It's not racist! It's demographics!

FEED A CHILD has apologized for a controversial ad that was deemed, by some, as racist. If you haven't seen it, there's a link below but here's a run down.

White woman "pets" black child and feeds him a small treat

White woman gives black child a treat for bringing her some sort of item

White woman eats dinner and gives black child a small piece as the child sits under the table

Ending message says some dogs are fed better than some children.

Now, as you first watch you may have thoughts similar to those reflected by others that have watched the video. How could anyone create something like this, let alone allow their child to participate? It's degrading, shocking, etc.

What most folks fail to realize is that this organization is based in South Africa. Wouldn't it stand to reason that the majority of the children they aim to feed are black? Wouldn't it make sense to appropriately represent the children you are trying to help?

Nevermind accurately representing the scenario they want the viewer to donate to. Clearly many folks are more concerned that it's racist to see a white woman feeding a black child than the actual plight of the children this commercial is meant to solicit help for.

Would they be happy to see a white child depicted in the role of the dog? Or would that also be racist because that would mean the organization believes people would donate more money for a white child, as opposed to a black child?

Maybe if some of these folks focused as much effort on helping these children as they do in pushing their constant claims of racism, we wouldn't need commercials like this.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/feed-a-child-ad_n_5573892.html

Student suspended for helping fellow student during asthma attack

This seems to be a hot topic on facebook. Should a teenager have been suspended for ignoring his teacher's directions to stay seated when he helped a fellow student that was having an asthma attack. Here's a link to the story if you want to read all the details but here's the basic rundown.

Students in a Texas school are told to stay in their seats and be calm while the teacher contacted the nurse about a student that's having difficulty breathing. Apparently, the means of contacting the nurse was email, which is the real issue here, but I'll get to that later.

This young man ignored the rules, picked up the sick student and carried her to the nurses office. For these actions, he was suspended from school.

Now, on the surface you think, what a load of garbage. Why would you suspend a student for trying to help someone else. Now, let's look at the story more closely...what most of the commentors failed to do.

If you read the entire story, it indicates these students attend an "alternative" school. For those that aren't familiar, this is a school for students that had disciplinary, attendance or legal issues at their home schools are getting a chance to complete school in an alternate location instead of being expelled. Thus, these classes are often on lock down when in session and students are not allowed to walk about freely like they might be in a regular public school.

The procedures for anyone leaving a classroom during the day are pretty tight. Usually involving a police officer being called to escort the student wherever they need to go. They do not allow the students to wander the halls freely, no matter what the situation is. For this reason, this young man was suspended, even though he was performing a good deed. Unfortunately, in these types of facilities, there are far too many students that would abuse this scenario if they thought they could get away with it. Letting one student break the rules with no consequences would open the door for chaos.

Now, let's get to the real issue here. Why does this school policy include emailing the nurse if there's a medical situation? Is that the only means of contact outside the classroom? Most schools have an intercom system or phones in the classroom. Could this be more of an issue with the teacher not understanding how urgent the situation really was? There are some definite failures on the part of the teacher in this situation but she couldn't leave the class unattended and she could have been fired if she'd allowed the sick student to leave the classroom on her own.

Unfortunately, there are situations that we are often placed in where rules have to be broken but that doesn't always stop the consequences of those actions. It's part of being a human. Weighing the good against the bad and doing the right thing, even if it means getting in trouble for it. I'm glad he did what he did but, without knowing the school procedures for situations of this nature, I can only speculate on what the teacher could/should have done.

Maybe this will bring the holes in their procedure to light and future situations can be handled more appropriately.

Julie Delpy may be right

Julie Delpy said that being a woman in the film industry is the worst because you're often ignored when you point out the inequality in the industry, as she did years ago regarding sexism. She's quickly bashed on social media and ends up apologizing because some in the black community took offense.

Blacks all over the US throw a fit because they don't feel enough blacks are nominated for Oscars, threaten to boycott the show and people fall all over themselves to make changes to their policies to appease them.

White woman gets a social media beat down & is forced to apologize.

Black woman gets praise and accommodation for her tirade.

Sounds to me like the folks bashing Julie have just proved her point.

Ban everything "dangerous"! Yeah, that'll work!

This is truly a horrible story but the father's call to keep these batteries out of our homes is another knee jerk reaction that is overboard.

There will always be things in your house that could potentially harm or kill you. You can't ban everything that "might" be a danger on the off chance that something might happen.

We need to teach our children about the dangers around them so they grow up being able to make informed decisions. If you simply remove everything from their presence during their childhood, they will never learn how to think for themselves, be aware of their actions and become adults that keep safety in mind.

Eventually, they will come into contact with dangers and if you haven't already taught them how to respond to them, bad things can happen.

I can certainly understand his feelings, but people need to think logically before they just start calling for bans on things.