[HN Gopher] Mr. Rogers sued the KKK ___________________________________________________________________ Mr. Rogers sued the KKK Author : bryanrasmussen Score : 162 points Date : 2022-07-30 16:58 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (allthatsinteresting.com) (TXT) w3m dump (allthatsinteresting.com) | Waterluvian wrote: | One of my favourite little stories is how Mr Rogers started off | in Canada. He brought a small team to Toronto and did the show | there for a year. One member of the team stayed in Canada when | the rest returned to the States. His name was Mr. Dressup, which | for many Canadians is our cherished childhood equivalent of Mr. | Rogers. | jollybean wrote: | I wonder if it'd be better to posit that the 'team' sued the KKK | because almost everything I know about this guy would lead me to | believe he wasn't even likely to attack his aggressors, even if | it was reasonable to do so. | | FYI check out this 1969 congressional hearing [1], especially as | compared to hearings today. | | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C5PMPIdG_Y | lupire wrote: | Asserting one's rights is not "attacking". Do you think that | Fred Rogers, upon learning that a gang of monstrous people is | saying horrific things while impersonating him, wouldn't force | them to stop? | exogeny wrote: | Mr. Rogers is one of the purest people to have ever walked this | Earth. I used to infrequently run into him outside of WQED's | studios when walking to and from CMU's campus and without fail, | he'd have a huge smile on his face and tell me (as I'm sure he | did everyone!) to have a great day and that he was proud. | | To this day the memory brings a huge smile to my face. What a | human being. | anonymousiam wrote: | Retric wrote: | "Anti-racism is usually structured around conscious efforts and | deliberate actions which are intended to provide _equal | opportunities for all people on both an individual and a | systemic level."_ | | Actually being color blind rather than having the appearance of | being color blind is a tricky thing. Taken to an extreme, a | collage which had a purely random acceptance criteria is non | discriminatory, but it would feel like discrimination if you | had a high GPA. | fallingknife wrote: | Yes that is the technical definition of discrimination, but | when people say something is "discriminatory" they usually | mean discriminatory in a way that it isn't supposed to be. To | your example of a college, it is supposed to discriminate on | academic performance, so nobody has a problem with | discrimination on GPA (of course comparing GPAs is still an | implementation problem). | | And to say it's hard to be colorblind is not true. You just | don't factor in race. You will probably fall back to the line | that black students would have had a higher GPA if they | weren't discriminated against in other areas of society, but | then it's not the school doing the discriminating. And this | is the core of the problem. Instead of selecting the best | students, universities have decided to select who they think | hypothetically would have been the best student in a perfect | world, and doing a very poor job of it. And their arrogance | in appointing themselves the corrector of all societal ills | and their myopic focus on only gender and race differences in | doing so has pissed a lot of people off. | crooked-v wrote: | > You just don't factor in race. | | You may not want to factor in race, but society already | has. People aren't spherical cows in a vacuum. | Dylan16807 wrote: | > You will probably fall back to the line that black | students would have had a higher GPA if they weren't | discriminated against in other areas of society, but then | it's not the school doing the discriminating. And this is | the core of the problem. Instead of selecting the best | students, universities have decided to select who they | think hypothetically would have been the best student in a | perfect world, and doing a very poor job of it. | | It's more complicated than that. | | If someone is in a bad environment, they can have a worse | GPA and be a worse student at that moment, but once they | get into the college environment they _will_ be a better | student, not just "could have been". | | > And their arrogance in appointing themselves the | corrector of all societal ills and their myopic focus on | only gender and race differences in doing so has pissed a | lot of people off. | | Appointing themselves the corrector? For anyone that _does_ | have that motivation, they 'd probably gladly welcome more | cooperation. And those two getting most of the focus is | because they get most of the discrimination. | fallingknife wrote: | > but once they get into the college environment they | will be a better student | | How, exactly? Not that this really matters b/c | universities today are credentialing scams where no one | fails out. | | > And those two getting most of the focus is because they | get most of the discrimination. | | Citation needed. And if they were being at all | quantitative about this, at least I would have some | sympathy. | | The giveaway is that they are being completely dishonest | about what they are doing. Harvard fought like hell to | prevent their admissions process from coming out in | discovery. If they were honest, they would make it public | anyway. What do they have to hide? Well, just that they | weren't running any remotely reasonable process to model | how good of a student someone is under normalized | conditions. They were artificially lowering the | "personality scores" of Asian students to keep them out. | crooked-v wrote: | > How, exactly? | | Consider two students with equal intelligence and equal | skill at studying. | | One lives in a rich suburban neighborhood where schools | are well-funded and the parents have the time and money | to supply constant extracurricular attention to their | children. | | The other lives in a single-parent household in a | historically redlined urban neighborhood where the school | budgets are peanuts and he has to work a part-time job on | the side to help support his family. | | Which one is going to have the more impressive transcript | in college applications? | fallingknife wrote: | Yes but how is that going to be equalized by another 4 | years of the same? | Retric wrote: | It's not that people will be exactly equal but rather you | can validate admission criteria by comparing graduation | rates and GPA's. | | If men and women graduate at similar rates and have | similar GPA's then your admission criteria are presumably | reasonably unbiased. If men have lower GPA's and graduate | at lower rates then presumably their admission criteria | should be raised to account for biases you aren't aware | of. | | If however you underrepresent men relative to the general | population you may want to focus on attracting more of | them through advertising. | | From an outside perspective this might seem unfair. Why | is the school spending so much money mailing to young men | while requiring more extra curricular activists to be | admitted? It's a question of equal standards vs equal | opportunity. | toolz wrote: | No one argues discrimination is bad, they argue | discrimination based on something as arbitrary as skin color | or gender is bad. It reads to me as very disingenuous to | frame the conversation as if there was an argument to be made | that college's discriminating on unrelated, unchangeable, | inherited characteristics is fair or just. | fsckboy wrote: | > _No one argues discrimination is bad, they argue | discrimination based on something as arbitrary as skin | color or gender is bad._ | | you're wrong. being in favor of "equitable outcomes" today | frequently means arguing that discrimination on the basis | of math or other test scores is bad. Google "math is | whiteness" or see the elimination of gifted and talented | programs in public schools | Dylan16807 wrote: | > Google "math is whiteness" | | That's about how teaching methods are failing some | children, and then they're being judged for it unfairly. | It's not against proper education and testing and using | that to sort. | fsckboy wrote: | > _teaching methods are failing some children_ | | if you assume that all children are equally capable of | learning everything then you are forced to conclude that | teaching methods are failing some children. But if you | "believe in science" (it's quite popular today to profess | belief in science), you don't believe assumptions like | that. | jacoblambda wrote: | All children are equally capable of learning but | different children are receptive to different teaching | styles and approaches. | | Only teaching children with a small selection of | approaches that were primarily refined with middle to | upper class white neuro-typical children can be | considered discriminatory. | | That's the point of those studies. | | It would be like forcing a kid who is growing up in | middle-to-upper class western society to solely learn | mathematics via ancient greek visual proofs and then | blame them for not understanding maths because they "just | aren't trying" or "they aren't smart". | | Everybody has equal capacities to learn but only if you | can find the style of learning which works for each | person. | rosmax_1337 wrote: | Is it true that all children are equally capable of | learning? | josephcsible wrote: | A lot of people argue that if exam scores or GPAs are | correlated with unchangeable, inherited characteristics, | then discriminating on exam scores or GPAs is unfair and | unjust. | halostatue wrote: | Stop selectively using Dr King's words to support a stance that | his writings, especially his writings later than the "I have a | dream" speech, do not support. | | https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.... | https://academic.udayton.edu/race/03justice/justice06.htm#Co... | | Mister Rogers _absolutely_ embraced anti-racism on his show. | That you do not understand that says much more about you than | about anyone else. | trasz wrote: | This. Since I've already googled up a link: | https://www.today.com/popculture/how-mister-rogers-pool- | mome... | nimbius wrote: | I'd argue the five minutes of episode when Fred soaked his feet | with a black man in a kiddie pool delivered a more crushing blow | to the KKK than his suit did. a lot of kids saw that, and in turn | became a lot harder to indoctrinate. | | bigots and racists unfortunately remembered that lesson very | well. teaching lgbtq and the history of race in this country is | all but forbidden in some States because it works. | bbarnett wrote: | tptacek wrote: | Whatever your definition of "hate" is, if it doesn't capture | teaching people to believe Black people are inferior, it's an | unproductive definition, one that will just lead you into | constant unproductive semantic debates. A lesson that Black | people are inferior is a lesson reasonable people will | consider hateful. Some beliefs people hold are simply | hateful; we are not bound to respect them. | bbarnett wrote: | You are seeing hate, as a reflection of your own emotional | response to the act. You are also insisting that those | responsible, must believe just as you do, and therefore | presuming they think their act wrong. | | If you cannot see how they view they world, how their | thinking is wrong, cannot see how they think, you have zero | chance of correcting it. | crooked-v wrote: | I'm sure many people who took part in historical | lynchings against minorities thought themselves | absolutely justified and were having a grand ol' time | doing it. If you look up the records, you'll find that | some lynchings were even treated as spontaneous parties | by the aggressors: they broke out the good booze, started | up some campfire cooking, danced and played music... all | while their targets hung dead in the background or, | sometimes, slowly choked to death. | | None of that makes it any less of a hateful act. | elliekelly wrote: | > Such people can believe black people are inferior, or lgbtq | is wrong, without it deriving from hate. Their hate comes | from people trying to "corrupt" their children's beliefs, and | anyone with a child would feel precisely the same way, if | they thought the thing taught, was very wrong. | | I think I understand what you're trying to say but if you | explore the next "layer" of their beliefs and ask _why_ | they're so afraid you'll find the ultimate root of these | beliefs is hatred. | Ma8ee wrote: | > it makes it sound as if this difference of opinion is hate | based | | Yes. If you think black people or gay people are inferior, | and that their rights should be suppressed because of that, | that is hate. | | > "they believe it to be wrong information" | | And we believe what they peddle to be lies grounded in hate | and bigotry. | eesmith wrote: | > it makes it sound as if this difference of opinion is hate | based, not just a wrong belief | | The belief was one of racial superiority and hatred over the | movement towards equal rights and equal access, which knocked | them off the pedestal they believed they were born to be on. | They didn't like how their children were being "corrupted" by | the ideals of racial equality, which upset their views about | social hierarchy. | | Public pools shut down or were privatized after desegregation | and civil rights laws made it impossible to have "whites | only" public pools. There's a book on this overall topic: | Contested Waters: A Social History of Swimming Pools in | America. | | There's an infamous picture of a motel manager pouring pool | chemicals into the motel pool to scare desegregationalist | activists who were swimming in it - | https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/motel-manager-pouring- | acid-... . | | Here's background on the context of the wading pool: | https://www.today.com/popculture/how-mister-rogers-pool- | mome... . "This 'Mister Rogers' moment broke race barriers. | It's just as powerful today / The scene aired amid racial | tensions in the U.S. over segregated swimming pools, and many | see it as Rogers taking a stand against racism. ... The same | year it aired, the Supreme Court ruled that pools could not | be segregated by race." | | You can also read what Clemmons (who played the officer) has | to say about it in his memoir, "Officer Clemmons: A Memoir", | which has this scene on the cover. | rblatz wrote: | I'm not sure the distinction between the idea that this other | group of people are inferior and hatred. | | If a group is inferior it's then ok to use the state and | other social systems to keep them below you. That seems | pretty hateful to me. | trention wrote: | rayiner wrote: | ratww wrote: | _> I 'd argue the five minutes of episode when Fred soaked his | feet with a black man in a kiddie pool delivered a more | crushing blow to the KKK than his suit did_ | | I didn't know this story, so I searched for a video: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6O_Ep9bY0U | b3morales wrote: | It's also described in the article, and there's a clip with | commentary from the actor, Francois Clemmons (playing | "Officer Clemmons"). | shadowgovt wrote: | The lawsuit stopped three Klansmen. | | Fred's show inoculated a generation against their lies. | | I totally agree. | OJFord wrote: | I watched Tom Hanks' portrayal on the plane a few months ago; | being non-American and unfamiliar with the original programme, I | was a good way in to the film before I started to suspect it was | a 'docudrama' rather than the surrealist drama I'd thitherto | thought! | | It was an enjoyable film about an apparently almost 'too good to | be true' gentleman even without the context of having grown up | with _The Neighbourhood_. | shadowgovt wrote: | Rogers is the only childhood hero I had who turned out to be | exactly who he seemed to be. | | And with no small amount of work... He was a trained | Presbyterian minister and child psychologist. His show was a | religious vocation. | dhosek wrote: | I literally have a picture of Mr Rogers on the wall over my | desk as a reminder of how I want to be. | ncr100 wrote: | Rogers practiced effective communication for children, which I | believe is worthwhile studying as an adult. Helps with clarity. | | Starts with: | | 1. State the idea you wish to express as clearly as possible, | and in terms preschoolers can understand. Example: "It is | dangerous to play in the street." | | 2. Rephrase in a positive manner, as in "It is good to play | where it is safe." | | 3. Rephrase the idea, bearing in mind that preschoolers cannot | yet make subtle distinctions and need to be redirected to | authorities they trust. As in, "Ask your parents where it is | safe to play." | | Ends with: | | ... 9. => "Your favorite grown-ups can tell you where it is | safe to play. It is important to try to listen to them, and | listening is an important part of growing." | | Remainder of rules available at | https://www.openculture.com/2019/05/mr-rogers-nine-rules-for... | imglorp wrote: | Grew up watching Fred on local TV, probably saw every episode | for a decade, and know people who have met him. | | He was the real deal, with the courage to have unswayable | adherence to pure humanitarian values. Look up the time he went | to shame Congress into funding PBS. | feet wrote: | We need more people like Mr. Rogers | aliqot wrote: | I put Mr Wizard into the same category | UncleOxidant wrote: | Yes! I didn't grow up watching Mr. Rogers (not sure why as | it was the right era, but I think he wasn't on TV | nationwide yet), but did grow up watching Mr. Wizard. For | my 10th birthday my mom arranged for me to go meet Mr. | Wizard in his studio lab which was a couple hours drive | from where we lived. Really nice guy. Give me some books | and some electric motors and showed me around. He invited | me to be a guest on his show, but I was way too shy as a | kid to do that. I was happy enough with the private tour. | michaelchisari wrote: | The documentary _" Won't You Be My Neighbor"_ was even better | than the movie, highly recommend it. | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhwktRDG_aQ | commandlinefan wrote: | The scene (actual video footage) of him testifying in front | of congress was so amazing I wouldn't have believed it | actually happened if I saw it in a dramatized movie. I tried | to find a clip on YouTube but I can't - it's worth watching | this documentary if only to watch him _actually convince_ a | skeptical senator to fund PBS. | OJFord wrote: | I don't know if it's what you're looking for, but another | comment has a YouTube link for something similar at least: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32289389 | jmclnx wrote: | Interesting read, gained even more respect for him from this | article. | hinkley wrote: | Before the #MeToo movement there was a slow ramp of scandals | about celebrities and for a while there every time someone | posted about Fred I would recite a little litany in my head, | | Pleasebegoodpleasebegoodpleasebegood | | That went into overdrive after the first rumors about Bill | Cosby started up. And then by John Lassiter I was a momentary | wreck every time Fred made the news. | | Fred Rogers has been gone long enough now that I'm more | confident that he was genuinely the Nice Guy his public image | paints him to be. Of course Fred Rogers sued the KKK. | | Arsenio Hall had Fred on the first run of his talk show. He was | agog. Major hero worship. Ended up gifting him a copy of his | signature jacket. Which was even bigger on Fred than it was on | Arsenio. | RajT88 wrote: | I enjoy casually horrifying people by mentioning that Fred | Rogers had 2 children. | | Which means that he at least occasionally did the nasty. | normac2 wrote: | Relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/767/ | hinkley wrote: | Somewhere in a highly secure secret government facility is | a recording of Fred Rogers saying, "I'm not angry, I'm just | disappointed." | | If I suddenly stop posting here in two days time it's | because They came for me. Please contact Amnesty | International. | lupire wrote: | fknorangesite wrote: | > after the first rumors about Bill Cosby started up | | 2004? | hinkley wrote: | I hate to be the one to have to tell you this but Fred | Rogers passed away in 2003. It's been almost two decades. | No wonder we're a mess. | fknorangesite wrote: | Ah well I'm Canadian so I've always been more of a Mr | Dressup kind of guy. | simplicio wrote: | I'm trying to imagine myself being impartial on a jury when one | side is the KKK and the other is Mr Rogers. | [deleted] ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-07-30 23:00 UTC)