Today, I sat through a program called "Rachel's Challenge." I was the lone voice. I was the only asshole to criticize such a seemingly good-natured pro-kindness school outreach program. And I didn't cry. At least not during the presentation. I cried later. But, I didn't cry because of Rachel Joy Scott or her message or the tragic loss of life or the Columbine Massacre or the stories of horrific "bullying".
I cried because it's a lie. Nobody really cares about how they treat people. Nobody will call themselves "bully". Nobody is genuinely committed to kindness or acceptance of others. It's fake. It's shock value. Rachel's Challenge is emotional manipulation and nobody is questioning it. Nobody but me. I questioned it. I asked a fundamental question that nobody could answer. Haven't we all been told that the Columbine shooting was caused because two misfit boys were bullied and decided to kill their bullies?
If so, wouldn't that have made Rachel a bully? I've asked this question to as many people as I could, but no one can give me a straight answer. Nobody knows and nobody else is asking why. I would honestly love if everybody would actually make a consistent effort to not only be kind people, but to do it for the right reasons. One shouldn't be kind because a professional speaker in a high school gym told them to do so or to get the most "chain links(paper links with kind deeds written on them)" of all the high schools or simply because it's trendy. People should be kind because they want to, because it's right, because they believe it. People have to want change to make change. They have to put in the effort. They have to try. But, nobody wants to try.
No one is thinking about the reasons why. Critical thinking is lost on these people, too clouded by forced emotion. No one is really sure why they should tolerate others or who they should really tolerate. It is impossible to be tolerant of everything without being intolerant. (To accept everything is to accept intolerance and things that contradict all the values one supposedly holds.) They only know that "kind" people accept everyone--unless of course it's someone who holds values that are dramatically different from the ones they are taught. Where's the logic in that? It's very hypocritical and it's not very smart.
Rachel's Challenge, as a whole, is not a very great program. It's way over-exaggerated and it's making some big corporations a lot of money (These seminars aren't free), as well as being heavily Christian. And, most of all, it makes kindness a fad--a novelty that will fade away by next week. People aren't going to change because of it. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do but make the best of it, be the people we want to be, question as much as we can, and accept the scam for what it is. How others choose (or don't choose) to act or think or believe is completely out of my control and I can't let it get the better of me. I can only observe and be entertained.
I like your insight in your post. I was just doing some research into the program and found your post. I realize how the well meaning, original concept of any program can get diluted through time and distance. Adding the fact that each branch could indeed take on its own perception of the program. It too makes me wonder what did you do to correct it? Were you satisfied with just going in and pointing the finger and walking away? Then posting a blog to bitch about it? Sometimes intentions are not good enough. Don't you agree?
ReplyDeleteYou get gang lynched if you question any of it. Kind of ironic.
DeleteI'm not sure what the person above was saying, "...posting a blog to bitch about it" But I think you're spot on. You are definitely not alone in your observations about their message and this organization. There are many problems with their message, starting with the fax that her death has nothing to do with NOT bullying. She apparently didn't bully, and that didn't prevent her death. Not to mention, what about all the other kids who died? Aren't they worth a mention in this whole thing or were they bullies and it's understandable why the two shooters would take aim at them.
ReplyDeleteThis program is bogus in my opinion, and you are spot on. It brings attention to the matter of bullying for a week, and then everything goes back to the status quo.
Only way through this is from personal responsibility. A) Being a good person yourself and B) Being able to embolden yourself against the assholes in school and C) Realize that one day, you will be living your own life, where you don't have to socialize with hundreds of other people, that have known you since 2nd grade, on a daily basis. High school sucks, it gets much better in a few years.
You're spot on, always begin with doubt, question everything and think critically.
I've asked the same question too. It's all an act. I believe she set the whole thing up. She sacrificed herself in order to get her message across on a large scale rather than just her school.
ReplyDeletei completely agree im actually really glad someone else see the truth behind it
ReplyDeleteIt was all fake. A Man in Iowa or Illinois had a dream about tears falling from a rose. There were 11 tears. He had a feeling that it had something to do with this so he called Rachel's parents and the parents said that they had no idea what he was talking about. A week or two later they found a drawing in Rachel's backpack of a rose with 11 tears. The same amount of people who died in columbine
ReplyDeleteI'm late to the game, but having researched Columbine pretty extensively, I can answer some of your questions.
ReplyDeleteAccording to other students (namely Brooks Brown in "No Easy Answers") Rachel was actually a pretty cool kid. No bullying on her part. She did have a strong faith in God, but she didn't push it on others.
Eric and Dylan did what they did in part because of the bullying, but in the actual shooting they didn't target bullies. If they had (or if the bombs had went off as planned), their "message" would have been far better received. The Columbine massacre was never intended to be a school shooting. It was intended to be far more destructive. When it didn't go as planned, they literally started picking off random victims. One of the targets (read, bullies) Eric mentions in his journals was Brandon Larson, who lived.
The psychic powers is silly. And strange coming from a Christian perspective since the Bible clearly tells how to handle mystics.
My personal impression, the taunting involved in the shooting was exaggerated, and Rachel is made out to be a martyr even though Val Schnurr was asked if she believed in God and lived. The right wing Christian media would have you believe Cassie Burnall and Rachel Scott died for their faith but the truth is they died because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Cassie was never even asked the question. I understand everyone grieves in their own way, but the way Rachel Scott is being exploited is very sickening, and I don't think it's to make money, I think it's to generate followers.
"... having researched Columbine pretty extensively..."
DeleteNot extensively enough... I guess. Otherwise you would've known that this whole Columbine thing was a big fat lie. The only thing that died in Columbine was the Truth. What a shame...
You're pretty dumb to reply to a post that is a year old, you're also on a level of stupid to believe it didn't happen. I also bet that you believe in a bunch of crackpot theories as well, course that's my two cents as I was researching this weird, vague memory I had of this.
DeleteThis is an interesting post and discussion. I teach in middle school, and I am not a fan of the Rachel's Challenge. The speaking event costs the school $5,000 (from what I am seeing online). The family has created a lucrative business. I find the assembles to be highly emotionally charged -- some students return to class sobbing and cannot function the rest of the school day. To what purpose? We live in an urban area with different kinds of issues from suburban Colorado. There are many other ways we can more specifically teach students about kindness and caring. Also, please consider that the act of mass shooting is often primarily a suicide.
ReplyDelete