understood by those listening?
Click to expand...

Could you please explain where my response makes you question my ability to assess men as men and women as women?

I hold men and women to the same standard when I talk about "their measure" so for me it makes more sense to talk about a person rather than a man or a woman. Also culture and society has often used "man" as a substitute for "all people male or female" and I prefer using person since there is no implied gender. I was assuming that Gaer was using "man" that way and not excluding women in her statement and responded as such.

I'd also appreciate an explanation of what makes my statement make you think that I think it is wrong to comment on something using a specific gender when using that gender makes sense such as your example.

If I'm truly communicating poorly or ambiguously then I'd like to know about that so I can improve my communication. However if you object to or don't like it when people use generic inclusive terms please just say that rather than insinuating that I'm unable or unwilling to use gender specific terms when they make sense.
 

asp3 said:
I think we view people and the world very differently. My measure of a person (measure of a man is very sexist to me) is how open their mind is to new ideas and how they are willing to dig deeply and consider challenges to their beliefs without objecting to other ideas out of hand.

For me this portion of the original post "your inate sense of right and wrong" is especially troubling. There are still far too many people who's "innate sense of right and wrong" tell then that the races shouldn't mix, that certain races are inferior to other races, that certain religions are blasphemous.

I have never felt any pressure to be ashamed of being white.
Click to expand...
What a great post. ❤️
 
APPARENTLY, WHEN an opinion is posted, you will not have to post three or more
additional post, explaining what you REALLY meant.
Everyone is now a mind reader, knowing you had several messages in the
original post.
I though the OP made a statement, hellfire and damnation, I can't read good, but I can
kind'a figure out what they was trying to say.
Now I gott'a send them to my wizard to have them figured out.
 
Last edited:
Where I'm at on the topic:

First, I've never been one to look for "hidden meanings;" I take what's written as it's written.
When I read the original post, what struck me was the tone similar to a somewhat lengthy poem on a card I received for high school graduation- to be an adult (in that case "woman") has little to do with age, but one's own actions and the way the person meets challenges in life.

As some people mentioned, if this https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46473/if--- was what they were referring to, I don't see anything negative in that, either. Of course, I hadn't read much Kipling, and don't know much about him.

Second, as some posters mentioned, too many words and terms don't mean what they used to mean. At least we're supposed to see it that way.

I think the only person who knows exactly what's meant in the original post is the person who wrote it. And rather than dissecting it looking for hidden meanings, I'd like to hear what she says about it.
 
I've read a bit of Kipling's work. It has to be evaluated in the context of Victorian times - the time of the British Empire and the British Raj in India. Kipling was a man of those times but he was not uncritical of the Raj.

What he was was a brilliant story teller. If you haven't read his Just So stories or the Jungle Books in their original form you have missed some great writing for children. He also wrote a longish poem called Gunga Din where he documents the bad treatment of the English of an Indian water 'boy'. The ending of the poem is all that most people remember -

You Lazarushian-leather Gunga Din!
Though I’ve belted you and flayed you,
By the livin’ Gawd that made you,
You’re a better man than I am, Gunga Din!
Click to expand...

For the full poem, that portrays Din's ill treatment by the British soldiers, see here:
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46783/gunga-din
 
asp3 said:
Could you please explain where my response makes you question my ability to assess men as men and women as women?
I hold men and women to the same standard when I talk about "their measure" so for me it makes more sense to talk about a person rather than a man or a woman. Also culture and society has often used "man" as a substitute for "all people male or female" and I prefer using person since there is no implied gender. I was assuming that Gaer was using "man" that way and not excluding women in her statement and responded as such.
I'd also appreciate an explanation of what makes my statement make you think that I think it is wrong to comment on something using a specific gender when using that gender makes sense such as your example.

If I'm truly communicating poorly or ambiguously then I'd like to know about that so I can improve my communication. However if you object to or don't like it when people use generic inclusive terms please just say that rather than insinuating that I'm unable or unwilling to use gender specific terms when they make sense.
Click to expand...
The use of generic inclusive terms, or did you mean to say, "gender inclusive terms"(?), does sometimes jar with me, when I see it as rewriting history, or the bible, (aka God says whatever because " she is a woman", or hopefully you know what I mean, God being generally referred to in male terms, and some objecting to this).? Maybe its just me, but that's hopefully an adequate explanation, and fits in with my befuddlement at the behaviour of students in Manchester university failing to appreciate the Kipling poem "If". :unsure: .
 
[QUOTE="grahamg, post: 1386409, member: 388)
"If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
Break
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!"
[/QUOTE]
It seems to me there is an irony in the behaviour of the university students and their dislike of Kipling's poem, perhaps because they read too much into the last lines, and its encapsulated in the poems first verse. They are "giving way to hating" aren't they, or intolerance at least. :unsure: .
Those taking down the poem say they, "acted as a team", there's irony in the fact they appeared to feel the need to back one another up! :rolleyes:.
 
Last edited:
grahamg said:
The use of generic inclusive terms, or did you mean to say, "gender inclusive terms"(?), does sometimes jar with me, when I see it as rewriting history, or the bible, (aka God says whatever because " she is a woman", or hopefully you know what I mean, God being generally referred to in male terms, and some objecting to this).? Maybe its just me, but that's hopefully an adequate explanation, and fits in with my befuddlement at the behaviour of students in Manchester university failing to appreciate the Kipling poem "If". :unsure: .
Click to expand...

Thank you, I appreciate your explanation. I like to use generic but gender inclusive or gender neutral seem to be good ways of describing the words I use as well.

I wouldn't think of trying to change your concept of god and I can understand how some of the terminology some people are using makes you feel like that's what they're attempting. However on the concept of god I think that each person needs to frame it in a way that works for them in spite of the way that god has historically been depicted.

I'm afraid that the Manchester University portion of this thread didn't catch my attention and I'm probably not familiar enough with Kipling to put it into perspective anyway.
 
Sunny said:
Graham, if you go back and reread my note, you will see that I am not objecting the slightest bit to Rudyard Kipling's poem. I was objecting to the fact that the poem was "borrowed" and twisted into an ugly, distorted explosion of hate. There is nothing wrong with the poem itself, it should have been left alone!
Click to expand...
How could I "borrow" and "distort" Rudyard Kipling's poem if Ihad never read it? And this is the first time I've been called a " arrogant white racist" too! I think that's funny!
 
Gaer said:
How could I "borrow" and "distort" Rudyard Kipling's poem if Ihad never read it? And this is the first time I've been called a " arrogant white racist" too! I think that's funny!
Click to expand...

I wouldn't think it was at all funny if I had given people that impression of myself, Gaer.
 
Gaer said:
How could I "borrow" and "distort" Rudyard Kipling's poem if Ihad never read it? And this is the first time I've been called a " arrogant white racist" too! I think that's funny!
Click to expand...
You must have been subliminally affected by Kipling, or something like that and putting aside the unintended interpretation placed upon your words, I'm becoming more than a little concerned by what I perceive as cultural vandalism. When Kipling's beautiful poems, containing so many positive thoughts for any human being to appreciate, they can't be read in educational establishments any longer, for fear of someone saying they're offended by his thoughts and words, or how they interpret them. Their behaviour in doing this offends me a great deal, but its lucky Kipling himself won't be worried about being censored.:whistle: .
 
Sunny said:
I wouldn't think it was at all funny if I had given people that impression of myself, Gaer.
Click to expand...
I worked for Civil rights in the 70's, and amassed funds for the NAACP, in spite of the fact I lost two executive positions to affimative action ( which IMO is reversed black discrimination). Did you?
 
“I gott’a have another horse.”

“Hugh, I done give you that pugh, what’ya do with it?”

“The neighbor come by borrowed it.”

“The one with all them grown boys with book learning?”

“Yea, him and his.”

“Clem, where’s my horse.”

“Well it’s kinda hard to say. I know them boys of his would gather
by the corral at night and argue.”

“So?”

“The pugh understood talking,
they killed that horse with their diverse wrangling, sure as I’m standing here.”

So, I need another horse.”
 
Gaer said:
I worked for Civil rights in the 70's, and amassed funds for the NAACP, in spite of the fact I lost two executive positions to affimative action ( which IMO is reversed black discrimination). Did you?
Click to expand...

Aha, the old "some of my best friends are black/Jewish/whatever" line, eh, Gaer? I'm sure losing two jobs had nothing to do with you, your attitudes, or your job skills. It was all the fault of the blacks! 😄

(To answer your question, no, I never lost a job to "affirmative action." I was good at what I did.)

I did go back and reread your OP, just to make sure I wasn't imagining anything. Here is part of it, in case you've forgotten what you wrote:

The mob cries out, "Show us you're ashamed to be white. Kneel in submission. Spit on your flag. Turn your backs on your symbol of America. Humble before us."

Amazing how you've changed your story. That quote is white supremacist hatred, pure and simple, neatly slipped in between dramatic sounding rhetoric, heavily and very obviously borrowed from Kipling's poem, And I suspect that quote reveals your real attitude on the subject, even if you now proclaim yourself a great civil rights leader. You apparently can't conceive of people working together, in peace and equality. One side or the other has to be dominant, with the other side kneeling in submission. You would have fit right in, in the Dark Ages.
 
Old&InTheWay said:
Sunny, you certainly seem filled with hatred and vitriol, do you get happy by attacking people over and over and taking their posts out of context? Aren't you a bit mean-spirited?
Click to expand...
I must say there are of course white people who feel oppressed today, maybe there always has been. When I hear mates of mine make the argument, "single, white males" are discriminated against I do think they are being a bit racist, (or soft, spoiled beggars, playing the victim card to cover their own shortcomings). The OP didn't strike me as racist, except maybe a hint of the feeling of being oppressed, when symbols, or individuals we admire, are ruthlessly undermined, even long after their deaths, because someone feels offended by something they may have said a hundred years ago! :rolleyes: .
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top