Today is June 19th, the day known as ‘Juneteenth’, the anniversary of the day when the news of the emancipation of slaves finally reached Texas in 1865. Although Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, enforcement of it in the secessionist states had to await the arrival of the Union army and Texas was the most remote part of the Confederacy. It was declared a federal holiday last year and tomorrow will be the first time the holiday will be celebrated as a national holiday though it has long been celebrated in the African-American community.
Today is also Father’s Day, one of the many ‘special’ days that the retail industry in the US loves to publicize and that are used to drive shopping. Naturally I ignore it.
My own father died over four decades ago. He was a wonderful man, kind and generous and always willing to do anything for his children. We had a great relationship but it was not manifested in long conversations or gift giving. Father’s Day was not a thing in Sri Lanka but if it were and if my father and I did talk on the phone, the conversation would be pretty much like the one below.
I used to think that I and my (now dead) father were utterly different. Now, working through my seventh decade of life, I think we are extremely similar. I don’t like how he treated people, but he was a product of his patriarchal time. I try to do better. I’m not too proud of my earlier life, but I think I am getting better now.
There is a long-standing American joke, regularly repurposed for different locations, that may apply here (though not in that comic):
If you need it explained, too bad.
Yep.
#0
They exchanged all vital information in minimum time. Very productive.
#2
I think I have only ever heard that joke formulated to be at the expense of black people, i.e. “what’s the most confusing day of the year for black people?”
Holms @ # 4: I think I have only ever heard that joke formulated to be at the expense of black people…
I first heard it aimed at a particular town of Latinx people, and have myself used it to put down certain rednecks: it travels well.
My favorite from the Lx series:
“I first heard it aimed at a particular town of Latinx people, and have myself used it to put down certain rednecks”
.
Some stereotypes are rooted in very humorless statistical realities that indicate unsolvable, institutionalized social problems:
“More than three quarters of African American births are to unmarried women, nearly double the illegitimacy rate of all other births, according to new federal data.
The National Center for Health Statistics said that in 2015, 77.3 percent of non-immigrant black births were illegitimate. The national non-immigrant average is 42 percent, and it was 30 percent for whites.
The new numbers were in a Center for Immigration Studies analysis on the births to immigrants. That total is 32.7 percent, but to Hispanic immigrants it is 48.9 percent, according to Steven Camarota, the director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/77-black-births-to-single-moms-49-for-hispanic-immigrants
I’ve heard it explained that the reason is that if you’re poor enough, you can’t afford to get married. In many cases, the babies have fathers who are fairly present, but they can’t afford to support a family (due to racism) and if they marry, the mother loses whatever benefits she has. There’s also the high incarceration rate among black men, so in many cases, the fathers are in prison.
Interestingly enough, it’s also common among retired people to shack up and not marry solely because their income would drop too much if they did. (Or they shack up with no romantic intentions just to save on living expenses.) But people don’t notice them because they don’t usually get pregnant. Plus, of course, so many of them are white, and nobody wants to hear about “moral depravity” among white people, only among non-white people.
BTW, I don’t know much about the Washington Examiner I know that there is a right-wing (think Murdoch, NY Post) paper with “Washington” in its name. Is this that one?
Allison @ # 7: … there is a right-wing (think Murdoch, NY Post) paper with “Washington” in its name. Is this that one?
Washington Examiner: RIGHT BIAS … moderate to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. … Overall, we rate the Washington Examiner Right Biased based on editorial positions that almost exclusively favor the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks.
… MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY … The Washington Examiner is owned by Clarity Media Group, owned by Philip Anschutz, an American billionaire entrepreneur who describes himself as a “conservative Christian.” Anschutz is also the owner of the right-leaning Weekly Standard and has donated millions of dollars to right-leaning causes, including anti-LGBT groups, such as the Family Research Council, which has been labeled a hate group. … Editorially, the Washington Examiner is 100% right. It is virtually impossible to find a single editorial that offers balance.
Allison @#7,
The Washington Examiner is indeed a right wing publication but it is not owned by Murdoch. The owner is another right-wing wealthy person Philip Anschutz who donates a lot of money to Conservative causes, including anti-LGBTQ and anti-abortion groups.
Allison @ # 7 -- Also see Washington Times:
Allison, you could be right. The article I linked to might be just right-wing extremists trying to make immorality and illegitimate births look like a sociological bad thing. It looks like they might have even infiltrated the CDC:
“The percentage of all births to unmarried women was 40.5% in 2020, up 1% from 2019 (40.0%) (Table 9) (13). The percentage of all births to unmarried women peaked in 2009 at 41.0% (13,17).
Except for non-Hispanic AIAN women, the percentage of nonmarital births in 2020 increased from 2019 for all race and Hispanic-origin groups: 28.4% for non-Hispanic White, 70.4% for non-Hispanic Black, 12.2% for non Hispanic Asian, 52.0% for non-Hispanic NHOPI, and 52.8% for Hispanic (Table 9). The percentage for non-Hispanic AIAN women was unchanged at 69.6%. The number of nonmarital births decreased by 2% from 2019 (1,498,113) to 2020 (1,464,121) (17).”
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-17.pdf
“illegitimate births”? — says it all, really.
Oh, to make it clearer to txpiper: notice how the CDC use the term “nonmarital births”.
So, yeah, “The article I linked to might be just right-wing extremists trying to make immorality and illegitimate births look like a sociological bad thing.”
(Very immoral to give birth when — dum dum duuum! — unmarried)
Surely the provision of the option of safe and free and accessible abortion services would have an effect on this rate of immoral and illegitimate birthing, no?
(Yeah, I know, I know… the answer is shotgun weddings, right?)