White is the new black.

[Sinfix_15]

Drop off your news articles that demonize white people here. White people suffer more racial attacks than any other group in america.

Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American - Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/2013/04/16/lets_hope_the_boston_marathon_bomber_is_a_white_am erican/)

[Elbow]

I hate white people.

[Browning151]

I hate white people.

I'm an equal opportunity offender, I just hate people in general.

[E36slide]

It had to be a an american. Two bombs and only 3 people died? Those streets were packed. Some intelligence went into this, but not of a true terrorists caliber. If it was pakistan based terrorism all 100 that got injured would have been dead. Someone wanted to harm multiple nationalities, but not kill.


this attack will end up being home made watch.

Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using Tapatalk 2

[Sinfix_15]

It had to be a an american. Two bombs and only 3 people died? Those streets were packed. Some intelligence went into this, but not of a true terrorists caliber. If it was pakistan based terrorism all 100 that got injured would have been dead. Someone wanted to harm multiple nationalities, but not kill.


this attack will end up being home made watch.

Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using Tapatalk 2

I thought the same when they said one of the bombs was made from a pressure cooker. The only thing making me question that this attack could be an american is that the media is conditioning me to believe that anytime an american criminal wants to do something, he reaches for an AR15.

[Sinfix_15]

Hispanic man shoots a black man and the media responds, "what if trayvon was white".... just more examples of racism towards white people.


http://www.bet.com/news/national/2012/05/16/photo-what-if-trayvon-were-white/_jcr_content/featuredMedia/newsitemimage.newsimage.dimg/051612-national-trayvon-martin-what-if-he-was-white.jpg

[BanginJimmy]

It had to be a an american. Two bombs and only 3 people died? Those streets were packed. Some intelligence went into this, but not of a true terrorists caliber. If it was pakistan based terrorism all 100 that got injured would have been dead. Someone wanted to harm multiple nationalities, but not kill.


this attack will end up being home made watch.

Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using Tapatalk 2

I agree. If this was done by Muslims, it wasnt done by any of the multinational groups. It was a lone wolf operation.

[bu villain]

Drop off your news articles that demonize white people here. White people suffer more racial attacks than any other group in america.

Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American - Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/2013/04/16/lets_hope_the_boston_marathon_bomber_is_a_white_am erican/)

I agree that the article has an outrageous title but he actually makes a legitimate point. Think about how many of the domestic mass shootings over the last few years have been perpetrated by white guys. We rightly don't then label the entire of group of white guys something to be concerned about. However when a small number of Islamic militants perpetrate killings, we see lots of people claiming we should be suspicious of all muslims. We should not be judging any large group by the actions of a small sliver of their worst members.


Hispanic man shoots a black man and the media responds, "what if trayvon was white".... just more examples of racism towards white people.

Questioning the racial motivations of a shooter is not racism. It doesn't imply that blacks or whites are any better or worse people than the other.

[.blank cd]

Facepalm this whole thread.

[Sinfix_15]

Facepalm this whole thread.

Just another example of the white man being oppressed by those who seek revenge.

[Sinfix_15]

I agree that the article has an outrageous title but he actually makes a legitimate point. Think about how many of the domestic mass shootings over the last few years have been perpetrated by white guys. We rightly don't then label the entire of group of white guys something to be concerned about. However when a small number of Islamic militants perpetrate killings, we see lots of people claiming we should be suspicious of all muslims. We should not be judging any large group by the actions of a small sliver of their worst members.



Questioning the racial motivations of a shooter is not racism. It doesn't imply that blacks or whites are any better or worse people than the other.


I've said this before..... many times...........................

the first people to come to the aid of victims or to seek justice when a white person commits a crime................................ is other white people. Collectively, the white community shuns it's "bad apples". Other racial groups are not as likely to adopt the same stance. My best explanation for it would be because they are smaller in numbers. the need to grow out weighs the need to get rid of bad apples.

[Sinfix_15]

Racism against whites: The overlooked phenomenon | Psychology Today (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/are-we-born-racist/201011/racism-against-whites-the-overlooked-phenomenon)

[bu villain]

I've said this before..... many times...........................

the first people to come to the aid of victims or to seek justice when a white person commits a crime................................ is other white people. Collectively, the white community shuns it's "bad apples". Other racial groups are not as likely to adopt the same stance.

I don't agree with that but hopefully we can both agree that nothing you have written in this thread is "racism". You are usually very sensitive to the word "racism" being misused but you are misusing in this thread. I just wanted to give you a friendly check so you won't be seen as hypocritical.

[bu villain]

Racism against whites: The overlooked phenomenon | Psychology Today (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/are-we-born-racist/201011/racism-against-whites-the-overlooked-phenomenon)

Despite the official sounding title of the blog, he is just giving his opinion and doesn't provide any evidence that racism against whites is overlooked any more than other race. The closest he gets is by providing evidence that many white people are afraid of looking racist. That's about it.

[Sinfix_15]

Despite the official sounding title of the blog, he is just giving his opinion and doesn't provide any evidence that racism against whites is overlooked any more than other race. The closest he gets is by providing evidence that many white people are afraid of looking racist. That's about it.

What would you consider evidence of racism towards whites?

[Sinfix_15]

Obama DOJ: Growth in Violent Crimes Against Whites | Judicial Watch (http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2012/10/obama-doj-growth-in-violent-crimes-against-whites/)

[Sinfix_15]

Here are some more shocking statistics: More than 1,600 Whites are murdered by Blacks each year. Blacks murder Whites at 18 times the rate Whites murder Blacks.

About 1 million Whites were murdered, robbed, assaulted, or raped by Blacks in 1992. In the last 30 years, 170 million violent and nonviolent crimes were committed by Blacks against Whites in the U.S. Blacks under 18 are more than 12 times more likely to be arrested for murder than Whites the same age.

Some 90% of the victims of race crimes are Whites. Blacks commit 7.5 times more violent interracial crimes than Whites, although they comprise only one-seventh of the White population.

On a per-capita basis, blacks commit 50 times more violent crimes than Whites. Some 27 million nonviolent crimes were committed in the U.S. in 1992 alone. 31% of the robberies involved Black offenders and White victims; only 2% involved White offenders and Black victims.

1.3 million of the 6.6 million violent crimes committed in the U.S. each year are interracial. Between 1964 and 1994, more than 45,000 people were killed in interracial murders in the U.S., compared to 58,000 Americans killed in Vietnam and 38,000 killed in Korea.

The above stats were collected by an Australian reporter, Neil Sheehan, who dug out half-concealed U.S. crime figures for an article in the Sydney Morning Herald (May 2, 1995). The contents of his article, he commented, could not possibly be published or discussed in the U.S. mainstream media.

One wonders how many Whites have to be killed by Blacks before the N.Y. Times and Dan Rather break the conspiratorial silence about the number of White casualties in the guerrilla war being waged against them by Blacks. Paved With Good Intentions, a book by Jared Taylor, also studies crime statistics by race. It must be stressed that Blacks make up only 12% of the population according to the 1990 U.S. census (and Black males about 6%), but they commit a vastly disproportionate number of violent crime.

Mr. Taylor reveals: 1) 58% of all arrests for weapons violations are Blacks. 2) 46% of all arrests for violent crimes are Blacks. 3) 73% of all "justified self-defense" killings are committed by Blacks. 4) 60.5% of all Blacks are armed with some type of weapon at all times. 5) 98% of all youths arrested for gun fights in Atlanta are Blacks.

In 1989, the FBI reported the following:

A) Blacks commit 8 times more assaults than Whites. B) Blacks commit 9 times more rapes than Whites. C) Blacks commit 14 times more murders than Whites. D) Blacks commit 19 times more armed robberies. E) Black neighborhoods are 35 times more violent than White neighborhoods. F) There were 629,000 interracial attacks committed in 1985 (the last year the FBI "chose" to report this information). Some nine out of every ten were committed by Blacks against Whites. G. Black males (6% of the population) make up 46% of the nation's prison population.
http://www.libreopinion.com/members/standarte...

[Echonova]

Racism against whites: The overlooked phenomenon | Psychology Today (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/are-we-born-racist/201011/racism-against-whites-the-overlooked-phenomenon)http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww42/sonialastrega/science.gif (http://media.photobucket.com/user/sonialastrega/media/science.gif.html)

[bu villain]

What would you consider evidence of racism towards whites?

Racism is a belief that one race is inferior to another. Committing a crime against a white person does not mean you think they are inferior or that the motivation for the crime was race. So, some examples of evidence of racism would include things like a crime committed against someone where their motive was clearly race and not financial gain or some other standard motive, discriminatory treatment for a non-white candidate when all other meaningful qualities are equal (caveat: sometimes discrimination based solely on race is appropriate).


Here are some more shocking statistics: More than 1,600 Whites are murdered by Blacks each year. Blacks murder Whites at 18 times the rate Whites murder Blacks...

These statistics do not show motivation. Blacks could murder Whites at 1000 times the rate Whites murder Blacks, but that doesn't prove racism. Crime is just one location racism could manifest itself but motivation is often hard to determine so you may have better luck providing evidence from other categories of life.

[Sinfix_15]

Most of my opinions are formed from personal experience, while i recognize that my life is a small sample of humanity as a whole..... i tend to be more susceptible to media when i see the same thing happening around me.

I'm gonna have to put a hidden camera on one day and just wonder around columbus capturing interracial interactions. Just yesterday i'm sitting in mcdonalds eating lunch. It's pretty crowded, probably 10-12 people in line.... a black guy in the line asks someone else to pay for his meal and hands them money, he then says out loud and easily heard, "i cant put money in white folk's hands"..... so then a few minutes later, two girls pull up in a suv that has an obama sticker on it, one white one black. The same black guy says to the white girl, "i see you got that obama sticker, so you about them people?" whatever that is suppose to mean. Then he says "you need to let me get your number so you can prove to me you're about them people" Few minutes later, guy sees my helmet sitting on the table, asks me what kind of bike i ride, i respond "CBR" he then looks at my helmet and says what does that mean? I respond "that i carry a gun" he replies "ok" and walks out the door.

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s268/Virtutis/001-16_zps81b164e9.jpg (http://s154.photobucket.com/user/Virtutis/media/001-16_zps81b164e9.jpg.html)

[.blank cd]

Few minutes later, guy sees my helmet sitting on the table, asks me what kind of bike i ride, i respond "CBR" he then looks at my helmet and says what does that mean? I respond "that i carry a gun" he replies "ok" and walks out the door.
Why did you say that?

[Sinfix_15]

Why did you say that?

To purposefully appear anti-social to someone i had no desire to talk to, while at the same time remaining politically correct and accurately answering his inquiry.

[bu villain]

Most of my opinions are formed from personal experience, while i recognize that my life is a small sample of humanity as a whole..... i tend to be more susceptible to media when i see the same thing happening around me.

I understand and you may be correct for your limited area of experience but that approach does not always lead to truth in the greater world. I am not claiming that no one is racist against whites. Clearly there is plenty of racism in the world. I just question whether whites receive more of it than any other group. Also the effects of that racism is important too. One dude in a McDonalds saying he doesn't want to put money in white people's hands is a much less worrisome condition than someone in a position of power exhibiting the same kind of racism.


Few minutes later, guy sees my helmet sitting on the table, asks me what kind of bike i ride, i respond "CBR" he then looks at my helmet and says what does that mean? I respond "that i carry a gun" he replies "ok" and walks out the door.

This was just an anecdote that has nothing to do with racism right? Or did I just miss it?

[Sinfix_15]

I understand and you may be correct for your limited area of experience but that approach does not always lead to truth in the greater world. I am not claiming that no one is racist against whites. Clearly there is plenty of racism in the world. I just question whether whites receive more of it than any other group. Also the effects of that racism is important too. One dude in a McDonalds saying he doesn't want to put money in white people's hands is a much less worrisome condition than someone in a position of power exhibiting the same kind of racism.


This is a normal every day thing for me. Almost any time i put myself in the public, i witness racism from black people. But then when i turn on the TV, all i hear is that racism is a white thing....



This was just an anecdote that has nothing to do with racism right? Or did I just miss it?

Yeah, that was not part of my point.

[bu villain]

This is a normal every day thing for me. Almost any time i put myself in the public, i witness racism from black people. But then when i turn on the TV, all i hear is that racism is a white thing....

I almost never hear racism from black people in my personal life so that probably biases me in the opposite way your life experiences bias you. Also, no matter where you get your news from, it does not represent the normal or average. It usually portrays the most extreme, distasteful, and shocking events in our society because that is what is considered newsworthy. A headline like "most black people respectful and humble" is not exactly "newsworthy" even if it is true.

[.blank cd]

I think there is a problem with the perception of what is and what isn't racism.

[Sinfix_15]

I think there is a problem with the perception of what is and what isn't racism.

spare me the letter definition of racism.....

[Sinfix_15]

I almost never hear racism from black people in my personal life so that probably biases me in the opposite way your life experiences bias you. Also, no matter where you get your news from, it does not represent the normal or average. It usually portrays the most extreme, distasteful, and shocking events in our society because that is what is considered newsworthy. A headline like "most black people respectful and humble" is not exactly "newsworthy" even if it is true.

You dont know what its like to be a white man in today's society that demonizes the white man. I am the villain. The fact that you are accepted by the black community bares no significance to how white people are treated. You havnt lived the "white experience".







Note: exaggerated sarcasm.

[C230K]

Latinos have it a lot worse than white people, anybody who says otherwise is wrong.

[On_Her_Face]

I know this is from the news outlets which is about as worthless as on a bull.
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/59785_10151651266182494_102883961_n.jpg


But c'mon man.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-m6lsHvRse_k/Tnf_NkkCnRI/AAAAAAAAAZ4/DixqxUje1EM/s1600/cmonman.jpg

[.blank cd]

Pretty sure it ended up being a white American.

[C230K]

Pretty sure it ended up being a white American.

Exactly, white people shouldn't bitch at all

[BanginJimmy]

I say we ban white people.

[On_Her_Face]

Pretty sure it ended up being a white American.

What I was getting at is why does it matter if he was white or any other ethnicity? That really makes no difference in my eyes as it was just an evil person.

[bu villain]

What I was getting at is why does it matter if he was white or any other ethnicity? That really makes no difference in my eyes as it was just an evil person.

This is exactly what I was trying to explain to Sinflix earlier. He gets upset when black people separate themselves based on their race but then makes the same distinctions when talking about crime, welfare, etc. It's like it's okay to denigrate people based on race but not to think they have been made victims because of their race.

[Sinfix_15]

This is exactly what I was trying to explain to Sinflix earlier. He gets upset when black people separate themselves based on their race but then makes the same distinctions when talking about crime, welfare, etc. It's like it's okay to denigrate people based on race but not to think they have been made victims because of their race.

lets keep this thread on topic please. It's about how the media has unjustly vilified "white america" and how it pander's to a minority audience to stir racial tension.

[.blank cd]

Sinfix is unclear on what racism actually means. He mentioned to me earlier to spare him the textbook definition of racism. Which means textbook racism doesn't mean what he wants it to mean. Lol.

[.blank cd]

lets keep this thread on topic please. It's about how the media has unjustly vilified "white america" and how it pander's to a minority audience to stir racial tension.

White people "vilifying white America."

Sounds like clear cut racism to me.

[Sinfix_15]

Sinfix is unclear on what racism actually means. He mentioned to me earlier to spare him the textbook definition of racism. Which means textbook racism doesn't mean what he wants it to mean. Lol.

I understand that a pseudo intellectual like yourself would define racism as strictly feeling superior to another race and how black people's "retaliations" does not equal them feeling superior and isnt racism.

I've heard this story before..... it's horse shit.

[.blank cd]

I understand that a pseudo intellectual like yourself would define racism as strictly feeling superior to another race and how black people's "retaliations" does not equal them feeling superior and isnt racism.

I've heard this story before..... it's horse shit.

So textbook racism aside, what is your definition of racism?

And for shits and giggles, what about your personal definition of intellectualism?

[Sinfix_15]

So textbook racism aside, what is your definition of racism?

And for shits and giggles, what about your personal definition of intellectualism?

Disliking or looking down on someone based solely on their race. Over emphasis put on race, over recognizing race.

[Sinfix_15]

The hearts of white people | Abagond (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/the-hearts-of-white-people/)

[Sinfix_15]

Jamie Foxx Celebrates Murdering ‘All the White People’ | FrontPage Magazine (http://frontpagemag.com/2012/ben-shapiro/jamie-foxx-celebrates-murdering-all-the-white-people/)

[.blank cd]

Disliking or looking down on someone based solely on their race. Over emphasis put on race, over recognizing race.I don't know anyone who does that on this forum....



......

[.blank cd]

Jamie Foxx Celebrates Murdering ‘All the White People’ | FrontPage Magazine (http://frontpagemag.com/2012/ben-shapiro/jamie-foxx-celebrates-murdering-all-the-white-people/)
This definitively proves Neo-conservatives have a difficult time separating fantasy from reality.

Seriously. Either that site knows what they're peddling is BS, OR they cannot separate fantasy from reality. Either way, why would you take anything from that page as truth?

[Sinfix_15]

I don't know anyone who does that on this forum....



......

Skin color is nothing more than an identifiable trait to me, like being tall or having red hair. Anytime i discuss race, it's always in that regard.

[Sinfix_15]

This definitively proves Neo-conservatives have a difficult time separating fantasy from reality.

Seriously. Either that site knows what they're peddling is BS, OR they cannot separate fantasy from reality. Either way, why would you take anything from that page as truth?

Show me a lie? you seem to be misunderstanding the point.

[Sinfix_15]

KUHNER: Obama's black nationalism - Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/26/obamas-black-nationalism/)

[.blank cd]

Show me a lie? you seem to be misunderstanding the point.

What's the point? That Jaime Foxx is racist because he starred in a satire of the negro slave era? Or because he cracked jokes about it?


I'll let you change your definition of racism now so that it doesn't include yourself.

[Sinfix_15]

What's the point? That Jaime Foxx is racist because he starred in a satire of the negro slave era? Or because he cracked jokes about it?


I'll let you change your definition of racism now so that it doesn't include yourself.

What lie did you find in that post and what conclusion did you derive from me posting it without a comment?

[.blank cd]

What lie did you find in that post and what conclusion did you derive from me posting it without a comment?

The post makes Jamie Foxx out to be some kind of racist (or the revised definition of racist). I don't know what you were getting at by posting it.

[Sinfix_15]

The post makes Jamie Foxx out to be some kind of racist (or the revised definition of racist). I don't know what you were getting at by posting it.

My only point in posting it is how open and acceptable it is to make derogatory comments about white people. While i dont feel Jamie Foxx is a racist, he is an intelligent man that was capable of delivering a better message and chose not to. My issue is with history the movie is based upon more so than the movie itself. Slavery always portrays white people as the villain without acknowledging that white people also came to the rescue.

[.blank cd]

Do you feel the same way about movies about the holocaust?

Should all movies be made with an educational purpose?
.

[Sinfix_15]

Do you feel the same way about movies about the holocaust?

Should all movies be made with an educational purpose?

If someone playing a german soldier in a movie made a joke about enjoying being able to kill jews, would that be acceptable?


The only racism that is commonly accepted in society is against white people. Every other group is treated with hyper sensitivity.



When i spoke of "Jamie Foxx's message", im talking about after the movie, not the movie itself

[.blank cd]

If someone playing a german soldier in a movie made a joke about enjoying being able to kill jews, would that be acceptable?


The only racism that is commonly accepted in society is against white people. Every other group is treated with hyper sensitivity.

Yes. If the joke was funny in context.


There's nothing about Jamie Foxx's portrayal I find offensive. Sympathizers were a minority. As a matter of fact, Django incorporated a story of a white sympathizer. So what's the issue? If you want to learn more about the white people who helped, pick up a history book

[Sinfix_15]

Yes. If the joke was funny in context.


There's nothing about Jamie Foxx's portrayal I find offensive. Sympathizers were a minority. As a matter of fact, Django incorporated a story of a white sympathizer. So what's the issue? If you want to learn more about the white people who helped, pick up a history book

I enjoyed the movie, no problems with it. Understanding the context of the joke, i thought it was funny also.

But i also acknowledge that this lack of sensitivity to racism would only fly when directed towards white people. Every other racial group would have condemned Foxx's comments.

Lets say i was in a cop movie that took place in chicago. I am a "rambo-like cop" that cleans up the streets of chicago with guns blazing and all the exaggerated action shots like Django. After the movie i say

"it sure was fun to kill all those black people"

[.blank cd]

Lets say i was in a cop movie that took place in chicago. I am a "rambo-like cop" that cleans up the streets of chicago with guns blazing and all the exaggerated action shots like Django. After the movie i say

"it sure was fun to kill all those black people"I would call such a movie distasteful, but I would also consider a movie with a black Rambo-like cop in Chicago killing a bunch of white people distasteful.

So what do you think the differences are in a scenario like this versus Django? Keep in mind, Django killed black people too

[Sinfix_15]

I would call such a movie distasteful, but I would also consider a movie with a black Rambo-like cop in Chicago killing a bunch of white people distasteful.

So what do you think the differences are in a scenario like this versus Django? Keep in mind, Django killed black people too

Yes, that's all part of me forming my opinion.

Django was a multicultural movie with no racial bias. It's fictional and makes no claim to be historical. For entertainment purpose only. I have no issues with it

Actor Jamie Foxx who plays Django comments after the movie and says "it was fun killing all of those white people", even though he killed white and black people in the movie. The movie distinguished characters by hero/villain and not by race, as it had both white and black heroes and villains.

In the eyes of society, white people are the villain in this story. Jamie Foxx perpetuates this stereotype with his comment. Only white stereotypes are given a pass in society and in the media.

[ISAtlanta300]

Do you feel the same way about movies about the holocaust?

Should all movies be made with an educational purpose?
.

Shindler's List.....

some german's actually did help the jews. Some whites actually did help the slaves....

[.blank cd]

Actor Jamie Foxx who plays Django comments after the movie and says "it was fun killing all of those white people", even though he killed white and black people in the movie. The movie distinguished characters by hero/villain and not by race, as it had both white and black heroes and villains.

In the eyes of society, white people are the villain in this story. Jamie Foxx perpetuates this stereotype with his comment. Only white stereotypes are given a pass in society and in the media.

So you have a problem with the joke? Not necessarily the content of the movie?

[.blank cd]

Lets examine an analog, and see how you'd feel about it. We're looking at a movie about oppressed race rising up against the oppressor, and an actor of the oppressed race making a quip about taking revenge on the oppressor.

Inglorious Basterds was a movie about a group of US Army special ops crew, among them a couple Jews, and their plan to take out Hitler. If you saw the movie, you know that the Jews prejudiciously slaughtered hundreds of Nazi soldiers and Nazi sympathizers. (If not, sorry bout the spoiler.)

How would you feel If the guy playing the Jew in question made the same joke in the same context, at the same venue?

[bu villain]

lets keep this thread on topic please. It's about how the media has unjustly vilified "white america" and how it pander's to a minority audience to stir racial tension.

You realize the media, like American society, is dominated by white people right? I actually think it's targeting people like you who they know will get stirred up and watch/talk about their coverage. Anger and outrage is good for ratings. Fox News knows this very well.


Skin color is nothing more than an identifiable trait to me, like being tall or having red hair. Anytime i discuss race, it's always in that regard.

I would like to believe that but I simply never see you posting articles about "a tall guy who killed a white person" or "a redhead who is abusing welfare". Your comments and posts often point out skin color as a critical aspect of the story.

[Sinfix_15]

Lets examine an analog, and see how you'd feel about it. We're looking at a movie about oppressed race rising up against the oppressor, and an actor of the oppressed race making a quip about taking revenge on the oppressor.

Inglorious Basterds was a movie about a group of US Army special ops crew, among them a couple Jews, and their plan to take out Hitler. If you saw the movie, you know that the Jews prejudiciously slaughtered hundreds of Nazi soldiers and Nazi sympathizers. (If not, sorry bout the spoiler.)

How would you feel If the guy playing the Jew in question made the same joke in the same context, at the same venue?

Your comparison helps my case.

You compare white people to nazi soldiers. Being a nazi is a choice and choosing to be a nazi makes you a villain. There's no distinction made between "white people" and "Slave owners". Not all white people were slave owners, so is Foxx's comment not perpetuating a stereotype?

[Sinfix_15]

You realize the media, like American society, is dominated by white people right? I actually think it's targeting people like you who they know will get stirred up and watch/talk about their coverage. Anger and outrage is good for ratings. Fox News knows this very well.



I would like to believe that but I simply never see you posting articles about "a tall guy who killed a white person" or "a redhead who is abusing welfare". Your comments and posts often point out skin color as a critical aspect of the story.

When an abnormal amount of redheads start doing things that warrant attention, i will act accordingly.

You've already agreed that black people have an elevated crime rate. I dont think being black makes you a criminal. I dont believe your skin has any relation to your intelligence or your morality. I simply acknowledge the statistical anomaly.

[David88vert]

Everyone - get over it.

Every group has racists in it, and every group has experienced racism.
Guess what, it's their right to be racist, and speak their mind.
Be glad that we live in a society that allows them to be themselves, and ignore the idiots.
Worry about your own actions, and not others. If they come and mess with you, then take action to defend yourself.
The Black Panthers, KKK, etc, are not doing anything that they are not allowed to. They just speak their minds - right or wrong. Are you going to let their opinions define your life?

[.blank cd]

Your comparison helps my case.

You compare white people to nazi soldiers. Being a nazi is a choice and choosing to be a nazi makes you a villain. There's no distinction made between "white people" and "Slave owners". Not all white people were slave owners, so is Foxx's comment not perpetuating a stereotype?

Just as there was a choice to be a nazi sympathizer, there was a choice to be a slave owner. Not all Germans were nazi sympathizers, and not all white people were slave owners.

[Sinfix_15]

Just as there was a choice to be a nazi sympathizer, there was a choice to be a slave owner. Not all Germans were nazi sympathizers, and not all white people were slave owners.

Nazi and german are two different things, same as slave owner and white. Had Foxx of said, "it was fun killing all those slave owners", there would be no grounds for complaint from anyone. If someone said "it was fun killing all of those germans", that comment would be in the same boat as Foxx's

[.blank cd]

Nazi and german are two different things, same as slave owner and white. Had Foxx of said, "it was fun killing all those slave owners", there would be no grounds for complaint from anyone. If someone said "it was fun killing all of those germans", that comment would be in the same boat as Foxx's

So, the words "white people" were understood, in the context of the discussion of the negro slave era, as slave owners, and thus the "complainers" didn't pick up on that.

If Foxx had played your modern day Rambo, killing a bunch of white people for no other reason, the same exact sentence from him would be understood as something totally different.

[Sinfix_15]

So, the words "white people" were understood, in the context of the discussion of the negro slave era, as slave owners, and thus the "complainers" didn't pick up on that.

If Foxx had played your modern day Rambo, killing a bunch of white people for no other reason, the same exact sentence from him would be understood as something totally different.

Understood by whom? and is that not the very definition of a stereotype?

Foxx is putting white people all in one group (slave owners), when they were not all a part of that group.

Person A's father was a slave owner and a combatant for the rebel army. Person B's father assisted the underground railroad and was a combatant for the yankee army.

Would both persons view this comment in the same context, understanding that "white people" meant "slave owner". Since history undeniably states that all white people were not slave owners and slaves would have never been freed without the aid of "white people".

[.blank cd]

Understood by whom? and is that not the very definition of a stereotype?

Foxx is putting white people all in one group (slave owners), when they were not all a part of that group.

Person A's father was a slave owner and a combatant for the rebel army. Person B's father assisted the underground railroad and was a combatant for the yankee army.

Would both persons view this comment in the same context, understanding that "white people" meant "slave owner". Since history undeniably states that all white people were not slave owners and slaves would have never been freed without the aid of "white people".Lets start over from the beginning...

I went to research the joke in question. It is part of his monologue on an episode of SNL, where he's joking about how being black is the new white. Here is the line in question, and ill go back a few sentences to provide some context:

"The [NY] Nets moved to 'Brooklyn', how black is that? The courts black, Jay Z's the owner, a rapper, how black is that? He only owns this much of the team, but he acts like he owns ALL of NY, how black is that? I've got a movie coming out...Django Unchained, I play a slave...how black is that? And in the movie I have to wear chains...ummm...how whack is that? But don't be worried, because I get out the chains, I get free, I save my wife, and I kill ALL the white people in the movie...how GREAT is that? And how black is it....."

It's difficult to grasp the prosodic features, or the emphasis he puts on certain words, through type, so here's the video...

http://youtu.be/B5jpYQdXvNc

We can now see the context of the joke as it was told. The person doing the killing is his character, who he refers to as himself, or "I". The white people he refers to are specifically the white slave owners within the movie (with the exception of the white man who freed his character, whom he did not kill). Not anyone else.

[Sinfix_15]

Lets start over from the beginning...

I went to research the joke in question. It is part of his monologue on an episode of SNL, where he's joking about how being black is the new white. Here is the line in question, and ill go back a few sentences to provide some context:

"The [NY] Nets moved to 'Brooklyn', how black is that? The courts black, Jay Z's the owner, a rapper, how black is that? He only owns this much of the team, but he acts like he owns ALL of NY, how black is that? I've got a movie coming out...Django Unchained, I play a slave...how black is that? And in the movie I have to wear chains...ummm...how whack is that? But don't be worried, because I get out the chains, I get free, I save my wife, and I kill ALL the white people in the movie...how GREAT is that? And how black is it....."

It's difficult to grasp the prosodic features, or the emphasis he puts on certain words, through type, so here's the video...

Jamie Foxx - Open Monologue - SNL [HQ] - YouTube (http://youtu.be/B5jpYQdXvNc)

We can now see the context of the joke as it was told. The person doing the killing is his character, who he refers to as himself, or "I". The white people he refers to are specifically the white slave owners within the movie (with the exception of the white man who freed his character, whom he did not kill). Not anyone else.

Like i said.....

You make my case for me. It's ok to describe slave owners as "white people". Stereotypes are acceptable only when applied to whites.

[.blank cd]

Like i said.....

You make my case for me. It's ok to describe slave owners as "white people". Stereotypes are acceptable only when applied to whites.

Yes. It's ok because all the slave owners in the movie were white! Lol. It's not a stereotype because it is the truth. All the slave owners in "Django Unchained" were in fact white. That's undebatable.

[Sinfix_15]

Yes. It's ok because all the slave owners in the movie were white! Lol. It's not a stereotype because it is the truth. All the slave owners in "Django Unchained" were in fact white. That's undebatable.

there were "black slavers" in the movie. Django even said "there is nothing worse than a black slaver", one of the primary villains in the movie was a "black slaver", Django spent half the movie pretending to be a "black slaver".

If you dont accept what Foxx said as a negative white stereotype, then you need to grab a dictionary and regain an understanding of what the word means. Referring to "slave owners" as "white people" is the very definition of a stereotype. You not understanding this just goes further to prove my point about the lack of sensitivity shown regarding the white race.

[.blank cd]

there were "black slavers" in the movie. Django even said "there is nothing worse than a black slaver", one of the primary villains in the movie was a "black slaver", Django spent half the movie pretending to be a "black slaver".
Look, I'm not gonna pretend Jaime Foxx said something he didn't say. You can revise what he said to justify your ends if you want, but there's nothing about it that was even remotely racist against whites. Period. Anyone who has even a rudimentary grasp on the English language would agree. Furthermore, even suggesting that something as innocuous as what Foxx said was some kind of racist statement takes away from the racism that actually exists.

Foxx's joke was not racist, you are grasping at straws at this point.

[.blank cd]

If you dont accept what Foxx said as a negative white stereotype, then you need to grab a dictionary and regain an understanding of what the word means. Referring to "slave owners" as "white people" is the very definition of a stereotype. You not understanding this just goes further to prove my point about the lack of sensitivity shown regarding the white race.Referring to ALL white people that ever existed would be a stereotype. Referring to just the characters in the movie who were white slave owners is NOT a stereotype. I couldn't make that any clearer.

Anyone who complains is only looking for something to complain about where nothing to complain about exists.

[Sinfix_15]

Referring to ALL white people that ever existed would be a stereotype. Referring to just the characters in the movie who were white slave owners is NOT a stereotype. I couldn't make that any clearer.

Anyone who complains is only looking for something to complain about where nothing to complain about exists.

I am making the point that negative white stereotypes are not given the same sensitivity as other racial groups. Is Foxx a racist? i dont think so, no. Did his comment perpetuate a stereotype? yes.

Nobody cares if you say something negative about white people. That is the point.

[.blank cd]

Did his comment perpetuate a stereotype? yes.

Nobody cares if you say something negative about white people. That is the point.

How does it perpetuate a stereotype when its a true statement? Lol. He said he killed all the white people in the movie. He did (for the most part.) All the white people he killed were slavers.

[Sinfix_15]

How does it perpetuate a stereotype when its a true statement? Lol. He said he killed all the white people in the movie. He did (for the most part.) All the white people he killed were slavers.

You need a ladder? dont want you to pull something from all that reaching



We need to get those minorities off the streets of chicago.

[Sinfix_15]

Just as there was a choice to be a nazi sympathizer, there was a choice to be a slave owner. Not all Germans were nazi sympathizers, and not all white people were slave owners.

And the definition of a stereotype is?????

[ISAtlanta300]

How about if this was said.... "I get to fly in a helicopter. We get shot down. I am one of the only white male soldiers surviving. How whack is that? But I finally get backup, get out my guns and get blasting away. 'It was fun killing all those blacks!!" - Black Hawk Down.

would that be racist?

[.blank cd]

You need a ladder? dont want you to pull something from all that reaching.

How in the world is that reaching? This came from his own two lips! Lol

[.blank cd]

How about if this was said.... "I get to fly in a helicopter. We get shot down. I am one of the only white male soldiers surviving. How whack is that? But I finally get backup, get out my guns and get blasting away. 'And I killed all those black people in the movie!!" - Black Hawk Down.

would that be racist?

Fixed it for ya.

You guys need to work on your analogs. Lol.

[Sinfix_15]

How in the world is that reaching? This came from his own two lips! Lol

You trying to say it isnt a racial stereotype is reaching.

[.blank cd]

You trying to say it isnt a racial stereotype is reaching.

No. I'm not.

If I said all white people are slave owners, that would be a stereotype.

If I said all the white people in a particular movie were slave owners, and they weren't actually slave owners, that would be a stereotype

If I said all the people in a particular movie were slave owners, and they were actually slave owners, its no longer a stereotype

[Sinfix_15]

No. I'm not.

If I said all white people are slave owners, that would be a stereotype.

If I said all the white people in a particular movie were slave owners, and they weren't actually slave owners, that would be a stereotype

If I said all the people in a particular movie were slave owners, and they were actually slave owners, its no longer a stereotype

lol just stop

[bu villain]

When an abnormal amount of redheads start doing things that warrant attention, i will act accordingly.

You've already agreed that black people have an elevated crime rate. I dont think being black makes you a criminal. I dont believe your skin has any relation to your intelligence or your morality. I simply acknowledge the statistical anomaly.

The thing is, you probably would never know if an abnormal amount of redheads start doing things that warrant attention because it's simply not something most people notice. Skin color happens to be one of the most easily identifiable physical traits in people but that is not a good reason to focus on it. If your concern was simply to acknowledge a statistical anomaly, I doubt you would bring it up time after time. The regularity and fervor of your concern seems to reach far deeper than that.

[Sinfix_15]

The thing is, you probably would never know if an abnormal amount of redheads start doing things that warrant attention because it's simply not something most people notice. Skin color happens to be one of the most easily identifiable physical traits in people but that is not a good reason to focus on it. If your concern was simply to acknowledge a statistical anomaly, I doubt you would bring it up time after time. The regularity and fervor of your concern seems to reach far deeper than that.

We notice a variety of misc traits and things that usually accompany them. Have you never heard the blonde vs brunette debate?

The only reason you care more about this issue is because you care more about this issue. The evidence supports my accusations, so now you're calling me a racist for observing the evidence. You make it seem as if i go to some great lengths to seek out information about black people to hold against them......... maybe its you that has blinders on, because i see it every time i walk out my front door. Statistics only serve to put a tangible number on my life experience and the life experience is the only reason i ever looked for the statistics.

[bu villain]

I am making the point that negative white stereotypes are not given the same sensitivity as other racial groups. Is Foxx a racist? i dont think so, no. Did his comment perpetuate a stereotype? yes.

Nobody cares if you say something negative about white people. That is the point.

I actually agree with your first paragraph. It is more acceptable to negatively stereotype whites in general but that is because whites were the perpetrators of negative stereotyping for so long. What goes around comes around so to speak. Does it make it right? No, but the impact of white's sterotyping others historically was far, far more heinous and significant than the stereotyping they receive these days. That is why I hardly see it as something that warrants the attention you give it.

The second paragraph I disagree with. If there is racism against white people that is significant, such as a violent crime and not just a distasteful joke, that is something lots of people care about.

[Sinfix_15]

I actually agree with your first paragraph. It is more acceptable to negatively stereotype whites in general but that is because whites were the perpetrators of negative stereotyping for so long. What goes around comes around so to speak. Does it make it right? No, but the impact of white's sterotyping others historically was far, far more heinous and significant than the stereotyping they receive these days. That is why I hardly see it as something that warrants the attention you give it.

The second paragraph I disagree with. If there is racism against white people that is significant, such as a violent crime and not just a distasteful joke, that is something lots of people care about.

The anti-white movement is picking up steam. At what point should it warrant attention?

So you acknowledge that what i am saying is 100% correct.... you simply do not think it's worthy of complaint. I've also said in the past that a portion of minorities seek "retribution" against whites, you seem to be agreeing to that also, correct?

It's ok to negative stereotype whites, more or less because they deserve it?.... made even more ironic by the fact that this very comment is a racial stereotype.

You say "white people were the perpetrators of negative stereotyping for so long", i suppose those perpetrators made up 100% of the white community correct?

[bu villain]

We notice a variety of misc traits and things that usually accompany them. Have you never heard the blonde vs brunette debate?

The only reason you care more about this issue is because you care more about this issue. The evidence supports my accusations, so now you're calling me a racist for observing the evidence. You make it seem as if i go to some great lengths to seek out information about black people to hold against them......... maybe its you that has blinders on, because i see it every time i walk out my front door. Statistics only serve to put a tangible number on my life experience and the life experience is the only reason i ever looked for the statistics.

How many post have you called out the hair color of someone? If you were posting every other day about blondes being the perpetrators of immoral action, best believe I would say something. Please point out where I called you a racist. I never did. All I said/implied is that you have a preoccupation with what you see as the immoral acts of blacks. While your view may reflect your experience, I don't see how your posts do anything but perpetuate stereotypes and let you vent your anger. You have outright stated you aren't interesting in discussing solutions to the problems you present so no good seems to come out of these types of discussions.

[Sinfix_15]

How many post have you called out the hair color of someone? If you were posting every other day about blondes being the perpetrators of immoral action, best believe I would say something. Please point out where I called you a racist. I never did. All I said/implied is that you have a preoccupation with what you see as the immoral acts of blacks. While your view may reflect your experience, I don't see how your posts do anything but perpetuate stereotypes and let you vent your anger. You have outright stated you aren't interesting in discussing solutions to the problems you present so no good seems to come out of these types of discussions.

I have clearly stated my solutions to every single one of my complaints.

[bu villain]

The anti-white movement is picking up steam. At what point should it warrant attention?

It warrants attention now if it causes significant harm to an individual. My issue isn't so much with you bringing it up when it occurs, it's more of the fact that you bring it up so much but never bring up cases when they are the victims of racism. It is the selectiveness with which your outrage occurs. It's completely one sided. Also, you seem to think the statistics allow you to treat all blacks the same rather than keeping your anger directed solely at the individuals who are the perpetrators.


So you acknowledge that what i am saying is 100% correct.... you simply do not think it's worthy of complaint. I've also said in the past that a portion of minorities seek "retribution" against whites, you seem to be agreeing to that also, correct?

Partially agreed. All racism is worthy of complaint, see my answer above. The portion that seek "retribution" I do not believe are a significant portion of the minority population and thus their views should not be projected on the rest of the group.


It's ok to negative stereotype whites, more or less because they deserve it?.... made even more ironic by the fact that this very comment is a racial stereotype.

You say "white people were the perpetrators of negative stereotyping for so long", i suppose those perpetrators made up 100% of the white community correct?

If you reread what I wrote, I specifically said it is not right. But it is understandable psychologically speaking. If someone hurts someone you care about, the desire for retribution is pretty normal. Even though it may be directed inappropriately, it is a form of psychological healing. No question, that doesn't make it right but it is inevitable.

[Sinfix_15]

It warrants attention now if it causes significant harm to an individual. My issue isn't so much with you bringing it up when it occurs, it's more of the fact that you bring it up so much but never bring up cases when they are the victims of racism. It is the selectiveness with which your outrage occurs. It's completely one sided. Also, you seem to think the statistics allow you to treat all blacks the same rather than keeping your anger directed solely at the individuals who are the perpetrators.



Partially agreed. All racism is worthy of complaint, see my answer above. The portion that seek "retribution" I do not believe are a significant portion of the minority population and thus their views should not be projected on the rest of the group.



If you reread what I wrote, I specifically said it is not right. But it is understandable psychologically speaking. If someone hurts someone you care about, the desire for retribution is pretty normal. Even though it may be directed inappropriately, it is a form of psychological healing. No question, that doesn't make it right but it is inevitable.


Sounds like the only thing we are in disagreement about is the significance of my complaints and the frequency in which i complain. Some of my complaints are exaggerated to purposefully be annoying and are usually generated from me being annoyed by a complaint from another racial group. I guess the strategy is more or less to say "yeah, i deal with that too, so lets all shut the fuck up about it"..... Your feeling towards my somewhat satirical complaint is the same as my feeling towards most other racial complaints....

"yeah, i can kinda see where you're coming from.... but it's time to shut the fuck up and move on"

[bu villain]

Sounds like the only thing we are in disagreement about is the significance of my complaints and the frequency in which i complain.

That's definitely a big part of it but there are actually two more significant issues:
1. The way you seem to generalize about all black people and think the statistics and your personal experiences justify the stereotyping
2. Your singular focus on the black race to the exclusion of others. Even when you mention whites, it's usually only to highlight how blacks would treat or be treated differently in the same situation. Everything is tied back to blacks.

[Sinfix_15]

That's definitely a big part of it but there are actually two more significant issues:
1. The way you seem to generalize about all black people and think the statistics and your personal experiences justify the stereotyping
2. Your singular focus on the black race to the exclusion of others. Even when you mention whites, it's usually only to highlight how blacks would treat or be treated differently in the same situation. Everything is tied back to blacks.

If it appears i am attempting to blanket all black people with any given comment, then that is a misunderstanding. I feel like ive stressed this point in the past.

The black community is the one that merits the most attention. I give it the most attention. No other aspect of my daily life sticks out more than this one. It's "low hanging fruit" as some people would say.

[.blank cd]

Some of my complaints are exaggerated to purposefully be annoying

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE!!

Goodnight everyone.

[Sinfix_15]

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE!!

Goodnight everyone.

I dont hide who i am.......

You should join the club.

Some of my comments intentionally mock an issue for the purpose of showing how silly that issue is. I'm honest about this.

[bu villain]

If it appears i am attempting to blanket all black people with any given comment, then that is a misunderstanding. I feel like ive stressed this point in the past.

You indeed have at times but then other times made generalized comments. You often say you call out the race of a person because it is just a description. Perhaps if you didn't always call out their race in your stories, I wouldn't get the impression that it is such an important description to you.


The black community is the one that merits the most attention. I give it the most attention. No other aspect of my daily life sticks out more than this one. It's "low hanging fruit" as some people would say.

They warrant most attention or ALL the attention because I don't see you giving any attention to other races? Is their race an important part of your experience? Would they be less of assholes, losers, etc if they were any other color? If not, why even mention their race? For example, If you care about welfare abuse, how many articles have you posted about welfare abuse committed by whites. As whites are 7 times the population of blacks, I am pretty sure most of the abuse is committed by whites. To me, what warrants attention is the abuse. I don't really care what race the abuser is.

[Sinfix_15]

You indeed have at times but then other times made generalized comments. You often say you call out the race of a person because it is just a description. Perhaps if you didn't always call out their race in your stories, I wouldn't get the impression that it is such an important description to you.



They warrant most attention or ALL the attention because I don't see you giving any attention to other races? Is their race an important part of your experience? Would they be less of assholes, losers, etc if they were any other color? If not, why even mention their race? For example, If you care about welfare abuse, how many articles have you posted about welfare abuse committed by whites. As whites are 7 times the population of blacks, I am pretty sure most of the abuse is committed by whites. To me, what warrants attention is the abuse. I don't really care what race the abuser is.

White people SHOULD be at the top of every negative statistic. I've used my own friends and family as examples of welfare abuse and stated that i was against it. I fail to see me demonstrating a bias here.

Theoretically speaking.... if i go about my day and am offended by 10 people, 5 white and 5 black, i would post "people are assholes"
if i go about my day and am offended by 10 people, 9 black and 1 white, i would post "black people are assholes"

This formula can be applied to nearly every racial comment i make.

[bu villain]

White people SHOULD be at the top of every negative statistic. I've used my own friends and family as examples of welfare abuse and stated that i was against it. I fail to see me demonstrating a bias here.

So crimes are more significant depending on the race of the person committing them? Negative actions by whites do not warrant as much attention as those by blacks because they SHOULD be fucking up more? Giving one example of white welfare abuse for every 10 of black welfare abuse is hardly balanced considering the opposite ratio would be closer to correct.


Theoretically speaking.... if i go about my day and am offended by 10 people, 5 white and 5 black, i would post "people are assholes"
if i go about my day and am offended by 10 people, 9 black and 1 white, i would post "black people are assholes"

This formula can be applied to nearly every racial comment i make.

What I don't understand is why do you choose race as the way to count them?

[Sinfix_15]

What I don't understand is why do you choose race as the way to count them?

Because i'm not observant enough to notice the color of their eyes.

[bu villain]

Because i'm not observant enough to notice the color of their eyes.

I'm not sure if you are joking or being honest but that really is the honest answer for a lot of people who focus on race, they just don't realize it.

[Sinfix_15]

I'm not sure if you are joking or being honest but that really is the honest answer for a lot of people who focus on race, they just don't realize it.

I'm not focused on race, i just chose not to ignore it in some circumstances. I dont walk around dividing people in to racial portions during my daily routine, but i notice when a particular racial group makes up the majority of the negativity i am surrounded by.

[bu villain]

I'm not focused on race, i just chose not to ignore it in some circumstances. I dont walk around dividing people in to racial portions during my daily routine, but i notice when a particular racial group makes up the majority of the negativity i am surrounded by.

Noticing it is one thing but when you include it in so many posts, often as the main subject, that's when you cross into the focusing category.

[Sinfix_15]

Noticing it is one thing but when you include it in so many posts, often as the main subject, that's when you cross into the focusing category.

Does the NAACP focus on race more or less than i do?

[.blank cd]

.Theoretically speaking.... if i go about my day and am offended by 10 people, 5 white and 5 black, i would post "people are assholes"
if i go about my day and am offended by 10 people, 9 black and 1 white, i would post "black people are assholes".
This has got to be literally the most racist thing I've ever seen!

Sinfix, if I end up going for the Dr in Psych, would you let me interview you for a dissertation?

[Sinfix_15]

This has got to be literally the most racist thing I've ever seen!

Sinfix, if I end up going for the Dr in Psych, would you let me interview you for a dissertation?

You cant be serious about that comment being racist.


Sure.

[.blank cd]

You see stupid shit said in jest every day. People use the N word, and racial slurs all the time.

But you just gave us a glimpse into how you process this information. It might not even be a conscious decision for you...but yeah...

[Sinfix_15]

You see stupid shit said in jest every day. People use the N word, and racial slurs all the time.

But you just gave us a glimpse into how you process this information. It might not even be a conscious decision for you...but yeah...

I was of a like mindset when i went through psychology and my black professor gave me nearly perfect marks. My final was on a racial topic.


You think it's ok to refer to slave owners as "white people" even though you clearly agree that 100% of white people were not slave owners.

In my theoretical scenario where 90% of black people are assholes, you say i would be racist for thinking "black people are assholes". Note the perimeters of my comment....... in my theoretical scenario, 90% of black people are assholes. I am saying that in a given circumstance if 90% of a group appear to me a certain way, i show little regard for offending the remaining 10%.

To you this is racism?

[Sinfix_15]

http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/book/images/rs-bookcover-front-200x318.jpg

[bu villain]

Does the NAACP focus on race more or less than i do?

Definitely more, but they don't pretend that it isn't part of their focus. I mean, it's in their name so they aren't exactly saying "We just don't ignore race".

[Sinfix_15]

Definitely more, but they don't pretend that it isn't part of their focus. I mean, it's in their name so they aren't exactly saying "We just don't ignore race".

So it's ok for organizations to form and operate for the sole purpose of representing race, yet it's racist for me to acknowledge race as an identifiable trait and make note of statistical anomalies that i find when observing various racial groups?

If given the opportunity, would you tell the NAACP "you focus on race too much" ?

[bu villain]

So it's ok for organizations to form and operate for the sole purpose of representing race, yet it's racist for me to acknowledge race as an identifiable trait and make note of statistical anomalies that i find when observing various racial groups?

If given the opportunity, would you tell the NAACP "you focus on race too much" ?

Again, I never called you racist but I will answer the rest of the question. The fact is, racism has had major effects particularly against blacks in this country. Organization is a way to combat that and hopefully in time, the need for such an organization will diminish to the point where it will no longer exist. Further, the stated goal of the NAACP is for "advancing" a group of people, not diminishing others. They are not anti-white or against any other race. Their focus is positive in nature, whereas your focus on the black race is exclusively negative.

I wouldn't tell them "they focus on race too much" because that is the entire purpose of the organization so it wouldn't make sense. That's like telling the NBA they focus too much on basketball. Organizations are not the same as individuals. However, at some point in the future I may say "society has reached a state that your organization is no longer needed" and hopefully by then, they will agree.

[Sinfix_15]

Again, I never called you racist but I will answer the rest of the question. The fact is, racism has had major effects particularly against blacks in this country. Organization is a way to combat that and hopefully in time, the need for such an organization will diminish to the point where it will no longer exist. Further, the stated goal of the NAACP is for "advancing" a group of people, not diminishing others. They are not anti-white or against any other race. Their focus is positive in nature, whereas your focus on the black race is exclusively negative.

I wouldn't tell them "they focus on race too much" because that is the entire purpose of the organization so it wouldn't make sense. That's like telling the NBA they focus too much on basketball. Organizations are not the same as individuals. However, at some point in the future I may say "society has reached a state that your organization is no longer needed" and hopefully by then, they will agree.

The NAACP will never cease to exist because their motive runs deeper than equality for black people, something they already have. If you think a day will ever come that the NAACP will say "well, our work is done", then you are highly optimistic. Society has already reached a point where this organization is no longer needed, yet here they stand. What more proof do you need that the world is an open book to everyone of every color? A black man can be anything he wants in this country. We just elected a black man president who wasnt even fit for the job. What more proof do you need?

My focus on the black community is not negative. I have explained this..... remember..... we both want a "garden", i simply believe it's more important to "pick the weeds" first. Gangs and gang violence is a huge problem in the black community. I blame this partly on feeling segregated from society, but the thing is.... groups like the NAACP and BPP are the driving force behind this segregation. These groups deliver a message that "there's us and then there's them". These organizations create the need for themselves. They are the reason they need to exist.

I think if you "pluck the weeds" from the black community (every community, but since we're currently talking about black people) and remove these crutch groups who promote racial segregation, people will be just fine. America didnt become the nation it is because we had someone coddling us and holding our hand every step of the way...... What i offer black people is what you've always asked for.... equality. Not a head start, not a handicap, not a crutch.... no pity, no shame, no indifference..... equality... in its simplest and purest form. You are equal to me..... so STFU, quit being a pussy.... fix your own shit and live your life.

[bu villain]

The NAACP will never cease to exist because their motive runs deeper than equality for black people, something they already have. If you think a day will ever come that the NAACP will say "well, our work is done", then you are highly optimistic. Society has already reached a point where this organization is no longer needed, yet here they stand. What more proof do you need that the world is an open book to everyone of every color? A black man can be anything he wants in this country. We just elected a black man president who wasnt even fit for the job. What more proof do you need?

Although not everyone believes that one individual who is half black becoming president means that racism is no longer a significant factor in our country. In your opinion it does. So be it. This really isn't about the NAACP though. It's about the content of your posts that focus on black people.


My focus on the black community is not negative. I have explained this..... remember..... we both want a "garden", i simply believe it's more important to "pick the weeds" first.

Please link me to some threads you have created that show black people in a positive light. I can find plenty that do the opposite. That's where I am getting the negative vibe from. As far as the garden goes, why should the race of the "weeds" matter? I don't see you discussing the white "weeds", asian "weeds", or latino "weeds".


What i offer black people is what you've always asked for.... equality. Not a head start, not a handicap, not a crutch.... no pity, no shame, no indifference..... equality... in its simplest and purest form. You are equal to me..... so STFU, quit being a pussy.... fix your own shit and live your life.

The implication here is that most black people want a handicap, a crutch, and your pity.

[BanginJimmy]

The implication here is that most black people want a handicap, a crutch, and your pity.

If you are in favor of affirmative action, you are in favor of a crutch.

If you are white and believe in AA, you truely believe blacks cannot stand on their own and they need help to succeed.

[bu villain]

If you are in favor of affirmative action, you are in favor of a crutch.

If you are white and believe in AA, you truely believe blacks cannot stand on their own and they need help to succeed.

That's only true if you believe the world is a true meritocracy and racial discrimination is not a factor. I don't believe we live in a meritocracy all the time and there is discrimination and yet I still do not support affirmative action. That being said, it's not because it is necessarily a crutch, it's just too blunt an instrument and sows the seeds of discord along racial lines.

[Sinfix_15]

Although not everyone believes that one individual who is half black becoming president means that racism is no longer a significant factor in our country. In your opinion it does. So be it. This really isn't about the NAACP though. It's about the content of your posts that focus on black people.

Black people are the "problem child" in america..... what about this is hard to understand?? It's pretty alarming to recognize to the impact that 15% of the population has on our crime rate. The NAACP is just an example of a commonly accepted group that drives racial segregation. The driving force behind black people being "black people" and not "people" is.... well, black people. You cant ask to have all of your accomplishments have a "black asterick" beside them and then complain when people do the same with your negatives.




Please link me to some threads you have created that show black people in a positive light. I can find plenty that do the opposite. That's where I am getting the negative vibe from. As far as the garden goes, why should the race of the "weeds" matter? I don't see you discussing the white "weeds", asian "weeds", or latino "weeds".

why should race matter? you tell me??????? i'm the one questioning the existence of all the "blacks only" organizations. I'm asking the same question..... when you find the answer, let me know.






The implication here is that most black people want a handicap, a crutch, and your pity.

The NAACP does..... dont see anybody complaining about their representation.

[Sinfix_15]

That's only true if you believe the world is a true meritocracy and racial discrimination is not a factor. I don't believe we live in a meritocracy all the time and there is discrimination and yet I still do not support affirmative action. That being said, it's not because it is necessarily a crutch, it's just too blunt an instrument and sows the seeds of discord along racial lines.

Affirmative action is a crutch.

[BanginJimmy]

That's only true if you believe the world is a true meritocracy and racial discrimination is not a factor.

There is no institutional discrimination against people that arent white in the US. Anyone that thinks there is is just making excuses for non achievers.




I don't believe we live in a meritocracy all the time and there is discrimination and yet I still do not support affirmative action.

We dont live in a true meritocracy, but our society is the closest this world has ever seen to one. There will ALWAYS be the hiring manager that selects the white guy, the straight guy, Harvard grad, or the cute girl over the black guy, the gay gay, the Princeton grad, or the ugly girl. Nothing will ever change about those things no matter what law is passed. In some arenas of life, your family name alone will get you further in life than your education or other identifying factor will.


That being said, it's not because it is necessarily a crutch, it's just too blunt an instrument and sows the seeds of discord along racial lines.

So you do think its a crutch? It is a blunt instrument and it does lead to racial tension. I know someone who is a midlevel executive in a large firm and he is black. According to him, he had less education and went to a lower tier school than most of the people that interned and the ones that hired in with him. He was always wondering if he only got the job because of his race. Over the last decade he has moved up quite a ways and earned the respect he gets, but early on every time he screwed up he got a lot of static about being the AA quota for the year. He would tell you himself, he just might have been. He was not as qualified as others that he interned with that were not offered a full time position.

[bu villain]

Black people are the "problem child" in america..... what about this is hard to understand?? It's pretty alarming to recognize to the impact that 15% of the population has on our crime rate. The NAACP is just an example of a commonly accepted group that drives racial segregation. The driving force behind black people being "black people" and not "people" is.... well, black people. You cant ask to have all of your accomplishments have a "black asterick" beside them and then complain when people do the same with your negatives.

The issue is you don't see the hypocrisy when you engage in the same "asterisk" designation that you rail against. Or maybe you believe two wrongs make a right. I'm not really sure. Plus, your posts are usually hostile towards blacks so your new found concern with black communities' self imposed segregation now seems feigned. Your position comes off similar to a wife beater, "I only hit you because I love you."


why should race matter? you tell me??????? i'm the one questioning the existence of all the "blacks only" organizations. I'm asking the same question..... when you find the answer, let me know.

You are changing the topic. My beef was never you questioning something a black person or group does in general, it was the frequency with which you do it compared to all other racial groups. Not long ago you started a thread with an article about a white group but you didn't do it to discuss the white group in question, you did it so you could segue into black groups. It's your continuous steering of any discussion into a discussion on blacks which is what I "chose not to ignore".


The NAACP does..... dont see anybody complaining about their representation.

The NAACP is not synonymous with all black people and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't describe themselves as asking for a crutch, a handicap, or your pity. We can discuss individual actions by the NAACP and I may even agree with you on some but I don't believe that is the goal of the group on whole.

[bu villain]

Affirmative action is a crutch.

It can be yes, but is not always.

[BanginJimmy]

It can be yes, but is not always.

When is it not? Even in the case of a bigoted hiring manager, if the black guy or woman has a strong resume, there is other employment out there. Institutional racism and bigotry is dead in this country and I would even say the mighty dollar is the reason for that. Businesses are here to make money and when they look to hire, if the black guy is the most qualified, so be it.

[bu villain]

There is no institutional discrimination against people that arent white in the US. Anyone that thinks there is is just making excuses for non achievers.

I agree that it is no longer institutionalized really but it certainly still exists.


We dont live in a true meritocracy, but our society is the closest this world has ever seen to one. There will ALWAYS be the hiring manager that selects the white guy, the straight guy, Harvard grad, or the cute girl over the black guy, the gay gay, the Princeton grad, or the ugly girl. Nothing will ever change about those things no matter what law is passed. In some arenas of life, your family name alone will get you further in life than your education or other identifying factor will.

Absolutely true but just because we are better than ever, doesn't mean there is no reason to stop fighting injustice. You are right there will always be a certain amount of unwarranted discrimination. The question is, have we reached that minimum yet or not. Intelligent people can disagree because this is not a simple question to answer.


So you do think its a crutch? It is a blunt instrument and it does lead to racial tension. I know someone who is a midlevel executive in a large firm and he is black. According to him, he had less education and went to a lower tier school than most of the people that interned and the ones that hired in with him. He was always wondering if he only got the job because of his race. Over the last decade he has moved up quite a ways and earned the respect he gets, but early on every time he screwed up he got a lot of static about being the AA quota for the year. He would tell you himself, he just might have been. He was not as qualified as others that he interned with that were not offered a full time position.

I agree it CAN be a crutch but isn't always. Maybe he got the job because of his race. Maybe another guy at another firm didn't get a job because of his race. Affirmative action helps to correct the latter situation but can have the downside of puttin an unqualified person in a position too. Therefore, affirmative action is not categorically a crutch. It depends on the circumstances. It is a blunt instrument because it may help the problem in aggregate but will be the wrong thing in some situations.

[bu villain]

When is it not? Even in the case of a bigoted hiring manager, if the black guy or woman has a strong resume, there is other employment out there. Institutional racism and bigotry is dead in this country and I would even say the mighty dollar is the reason for that. Businesses are here to make money and when they look to hire, if the black guy is the most qualified, so be it.

See my response above. I'm not as confident as you are that the business world is a meritocracy as much as we like to believe. If that were the case, personal connections would not be the number one way people get hired.

[Sinfix_15]

The issue is you don't see the hypocrisy when you engage in the same "asterisk" designation that you rail against. Or maybe you believe two wrongs make a right. I'm not really sure. Plus, your posts are usually hostile towards blacks so your new found concern with black communities' self imposed segregation now seems feigned. Your position comes off similar to a wife beater, "I only hit you because I love you."

I've stated before...... i purposefully mock some arguments to shine light on how stupid the original issue is. I am not hostile towards black people. I am hostile towards gangs, gang violence, pimps, thugs, gangsters ect.... just so happens i notice a larger presence of these things in the black community. 15% of the population accounts for 50% of our crime...... this is a problem. Your analogy is not accurate..... i dont "hit" out of love.... but i do believe we need to start doing a lot more "hitting". My stance on the criminal justice system is pretty transparent. I believe in harsh punishments for violent crime across the board. I say that every time we have a conversation about it. I dont care what color a criminal is..... but i cant help but notice what color they are. It's not like i'm saying "white criminals should be given a pass and black criminals should be treated more harshly", nope... that's something the NAACP would say, not me. My observance of color is just that.... observance. It's not a deciding factor on any decision i make.




You are changing the topic. My beef was never you questioning something a black person or group does in general, it was the frequency with which you do it compared to all other racial groups. Not long ago you started a thread with an article about a white group but you didn't do it to discuss the white group in question, you did it so you could segue into black groups. It's your continuous steering of any discussion into a discussion on blacks which is what I "chose not to ignore".

When people offend me, i speak about it. I'm not deciding for these offenses to be black people, they just are. It's not because theyre black, but i cant help but notice that they are......... cops pay more attention to red cars..... color is a part of our life.... i cant turn that part of my brain off and not notice it. I'm not ignoring white people, im not focusing on black.... i'm simply being honest about my perception of the world and unfortunately black people are on the short end of it. If i added up all the admirable people i come in contact with, it's a pretty diverse group.... honestly, black people are a large portion of that group. Just for the sake of putting a number on it... id say 40%black 45%white 10%hispanic 5%other...... but.... if i looked at the group of low life scumbags that ive ever came in contact with..... that group is about 75% black




The NAACP is not synonymous with all black people and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't describe themselves as asking for a crutch, a handicap, or your pity. We can discuss individual actions by the NAACP and I may even agree with you on some but I don't believe that is the goal of the group on whole.

Doesnt matter how THEY describe themselves...... It's what they are.

[BanginJimmy]

See my response above. I'm not as confident as you are that the business world is a meritocracy as much as we like to believe. If that were the case, personal connections would not be the number one way people get hired.


Funny that you point out personal connections here. As I said in my previous post, in some arenas, your family name will open doors for you that would have been otherwise closed.


As far as stopping injustice, we have gone as far as we can legislatively. The old guard in business is slowly being replaced by people that dont carry the same biases. In this regard, I think the only way to improve further is to allow time pass without creating a new reason for a bigotry or bias.


Think of it this way. If a white guy feels he didnt get a job he really wanted because a black guy was needed to fill a quota, there is a chance he is going to be less likely to hire a black guy if/when he moves into a position to hire.

[Sinfix_15]

Why are liberals afraid of black conservatives? | Washington Times Communities (http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/what-really-going/2013/apr/14/why-do-liberals-seem-so-afraid-black-conservatives/#.UWs_RNgI1cA.twitter)

[.blank cd]

Why are liberals afraid of black conservatives? | Washington Times Communities (http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/what-really-going/2013/apr/14/why-do-liberals-seem-so-afraid-black-conservatives/#.UWs_RNgI1cA.twitter)

Wow. If he wants me to take him seriously as a black conservative, the absolute least he could do is run his paper through a fact-checker, then a spell-checker.

[bu villain]

My observance of color is just that.... observance. It's not a deciding factor on any decision i make.
...
When people offend me, i speak about it. I'm not deciding for these offenses to be black people, they just are. It's not because theyre black, but i cant help but notice that they are.........

Overall I think this was one of the more honest statements I've seen you make so kudos for that. What I think you may not realize (or care about maybe) is that when you decide to explicitly include someone's race in a discussion, that is a choice that has implications. If you used race equally in context of both good and bad events, I would have no reason to doubt you were just including it only as a descriptor without any particular significance. It's harder to believe that though when you seem to consistently mention one particular race and in the context of something being done wrong.


Funny that you point out personal connections here. As I said in my previous post, in some arenas, your family name will open doors for you that would have been otherwise closed.

As far as stopping injustice, we have gone as far as we can legislatively. The old guard in business is slowly being replaced by people that dont carry the same biases. In this regard, I think the only way to improve further is to allow time pass without creating a new reason for a bigotry or bias.

Think of it this way. If a white guy feels he didnt get a job he really wanted because a black guy was needed to fill a quota, there is a chance he is going to be less likely to hire a black guy if/when he moves into a position to hire.

A well reasoned response. Saying we have gone as far as we should legislatively is obviously an opinion which not everyone agrees with but with such a difficult to quantify issue, I also can't say you are wrong.

[Sinfix_15]

Overall I think this was one of the more honest statements I've seen you make so kudos for that. What I think you may not realize (or care about maybe) is that when you decide to explicitly include someone's race in a discussion, that is a choice that has implications. If you used race equally in context of both good and bad events, I would have no reason to doubt you were just including it only as a descriptor without any particular significance. It's harder to believe that though when you seem to consistently mention one particular race and in the context of something being done wrong.


If i had equal portions of good and bad events to discuss, we probably wouldnt be having this discussion to begin with. The foundation of the conversation we're currently having is me complaining about the disproportionate amount of bad events available to speak about. I offer my honest opinion and however it lands, it is what it is. I dont monitor my thoughts in a way to keep inventory on how many good and bad things i say about a particular topic. I speak my mind. If it turns out to be 99% negativity, so be it. It's not planned or predetermined.

[bu villain]

At this point, we have both stated our sides so I won't continue to belabor this topic any further. My final statement would be, if race is not an important factor in whatever statement you are making, I suggest omitting it in the future. Since it is not an important factor, it won't take away from your argument and it will prevent any confusion about what your real concern is. It's not about being PC, it's about communicating effectively.

[Sinfix_15]

At this point, we have both stated our sides so I won't continue to belabor this topic any further. My final statement would be, if race is not an important factor in whatever statement you are making, I suggest omitting it in the future. Since it is not an important factor, it won't take away from your argument and it will prevent any confusion about what your real concern is. It's not about being PC, it's about communicating effectively.

I agree. I hope to one day live in a world where this is possible.

[Sinfix_15]

NAACP Condones IRS Persecution Of Conservative, Jews | The Dana Show (http://danaloeschradio.com/naacp-condones-irs-persecution-of-conservative-jews/)

[Sinfix_15]

Sheila Jackson Lee says GOP complicating debt debate because Obama is black - Spokane Conservative | Examiner.com (http://www.examiner.com/article/sheila-jackson-lee-says-gop-complicating-debt-debate-because-obama-is-black?utm_content=buffer828c3&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=Buffer)

[Sinfix_15]

http://maddmedic.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/linus.jpg

[Sinfix_15]

JAMES EDWARDS » Blog Archive Northwestern University man denied position on student government because he is a (http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/northwestern-university-man-denied-position-on-student-government-because-he-is-a-heterosexual-white-male/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

[David88vert]

JAMES EDWARDS » Blog Archive Northwestern University man denied position on student government because he is a (http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/northwestern-university-man-denied-position-on-student-government-because-he-is-a-heterosexual-white-male/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)


From the article:
"Ian Coley, a student on the Associate Student Government Diversity and Inclusion Committee, later said white heterosexual males are not qualified to hold the position of associate vice president of diversity and inclusion."
“This university is not ready, in any capacity, for a heterosexual white male to be in charge in any way of diversity and inclusion,” said Coley, according to the Daily Northwestern.


Hmmm.... diversity and inclusion.....perhaps they don't know the definition of inclusion....

[Sinfix_15]

From the article:
"Ian Coley, a student on the Associate Student Government Diversity and Inclusion Committee, later said white heterosexual males are not qualified to hold the position of associate vice president of diversity and inclusion."
“This university is not ready, in any capacity, for a heterosexual white male to be in charge in any way of diversity and inclusion,” said Coley, according to the Daily Northwestern.


Hmmm.... diversity and inclusion.....perhaps they don't know the definition of inclusion....

There's white people and then there's everyone else. White racism is ok....

[Browning151]

From the article:
"Ian Coley, a student on the Associate Student Government Diversity and Inclusion Committee, later said white heterosexual males are not qualified to hold the position of associate vice president of diversity and inclusion."
“This university is not ready, in any capacity, for a heterosexual white male to be in charge in any way of diversity and inclusion,” said Coley, according to the Daily Northwestern.


Hmmm.... diversity and inclusion.....perhaps they don't know the definition of inclusion....

That seems to be the case with a lot of groups that preach diversity, acceptance etc. etc.