"Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
Unlike the government, DePaul as a private institution is under no obligation to provide a platform for the promulgation of the hateful terms and rhetoric which Hellwig represented.
________________________________________________
OPEN LETTER
Rev. Dennis H. Holtschneider
President
Barbara Schaffer
Director, Sexual Harassment Policy Office
DePaul University
Chicago, Illinois 60614
Dear President Holtschneider and Ms Schaffer:
We were all present at the address on April 4, followed by a question and answer period with a man billed as "Warrior," whose legal name is said to be James Hellwig. The right-wing lecturer was sponsored by the DePaul Conservative Alliance.
We raise no objection to the teaching of Objectivist philosophy on campus. Indeed, the free flow of ideas is vital in a democracy. However, Mr. Hellwig does John Locke and Ayn Rand a great disservice by peppering their words with hate, then hurling them at supposed "illegitimate" groups.
Hellwig insulted several groups, for example referencing immigrants who "defecate and urinate on lawns." As gay men, we were personally attacked by Hellwig's repeated use of the term "queer," a pejorative term referring to gay men. This term of known insult is not quite as harsh as "faggot," but is close, perhaps similar to referring to an African American as a "darky" or "spook."
As examples, we site Hellwig saying, "Queers are not legitimate as are heterosexuals," and "Queering does not benefit society."
One of us confronted Hellwig verbally, demanding that he stop using a term of derision when referring to gays, which Hellwig refused to do. The person challenging the rank bigotry of the speaker was the one ejected from the hall, apparently upon the direction of the lecture sponsors.
We ask you, would the university tolerate public use of "nigger" in reference to African Americans? "Kikes" in reference to Jews? Was there not someone in the audience from the university administration who could have intervened to stop Hellwig's hate speech? Unlike the government, DePaul as a private institution is under no obligation to provide a platform for the promulgation of hateful terms and rhetoric which Hellwig represented.
Especially given the current climate charged with hate mongering calculated to demonize, isolate and legitimize discriminatory legislation against gays, and given Catholic social teaching, we suggest that DePaul has an obligation to exercise the option for the poor and the oppressed by saying no to right-wing hate speech.
As we know, churches in Germany laughed off the Nazi menace when it could have been stopped. Today, as members of one targeted group, we are not laughing.
Edward Farnham
Jeff Graubart
Bob Schwartz
Craig Teichen
Chicago
[Draft letter. Final version may be revised.]
Comments
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
05 Apr 2006
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
05 Apr 2006
2 students were kicked out of the event for pointing out that Hellwig was violating the student handbook and harassing students.
Students continued to leave the event one by one as they became disgusted with the speaker.
During the Q & A, 40 students stood up and left at once.
All those students who left met and compiled their accounts and are forming a coalition to decide what steps to be taken next.
Follow www.depaulasu.net for more updates.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
05 Apr 2006
If the proper creative energies were flowing, we would flip it around, and use the speaker's hate-speech as our prop in a counter-drama with a different conclusion. Make his or her hate rant a play-within-a-play, so to speak.
Otherwise, just don't go. Pass out a flyer outside to inform those who do attend, but don't join the cast.
And yes, I wouldn't put John Locke on a par with Ayn Rand, by any means. Locke's teachings on political and religious tolerance, though, are both problematic and instructive. He favored a breakthrough grassroots tolerance among Protestants, but didn't have much for 'Papists.'
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
05 Apr 2006
So you are a dogmatic simpleton. Ayn Rand a pseudo-philosopher crank? Only because she stands for everything you disagree with. See, unlike you, I can read and enjoy authors that I reject on a philosophical level without belittling their ardous work. You won't see me calling Bakunin, Gramsci or Marx "cranks".
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Also, take a chance to compare our event and how the crowd behaved with how the DCA behaved when Ward Churchill came. We didn't have any *coughing* eruptions, not one outburst, not one person kicked from the event. Compared with last night, where at least 4-6 people were booted from the event and many more created unnecessary hysteria. I don't know who was behind a lot of the organized kookiness last night, but ASU is certainly being eyed right now. Personally, I could care less that these people made fools of themselves, because we have it on video and they surely don't create a good name for themselves by sulking about every other comment Warrior made.
Again, I think DePaul has some serious issues it needs to deal with. I think they do have a backwards idea of tolerance and diversity. Their idea of diversity is to have everyone look different but only present a certain viewpoint in thought. So the campus looks like a rainbow but marches to beat of the same drummer. And to me, that is the shallowest form of diversity.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Use of the word "Queer" is rejected by most LGBT people
06 Apr 2006
You don't have to take my word for it, Captain Queero. According to a recent National Lesbian & Gay Task Force study of African American LGBT people, conducted in association with nine African American LGBT organizations:
"When respondents were asked which one label out of a very extensive list…comes closest to how you describe your sexual orientation, 42 percent of the sample self-identified as gay, 24 percent chose the label lesbian, 11 percent checked the category bisexual, and 1 percent marked transgender... In contrast to the high levels of agreement on the labels gay and lesbian, Black GLBT people do not readily, or even remotely, identify as 'queer.' 'Queer' was one of the least popular options, receiving few responses (1 percent)."
--Pages 25-26, "Say It Loud: I'm Black & I'm Proud", The Policy Institute of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, 2002.
So actually, it is your use of the term "queer" which is insulting to most LGBT people, Captain Queero, and not the other way around. You'd do better to get your facts "straight" before slamming other groups in the community, whether on the internet or in private whispering campaigns (yes, things you say do get back to us).
The Gay Liberation Network is quite proud of our new name as it harkens back to the best traditions in radical LGBT activism, when people unabashedly said what their politics were (as opposed using euphemisms like "Human Rights Campaign," etc) and made it a point of politcal principle to offer direct solidarity to other oppressed groups, against racism, against the war, etc. So that people don't get the idea that we're just about solidarity with gay men alone, on most of our literature and website, www.GayLiberation.org, we have the additional monicker of being "A Lesbian, Gay, Bi & Trans direct action group." Our record in solidarity with other communities, in police brutality activism, etc. bears this out.
No one term, "Gay, "Queer," etc. is going to be seen as inclusive by everyone, but most working class LGBT folks, having grown up having the "queer" and "faggot" words thrown at us as term of abuse, not unlike how the "n-" term is thrown at Black people, are not going to embrace these words to describe ourselves, our organizations, or our movement.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
To Captain Queero and GLN- chill. I think we can all agree that there is a big difference between Captain Queero using the word in a positive way to reclaim it, and the "Warrior" using it in a way to undermine LGBTQA rights. While not the same, it's simelar to the difference between a socially aware rap group like Dead Prez using the N word as compared to some white conservative using the N word.
Re: Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
If you were at the event I think you would have a better understanding about the issues at stake in the discussion of queer labeling that went on there.
What was contested was not the use of the word queer by self-identified LGBTQ people and allies, but the use of it by the "Warrior" in a derogatory way. Some students brought up that as a homophobic straight person who repeatedly spoke hatefully about LGBTQs and said that all queers are mentally and emotionally unstable, that they are unnatural, and who himself related his usage of the word "queer" to its definition of abnormality, he had no claim to the word and could only use it in a discriminatory and prejudiced way. He also compared "queers" to pedophiles, among other things. His speech was hateful and violent.
Many queers have reclaimed the term as empowering or the most fitting label for their identity, but reject its usage as derogatory. Again, the example used by others, its the difference between a woman self-identifying as a dyke and being called a dyke by a homophobe.
That was the issue.
Re: Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
If you were at the event I think you would have a better understanding about the issues at stake in the discussion of queer labeling that went on there.
What was contested was not the use of the word queer by self-identified LGBTQ people and allies, but the use of it by the "Warrior" in a derogatory way. Some students brought up that as a homophobic straight person who repeatedly spoke hatefully about LGBTQs and said that all queers are mentally and emotionally unstable, that they are unnatural, and who himself related his usage of the word "queer" to its definition of abnormality, he had no claim to the word and could only use it in a discriminatory and prejudiced way. He also compared "queers" to pedophiles, among other things. His speech was hateful and violent.
Many queers have reclaimed the term as empowering or the most fitting label for their identity, but reject its usage as derogatory. Again, the example used by others, its the difference between a woman self-identifying as a dyke and being called a dyke by a homophobe.
That was the issue.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
I am surprised that you would brush off Objectivism taking into consideration that Ayn Rand’s writings are highly popular among businesspeople. You would be surprised by the amount of politicians and CEOs of S&P 500 that she influenced through her writings. Let me just drop one name: Alan Greenspan. Although I personally enjoy her works, I have to admit that I prefer Milton Friedman and Ludwig von Mises.
Captain Queero,
Capitalist pig? This is a very old concept called dehumanizing your enemy. If you can see the enemy as less human than yourself, you can readily excuse fighting and killing them.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Reply to Captain Queero
07 Apr 2006
"Regardless of your statistics Andy"
No, Captain Queero, they're not my statistics, they're those of NINE BLACK LGBT organizations and the NGLTF.
* * * * *
"queer is a legitamite (sic) description of ones (sic) sexual expression and by not recognizing that you are spitting in the faces of all the people that do describe themselves that way"
Where, pray tell, did I say the "queer" label was not "legitimate"? As an anarchist, I thought you would think such considerations were irrelevant. What I did say was that the vast majority of LGBT people reject the "queer" label in favor of the very label, "gay," which you attack as illegitimate.
Speaking from myself, I take great offense at anyone other than other LGBT people calling me "queer," as it is popularly understood to be a term of abuse, which is why the really nasty bigots like Fred Phelps et al make a point of calling us "queers" and "faggots," not unlike how Klansmen make sure to refer to African Americans by using the n- word.
You never hear the more "respectable" bigots, like Peter LaBarbera, referring to us as "queers," as he knows that using such slurs would help label him in the public mind as a bigot. LaBarbera, the Washington Times, Focus on the Family and other respectable bigots also refuse to use the term "gay," as they see that as a positive reference to us, preferring instead to use the term "homosexuals," a term which was rapidly rejected following the Stonewall Rebellion in 1969.
* * * * * *
"as for the NGLTF and it's surveys... im sure they really went really far to find their statistics, like the capitalist pride parade or the everyone wear all designer clothes and prance around with perfect hair or we will outcast you market days."
Here you deride the NGLTF for not going "really far" to find its sampling, but then you're too lazy yourself to go on the web to see how "far" they actually went. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Here's the URL for the survey: www.thetaskforce.org/reslibrary/list.cfm
If you bother to go there you'll find out that NO, they didn't go to "capitalist pride parades" or "market days" to get their info. All of the surveys were taken at Black Pride events held in major cities around the country. If you've ever been to any of them (I've been to Chicago's a few times), you would note that they're about 99% African American in attendance and a far cry from the corporate feel of Lakeview's Pride Parade and Market Days. They're overwhelmingly working class, and nary a Jewel shopping cart in site. If you go look up the study you'll also find that one of its five co-authors is one Cathy Cohen, one of the most respected voices in Chicago's Black Lesbian community.
It's very easy sit behind a keyboard and lob rhetorical bombs at other groups and individuals, Captain Queero. It's another thing to take the time to back up our arguments with some thought and a little research. If we're going to make any headway in this town against the true "evil doers," I'd suggest we concentrate much more on doing the latter rather than the former.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
I am queer and proud of it.
(I love you, Captain!)
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Objectivism's 'law of identity' axioms, however, imprison you in a cul-de-sac. The truth is, you can't change the world by yourself, nor is a world were 'a' is always just equal to 'a' very open to being changed.
Our selves are in fact profoundly social. It is a new born organism's transactions with other selves that allows a self to grow into being at all. George Herbert Mead, Dewey's sidekick at the University of Chicago, is the mother lode on this topic, if you don't want to go all the way back to the Buddha.
As an antidote to Rand's A=A Aristotleanism, I like pondering an aphorism from a medieval Irish monk, John Scotus Erigena, condemned for heresy. He said, contra St Anselm, 'God is all that is and all that is not.' A = A and not A, the law of contradiction, a la Hegel.
As to the other topic, non-heterosexual folks can call themselves what ever they want, and hardly need my approval in any case, but where I come from, 'queer' is a nasty put-down and I have no intention to start using it in these late days of my life.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Why this need to "speak out against perversion?"
06 Apr 2006
Preachers rake in the bucks by denouncing "perversion." Politicians and other rightwing nuts like has been wrestlers sometimes organize or rally gangs of not so enlightened killers by condemning "perversion."
The greatest "perversion pimp" of them all, Adolph Hitler. Guess you're in good company, Mr White.
Re: Why this need to "speak out against perversion?"
07 Apr 2006
BLACK BOB
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
07 Apr 2006
Having been ejected and prevented from completely sabotaging the event (which cost someone money, and presumably others wished to enjoy without interruption by hecklers), he and his troublemaking friends choose now to continue making a spectacle. Seeking public approval of their disruptive behaviour from authorities at DePaul, when they should be facing reprimand for their own anti-social behaviour.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
07 Apr 2006
Having been ejected and prevented from completely sabotaging the event (which cost someone money, and presumably others wished to enjoy without interruption by hecklers), he and his troublemaking friends choose now to continue making a spectacle. Seeking public approval of their disruptive behaviour from authorities at DePaul, when they should be facing reprimand for their own anti-social behaviour.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
07 Apr 2006
On a kinda funny side note -- the ultimate warrior used to get all oiled up with his muscles rippling, paint his face in bright rainbow colors, he'd tie his armbands so tight and sexy, he'd run so fast you could see even his ass muscles bulging, too bad we could all tell he had a small cock under those skimpy wrestling shorts. But, I'd let him suck me off.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
07 Apr 2006
"permiso, chulo <i>whitesox</i>, pero no quieremos culeros gringos usar la nombre de nuestro club de beisbol."
You wanted to say: "Permiso, chulo whitesox, pero no QUEREMOS QUE culeros gringos USEN el nombre de nuestro club de beisbol."
Please contact me for some Spanish classes. ;) Ah, and "culero" is not a very gay-friendly term. Do your research.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
07 Apr 2006
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
07 Apr 2006
Well, Jesse Ventura became governor. So there's a link between wrestling and politics. ;)
Reply to Captain Queero
07 Apr 2006
"Regardless of your statistics Andy"
No, Captain Queero, they're not my statistics, they're those of NINE BLACK LGBT organizations and the NGLTF.
* * * * *
"queer is a legitamite (sic) description of ones (sic) sexual expression and by not recognizing that you are spitting in the faces of all the people that do describe themselves that way"
Where, pray tell, did I say the "queer" label was not "legitimate"? As an anarchist, I thought you would think such considerations were irrelevant. What I did say was that the vast majority of LGBT people reject the "queer" label in favor of the very label, "gay," which you attack as illegitimate.
Speaking from myself, I take great offense at anyone other than other LGBT people calling me "queer," as it is popularly understood to be a term of abuse, which is why the really nasty bigots like Fred Phelps et al make a point of calling us "queers" and "faggots," not unlike how Klansmen make sure to refer to African Americans by using the n- word.
You never hear the more "respectable" bigots, like Peter LaBarbera, referring to us as "queers," as he knows that using such slurs would help label him in the public mind as a bigot. LaBarbera, the Washington Times, Focus on the Family and other respectable bigots also refuse to use the term "gay," as they see that as a positive reference to us, preferring instead to use the term "homosexuals," a term which was rapidly rejected following the Stonewall Rebellion in 1969.
* * * * * *
"as for the NGLTF and it's surveys... im sure they really went really far to find their statistics, like the capitalist pride parade or the everyone wear all designer clothes and prance around with perfect hair or we will outcast you market days."
Here you deride the NGLTF for not going "really far" to find its sampling, but then you're too lazy yourself to go on the web to see how "far" they actually went. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Here's the URL for the survey: www.thetaskforce.org/reslibrary/list.cfm
If you bother to go there you'll find out that NO, they didn't go to "capitalist pride parades" or "market days" to get their info. All of the surveys were taken at Black Pride events held in major cities around the country. If you've ever been to any of them (I've been to Chicago's a few times), you would note that they're about 99% African American in attendance and a far cry from the corporate feel of Lakeview's Pride Parade and Market Days. They're overwhelmingly working class, and nary a Jewel shopping cart in site. If you go look up the study you'll also find that one of its five co-authors is one Cathy Cohen, one of the most respected voices in Chicago's Black Lesbian community.
It's very easy sit behind a keyboard and lob rhetorical bombs at other groups and individuals, Captain Queero. It's another thing to take the time to back up our arguments with some thought and a little research. If we're going to make any headway in this town against the true "evil doers," I'd suggest we concentrate much more on doing the latter rather than the former.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
08 Apr 2006
"Lap dog," or dog who's all bark and no bite?
08 Apr 2006
"you said that most LGBT people were insulted by the word queer, even though the poll had nothing to do with which word you are insulted by"
Again, stop being lazy, and read the study, rather than just spouting off. Here's what part of the narrative of the study reads:
"What do these findings mean? Some argue that the term 'gay' largely represents the experiences and identity of men, specifically White men. The empirical evidence shows, however, that among those most likely to self-identify as non-straight in the Black Pride sample, the term 'gay' (and, among women, 'lesbian') is primarily chosen and readily used. Nearly two thirds of men, and even 12 percent of women, chose 'gay' to describe themselves. Six in 10 women chose the term 'lesbian.' The evidence also indicates that there is a strong reluctance among Black GLBT people to use the term 'queer' as a primary identifier of their sexual orientation..."
And here's the kicker:
"The lack of identification as 'queer' might reveal the racism that Black GLBT people experience from White 'queer identified' activists in their organizations and campaigns, including their lack of outreach to Black GLBT communities. These White 'queer' activists are often thought to have greater access to resources and privilege, and to embrace a greater fluidity concerning their sexual practices and sexual identities, than most Black Pride respondents. These qualities are luxuries often missing in communities of color. Second, the rejection of the term queer might indicate that the radical promise that the term queer holds has not been embraced by Black GLBT individuals as an alternative way (and politics) of sexual identification. As Cathy Cohen states, 'In its current rendition, queer politics is coded with class, gender, and race privilege, and may have lost its potential to be politically expedient organizing tool for addressing the needs—and mobilizing the bodies—of people of color.'"
Coming from Cohen, someone who had previously self-identified as "queer," I'd say that's a pretty harsh judgment. One might even hazard to say that it's a view of the term "queer" as pretty damn insulting, to put it mildly.
As for your use of the term "queer" at our events, I didn't say anything in public the times you've done it as your use of the term is far different than when bigots use it, as has been discussed in several of the posts above. It may not be the term that I would recommend using to self identify, but I'm not going to tell others how they self-identify.
You write:
"... maybe its because every year and every event you have less and less people show up... and in order to get anyone to attend you invite the anarchists "
Get a grip on reality. Re: the war, the March 18th Chicago protest was the largest anti-war protest this city has seen since the March 20, 2003 march on Lake Shore Drive at the start of the war, which we also had a big hand in organizing. By many accounts Chicago's protest was also the largest protest in the country on the 3rd anniversary of the war. So hardly a case of "less and less people show up."
We heard through the grapevine that you were pissing on the whole notion of a Michigan Avenue march – fine – then organize your own alternative, rather than piss and moan AFTER the event like you do every year. Oh, sorry, you didn't do that because you knew that even LESS and LESS people would have shown up for your event!! For all your talk about me being "the pigs' lapdog on M18," I didn't exactly see you charging the barricades, macho man. You had tough talk about direct action and delivered exactly: NOTHING. I make no apologies about M18 being a "legal" march, because that's what people democratically decided to do. Now if you had used those people who had come to the event wanting to participate in a legal event as a shield for direct action, I would have had a huge problem with that. That's not what they had signed up for, and it would have been extremely manipulative for you have done so. So don't piss and moan about us keeping the thing legal. As it was, we had a running battle all day long with the police, with several shouting matches with them (while they videotaped us for "evidence"), with Ralph Chiezewski (sp?), Deputy Cmdr of the Central Business District, implicitly threatening to arrest me as late as 8:30 PM that night. Thank you very much, I'm still dealing with three charges from last year, with a court date on Monday, and Chiezewski testifying against me probably sometime next month.
If you're talking about attendance at equal marriage rights events, our last protest was virtually over when your group finally decided to show up, so don't judge the turnout there by what you (finally) showed up to see. I happen to know that not all of your number were very thrilled with your intervention at that event, so I wouldn't be so quick to speak for all of "the anarchists," if I were you. By the way, it was one of your folks who contacted us about attending, we said "great, let's talk about it," and then never heard back.
Speaking more generally, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why attendance is smaller today at marriage equality events than it was in the Spring of '04. People tend to show up for political events when they see a real possibility for imminent victory, or imminent clamp down. In several states over the past two years we've been dealt severe setbacks, numbing the earlier anticipation of imminent victory, and the marriage issue has subsided somewhat in Illinois due to the threat of a constitutional amendment being squelched for the time being, this likewise leading to lower turn out. Unfortunately, thanks to the efforts of our opponents, this is probably a temporary state of affairs.
To conclude, it's very easy to simply show up at events organized by others and make potshot criticisms, it's a completely different thing to initiate the organizing of large events and then bear responsibility for what happens. If you don't like the nature of activism in this town, become something more than a professional critic. Spend that energy organizing a better alternative. Then your criticisms will have far more credibility.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
08 Apr 2006
"PS good job being the pigs' lap dog on m18 andy!"
Again... This is a very old concept called dehumanizing your enemy. If you can see the enemy as less human than yourself, you can readily excuse fighting and killing them. I am not Bobby Schwartz, so I won't use the Hitler analogy. But you can see my point.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
08 Apr 2006
It depends on how you define social. Is it homo or heterogenius. While one should avoid crude subjective narcisism, the monolthic 'real' existing social needs to be avoided as well. If there is a social it is a contingency of subjects. It is not something that can put on a black board or codified in constitutions. Immanant Multiplicity is what I would call it. There is a line to be drawn between the likes of Stirner and Marx(though Stirner for me is better overall). The subject constructs as much as it is constructed by power.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
08 Apr 2006
Thanks to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The social construction of 'social self' a la George Herbert Mead:
The 'I' and the 'me' are terms central to the social philosophy of George Herbert Mead, one of the biggest influences on the development of the branch of sociology called symbolic-interactionism. The terms refer to the psychology of the person.
In Mead's understanding, the 'me' is the socialised aspect of the person. It is what is learned in interaction with others and (more generally) with the environment. This includes both knowledge about that environment (including society), but also about who he or she is: his or her 'sense of self'. This is because the person learns to see who he or she is (man or woman, old or young, etc.) by observing the responses of others to himself/herself or his/her actions. If others respond to the person as (for instance) a woman, the person develops a sense of herself indeed as a woman.
The 'I' is the active aspect of the person. This acts creatively, though within the context of the 'me'. (Mead notes that it is only after we act or speak that we know what we were going to do or say.) People, he argues, are not automatons. They do not blindly follow rules. They construct a response on the basis of what they have learned, the 'me'.
Taken together, the 'I' and the 'me' form the person or the 'self' in Mead's social philosophy.
Reference
* George Herbert Mead, Mind, Self and Society, (1934), Edited by Charles W. Morris, Chicago: University of Chicago.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
08 Apr 2006
What is that? how come it has to come down to personal atacks this is an inapropriate response to an open debat. ha andy my little suburban anarchist ass can't hold up my argument so i throw personal insults at you, how pathetic, sad and pathetic.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
09 Apr 2006
出会い
25 Mar 2008
高額バイト
22 Oct 2009
家出少女狩り
27 Oct 2009
良い若妻紹介しますよ
29 Oct 2009
儲け話
31 Oct 2009
お宝映像
01 Nov 2009
動物占い
02 Nov 2009
熟女
03 Nov 2009
助けて
06 Nov 2009
スタビ
07 Nov 2009