|
|
|
|
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/24/2008 4:14:49 AM | The whole thing just starts a bunch of bigots being repulsed by racist-----and that makes you better how?
It is all hate. It's the pot calling the kettle black.
Well, I think that there is a difference between objecting to racism and indulging in bigotry.
If you can describe one positive thing that could come from letting those T-shirts go without denouncing their racist implications, I'll back off.
Deploring hate is not the same as hate. Is it? | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/24/2008 9:06:14 AM |
The whole thing just starts a bunch of bigots being repulsed by racist-----and that makes you better how?
It is all hate. It's the pot calling the kettle black.
This si not bigotry, this is someone pointing out that a memeber of their race has disriminated against another. I think we have had wuite a lot of tolerence for you in perticular with all the whining you have done about being a poor little white american. Your ignorance certainly bothers me, but it is tolerated. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/24/2008 9:46:45 AM | | Many express opinions that appear Racist to some but are only actually racist to the hyper sensitive politically correct...there are many other words besides racist and bigoted that would probably be more fair and true in referring to others who don't share your beliefs.What it boils down to is what your understanding of what Racism really is....is racism being concerned about your race?Is being proud of your Heritage always racism? Do you have to hate the other race to be racist? Does discrimination= Racism? Is all stereotyping Racist?is a cartoon that depicts a similarity to Curious George racist?Is basing advancement and opportunity solely on Race always Racist?If the designer or wearer of the shirt had no hate towards "Blacks" and they just simply saw a comical resemblance is that really "Racist" or is it just being insensitive to those who may find it a Racist depiction? I think the problem is that most people don't know exactly how they define Racism. And that the definition of racism has been expanded to encompass many things that are not actually Racist.. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/24/2008 10:12:12 AM | It's like Art and pornography. Racism is very subjective. There is no objective definition of it.
For example, I think the Playboy is art. The way the photos are done and the way it is all done very tastefully to me is art. Ask someone else and they may consider it to be pornography. And that is fine. But have we gone to far with our definition of pornography so that now the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue has to be wrapped into a black plastic bag?
Same difference. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/24/2008 12:17:53 PM | Is being proud of your Heritage always racism?
Not at all. Being proud of the positive acheivements of your ancestors, your culture, and your descendents is a fine thing! I am pleased as punch to be associated with the Framers of the U.S. Constitution. Also, Newton, W. Edwards Deming, Alan Turing, and Grace Hopper, among many others who have shaped our lives. Awesome people. All White like me. I can also hardly wait to see what the current crop of kids does with the incredible toolkit we're giving them--Wikipedia is an awesome thing, and the new meaning-based search engines will make it even more incredible.
Of course, with those tools being universally available, it won't just be White kids who do great things with them. Needless to say, that's fine with me! The more the merrier as far as I'm concerned.
Do you have to hate the other race to be racist?
Yes. However, that hate can be so subtle that a person might not even recognize it as hate. It can be as simple as believing that the brilliance and contributions made to your life by people of another race are rare, exceptional, and uncharacteristic--that except for those rare exceptions the people of that race are generally worthless (or more trouble than they're worth).
No one is harder on the environment than a North American of European descent. Are we worth it? Will we continue to be worth it as energy supplies dwindle and we continue to refuse to adapt? Time will tell.
It's like Art and pornography. Racism is very subjective. There is no objective definition of it.
Actually, this is not true. Although it is like Art vs. pornography, what makes the difference is the apparent intention of the person who puts it forward.
If that intention is to honor, celebrate, elevate, raise awareness (either through support or criticism), or otherwise motivate people toward positive action, it's art.
If that intention is to demean, denigrate, exploit, intimidate, dismiss, or otherwise advocate complacency or negative action, it's divisive. Depending on the content, it could be racist, sexist, homophobic, ideological, religious, or some other elitist nonsense. But it is still ugly nonsense in the same way that pornography is ugly nonsense when you compare it with artistic portrayals of the human body.
There is a subjective element involved in recognizing something as racist vs. parody. However, it is the responsibility of the speaker to clarify their intention if they find they've been misunderstood. So, if I see a T-shirt with an image that rings my racism alarm and the person who printed it refuses to clarify her or his intention--I can be pretty sure that it is an expression of racism--because no one who didn't intend it that way would hesitate for a second to clear up such a demeaning misperception about themselves. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/24/2008 1:51:02 PM | I still want 1 of those t'shirts. Are they selling them on Ebay?
There should be only 1 person offended by the t-shirt, and that would be the Obama person. However, i don't really hear anything from him.
So, you people are wasting your time "being offended"...
If ya really want to go forward with "stuff" .. then you pay my taxes to support those black folk. I choose not to, but don't have a choice.
Thank goodness they put a cap on the baby thing ....
Obviously i went the wrong way in life. I worked for a living ... maybe, i should have had babies, lived in public housing and got food stamps.
Racism is alive and well in the USA. Thats a fact. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/24/2008 2:30:05 PM | Princess Anne is always dipicted horse like.......lol when they want to make fun of her .
Nothing is said about it. Then when they want to dipict a terrorist.........they place a turban on a Middle Eastern face............no protesting liberals sound off ever.
no I didn't forget, I just generally don't comment on things that are irrelrvent to the topic of discussion. But if you want me to touch on that then I will. If you find me a forrum that discusses the mistreatment of Aboriginal people you will find that I will defend your grandfather and all other Aboriginal people tooth and nail. I believe that Aboriginal people were horribly mistreated and they deserve every bit of compensation that they recieve if not more. As I said before, find me a forrum on this topic and I will have a lot to say in Aboriginal people's defense. Hope that satisfied your need to change the subject
There was one about a month ago.........so I assume that you didn't comment then........... | |
|
| |
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/24/2008 5:22:42 PM | SO much what people are talking about is symbols, and the great thing about many symbols is that they can be interpreted differently.
For example, the Confederate Flag can have several different meanings. Such as racism/slavery, or a trying time in our nations history that showed unity, or the battle for federalism and states rights (which the civil war was truly about.)
An issue of Playboy can stand for art, it can stand for the degradation of women, it can stand for pornography, or it can stand for one of the symbols of the American Dream.
It's all how you interpret the symbol. Just because I interpret a symbol one way doesn't mean that it will and is interpreted the same way as everyone else is going to interpret it.
If you want to interpret a monkey on a shirt portraying Barrack Hussein Obama as racist, then that is your choice. If you want to interpret a monkey on a shirt portraying Barrack Hussein Obama as a statement saying that says his political viewpoints is that of a monkey, then that is your choice of how to interpret that symbolism. If you want to interpret a monkey on a shirt portraying Barrack Hussein Obama as a statement saying that "even a monkey could run for President," then that is your choice on how to interpret that symbol. But until we all have universal definitions on how symbols are suppose to be interpreted, as well as a black and white definition on things such as art, pornography, racism, and any other thing you want to throw out there that is currently subjectively defined, then we ae always going to argue over racism and discrimination of all kinds until the Earth succumbs to our own stupidity. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/25/2008 12:04:39 AM | Racist/Bigots=Bigots/Racist. You can only defend what is not of your own to be righteous enough to speak. So this is a thread of righteous bigot racist they will never care about all people and their particular "right" to feel slighted by wrong doing unless it fits into their particular vision of wrong. In other words we have found the only place known to man where two wrongs can make it right.
Happy Memorial Day.
righteous
2 entries found.
righteousself-righteous
Main Entry: righ·teous
Pronunciation: \ˈrī-chəs\
Function: adjective
Etymology: alteration of earlier rightuous, alteration of Middle English rightwise, rightwos, from Old English rihtwīs, from riht, noun, right + wīs wise
Date: 1530
1: acting in accord with divine or moral law : free from guilt or sin
2 a: morally right or justifiable b: arising from an outraged sense of justice or morality
3slang : genuine, excellent
synonyms see moral
— righ·teous·ly adverb | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/25/2008 2:01:12 PM |
There was one about a month ago.........so I assume that you didn't comment then...........
sorry, poor wording on my part. I did not intend to say that there weren't any, I am new to forrums I am sure there are. My point was that it did not apply to the topic of discussion. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/25/2008 2:48:45 PM | WHEW!!
Thank Heavens for Ace, Brandie, Sara, and Nero!  Those guys are like The Power Rangers, defending us against some of the more frightening fish inhabiting this thread!  | |
|
| |
| |
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/25/2008 8:05:06 PM | [Racism is alive and well ...]
Well, actually it's not. It's dying out and high time too. Oh yes, there will continue to be pockets of it, but no one can long deny the power of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech. That fact that a Black man could have been so eloquent and led a movement that was rooted in such profound dignity makes a lie of the notion that Blacks are inferior in any way.
Do you eat Peanut Butter? Thank George Washington Carver, a Black man. Every time you eat a PBJ sandwich, you can thank him for it. You can most likely also thank Luther Burbank for the jam.
You can expect to encounter lots of trouble along the way if you intend to push a racist agenda. It is now a discredited, disreputable viewpoint, as it should have always been.
What I'd like to know is, why on Earth would you want to associate your precious reputation with nonsense like that?
For anyone of your generation, it is a losing proposition.
But hey, if you want to align yourself with a bunch of backward, unthinking losers who will either wind up broke or in jail, I guess that's what you'll do.
But again I must ask, why on Earth would you want to? | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 1:07:27 AM | Racism is alive and well ...]
Well, actually it's not. It's dying out and high time too
As long as affirmative action laws exist racism exists. As to the dying out, all i see is it getting worse at least here in Canada.
You can expect to encounter lots of trouble along the way if you intend to push a racist agenda. It is now a discredited, disreputable viewpoint, as it should have always been
It can't be all that bad if it is forced upon society by government and every minority rights group as well as the other "hate" groups like the Black Panthers, the Ku Klux Klan and the NAACP in the States. as well as the Bnai Brith, the KKK and the western Cree council and many others in Canada. It must be a good thing if the liberals are so intent on keeping it around as to entrench it into the constitution.
But hey, if you want to align yourself with a bunch of backward, unthinking losers who will either wind up broke or in jail, I guess that's what you'll do.
That's about as open minded and accepting as i would expect from anyone filled with bigotry toward a certain group or race or religion etc. Shows me you are no better than the rest for all your valid discussion in your earlier posts you've just negated every word from them. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 3:54:13 AM |
That's about as open minded and accepting as i would expect from anyone filled with bigotry toward a certain group or race or religion etc. Shows me you are no better than the rest for all your valid discussion in your earlier posts you've just negated every word from them.
Backward unthinking losers arn't a race. It seems the only group you believe in protecting are the self identified racists. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 8:30:23 AM | That's about as open minded and accepting as i would expect from anyone filled with bigotry toward a certain group or race or religion etc. Shows me you are no better than the rest for all your valid discussion in your earlier posts you've just negated every word from them.
Unlike being Black, or Brown, or from the Middle East, people have a choice as to what political strategies they pursue. Racism is a strategy for getting ahead and keeping ahead at the expense of others. It is just as ugly and offensive when Blacks use it. However, their use of it in no way excuses yours.
At one time, it appeared to work for some White people, but at what cost? How many potential Martin Luther Kings, George Washington Carvers, Luther Burbanks, and other major contributors to our lives did we miss out on because our bigoted predecessors refused to educate Black people? How many are we missing out on now because we don't adequately fund schools in non-White neighborhoods?
The only way that the racist strategy succeeded in the past was through governmental and institutional practices that we now recognize as criminal. There is a difference between racism and institutionalized racism. People have a right to their bigoted opinions. But, when you involve the government in policies that are intended to prevent any one from a group from prospering or receiving a fair shot, that institutionalized injustice is a threat to everyone and must be stopped. If the government can do it to _them,_ it can do it to _you._
And at the root, I suspect you fear that the government has now turned on _you._ But if our predecessors had ensured us all the fairest government possible, you wouldn't have to fear that nearly as much, would you? So what can we do? Our only hope is to insist on a government that really does treat everyone equally.
Your complaints about Affirmative Action show me that you understand the concept of injustice. Your lack of concern about the disadvantages that institutionalized racism has imposed on other groups indicates that you might be less interested in justice than you would like to believe.
If you have a better method for countering the residual bias against non-Whites that came from centuries of institutionalized racism, let's hear it! If what you advocate is simple indolence on the part of the government, then you are complicit in perpetuating the injustice that you now fear. You are abetting a criminal conspiracy, and at some level you know it.
Justice isn't about what's convenient for you or the people you favor over others, it's about what's right.
As it is now, AA is simply an effort to recognize diversity as a valid qualification. The simple fact is that diverse companies are stronger competitors than narrow ones, and the most successful companies have recognized that.
So, if two otherwise similarly qualified candidates are in the running for a job, rather than choosing the one who's White (as if that was in any way a predictor of performance), AA urges hiring managers to consider the benefits of having a diverse workforce--for their own organizations as well as society as a whole. It also urges organizations to direct recruiting efforts toward populations that are new to them.
Do you know who started Affirmative Action? President Harry Truman. Do you know why? Because Black soldiers who fought and died for us all (and still do in disproportionate numbers) couldn't get a fair shake in the military.
Even when there were quotas for military (and later federal) contractors, the quotas under AA reflected the actual proportions of Blacks and other minorities within the population as a whole. It wasn't as though anyone was saying "no jobs for Whitey." They were saying, "if we really are giving people from all races and ethnicities a fair shot at the good jobs through our government dollars, that should show up in the hiring statistics." Sorry, but being White doesn't entitle you to _all_ the good jobs, and the people who liked to think that it did were in the wrong.
So, you can go on complaining about the shortcomings of AA and cite the racism of others as excuses to justify your own unwillingness to stand up for justice. That is your choice. But it is a failed strategy that will bring you nothing but frustration.
People who refuse to recgonize that fact or the evidence that proves it _are_ losers.
People who advocate injustice for others do so by their own choice. Anyone who advocates the denial of justice to others is a criminal at heart. So, I see nothing racist or unfair about pointing out the most likely outcomes of such choices.
My position is backed by logic, evidence, and compassion. If you can disprove my logic, show me any evidence whatsoever to indicate that my conclusions are wrong, or show how my position needlessly hurts anyone, I'll happily revise it.
What is the basis for your position, and what are you willing to do about it if it turns out that yours might be mistaken? | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 10:29:23 AM |
There is a difference between racism and institutionalized racism. People have a right to their bigoted opinions. But when you involve the government in policies that are intended to prevent anyone from a group from prospering or receiving a fair shot, that institutionalized injustice is a threat to everyone and must be stopped.
I agree with this
As it is, AA is simply an effort to recognize diversity as a valid qualification. The simple fact is that diverse companies are stronger competitors than narrow ones.
This is not a fact at all. The Japanese have no diversity at all and build a much better automobile. If anything, most industries have reduced or eliminated qualifications in order to reach the government required “diversity” and it is only in their interest to do this to avoid litigation which is very expensive.
So, if two otherwise similarly qualified candidates are in the running for a job, rather than choosing the one who's White, consider the benefits of having a diverse workforce to your own organization as well as society as a whole.
In the actually workings of AA as it is applied in the USA, the less qualified candidate is often selected with the only purpose being to achieve racial and gender quotas. Take the fire department for example, physical tests have been either dramatically lowered or eliminated altogether to allow a greater percentage of women to get these jobs. That in your opinion has improved things and perhaps it has all except for that poor guy roasting marshmallows on his burning leg while waiting for the weaker sex to come get him out of there.
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Joan Bader Ginsburg did use racial quotas in determining if racial injustice had occurred. I just loved it when one of the attorneys pointed out to Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg that her own staff was entirely all white and entirely all Jewish. She still used quotas as the final determination. Can anyone say the word “hypocrite?”
There is still one occupation that is massively under represented with the proper ratio of Blacks. That occupation is that of physician. Why is that? Well, it would be so obvious if standards were dropped in that occupation because more people would actually die as a result. Are there Blacks smart enough to become doctors? Sure there are. Eventually, without FORCING IT, I am sure that the racial representation of Blacks will go up but only by those that are actually qualified by the same exact standards as everyone else.
It wasn't as though anyone was saying "no jobs for Whitey."
That is an incorrect statement. There are "set aside" jobs by the federal, every state, most county, and most city governments that are only for women or minorities and WHITE MEN NEED NOT APPLY. Those are the facts, my friend.
As far as the monkey shirt goes, I would not put it on and I see it as in very bad taste. That's as bad as saying that the Oval Office will be filled with chicken bones and watermelon seeds if Obama wins. It's just in bad taste and I do see it as having racist overtones because some Blacks are very sensitive over these issues. Why inflame peoples sensitivities if you don't have to? However, I am more often offended when people talk about Catholic priests as all being child molesters and I am not even Catholic. Often, the same people that would watch what they say around women and Blacks are the first ones to attack Christians and other unprotected groups like white men. To be honest about it, I see far more racism in the Black community against whites than in white communities against Blacks. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 10:51:07 AM |
It can't be all that bad if it is forced upon society by government and every minority rights group as well as the other "hate" groups like the Black Panthers, the Ku Klux Klan and the NAACP in the States. as well as the Bnai Brith, the KKK and the western Cree council and many others in Canada. It must be a good thing if the liberals are so intent on keeping it around as to entrench it into the constitution.
I don't think it is appropriate to call The Bnai Brith, Naacp, ect, hate groups or class them with the kkk. Do you have any proof to show that these organisations (KKK and Black Panthers excluded) have negative effects on society? These organisations are not put in place to fuel racism. Organisations like the Bnai Brith are in place to assist the needs of a specific group of people based on the kind of opression, segregation or torture they may have recieved. While the Jewish and Aboriginal people were both horribly mistreated, both deserve individual attention for it. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 1:48:29 PM |
In the actually workings of AA as it is applied in the USA, the less qualified candidate is often selected with the only purpose being to achieve racial and gender quotas. Take the fire department for example, physical tests have been either dramatically lowered or eliminated altogether to allow a greater percentage of women to get these jobs. That in your opinion has improved things and perhaps it has all except for that poor guy roasting marshmallows on his burning leg while waiting for the weaker sex to come get him out of there.
My exhusband worked in a public safety department in North Carolina - combined services of police and firefighting. He cheered on the few women who definitely DID accomplish the physical tests for the firefighting, wrangling the charged hoses and all. He was mightily impressed and respectful as their department DID NOT lower these requirements for women. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 4:40:23 PM | There is a difference between racism and institutionalized racism. People have a right to their bigoted opinions. But when you involve the government in policies that are intended to prevent anyone from a group from prospering or receiving a fair shot, that institutionalized injustice is a threat to everyone and must be stopped.
I agree with this
Good. At least we agree on the principle. As far as how it is implemented, if there's a better approach then AA, I'd be all for that. Until there's a better approach that has a chance of working, indolence really isn't an option--is it?
As it is, AA is simply an effort to recognize diversity as a valid qualification. The simple fact is that diverse companies are stronger competitors than narrow ones.
This is not a fact at all. The Japanese have no diversity at all and build a much better automobile.
Yes, the characteristic Japanese approach to industry is to reverse engineer and then optimize the hell out of whatever they undertake. And they're good at it.
What they're not so good at is inventing new products or opening new markets for those products. That is where the characteristic American approach is still the world's leader. And why can we do that better than others? Because of our diversity of viewpoints and backgrounds. There's a great book about how diversity enhances the success of business called Hot Spots by Professor Lynda Gratton of the London School of Business. Check it out. www.lyndagratton.com. Her research appears to be solid.
If anything, most industries have reduced or eliminated qualifications in order to reach the government required “diversity” and it is only in their interest to do this to avoid litigation which is very expensive.
There have been many instances where it was found that qualifications that had nothing to do with actual performance on the job were eliminated. That's true. Some of those qualifications were put in place to serve as barriers to entry. For example, requiring a degree for a job as an assembler, or having a requirement that a person be able to lift 250 lbs. when the weight could be dragged just as quickly.
Yes, there have been abuses and overreactions, but those have gone both ways.
So, if two otherwise similarly qualified candidates are in the running for a job, rather than choosing the one who's White, consider the benefits of having a diverse workforce to your own organization as well as society as a whole.
In the actually workings of AA as it is applied in the USA, the less qualified candidate is often selected with the only purpose being to achieve racial and gender quotas.
I'm sure that this has happened, and it should be stopped. But how many times has a better qualified and better performing candidate been shunned because she or he was Black, Brown, Jewish, Arabic, Native American, or female?
One need not scrap an entire policy that is intended to promote justice simply because it has been abused. And one should not do so when the alternative is to allow a system of institutionalized injustice to persist. --not if you agree with the principle at any rate.
I do see it as having racist overtones because some Blacks are very sensitive over these issues. Why inflame peoples sensitivities if you don't have to? ...
To be honest about it, I see far more racism in the Black community against whites than in white communities against Blacks.
Could that be because you're more sensitized to hate that is directed against you than you are concerned about hate that is directed against others? If you were Black, I wonder how your perception might change. Do you ever wonder about that yourself?
It's a very interesting thought experiment. Ever read _Black_Like_Me?_
However, I am more often offended when people talk about Catholic priests as all being child molesters and I am not even Catholic. Often, the same people that would watch what they say around women and Blacks are the first ones to attack Christians and other unprotected groups like white men.
What one chooses to believe is a matter of choice and subject to debate. I have no qualms about criticizing _any_ religious viewpoint, especially when people hold the view that their purported connection to the Divine gives them a mandate to dictate the behavior or interfere with the rights of others.
My personal view of Christianity is that it is the most profoundly moving story ever told. My view of Christians is that the ones who actually apply what Christ taught deserve nothing but admiration and support. However, there is a lot of utter nonsense that gets passed off as Christianity, and when people choose to subscribe to such nonsense rather than thinking things through for themselves, it gives Christianity a bad name.
So if you announce yourself as a Christian to me, pardon me if I wince. But if I find out that you've been tending the sick, visiting the prisoners, treating others as you would want to be treated if you were in their position, instilling hope, reminding us all that we all, in fact, have a direct line to God's love whether we realize it or not and that it's there for the asking, behaving as good citizens by (in this day and age) respecting the rights and dignity of others, and you're doing all that because you believe in Christ and what he stood for, you will receive nothing from me but heartfelt respect.
However, those guys in charge of the Spanish Inquisition? The ones who want to abrogate the Constitution so that they can prevent other people from getting married?
The ones who would punish girls for getting pregnant (as if an abortion wasn't punishment enough)? The ones who want to establish a Christian theocracy with themselves in charge? The ones who go on TV to swindle donations from shut-ins?
Please.
Critics of so-called Christianity don't have to do a _thing_ to besmirch the good name of that faith. Look to the contemptible behavior your fellow Christians if you want to know why there is so much disparagement in the air.
I'll bet that guy who's selling those damned T shirts sees himself as a good Christian and a good ole' boy, and if you see him that way too, God help you. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 5:39:19 PM | OUCH, Ace!!!
Those last two post were as RIDICULOUSLY on point, as they were scathing!!! DAMN, you're good!!!
It's really pretty laughable -- though sad and nauseating -- to see and listen to some people try to justify perpetuating America's undeniable historic transgressions under the pretext of "reverse discrimination," "pride," and "heritage." And I think it is nothing short of a "flying disgrace" that we STILL have state governments which today fly confederate flags over the statehouse in the name of heritage when we ALL know the true essence of its symbolism.
I suppose the advocates of flying those colors prominently in the government's representative image would also argue that some communities should show "German-pride" by adorning swastikas on the flags of their governmental agencies as well, eh?
What a croc!!!
I truly hope such characters prove to be in the minority of those voting in November; they've retarded our nation's progress for too long already! | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 6:28:25 PM |
Could that be because you're more sensitized to hate that is directed against you than you are concerned about hate that is directed against others? If you were Black, I wonder how your perception might change.
Actually, I am a Black man but I went through a series of operations to look white. I bleached my skin, had a nose job, had my lips thinned, had my hair colored and straightened, I wear blue color contacts, and I had my penis shortened.
Wherefore Art Thou?, with all due respect to your ex-husband, standards absolutely have been dropped for every fire department nationwide for the purpose of allowing more women into their ranks. Fire fighting is a very physically demanding job that men do better than women. When women succeed in pro football or in pro basketball along side men then get back to me. I did not invent the phrase "the weaker sex." Without the government forcing this to happen it would not have happened just like it has not happened in sanitation collection. I suppose you feel that women are men's equal as combat solders in hand to hand combat too? There probably are exceptions here and there but few and very far between. | |
|
| Monkey Shirt Racist?
Posted: 5/26/2008 6:38:17 PM | I don't think it is appropriate to call The Bnai Brith, Naacp, ect, hate groups or class them with the kkk. Do you have any proof to show that these organisations (KKK and Black Panthers excluded) have negative effects on society? These organisations are not put in place to fuel racism. Organisations like the Bnai Brith are in place to assist the needs of a specific group of people based on the kind of opression, segregation or torture they may have recieved. While the Jewish and Aboriginal people were both horribly mistreated, both deserve individual attention for it.
You just answered your own question. If the NAACP and Bnai Brith are in place to openly represent one segment of a society based race and heritage they are no better than any other racist group. If that doesn't fuel racism than nor would the workings of the KKK, by the same definition. It has absolutly nothing to do with opression it has to do with race or in the case of the Bnai Brith religion. | |
|
|
| Page 8 of 11
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
|
Home
login 
