PDA

View Full Version : Should chanting "USA" be racist?



garhkal
02-15-2013, 05:14 AM
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/03/07/10602066-racist-texas-high-school-apologizes-for-fans-usa-chant-after-basketball-game?lite


http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/340639/students-told-stop-usa-chant-take-american-flag-bandanas-andrew-johnson


http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/school-says-%E2%80%9Cusa-usa%E2%80%9D-chant-is-racist.html


http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/students-suspended-for-chanting-u-s-a/?cat_orig=us


So, the kids at the other school ARE americans (by some reports), but are hispanic too..
So is it racism??

Quixotic
02-15-2013, 05:31 AM
It's incredibly poor taste, but makes for a great story if you slap the racism stamp on it.

Banned
02-15-2013, 05:49 AM
The racial connotation is fairly obvious. White Texans chanting "USA!" when they score against a mostly-hispanic team... implying that hispanics aren't real Americans.

efmbman
02-15-2013, 11:38 PM
I don't see the connection considering that "American" and "USA" describe nationalities and countries. I'm sure I am simply not liberal enough to feel their pain.

Banned
02-15-2013, 11:55 PM
I don't see the connection considering that "American" and "USA" describe nationalities and countries. I'm sure I am simply not liberal enough to feel their pain.

So could you - being completely honest - say that the students came up with this chant with pure intentions? That there was no racism or malice in general when they got together and decided to chant "USA!" when their team scored?

How would this chant even make sense with two American teams playing against eachother... unless it was a deliberate jab at the competing team members race?

efmbman
02-16-2013, 12:25 AM
So could you - being completely honest - say that the students came up with this chant with pure intentions? That there was no racism or malice in general when they got together and decided to chant "USA!" when their team scored?

How would this chant even make sense with two American teams playing against eachother... unless it was a deliberate jab at the competing team members race?

Nevermind... you're right. I've never seen a more racist incident in all my years.

Banned
02-16-2013, 05:47 PM
Nevermind... you're right. I've never seen a more racist incident in all my years.

These students were a complete embarrassment to themselves, their parents, their school, and their team. They deserve the punishment.

If, even in "all your years", you can't comprehend that... oh well.

efmbman
02-16-2013, 06:17 PM
These students were a complete embarrassment to themselves, their parents, their school, and their team. They deserve the punishment.

If, even in "all your years", you can't comprehend that... oh well.

I already said you're right. You win the interwebs.

Rizzo77
02-17-2013, 01:34 AM
Dang. It's just more Hispanic on Hispanic hysteria. NO ONE wins when that happens.

Banned
02-17-2013, 04:24 AM
I already said you're right. You win the interwebs.

I bet you're one of those guys who thinks there's nothing wrong with a supervisor telling a female supervisor to deplouse so he can look her over. Unable to see even obvious human motiviations that don't fit your political viewpoint!

JD2780
02-17-2013, 02:19 PM
Joe, now you're just being crazy. We've all seen worse forms of racism. Yes, do I think the kids were doing it to put down the most hispanic kids. That one is a little obvious. However, punishing them? Good luck being able to punish them. A lawyer would have a field day with that.

At the same time if my kids wears an American flag t-shirt on cinco de mayo should he be told to change his shirt? If my son rides his bike with an American flag attached to it, should his school principal not allow him to ride his bike on to school grounds because it might offend some of the latinos in his school? No, he should be allowed to do both. However, that pathetic liberal mentality of this country is starting to go that way. I'm just glad my kid goes to a school that has mostly military families in it so he wont have to deal with that stupidity in the near future.

garhkal
02-17-2013, 05:39 PM
Exactly, we have already had some schools throw issues out there with kids wearing american flags on cinco de mayo..

JD2780
02-17-2013, 05:50 PM
You dont see us Irish folks freaking out and claiming discrimination or racism when people wear or carry American flags on St Patty's day.

Banned
02-17-2013, 06:32 PM
Joe, now you're just being crazy. We've all seen worse forms of racism. Yes, do I think the kids were doing it to put down the most hispanic kids. That one is a little obvious. However, punishing them? Good luck being able to punish them. A lawyer would have a field day with that.

Did you even read the article before commenting about it????

"As punishment, Alamo Heights students who were involved in the chanting will not be allowed to attend the team’s remaining state title games."


At the same time if my kids wears an American flag t-shirt on cinco de mayo should he be told to change his shirt? If my son rides his bike with an American flag attached to it, should his school principal not allow him to ride his bike on to school grounds because it might offend some of the latinos in his school? No, he should be allowed to do both. However, that pathetic liberal mentality of this country is starting to go that way. I'm just glad my kid goes to a school that has mostly military families in it so he wont have to deal with that stupidity in the near future.

Now who's being crazy? How are these two situations even remotely related?

efmbman
02-17-2013, 08:40 PM
I bet you're one of those guys who thinks there's nothing wrong with a supervisor telling a female supervisor to deplouse so he can look her over. Unable to see even obvious human motiviations that don't fit your political viewpoint!

LOL that's the pot calling the kettle black! Or is that racist as well? You are one of the most narrow minded people that post here, Joe. No one can possibly sway your position to even see an alternate point of view. I know things are slow around here with PYB being banned, but do you rellay feel the need to take over as the #1 troll?

JD2780
02-18-2013, 12:02 AM
Did you even read the article before commenting about it????

"As punishment, Alamo Heights students who were involved in the chanting will not be allowed to attend the team’s remaining state title games."



Now who's being crazy? How are these two situations even remotely related?

A good lawyer could easily argue they infriged on their first amendment right. If roles were reversed you wouldnt even bat an eye at somebody saying crap against a white American.

My connection is the fact that only white people can be discriminatory.

efmbman
02-18-2013, 12:29 AM
A good lawyer could easily argue they infriged on their first amendment right.

But... but... our resident constitution expert tells us repeatedly that only the government can violate the 1st amendment. I think we may have a constitutional crisis looming in San Antonio!

Banned
02-18-2013, 02:10 AM
LOL that's the pot calling the kettle black! Or is that racist as well? You are one of the most narrow minded people that post here, Joe. No one can possibly sway your position to even see an alternate point of view. I know things are slow around here with PYB being banned, but do you rellay feel the need to take over as the #1 troll?

Then it is fortunate that the school authorities did not decide to throw common courtesy under the bus so as to not upset your conservative perspective of the world.

Some students behaved like jackasses... they got the banhammer. Oh well.


A good lawyer could easily argue they infriged on their first amendment right. If roles were reversed you wouldnt even bat an eye at somebody saying crap against a white American.

My connection is the fact that only white people can be discriminatory.

If any of the students feel that way, they are more than welcome to convince their parents to hire a lawyer. I highly doubt that will happen. So what would be the victory conditions of such a case? The right to go to the game and act like retards?

JD2780
02-18-2013, 03:19 AM
Then it is fortunate that the school authorities did not decide to throw common courtesy under the bus so as to not upset your conservative perspective of the world.

Some students behaved like jackasses... they got the banhammer. Oh well.



If any of the students feel that way, they are more than welcome to convince their parents to hire a lawyer. I highly doubt that will happen. So what would be the victory conditions of such a case? The right to go to the game and act like retards?

Where is the out pouring of support for their rights? Oh wait, its because they were white. Nope, whitey cant be a racist. How often do I see other races act like jackasses and nobody does a damn thing, but some white kids do it and its a travesty.

Banned
02-18-2013, 04:41 AM
Where is the out pouring of support for their rights? Oh wait, its because they were white. Nope, whitey cant be a racist. How often do I see other races act like jackasses and nobody does a damn thing, but some white kids do it and its a travesty.

I think Conservatives can only be bothered to support a fellow white man when he kills somebody. Now instead of just acting like a bunch of douchebags, those kids had OPENED FIRE on the hispanics, then pundits would be popping out of the woodwork explaining how those hispanics were a clear and present danger. :)

sandsjames
02-19-2013, 04:10 PM
It could have all been easily handled if the Hispanic kids would have started chanting "Estados Unidos" (as they probably didn't understand what "USA" was anyway) in order to show their love for the country their parents, most likely, are in illegally.

And I'm not sure how chanting "USA" in the U.S., when the entire room is filled with American citizens, can be considered racism. Is it bad taste? Yes. We're their intentions patriotic? No. We're their intentions racially motivated? Probably. But racism, no.

TJMAC77SP
02-19-2013, 07:36 PM
I think Conservatives can only be bothered to support a fellow white man when he kills somebody. Now instead of just acting like a bunch of douchebags, those kids had OPENED FIRE on the hispanics, then pundits would be popping out of the woodwork explaining how those hispanics were a clear and present danger. :)

Was that a sly reference to the Martin case?

Let's see.....how to counter your "pundits would be popping out of the woodwork explaining how those hispanics were a clear and present danger".......

Oh yeah...........You gotta be frappin' kidding me ?!?!

When are you going to realize that your Liberals = 100% good; Conservative = 100% evil mentality is both a logic and factual failure. Just make the argument without emotion and hyperbole. Some might actually agree with you.

I can't speak to the motivation but I do think chanting "USA" at an intracity game is weird.

BTW: You can't totally dismiss the Cinco de Mayo comparison...........it could be relevant in certain circumstances.

Banned
02-19-2013, 08:27 PM
Was that a sly reference to the Martin case?

Let's see.....how to counter your "pundits would be popping out of the woodwork explaining how those hispanics were a clear and present danger".......

Oh yeah...........You gotta be frappin' kidding me ?!?!

When are you going to realize that your Liberals = 100% good; Conservative = 100% evil mentality is both a logic and factual failure. Just make the argument without emotion and hyperbole. Some might actually agree with you.

Yes, that was a sly Martin reference. You were too clever for me.


I can't speak to the motivation but I do think chanting "USA" at an intracity game is weird.

BTW: You can't totally dismiss the Cinco de Mayo comparison...........it could be relevant in certain circumstances.

Yes exactly - why chant "USA" at a game when all involved are American? I could understand if, say, an American team scored againtst a French or British team. The school was within their rights, and acted appropriately IMHO by barring the ring leaders of the chant from future games.

TJMAC77SP
02-19-2013, 08:42 PM
Yes, that was a sly Martin reference. You were too clever for me.



Yes exactly - why chant "USA" at a game when all involved are American? I could understand if, say, an American team scored againtst a French or British team. The school was within their rights, and acted appropriately IMHO by barring the ring leaders of the chant from future games.

How is the Martin case going? I thought the media had decided to label Zimmerman a White-Hispanic. Still love that term. Haven't seen anyone else described in that manner. Interesting don't you think.

So.....................as to your hyperbole...........nothing?

Pullinteeth
02-19-2013, 08:46 PM
The question asked by the thread title is a bit odd since chanting USA CAN'T be racist. Chanting a nationality in this case is obviously in poor taste and at the very least misguided, nationality isn't the same as race. Another point to the racism issue is that hispanic is not a race, it is an ethnicity so again, not racist. Ethnocentric? Sure. Racist? Nope.

garhkal
02-19-2013, 09:00 PM
And I'm not sure how chanting "USA" in the U.S., when the entire room is filled with American citizens, can be considered racism..

Its the same reasoning that the left gives when labling any who call for immigration reform that does NOT amnesty those illegals here as being racist cause they 'obviously only mean the mexican illegals..

efmbman
02-19-2013, 09:56 PM
The question asked by the thread title is a bit odd since chanting USA CAN'T be racist. Chanting a nationality in this case is obviously in poor taste and at the very least misguided, nationality isn't the same as race. Another point to the racism issue is that hispanic is not a race, it is an ethnicity so again, not racist. Ethnocentric? Sure. Racist? Nope.

I tried that already...


I don't see the connection considering that "American" and "USA" describe nationalities and countries.

Joe convinced me that nationality and race are the same thing. I was wrong... so wrong. I an anxious to see how the ethnicity angle plays out. I learn something everyday I visit this forum.

Banned
02-19-2013, 11:56 PM
Yes, yes, Conservative intellectuals are right on this as always. I cannot imagine how implying hispanics are not real Americans could possibly be racist.

sandsjames
02-20-2013, 12:00 AM
Yes, yes, Conservative intellectuals are right on this as always. I cannot imagine how implying hispanics are not real Americans could possibly be racist.

Because hispanic is not a race. That's like saying that if we implied that women weren't real Americans we'd be racist.

Banned
02-20-2013, 12:04 AM
Because hispanic is not a race. That's like saying that if we implied that women weren't real Americans we'd be racist.

Oh geezus, are you really going to try and make that argument?

The students actions were prejudiced against ethnicity, so the punishment was justified. Happy now?

sandsjames
02-20-2013, 12:12 AM
Oh geezus, are you really going to try and make that argument?

The students actions were prejudiced against ethnicity, so the punishment was justified. Happy now?

Sure. I can agree with that. The actions were uncalled for and it's within the schools rights to take the action they did. I just hope they take the same actions when the roles are reversed.

I'd also venture a guess that probably 2 or 3 of the students are racist and the rest got caught up in the chant as it gained momentum. Peer pressure is a bitch. It's not an excuse, but it's a bitch. Either way, I don't see the actions as a racist incident.

Banned
02-20-2013, 12:17 AM
Sure. I can agree with that. The actions were uncalled for and it's within the schools rights to take the action they did. I just hope they take the same actions when the roles are reversed.

Agreed.


I'd also venture a guess that probably 2 or 3 of the students are racist and the rest got caught up in the chant as it gained momentum. Peer pressure is a bitch. It's not an excuse, but it's a bitch. Either way, I don't see the actions as a racist incident.

Yes, it is interesting how people get "caught up" in wrong doing. Hopefully as military service members we can avoid being swayed by peer pressure, yes?

efmbman
02-20-2013, 12:19 AM
For the record, I think what the students did was uncalled for. They earned their punishment 100% and probably even deserve a smack on the back of the head. I just don't think it was racist. I would take the same action in any youth sports where the object is to learn fundamentals and sportsmanship. Those students failed at that.

Punisher
02-20-2013, 12:10 PM
For the record, I think what the students did was uncalled for. They earned their punishment 100% and probably even deserve a smack on the back of the head. I just don't think it was racist.

I have yet to see where conservatives draw the line on what's racist and what's not. I mean, if it's brown-on-white racism, they're very quick to call it out.

White on brown racism, however? The Ku Klux Klan could burn a cross on a black man's front lawn, and people will still call him a race baiter if he says it's racist.

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 12:12 PM
I assume that most of the comments here are about the incident in San Antonio. The OP cites more than one incident. Although the incident in California (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/340639/students-told-stop-usa-chant-take-american-flag-bandanas-andrew-johnson)was very similar it seems to have been ignored in this thread. Of course it would be harder to paint that incident in the same fashion given the demographics of the audience in the video clip?

Makes it a bit harder argument I understand so carry on.

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 12:14 PM
I have yet to see where conservatives draw the line on what's racist and what's not. I mean, if it's brown-on-white racism, they're very quick to call it out.

White on brown racism, however? The Ku Klux Klan could burn a cross on a black man's front lawn, and people will still call him a race baiter if he says it's racist.

Who exactly are these 'people' who would say that?

What about black on brown or brown on black?

Punisher
02-20-2013, 12:20 PM
Who exactly are these 'people' who would say that?

Emfbman and sandsjames, so far. I've seen others share the same mindset; though I don't care to go back to dig up more names. Two is enough for now.


What about black on brown or brown on black?

By "brown," I simply meant anyone who isn't white. Including blacks.

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 12:25 PM
Emfbman and sandsjames, so far. I've seen others share the same mindset; though I don't care to go back to dig up more names. Two is enough for now.


I am not seeing the logic jump where the words of either of those two would prove they would think that the klan burning a cross on the lawn of a black man would not be racist. Maybe you can expand on that.


By "brown," I simply meant anyone who isn't white. Including blacks.

I will have to let Hispanics and blacks decide whether that characterization is appropriate. Seems factually wrong on the surface but so be it.

Punisher
02-20-2013, 12:31 PM
I am not seeing the logic jump where the words of either of those two would prove they would think that the klan burning a cross on the lawn of a black man would not be racist. Maybe you can expand on that.

Look at what they're dismissing right now as something that's not racist. Again, I have yet to see where they draw the line on when a white-on-brown incident can be considered racist.

Sure, I was exaggerating on the KKK burning a cross on the black man's lawn scenario.

Or, am I?

That's what I'm trying to find out.

Some of the most blatantly racist things can occur, but if they're pointed out for what they are, then the person doing the pointing out is the one who ends up being villified.


I will have to let Hispanics and blacks decide whether that characterization is appropriate. Seems factually wrong on the surface but so be it.

It's all semantics. If you want me to use different words, feel free to let me know and I'll do it. But, I would at least hope that you now knowing what I mean would suffice.

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 12:40 PM
Damn....you were almost there.



Look at what they're dismissing right now as something that's not racist. Again, I have yet to see where they draw the line on when a white-on-brown incident can be considered racist.

Sure, I was exaggerating on the KKK burning a cross on the black man's lawn scenario.

But...you lost it.


Or, am I?
That's what I'm trying to find out.

Some of the most blatantly racist things can occur, but if they're pointed out for what they are, then the person doing the pointing out is the one who ends up being villified.





It's all semantics. If you want me to use different words, feel free to let me know and I'll do it. But, I would at least hope that you now knowing what I mean would suffice.


Actually their argument is semantics. If I have to wait until your second explanatory post everytime this will get cumbersome.

Punisher
02-20-2013, 01:03 PM
Damn....you were almost there.

But...you lost it.

I think that if you won't have emboldened that part of the second quote, my intents would have been clear.


Actually their argument is semantics. If I have to wait until your second explanatory post everytime this will get cumbersome.

You really don't have to wait. I'm under the impression that you often know fully well what someone is talking about, but ask questions that are designed to elicit a response that you can use against the person later.

Punisher
02-20-2013, 01:35 PM
At the same time if my kids wears an American flag t-shirt on cinco de mayo should he be told to change his shirt?

I remember the incident that you're referring to, and it wasn't that simple.

It was actually a GROUP of men, wearing the SAME American flag t-shirts. And these t-shirts were fresh-off-the-rack, brand new.

So what we see here is an incident where these guys specifically got these t-shirts to wear to this event, and they got exactly the attention that they were looking for.

I look at what these guys were doing like this: I'm an atheist. Someone else may be Christian. And that's okay. I respect them and their beliefs. But when they crash my turf with the intent to be "in your face" with their Christianity, then we're going to have problems.

Does that mean that I have a problem with who they are as Christians? Hardly. It's all about what their intent is being what they're doing with their Christianity.

Same thing with dudes crashing a Cinco De Mayo festivity with American flag t-shirts.

Pullinteeth
02-20-2013, 01:42 PM
Look at what they're dismissing right now as something that's not racist. Again, I have yet to see where they draw the line on when a white-on-brown incident can be considered racist.

It's all semantics. If you want me to use different words, feel free to let me know and I'll do it. But, I would at least hope that you now knowing what I mean would suffice.

Because it HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE.... What part of that do you not understand? Do I need to type slower? I guess it is time to invoke Godwin's Law so let me give you an example that might help you grasp the concept (I will type slow). Just because a moron thinks some group of people are of one race or another doesn't make it so. Making up races doesn't=racism. Aryan is not a race neither is Judiasm. Aryan is a made up race of mythological beings and Judiasm is a religion. Some @$$hat named Hitler decided they were both races and made up rules about who belonged to what race and who didn't. He had a SHITLOAD of people killed. Some it WAS racially motivated-blacks etc... Most of it was nationalistic, ethnic, or religion based murder. NOT racism. Anti-Semetics aren't racist even though they may claim to be, they are just stupid anti-semetics. Hell, most people that extoll the virtues of the "white race" aren't even aware that most hispanics are white, most jews are white, catholics are white...and on and on and on.... Just because stupid people believe something, doesn't make it so.

Punisher
02-20-2013, 02:23 PM
Because it HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE.... What part of that do you not understand?

I know. NOTHING has anything to do with race to a conservate. You can flat out call them beaners, wetbacks, spics; whatever, and be immune to accusations of racism by saying that they're the ones bringing race into it. That's how these bullshit tactics work.



Do I need to type slower?

Please. Knock yourself out.



I guess it is time to invoke Godwin's Law so let me give you an example that might help you grasp the concept (I will type slow).

Now we're talkin'!


Just because a moron thinks some group of people are of one race or another doesn't make it so. Making up races doesn't=racism. Aryan is not a race neither is Judiasm. Aryan is a made up race of mythological beings and Judiasm is a religion. Some @$$hat named Hitler decided they were both races and made up rules about who belonged to what race and who didn't. He had a SHITLOAD of people killed. Some it WAS racially motivated-blacks etc... Most of it was nationalistic, ethnic, or religion based murder. NOT racism. Anti-Semetics aren't racist even though they may claim to be, they are just stupid anti-semetics. Hell, most people that extoll the virtues of the "white race" aren't even aware that most hispanics are white, most jews are white, catholics are white...and on and on and on.... Just because stupid people believe something, doesn't make it so.

Aryans are not made up. Hitler defined Aryans wrong, though. Iranians/Persians are Aryan.

But in the end, this is all semantics. You act as though this okay, because technically something is or isn't a race.

Go ahead. Type slower than you did last time. Maybe I might understand your gibberish better.

sandsjames
02-20-2013, 02:29 PM
By "brown," I simply meant anyone who isn't white. Including blacks.Damn...That's racist!!

sandsjames
02-20-2013, 02:32 PM
Actually their argument is semantics. If I have to wait until your second explanatory post everytime this will get cumbersome.

That's pretty much correct. I think both he and I have pretty clearly stated we don't condone or agree with what happen and what the intentions were. The only point being that it's simply (semantically) racist.

sandsjames
02-20-2013, 02:36 PM
I remember the incident that you're referring to, and it wasn't that simple.

It was actually a GROUP of men, wearing the SAM American flag t-shirts. And these t-shirts were fresh-off-the-rack, brand new.

So what we see here is an incident where these guys specifically got these t-shirts to wear to this event, and they got exactly the attention that they were looking for.

I look at what these guys were doing like this: I'm an atheist. Someone else may be Christian. And that's okay. I respect them and their beliefs. But when they crash my turf with the intent to be "in your face" with their Christianity, then we're going to have problems.

Does that mean that I have a problem with who they are as Christians? Hardly. It's all about what their intent is being what they're doing with their Christianity.

Same thing with dudes crashing a Cinco De Mayo festivity with American flag t-shirts.

I'd say that the incident you're talking about would be much more like an Atheist coming INTO a church and then bitching that religion was being thrown in their face.

sandsjames
02-20-2013, 02:36 PM
I remember the incident that you're referring to, and it wasn't that simple.

It was actually a GROUP of men, wearing the SAM American flag t-shirts. And these t-shirts were fresh-off-the-rack, brand new.

So what we see here is an incident where these guys specifically got these t-shirts to wear to this event, and they got exactly the attention that they were looking for.

I look at what these guys were doing like this: I'm an atheist. Someone else may be Christian. And that's okay. I respect them and their beliefs. But when they crash my turf with the intent to be "in your face" with their Christianity, then we're going to have problems.

Does that mean that I have a problem with who they are as Christians? Hardly. It's all about what their intent is being what they're doing with their Christianity.

Same thing with dudes crashing a Cinco De Mayo festivity with American flag t-shirts.

I'd say that the incident you're talking about would be much more like an Atheist coming INTO a church and then bitching that religion was being thrown in their face.

Punisher
02-20-2013, 03:13 PM
I'd say that the incident you're talking about would be much more like an Atheist coming INTO a church and then bitching that religion was being thrown in their face.

Not exactly. The church doesn't allow the same freedoms.

JD2780
02-20-2013, 03:15 PM
I'd say that the incident you're talking about would be much more like an Atheist coming INTO a church and then bitching that religion was being thrown in their face.

Correct. If i get a group of people to wear American flag shirts on St Patty's do you think a bunch of "Irish-Americans" are going to blow a gasket? Nope. Want to know why? Because they're AMERICAN with Irish decent. People need to get over crap like that. Oh you hurt my feelings. Then go some place that says what you can and cant wear.

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 03:41 PM
I think that if you won't have emboldened that part of the second quote, my intents would have been clear.



You really don't have to wait. I'm under the impression that you often know fully well what someone is talking about, but ask questions that are designed to elicit a response that you can use against the person later.

Actually I ask questions to make a point. Now, not later.

You DID exaggerate in order to attempt to make your point. THAT was the point I was making (which you recognized but evidently couldn’t bring yourself to just state so and leave it alone) and there was no ‘later’ to it. My question made my point as it stands. I emboldened your words to assist in making my point. Exactly what are you ‘trying to find out” about emfbman and sandsjames? You had already stated they wouldn’t call the burning of a cross by the Klan racist.

These kids in San Antonio engaged in inappropriate behavior. Simply put, nothing else needed. Hyperbole and rhetoric never really help an argument.

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 03:48 PM
Actually Aryan is made up. In the sense that there is no defined DNA identity of Aryan. Many ethnic groups have identified themselves as Aryan. Hitler just gets the most publicity over the designation.

Sometimes semantics actually matters.

Banned
02-20-2013, 04:35 PM
Actually Aryan is made up. In the sense that there is no defined DNA identity of Aryan. Many ethnic groups have identified themselves as Aryan. Hitler just gets the most publicity over the designation.

Sometimes semantics actually matters.

So basically your argument boils down to we can do or say anything we like to hispanics, and it can't be racist, because hispanics are tecnically an ethnicity, not a race?

JD2780
02-20-2013, 04:39 PM
So basically your argument boils down to we can do or say anything we like to hispanics, and it can't be racist, because hispanics are tecnically an ethnicity, not a race?

Freedom of speech right? Dont infringe on it or the ACLU will get you. Oh wait, they only attack whitey.

Banned
02-20-2013, 04:42 PM
Freedom of speech right?

So where do you draw the line? Are you saying schools should not be allowed to stop bullying or rude behavior in general? Or how about parents? Don't they "infringe" on first ammendment rights all the time?


Dont infringe on it or the ACLU will get you. Oh wait, they only attack whitey.

You do realize that the ACLU has defended white Christians too, right? Good on them for even bothering, because Christians will never give them an ounce of credit for it.

JD2780
02-20-2013, 04:52 PM
So where do you draw the line? Are you saying schools should not be allowed to stop bullying or rude behavior in general? Or how about parents? Don't they "infringe" on first ammendment rights all the time?



You do realize that the ACLU has defended white Christians too, right? Good on them for even bothering, because Christians will never give them an ounce of credit for it.

Legit question Joe. Where do you draw the line? I dont know. Its a tough spot to be in. Why can WBC say hateful things at military funerals. Regardless of your opinion of the wars you should respect funerals. However, WBC likes to chant away saying hurtful things.

Joe, I'll be up front. For much of this I've been playing devils advocate. At a school function when its obvious people are saying things to be hurtful yes something needs to be done. Its on school grounds and the school has a responsibility to establish an atmosphere free of that kind of bigotry.

Where do you draw the line in respect to bullying? Still tough to tell. My buddy's daughter got wrapped up in a bullying incident at her school. However, she said something online, didnt really even say anything just put "LOL". My buddy was called to the principals office to discuss his daughter and her up coming suspension. Now that is a tough one as well. It didnt happen on school ground, didnt happen during school hours? How can they suspend her for this? Dont get me wrong, my buddy took care of business when he got her home, but should the school have suspended her? I dont believe so. I believe they acted correctly in notifying him about her actions.

Punisher
02-20-2013, 04:55 PM
Correct. If i get a group of people to wear American flag shirts on St Patty's do you think a bunch of "Irish-Americans" are going to blow a gasket? Nope. Want to know why? Because they're AMERICAN with Irish decent. People need to get over crap like that. Oh you hurt my feelings. Then go some place that says what you can and cant wear.

You have to consider that a St Patty's festivity is not likely to attract that kind of thing anyway. Latinos, unfortunately, bear a burden that non-Hispanic whites and blacks don't - and that's being thought of as foreign, regardless of their citizenship or where they were born. And Latinos are fully aware of this.

And that's the reason for the whole "USA" chanting in the first place.

This is why you can't compare St Patty's Day to Cinco De Mayo.

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 04:58 PM
So basically your argument boils down to we can do or say anything we like to hispanics, and it can't be racist, because hispanics are tecnically an ethnicity, not a race?

Where in my post is the word Hispanic or even an allusion to it?

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 05:00 PM
Freedom of speech right? Dont infringe on it or the ACLU will get you. Oh wait, they only attack whitey.

In fairness, the ACLU will defend groups which are not normally associated with their base (Nazis in Skokie. IL for example).

One thing they refuse to take on is a 2nd Amendment case but that is for another thread I suppose.

Pullinteeth
02-20-2013, 05:12 PM
I know. NOTHING has anything to do with race to a conservate. You can flat out call them beaners, wetbacks, spics; whatever, and be immune to accusations of racism by saying that they're the ones bringing race into it. That's how these bullshit tactics work.

Aryans are not made up. Hitler defined Aryans wrong, though. Iranians/Persians are Aryan.
But in the end, this is all semantics. You act as though this okay, because technically something is or isn't a race.
Go ahead. Type slower than you did last time. Maybe I might understand your gibberish better.

When did I say that? If it actually had to do with race, it could be racism. This doesn't. You are correct. None of those terms are technically racist. That doesn't make them right.
You are wrong AND right. Aryans are made up. It was a self-defined ethnic term based primarily upon linguistics NOT race. It had to do with those languages that were derived from Iranian origins. Then when it was discovered that a lot of European languages had the same root language, they were added to the mix. The Nazis really screwed it all up by reclassifying it as a race and then subdividing it so they could exclude those "Aryans" that they weren't too fond of.
When did I ever say discrimination of any kind was ok as long as it wasn't based upon race? You seem to be the one basing the measure of right and wrong on whether you can define it as racism...


So basically your argument boils down to we can do or say anything we like to hispanics, and it can't be racist, because hispanics are tecnically an ethnicity, not a race?

Depends who "we" are and what is said.

Punisher
02-20-2013, 05:17 PM
Actually Aryan is made up. In the sense that there is no defined DNA identity of Aryan. Many ethnic groups have identified themselves as Aryan. Hitler just gets the most publicity over the designation.

Sometimes semantics actually matters.

Okay, here goes: Iran is actually the oldest country in the world that still exists today. In fact, it predates Egypt by 100 years (though the pre-united Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt did exist before that).

And, they have ALWAYS been called Aryans. In fact, the word "Iran" itself literally means "land of the Aryans" in Persian.

If "Aryan" is made up, then so is Irish, German, and any other ethnic group you can think of.

Banned
02-20-2013, 05:28 PM
Legit question Joe. Where do you draw the line? I dont know. Its a tough spot to be in. Why can WBC say hateful things at military funerals. Regardless of your opinion of the wars you should respect funerals. However, WBC likes to chant away saying hurtful things.

Joe, I'll be up front. For much of this I've been playing devils advocate. At a school function when its obvious people are saying things to be hurtful yes something needs to be done. Its on school grounds and the school has a responsibility to establish an atmosphere free of that kind of bigotry.

Where do you draw the line in respect to bullying? Still tough to tell. My buddy's daughter got wrapped up in a bullying incident at her school. However, she said something online, didnt really even say anything just put "LOL". My buddy was called to the principals office to discuss his daughter and her up coming suspension. Now that is a tough one as well. It didnt happen on school ground, didnt happen during school hours? How can they suspend her for this? Dont get me wrong, my buddy took care of business when he got her home, but should the school have suspended her? I dont believe so. I believe they acted correctly in notifying him about her actions.

Okay... so would you agree with the statement that these students acted because of the color of the opposing team's skin... them being brown (hispanic) meant they weren't "real" citizens?


In fairness, the ACLU will defend groups which are not normally associated with their base (Nazis in Skokie. IL for example).

One thing they refuse to take on is a 2nd Amendment case but that is for another thread I suppose.

Really now?

"ACLU POSITION
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right. For seven decades, the Supreme Court's 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view. This position is currently under review and is being updated by the ACLU National Board in light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller in 2008.

In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia. The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. However, particular federal or state laws on licensing, registration, prohibition, or other regulation of the manufacture, shipment, sale, purchase or possession of guns may raise civil liberties questions.

ANALYSIS
Although ACLU policy cites the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Miller as support for our position on the Second Amendment, our policy was never dependent on Miller. Rather, like all ACLU policies, it reflects the ACLU's own understanding of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Heller takes a different approach than the ACLU has advocated. At the same time, it leaves many unresolved questions, including what firearms are protected by the Second Amendment, what regulations (short of an outright ban) may be upheld, and how that determination will be made.

Those questions will, presumably, be answered over time."
http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_prisoners-rights_drug-law-reform_immigrants-rights/second-amendment

And this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/us/05guns.html?_r=0

And once again, jumping on the bandwagon bashing the ACLU for imaginary failings.

JD2780
02-20-2013, 05:33 PM
Okay... so would you agree with the statement that these students acted because of the color of the opposing team's skin... them being brown (hispanic) meant they weren't "real" citizens?



.

Real citizens? I dont know, were they being derogatory asshats? Yes.

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 06:44 PM
Okay... so would you agree with the statement that these students acted because of the color of the opposing team's skin... them being brown (hispanic) meant they weren't "real" citizens?



Really now?

"ACLU POSITION
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right. For seven decades, the Supreme Court's 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view. This position is currently under review and is being updated by the ACLU National Board in light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller in 2008.

In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia. The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. However, particular federal or state laws on licensing, registration, prohibition, or other regulation of the manufacture, shipment, sale, purchase or possession of guns may raise civil liberties questions.

ANALYSIS
Although ACLU policy cites the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Miller as support for our position on the Second Amendment, our policy was never dependent on Miller. Rather, like all ACLU policies, it reflects the ACLU's own understanding of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Heller takes a different approach than the ACLU has advocated. At the same time, it leaves many unresolved questions, including what firearms are protected by the Second Amendment, what regulations (short of an outright ban) may be upheld, and how that determination will be made.

Those questions will, presumably, be answered over time."
http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_prisoners-rights_drug-law-reform_immigrants-rights/second-amendment

And this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/us/05guns.html?_r=0

And once again, jumping on the bandwagon bashing the ACLU for imaginary failings.

Joe, I actually defended the ACLU. Has the ACLU taken a 2nd Amendment case to court?

TJMAC77SP
02-20-2013, 07:06 PM
Okay, here goes: Iran is actually the oldest country in the world that still exists today. In fact, it predates Egypt by 100 years (though the pre-united Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt did exist before that).

And, they have ALWAYS been called Aryans. In fact, the word "Iran" itself literally means "land of the Aryans" in Persian.

If "Aryan" is made up, then so is Irish, German, and any other ethnic group you can think of.

I suppose you are right in the historical sense if you ignore the use of the word by several ethic groups. However they haven't 'always' been called Aryan. They may have always called themselves Aryan but that wasn't in universal usage. They are indeed one of the oldest civilizations in the world. I don't think that Iran as we know it is the Iran of the era you speak of though but that really would be a moot point.

Having said that my statement that there is no DNA profile for what would be considerd Aryan is most likely incorrect.



BTW, Irish and German are not ethnic groups they are nationalities. That is semantics.


Wiki is great isn't it?

Pullinteeth
02-20-2013, 08:38 PM
Okay, here goes: Iran is actually the oldest country in the world that still exists today. In fact, it predates Egypt by 100 years (though the pre-united Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt did exist before that).

And, they have ALWAYS been called Aryans. In fact, the word "Iran" itself literally means "land of the Aryans" in Persian.

If "Aryan" is made up, then so is Irish, German, and any other ethnic group you can think of.

I just love how you make stuff up and present it as fact... The term Aryan is not a race nor have Iranians always been called Aryans. The term Aryan is a bastardization of the sanscrit "Arya" which meant noble... Sanskrit came around somewhere in the 1500 Century BC... LONG time ago but not "always" esp since Iran has had people hangin out there since at LEAST 2800 BCE. As I have already stated, the term Aryan when used to refer to Iranian people has NOTHING to do with race and everything to do with language. The earliest know reference to Iran as Eran (the land of the Aryans) was in the 3rd Century so again....NOT always.
The term Aryan as it has to do with race is a made up concept. As already explained to you, Irish and German are not races either....

Again, I am NOT saying what they did was right or acceptable, I am simply stating facts-it isn't RACISM.

garhkal
02-20-2013, 08:54 PM
Who exactly are these 'people' who would say that?

What about black on brown or brown on black?

Agreed. heck during the 1 oclock segment of fox news, they were going on about that program in wisconsin where white people do a segment on you tube with stuff scraweled over their faces seeming to make the statement being 'white is racist in itself cause of how society is set up to 'give us privelage'.
And one of the people who made said group up, made the comment that "OF course blacks/latinos etc can't be racist. As racism is the majority overruling the minority" or something to the effect.


You have to consider that a St Patty's festivity is not likely to attract that kind of thing anyway. Latinos, unfortunately, bear a burden that non-Hispanic whites and blacks don't - and that's being thought of as foreign, regardless of their citizenship or where they were born. And Latinos are fully aware of this.

And that's the reason for the whole "USA" chanting in the first place.

And are not Irish people also foreign? Or is it only the non northern european/south american foreigners we need to be concerned about?

Pullinteeth
02-20-2013, 09:10 PM
And are not Irish people also foreign? Or is it only the non northern european/south american foreigners we need to be concerned about?

Yes, yes they are. As a matter of fact, there was quite a bit of discrimmination against them and other immigrants (Italians, eastern Europeans, etc)-esp in the NE-but again, wasn't RACIST. Now, the discrimmination against those of Asian decent (Chinese and Japanese specifically) WAS racist AND ethnocentric AND ultra-nationalistic (for the non-citizens)... Neither was more right or wrong, just different labels...

Banned
02-20-2013, 09:35 PM
Joe, I actually defended the ACLU. Has the ACLU taken a 2nd Amendment case to court?

Look in the second link.

efmbman
02-20-2013, 10:21 PM
I have yet to see where conservatives draw the line on what's racist and what's not...


Who exactly are these 'people' who would say that?


Emfbman and sandsjames, so far.

What makes you so certain that I am a conservative? Are you jumping to a conclusion based the limited information you know about me? Isn't that a lot like stereotyping? Or, dare I say, racism? Predjudice based on assumptions?

Just fooling around... honest! If having a label slapped on me works for you or anyone, that's fine by me. If given a choice, I would prefer "human", though.

JD2780
02-20-2013, 10:26 PM
What makes you so certain that I am a conservative? Are you jumping to a conclusion based the limited information you know about me? Isn't that a lot like stereotyping? Or, dare I say, racism? Predjudice based on assumptions?

Just fooling around... honest! If having a label slapped on me works for you or anyone, that's fine by me. If given a choice, I would prefer "human", though.

I dont know. The human race is going to crap also.

Punisher
02-21-2013, 11:23 AM
What makes you so certain that I am a conservative? Are you jumping to a conclusion based the limited information you know about me? Isn't that a lot like stereotyping? Or, dare I say, racism? Predjudice based on assumptions?

Okay, my bad. I tell you what: I'm gonna stand back and let you tell me. The non-acknowledgement of nonwhite-on-white racism is a conservative thing; but you can go right on ahead and tell what you are. But the second you tell me that you're straight down the middle or give me some bs about labels not defining you, I'm going to call a spade a spade, and tell you that you're conservative.


Just fooling around... honest! If having a label slapped on me works for you or anyone, that's fine by me. If given a choice, I would prefer "human", though.

Wow, looks like I may have already called it.

TJMAC77SP
02-21-2013, 12:43 PM
Look in the second link.

Thanks Joe. I had not heard of that case. I have often found it amusing that given the number of gun law cases and suites that that ACLU had not entered the foray. Turns out they have. Additionally I love the part about joining with the NRA to fight Bubba Profile stops by the police in Texas.

TJMAC77SP
02-21-2013, 01:00 PM
Okay, my bad. I tell you what: I'm gonna stand back and let you tell me. The non-acknowledgement of nonwhite-on-white racism is a conservative thing; but you can go right on ahead and tell what you are. But the second you tell me that you're straight down the middle or give me some bs about labels not defining you, I'm going to call a spade a spade, and tell you that you're conservative.



Wow, looks like I may have already called it.

So the refusal to acknowledge racism against whites ("nonwhite-on-white racism") is a "conservative thing” I am a bit confused by that statement.

First I am going to assume you meant to say white on nonwhite (noticeably abandoning your 'brown' label).

Secondly, isn't that just going back to your assertion that a burning cross by the Klan would not be acknowledged as racism by conservatives (like efmbman and SJ....as you have described them)? I would have thought by now you would have seen the fallacy of that very broad stated position.


Lastly, exactly why is being conservative a bad thing in your mind? You use it as if it were a slur. More to the point how do you not see the logic failure of painting a very large group of people with a brush that is more accurately applied to a very small minority? Should the same logic be used to label all liberals as socialist, bleeding heart, tree-hugging know-nothings who have zero concepts of personal responsibility and work ethic?

Hey, this hyperbole stuff is actually fun.


I get the feeling that you are dancing around calling some here racists and substitute the word conservative for that slur. If that isn’t true, I apologize. It is just my perception.

One last question………….in your mind are there no racist liberals?

Punisher
02-21-2013, 01:29 PM
So the refusal to acknowledge racism against whites ("nonwhite-on-white racism") is a "conservative thing” I am a bit confused by that statement.

First I am going to assume you meant to say white on nonwhite (noticeably abandoning your 'brown' label).

Correct, that's what I meant.


Secondly, isn't that just going back to your assertion that a burning cross by the Klan would not be acknowledged as racism by conservatives (like efmbman and SJ....as you have described them)? I would have thought by now you would have seen the fallacy of that very broad stated position.

What's the fallacy? I have yet to see a confirmation or denial from either of the two people I've mentioned. Again, I want to know where the line is drawn. I mean, without shouting a specific slur while committing a particular act, what does a white person have to do in order to be considered racist? Shouting "USA" at a sporting event where the opposing team consists mostly of Mexican Americans isn't enough? If that isn't, what is?

All this talk that I see here, where people sarcastically state that black people can't be racist, or Latinos can't be racist; I'm starting to think that there's really a mentality here that whites can't be racist.



Lastly, exactly why is being conservative a bad thing in your mind? You use it as if it were a slur. More to the point how do you not see the logic failure of painting a very large group of people with a brush that is more accurately applied to a very small minority?

Where's the line drawn between a "stereotype" and a "defining characteristic"? I hate semantics, but having them thrown at me, I'll throw some back.


Should the same logic be used to label all liberals as socialist, bleeding heart, tree-hugging know-nothings who have zero concepts of personal responsibility and work ethic?

Hey, this hyperbole stuff is actually fun.

Actually, you probably could describe us that way. Although, we'd probably use different words. We'd use ones that sound good, while conservatives would use ones that sound bad.


I get the feeling that you are dancing around calling some here racists and substitute the word conservative for that slur. If that isn’t true, I apologize. It is just my perception.

You'll see me refer to conservatives in many different contexts while I'm here. Also, I've used the word "racist" many times; so I don't see why a euphemism would be necessary.


One last question………….in your mind are there no racist liberals?

A racist liberal is like a man who sucks dick without being gay.

Pullinteeth
02-21-2013, 01:45 PM
A racist liberal is like a man who sucks dick without being gay.

And there are a lof of 'em (racist liberals I mean, not you).

Punisher
02-21-2013, 01:52 PM
And there are a lof of 'em (racist liberals I mean, not you).

Just like I'm sure there are plenty of straight men who suck dick. What do they, and liberals who are racist have in common?

They're outcasted. Not considered "one of the guys" by the rest. What they do and believe violates the very tenets of the group they claim to be in, and they get weird looks when they claim to be in that group.

By the way; why not try addressing the rest of my post?

Pullinteeth
02-21-2013, 02:15 PM
By the way; why not try addressing the rest of my post?

Sure, just as soon as you admit hispanic is not a race and neither is Aryan.... BTW, "outcasted" isn't a word.

Punisher
02-21-2013, 02:20 PM
Sure, just as soon as you admit hispanic is not a race and neither is Aryan....

Quote me where I said they were. They're ethnicities.


BTW, "outcasted" isn't a word.

No one cares, but you.

Pullinteeth
02-21-2013, 02:27 PM
Correct, that's what I meant.

What's the fallacy? I have yet to see a confirmation or denial from either of the two people I've mentioned. Again, I want to know where the line is drawn. I mean, without shouting a specific slur while committing a particular act, what does a white person have to do in order to be considered racist? Shouting "USA" at a sporting event where the opposing team consists mostly of Mexican Americans isn't enough? If that isn't, what is?

All this talk that I see here, where people sarcastically state that black people can't be racist, or Latinos can't be racist; I'm starting to think that there's really a mentality here that whites can't be racist.

Where's the line drawn between a "stereotype" and a "defining characteristic"? I hate semantics, but having them thrown at me, I'll throw some back.

Actually, you probably could describe us that way. Although, we'd probably use different words. We'd use ones that sound good, while conservatives would use ones that sound bad.

You'll see me refer to conservatives in many different contexts while I'm here. Also, I've used the word "racist" many times; so I don't see why a euphemism would be necessary.

A racist liberal is like a man who sucks dick without being gay.

If that is what you meant, you are an idiot. I think what you actually meant was that conservatives view the non-acknowledgement of non-white on white racism to be an issue and liberals think there is no such thing. What you just agreed was your point was that conservatives refuse to acknowlege non-white on white racism which is the opposite of reality (not a new view for you I know but...). Please provide ONE example of any one of us saying that a white person can't be racist...

The fallacy comes because you made a stupid statement and can't back it up. The fact that you don't know that the definition of words dictates what they relate to is actually astounding. That you think nationality, race, and ethnicity are all the same is quite frankly disturbing. Please provide ONE example of any one of us saying that a white person can't be racist...

It is interesting that when your hipocarcy is pointed out, you refuse to respond-isn't it?

What is the kinder gentler work that liberals use to describe themselves as "know nothings?" That one I am genuinely interested in knowing. BTW, Obama would vehemently disagree with you that he is a socialist.

Maybe it would be necessary because you have no idea what racism is?

What you do on your own time is your own business...

Pullinteeth
02-21-2013, 02:27 PM
Quote me where I said they were. They're ethnicities.

No one cares, but you.

Then you agree it CAN'T be racism...

Punisher
02-21-2013, 02:38 PM
Then you agree it CAN'T be racism...

No, I do not.

Ever since the extinction of Neanderthals and Denisovans, there is no such thing as biologically based racial divisions among humans. In other words race is a 100% social construct. It is no more or less valid to say that Hispanic or Aryan is a race, than to say that black or Asian is.

So, race being a social construct anyway; YES, it IS racism.

Pullinteeth
02-21-2013, 02:58 PM
Quote me where I said they were. They're ethnicities.

Holy shit that was easy...


No, I do not.

Ever since the extinction of Neanderthals and Denisovans, there is no such thing as biologically based racial divisions among humans. In other words race is a 100% social construct. It is no more or less valid to say that Hispanic or Aryan is a race, than to say that black or Asian is.

So, race being a social construct anyway; YES, it IS racism.

Oh, and you are still wrong. Just because YOU call something a race doesn't make it so. You are also wong that there is no such thing as biologically based racial divisions. While the definitions of those divisions has changed over the years there ARE biologically based racial divisions-they may not be exact and these days race is generally used as a cultural construct, you are still wrong-shocker I know.

Punisher
02-21-2013, 03:19 PM
Holy shit that was easy...



Oh, and you are still wrong. Just because YOU call something a race doesn't make it so. You are also wong that there is no such thing as biologically based racial divisions. While the definitions of those divisions has changed over the years there ARE biologically based racial divisions-they may not be exact and these days race is generally used as a cultural construct, you are still wrong-shocker I know.

No, you are wrong. There is no such thing as biological race. If you think there is, show me some links that says there is.

TJMAC77SP
02-21-2013, 03:20 PM
……………….
What's the fallacy? I have yet to see a confirmation or denial from either of the two people I've mentioned. Again, I want to know where the line is drawn. I mean, without shouting a specific slur while committing a particular act, what does a white person have to do in order to be considered racist? Shouting "USA" at a sporting event where the opposing team consists mostly of Mexican Americans isn't enough? If that isn't, what is?

All this talk that I see here, where people sarcastically state that black people can't be racist, or Latinos can't be racist; I'm starting to think that there's really a mentality here that whites can't be racist.

I am amazed that you can’t see the huge logic gap between asserting that because someone says an act such as we see with the San Antonio game is not racist would also claim that the Klan burning a cross on a black families front yard is also not racist. I actually suspect that you do have a glimmer of the truth but to put it plainly, is not only absurd, its hyperbole and you almost admitted that (but couldn’t quite let yourself go that far).



Where's the line drawn between a "stereotype" and a "defining characteristic"? I hate semantics, but having them thrown at me, I'll throw some back.

We are all taught that applying stereotypes to whole groups of people is wrong. I also see that you have resorted to the ‘they are calling me names I will do the same’ defense. Doesn’t help the cause.



Actually, you probably could describe us that way. Although, we'd probably use different words. We'd use ones that sound good, while conservatives would use ones that sound bad.

And ‘we’d’ be wrong although I would like to hear the nicer words used to describe someone who has no concept of personal responsibility or work ethic.



You'll see me refer to conservatives in many different contexts while I'm here. Also, I've used the word "racist" many times; so I don't see why a euphemism would be necessary.

So what was your answer? Are you or are you not calling efmbman and SJ racists?



A racist liberal is like a man who sucks dick without being gay.

Is that your obtuse and clever way of claiming there is no such thing as a racist liberal?

Punisher
02-21-2013, 03:21 PM
And before you ask:

http://wupa.wustl.edu/record_archive/1998/10-15-98/articles/races.html

TJMAC77SP
02-21-2013, 03:25 PM
No, I do not.

Ever since the extinction of Neanderthals and Denisovans, there is no such thing as biologically based racial divisions among humans. In other words race is a 100% social construct. It is no more or less valid to say that Hispanic or Aryan is a race, than to say that black or Asian is.

So, race being a social construct anyway; YES, it IS racism.

While I appreciate you quoting from Wiki, you need to pay attention to detail.

Note the following from the page you looked at.

Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, or social affiliation.

There are biological underpinnings to the use of race as well as the social contructs you cited (verbatim)

I think we have more semantics here.

Punisher
02-21-2013, 03:31 PM
While I appreciate you quoting from Wiki, you need to pay attention to detail.

Note the following from the page you looked at.

Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, or social affiliation.

There are biological underpinnings to the use of race as well as the social contructs you cited (verbatim)

I didn't quote wiki, and I'm not sure which page you're referring to.

Trust me, if I had seen this page; then I would have easily used this:


Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, or social affiliation.

To show Pullinteeth that prejudice against Latinos can be, and is, racism.

But thanks for showing me that, TJ!

Pullinteeth
02-21-2013, 03:32 PM
No, you are wrong. There is no such thing as biological race. If you think there is, show me some links that says there is.

So...reading...not your strong suit? I never said there was. YOU said there was "no such thing as bilogically based racial divisions" and then as now...you are WRONG. I never said there was any such thing as biological race (still a matter of debate) but there certianly are/were biological basis' for the racial divisions....

Here you go...I know reading isn't your strong suit but-end of second line, beginning of the third;

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/race/

Even better, this one doesn't even require you to read;

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122620064

This one has some big words so you might want to skip it;

http://www.biologyreference.com/Ar-Bi/Biology-of-Race.html

Here is a 12 page paper from Oregon State telling you that you are "misguided"

http://people.oregonstate.edu/~kaplanj/2003-PhilSc-race.pdf

Punisher
02-21-2013, 03:51 PM
So...reading...not your strong suit? I never said there was. YOU said there was "no such thing as bilogically based racial divisions" and then as now...you are WRONG.

No, YOU are. Watch me.


I never said there was any such thing as biological race (still a matter of debate) but there certianly are/were biological basis' for the racial divisions....

And you are wrong.


Here you go...I know reading isn't your strong suit but-end of second line, beginning of the third;

Oh, it's not? We'll see who can't read for shit:


http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/race/

And look at the first sentence that precedes all of that: "The concept of race has historically signified the division of humanity into a small number of groups based upon five criteria:"

This doesn't mean that it's correct. In fact, the author went on to challenge this.


Even better, this one doesn't even require you to read;

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122620064

I'm not able to listen to audio, and I seriously doubt that you yourself sat through 35 minutes of audio during our conversation to determine if this was a suitable link to post here. I doubt you even know whether or not the audio even supports your assertions.


This one has some big words so you might want to skip it;

http://www.biologyreference.com/Ar-Bi/Biology-of-Race.html

Again, reading isn't your strong suit. Read the middle of the second paragraph.


Here is a 12 page paper from Oregon State telling you that you are "misguided"

http://people.oregonstate.edu/~kaplanj/2003-PhilSc-race.pdf

Wow, you've proven again that... you can't read for nothing! Read the last paragraph.

Your failed attempts have blown up in your face. Not only have you proven yourself wrong, but you've proven that... reading isn't your strong suit.

TJMAC77SP
02-21-2013, 03:55 PM
I didn't quote wiki, and I'm not sure which page you're referring to.

Trust me, if I had seen this page; then I would have easily used this:

Well, I guess we have an amazing coincidence since you used an exact phrase from the page. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification))

When people define and talk about a particular conception of race, they create a social reality through which social categorization is achieved. In this sense, races are said to be social constructs.


To show Pullinteeth that prejudice against Latinos can be, and is, racism.

But thanks for showing me that, TJ!

No problem. I don’t think I ever argued that point (only your insulting hyperbole). Too bad you didn’t make that argument without implying that posters here are racist for focusing on what is and isn’t race and not what is really the point and that is the behavior itself (and its appropriateness).

Pullinteeth
02-21-2013, 04:00 PM
No, YOU are. Watch me.

And you are wrong.

Oh, it's not? We'll see who can't read for shit:

And look at the first sentence that precedes all of that: "The concept of race has historically signified the division of humanity into a small number of groups based upon five criteria:"

This doesn't mean that it's correct. In fact, the author went on to challenge this.

I'm not able to listen to audio, and I seriously doubt that you yourself sat through 35 minutes of audio during our conversation to determine if this was a suitable link to post here. I doubt you even know whether or not the audio even supports your assertions.

Again, reading isn't your strong suit. Read the middle of the second paragraph.

Wow, you've proven again that... you can't read for nothing! Read the last paragraph.

Your failed attempts have blown up in your face. Not only have you proven yourself wrong, but you've proven that... reading isn't your strong suit.

Yep, you have once again proven you can't read. I never said that the bais was legit, all I said was there was a biological basis for race-you stated there wasn't. The validity of this basis wasn't even mentioned. So yet AGAIN...you FAIL!!

Punisher
02-21-2013, 04:25 PM
Yep, you have once again proven you can't read. I never said that the bais was legit, all I said was there was a biological basis for race-you stated there wasn't. The validity of this basis wasn't even mentioned. So yet AGAIN...you FAIL!!

I can't believe I allowed you to bait me into a pre-teen style dick measuring contest. You can play with your penis on your own. Leave me out of it.

Punisher
02-21-2013, 04:36 PM
Well, I guess we have an amazing coincidence since you used an exact phrase from the page. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification))

When people define and talk about a particular conception of race, they create a social reality through which social categorization is achieved. In this sense, races are said to be social constructs.

No problem. The concept of race as a social construct is something that I've been dicussion for about 15 years now.


No problem. I don’t think I ever argued that point (only your insulting hyperbole).

The very reason I put the hyperbole out there, was because I wanted them could confirm or deny it - hopefully, deny.


Too bad you didn’t make that argument without implying that posters here are racist for focusing on what is and isn’t race and not what is really the point and that is the behavior itself (and its appropriateness).

I didn't meant to imply that the posters were racist, only the people doing the chanting.

What I will say about the posters here, is that it's those in a privileged group that often aren't able to acknowledge when someone in a less privileged group is being wrong; or even acknowledge their own unearned privileges.

Doesn't make them racist; it just means that they're not concious of it because they have the luxury of not having to be.

And we don't even have to discuss that in the context of race. We can dicuss this in the concept of sex; as we often fail realize the unearned privileges we have as men. But women will be glad to point them out to us.

TJMAC77SP
02-21-2013, 06:04 PM
No problem. The concept of race as a social construct is something that I've been dicussion for about 15 years now.



The very reason I put the hyperbole out there, was because I wanted them could confirm or deny it - hopefully, deny.



I didn't meant to imply that the posters were racist, only the people doing the chanting.

What I will say about the posters here, is that it's those in a privileged group that often aren't able to acknowledge when someone in a less privileged group is being wrong; or even acknowledge their own unearned privileges.

Doesn't make them racist; it just means that they're not concious of it because they have the luxury of not having to be.

And we don't even have to discuss that in the context of race. We can dicuss this in the concept of sex; as we often fail realize the unearned privileges we have as men. But women will be glad to point them out to us.

A more reasoned post and some valid points. I will agree with the basic concept and expand by stating that the other group often suffers from the same myopic vision reflected by their own actions. Not defending the ring leaders in this particular situation as it does seem at its core to be in appropriate and insulting but it would have been better journalism to at least attempt to discuss the situation with the participants. For example, is this chanting something they do at all games or only ones where they are playing a predominantly Hispanic populated school? My point is that stories are often more complicated than first reported. Those who rushed to spew opinions in the Martin shooting case are now seeing that (although it is highly doubtful you will see that written on this forum).

However as to your claim that you only intended to paint the participants at the game as racists, there seems to be some contractions. This is the exchange which started the whole thing so it would appear that indeed you did mean to imply that some posters, specifically the two named are indeed racist.



I have yet to see where conservatives draw the line on what's racist and what's not. I mean, if it's brown-on-white racism, they're very quick to call it out.

White on brown racism, however? The Ku Klux Klan could burn a cross on a black man's front lawn, and people will still call him a race baiter if he says it's racist.


Who exactly are these 'people' who would say that?

What about black on brown or brown on black?


Emfbman and sandsjames, so far. I've seen others share the same mindset; though I don't care to go back to dig up more names. Two is enough for now.

By "brown," I simply meant anyone who isn't white. Including blacks.

Finally, is your defense to seriously claim that you threw out an incredible accusation without proof to have someone deny it in order to prove whether or not the accusation is indeed true? The implication being that if it isn’t denied, it must be true?

JD2780
02-21-2013, 06:27 PM
"White power"
-Clayton Bigsby

Punisher
02-21-2013, 07:22 PM
A more reasoned post and some valid points. I will agree with the basic concept and expand by stating that the other group often suffers from the same myopic vision reflected by their own actions.

Maybe, but eventually, we're going to have to find where the line is drawn between valid observations and victim-blaming.


Not defending the ring leaders in this particular situation as it does seem at its core to be in appropriate and insulting but it would have been better journalism to at least attempt to discuss the situation with the participants. For example, is this chanting something they do at all games or only ones where they are playing a predominantly Hispanic populated school?

If both teams are perceived as, or considered, American by those doing the chanting; then why would they be chanting "USA" in the first place? This is why I can't see it occurring at "all games."


My point is that stories are often more complicated than first reported. Those who rushed to spew opinions in the Martin shooting case are now seeing that (although it is highly doubtful you will see that written on this forum).

I'll keep my comments to myself on this, at least on this thread. This is for a different discussion.


However as to your claim that you only intended to paint the participants at the game as racists, there seems to be some contractions. This is the exchange which started the whole thing so it would appear that indeed you did mean to imply that some posters, specifically the two named are indeed racist.

Finally, is your defense to seriously claim that you threw out an incredible accusation without proof to have someone deny it in order to prove whether or not the accusation is indeed true? The implication being that if it isn’t denied, it must be true?

What I was hoping for was denial of the accusation, and I would expect that if they're going to deny it, then explain where they would draw the line. In fact, with regards where the line is drawn, I've asked that question two or three times now.

garhkal
02-21-2013, 08:28 PM
What's the fallacy? I have yet to see a confirmation or denial from either of the two people I've mentioned. Again, I want to know where the line is drawn. I mean, without shouting a specific slur while committing a particular act, what does a white person have to do in order to be considered racist? Shouting "USA" at a sporting event where the opposing team consists mostly of Mexican Americans isn't enough? If that isn't, what is?

Perhaps cause being mexician is not a race... Latino would be, but not just mexicians.
But to answer the q..
Calling a latino person a 'spick'
Calling a white person a "cracker'
Calling a black person a "nigger"
calling an asian person a "chink, or slant eye"

Those to me are racist slurs.
Just chanting USA at a sport event, is not.



All this talk that I see here, where people sarcastically state that black people can't be racist, or Latinos can't be racist; I'm starting to think that there's really a mentality here that whites can't be racist.

Maybe its cause we don't see the left's ascertation that latinos/blacks etc can't be racist as being sarcastic.



Where's the line drawn between a "stereotype" and a "defining characteristic"? I hate semantics, but having them thrown at me, I'll throw some back.

To me honest i don't think there IS a difference between the two.



A racist liberal is like a man who sucks dick without being gay.

That actually made me laugh.


Sure, just as soon as you admit hispanic is not a race and neither is Aryan.... BTW, "outcasted" isn't a word.

Sorry, but being every place i have ever been asked to fill in my ethnicity/race has always had latino/hispanic as one of the options, so to many it is seen as a race.


I am amazed that you can’t see the huge logic gap between asserting that because someone says an act such as we see with the San Antonio game is not racist would also claim that the Klan burning a cross on a black families front yard is also not racist. I actually suspect that you do have a glimmer of the truth but to put it plainly, is not only absurd, its hyperbole and you almost admitted that (but couldn’t quite let yourself go that far).

While it may be hate related, i have never understood WHY burning a cross is seen as racist?
Is it just cause it was done by whites on the lawn of a black person?

Punisher
02-21-2013, 09:57 PM
While it may be hate related, i have never understood WHY burning a cross is seen as racist?
Is it just cause it was done by whites on the lawn of a black person?

Here you go, TJ! I wasn't expecting it, but to at least one person on the thread, not even the KKK burning a cross on a black man's front lawn crosses the line of what's racist!

Banned
02-22-2013, 02:41 AM
While it may be hate related, i have never understood WHY burning a cross is seen as racist?
Is it just cause it was done by whites on the lawn of a black person?

Did this really just happen, or was I sniffing too much glue again?

Pullinteeth
02-22-2013, 01:19 PM
Sorry, but being every place i have ever been asked to fill in my ethnicity/race has always had latino/hispanic as one of the options, so to many it is seen as a race.

Did you even read what you wrote? Hipanic/Latino/Latina is considered an ethnicity NOT a race. You have white hispanics, black hispanics, american indian hispanics...

garhkal
02-22-2013, 08:45 PM
Here you go, TJ! I wasn't expecting it, but to at least one person on the thread, not even the KKK burning a cross on a black man's front lawn crosses the line of what's racist!

Its a legitimate question.
Yes burning a cross is hateful. BUT how does it clas as being racist? Or is it just cause the act is done on the property of a black person that makes it racist? That is what i am getting at.

sandsjames
02-22-2013, 08:57 PM
What I was hoping for was denial of the accusation, and I would expect that if they're going to deny it, then explain where they would draw the line. In fact, with regards where the line is drawn, I've asked that question two or three times now.

If you were someone who merited a response, I would have confirmed or denied. However, even though both of us you mentioned made our points on what the issue was and how we felt about it (the difference between feelings about the actions of the students vs whether or not we felt it was racism), you still threw out your accusation.

To answer your question in a different way I'd say that everyone, to some degree, could be considered racist or sexist. Any prejudice about someone of a different race or sex can fall into that category. So I guess what I'm saying is that I'd like to hear a denial from you that you have never had a thought or been in a situation that could lead people to think that you are racist/sexist. Once you do that then I will give you my answer.

Banned
02-23-2013, 10:29 PM
If you were someone who merited a response, I would have confirmed or denied. However, even though both of us you mentioned made our points on what the issue was and how we felt about it (the difference between feelings about the actions of the students vs whether or not we felt it was racism), you still threw out your accusation.

To answer your question in a different way I'd say that everyone, to some degree, could be considered racist or sexist. Any prejudice about someone of a different race or sex can fall into that category. So I guess what I'm saying is that I'd like to hear a denial from you that you have never had a thought or been in a situation that could lead people to think that you are racist/sexist. Once you do that then I will give you my answer.

Everybody has their own prejudices. Most of us however, have the sense not to act on them.

sandsjames
02-24-2013, 02:23 PM
Everybody has their own prejudices. Most of us however, have the sense not to act on them.

Agree completely.

Punisher
02-24-2013, 03:45 PM
If you were someone who merited a response, I would have confirmed or denied.

In other words, you're copping out with a lame attempt to look good while doing it. Please...


However, even though both of us you mentioned made our points on what the issue was and how we felt about it (the difference between feelings about the actions of the students vs whether or not we felt it was racism), you still threw out your accusation.

My accusation of what?


To answer your question in a different way I'd say that everyone, to some degree, could be considered racist or sexist.

1. That wasn't my question, and

2. again, this is still a cop out.


Any prejudice about someone of a different race or sex can fall into that category. So I guess what I'm saying is that I'd like to hear a denial from you that you have never had a thought or been in a situation that could lead people to think that you are racist/sexist.

If I'm letting others be the judge (which is the most objective thing to do); I've never been accused of being racist. Well, other than the typical "You're playing the race card! You're REAL racist!" But, of course, that's not a real accusation of racism. That's a deflection tactic. And a pathetic one at that.


Once you do that then I will give you my answer.

First you say you will, then you give me something that appears to be what you consider to be answer; then you try to work out a "deal."

But that's fine. You don't have to give me answer. Garkhal has already given me something to work with in my talks with TJ.

sandsjames
02-24-2013, 04:22 PM
In other words, you're copping out with a lame attempt to look good while doing it. Please... Please what?


My accusation of what? Of me being racist.


If I'm letting others be the judge (which is the most objective thing to do); I've never been accused of being racist. Really?


Well, other than the typical "You're playing the race card! You're REAL racist!" But, of course, that's not a real accusation of racism. That's a deflection tactic. And a pathetic one at that. Ohhhh, so you have been accused. But since you don't find the reason valid, it's not valid. Now that I know that I will use it in the future if it's ever necessary.


First you say you will, then you give me something that appears to be what you consider to be answer; then you try to work out a "deal."I didn't give an answer. I simply stated that everyone is prejudiced in some manner, whether against race, sex, age, etc.


But that's fine. You don't have to give me answer. Garkhal has already given me something to work with in my talks with TJ.Thanks for letting me off the hook. Now I can breathe easy.

Punisher
02-24-2013, 04:43 PM
Please what?

Spare me the bullshit.


Of me being racist.

Quote me where I made that accusation.


Really?

Might be a shock to some.


Ohhhh, so you have been accused. But since you don't find the reason valid, it's not valid. Now that I know that I will use it in the future if it's ever necessary.

The "reason" isn't what makes it invalid. The intend behind it is what does. When someone calls another racist in that situation, they don't really believe that that person is a racist. It's like a Christian telling an atheist that he's going to hell, and the atheist responds back with "No, you are." The atheist doesn't really believe what he just said, that's just an argument tactic.

I'm going to add something else. I've called out racism in every possible direction. However, in my experience, the "race card," "race baiting," "you're the real racist," "why are you making this about race" responses ONLY come when a white-on-nonwhite is called out.

Things that make you go "hmmm...."


I didn't give an answer. I simply stated that everyone is prejudiced in some manner, whether against race, sex, age, etc.

This says otherwise:


To answer your question in a different way I'd say that everyone, to some degree, could be considered racist or sexist

Ya mind 'splanin' that?


Thanks for letting me off the hook. Now I can breathe easy.

You've absolved yourself a long time ago. I was just telling you that I don't need your response.

sandsjames
02-24-2013, 05:22 PM
You've absolved yourself a long time ago. I was just telling you that I don't need your response.Thanks, especially since you've already been told you don't merit a valid response.

Punisher
02-24-2013, 05:38 PM
Thanks, especially since you've already been told you don't merit a valid response.

No, I've just written off your ability to give one. For someone that's not worth your time, I still continue to consume it. Not only do you confuse me, but you confuse yourself.

sandsjames
02-24-2013, 06:16 PM
No, I've just written off your ability to give one. For someone that's not worth your time, I still continue to consume it.

That's where you're wrong, my friend. You don't consume my time. You fill the dead time while I'm waiting for YouTube videos to load at work. I'm guessing you're not at work (though I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong), so it would appear I'm consuming your time.

Banned
02-24-2013, 07:22 PM
If Punisher was racist... why did he base his screen name on a white vigilante? Just sayin'. :D

JD2780
02-24-2013, 07:43 PM
If Punisher was racist... why did he base his screen name on a white vigilante? Just sayin'. :D

The punisher killed mostly white people in his movie though. Just saying. Maybe he hates white people. Self-loathing.

Banned
02-24-2013, 08:30 PM
The punisher killed mostly white people in his movie though. Just saying. Maybe he hates white people. Self-loathing.

In the movie, yeah. But in the comics he kills everyone equally. Russians, mafia, gangbangers...

JD2780
02-24-2013, 08:35 PM
In the movie, yeah. But in the comics he kills everyone equally. Russians, mafia, gangbangers...

He can still be a racist. He hates the human race!!!

efmbman
02-24-2013, 08:46 PM
He can still be a racist. He hates the human race!!!

Maybe more like a Dirty Harry type... Harry Callahan hates everyone equally.

Greg
02-24-2013, 09:27 PM
Maybe more like a Dirty Harry type... Harry Callahan hates everyone equally.

Maybe so, but:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CG2cux_6Rcw

Punisher
02-25-2013, 12:43 PM
That's where you're wrong, my friend. You don't consume my time. You fill the dead time while I'm waiting for YouTube videos to load at work.

If that's how you want to look at it to make yourself feel better, then by all means, look at it that way. However, you could be tending to things that are more worthy of your time than talking to me.

But you won't let anything I say go unanswered, will you? It's an itch that you know you have to scratch.


I'm guessing you're not at work (though I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong), so it would appear I'm consuming your time.

Which one of us is trying to act like some big shot, and embellishing the value of our time? One of us is, and it ain't me.

Punisher
02-25-2013, 12:53 PM
If Punisher was racist... why did he base his screen name on a white vigilante? Just sayin'. :D

This assumes that I'm non-white.


The punisher killed mostly white people in his movie though. Just saying. Maybe he hates white people. Self-loathing.

This assumes that I'm white.


In the movie, yeah. But in the comics he kills everyone equally. Russians, mafia, gangbangers...

Very true statement. He's actually my favorite character in comics, because he's the most realistic. No super powers. And unlike other non-super powered heroes, he has no unrealistic ability to take on hordes of armed or super-powered villains with only their bare hands or non-firearm gadgets in their "utility belt." And he's not some "boy scout" that feels obligated to save the villains too.

I've never stated what my race is. And I'm going to stay racially ambiguous here, so that what I say can speak for itself.

JD2780
02-25-2013, 01:39 PM
This assumes that I'm non-white.



This assumes that I'm white.



Very true statement. He's actually my favorite character in comics, because he's the most realistic. No super powers. And unlike other non-super powered heroes, he has no unrealistic ability to take on hordes of armed or super-powered villains with only their bare hands or non-firearm gadgets in their "utility belt." And he's not some "boy scout" that feels obligated to save the villains too.

I've never stated what my race is. And I'm going to stay racially ambiguous here, so that what I say can speak for itself.

In the movie and the book, the punisher was white. So I was basing my opinion off of a book character. I'm not assuming anything about you except for the fact that you either A) Dig the comic character or B) Think you're a badass the punishes your troops. I dont really care which.

JD2780
02-25-2013, 01:39 PM
This assumes that I'm non-white.



This assumes that I'm white.



Very true statement. He's actually my favorite character in comics, because he's the most realistic. No super powers. And unlike other non-super powered heroes, he has no unrealistic ability to take on hordes of armed or super-powered villains with only their bare hands or non-firearm gadgets in their "utility belt." And he's not some "boy scout" that feels obligated to save the villains too.

I've never stated what my race is. And I'm going to stay racially ambiguous here, so that what I say can speak for itself.

In the movie and the book, the punisher was white. So I was basing my opinion off of a book character. I'm not assuming anything about you except for the fact that you either A) Dig the comic character or B) Think you're a badass the punishes your troops. I dont really care which.

Punisher
02-25-2013, 02:18 PM
In the movie and the book, the punisher was white. So I was basing my opinion off of a book character. I'm not assuming anything about you except for the fact that you either A) Dig the comic character or B) Think you're a badass the punishes your troops. I dont really care which.

Well, although you don't care which; since B) can affect how people on this board interact with me, it's definitely not B). That's the impression I get from PYB and AOD. I couldn't have punished my troops if I wanted too. Like many other POs and NCOs these days these days, my hands were tied behind my back. In fact, I'd actually often let my troops run wild just to rebel against the chain of command and show them the result of tying my hands.

Just wanted to make that clear.

Pullinteeth
02-25-2013, 02:24 PM
Everybody has their own prejudices. Most of us however, have the sense not to act on them.

Not true at all... Most people act based on their prejudices every day. Prejudice isn't necessarily a bad thing.

For example, say you have young children and you see a middle aged man driving around the playground day after day in a panel van with no apparent reason to be there. You see that man call your daughter over to him... Do you act on your prejudice or do you do the morally superior thing and refuse to judge him based upon your prejudice?

Example 2, say you are transporting a large quantity of valuables (money or jewelry whatever) for your boss. You have to drive for 6 hours to reach your destination. Four hours into the drive sometime just after one in the morning, you are feeling a bit puckish and your bladder is demanding you return the coffee you rented an hour ago. You pull off the interstate and find yourself on MLK Boulevard. There is a dimly lit gas station still open but nothing else appears to be open. Off in the shadows, you see what appears to be a group of 6-8 males in their early to mid 20s with their pants sagging, white t-shirts or a-shirts and colored bandanas tied around their heads. You on the other hand are wearing gator shoes that go nicely with your business suit. What do you do?

Punisher
02-25-2013, 02:44 PM
Not true at all... Most people act based on their prejudices every day. Prejudice isn't necessarily a bad thing.

For example, say you have young children and you see a middle aged man driving around the playground day after day in a panel van with no apparent reason to be there. You see that man call your daughter over to him... Do you act on your prejudice or do you do the morally superior thing and refuse to judge him based upon your prejudice?

No strange adult; man, woman, young, or old; should be calling a strange child on the playground over to them. The only thing that the adult should be saying to any of those children should be asking where their parents are. I would think that any parent would react to any strange adult to talking to their children


Example 2, say you are transporting a large quantity of valuables (money or jewelry whatever) for your boss. You have to drive for 6 hours to reach your destination. Four hours into the drive sometime just after one in the morning, you are feeling a bit puckish and your bladder is demanding you return the coffee you rented an hour ago. You pull off the interstate and find yourself on MLK Boulevard. There is a dimly lit gas station still open but nothing else appears to be open. Off in the shadows, you see what appears to be a group of 6-8 males in their early to mid 20s with their pants sagging, white t-shirts or a-shirts and colored bandanas tied around their heads. You on the other hand are wearing gator shoes that go nicely with your business suit. What do you do?

I actually used to be a pizza deliveryman; did it for about two years. I've been robbed three times. None of those times were in the type of neighborhood that you described, even though I delivered to them. One of the times I got robbed was on the property of a Greek Orthodox church, when a I delievered to a priest in the rectory.

JD2780
02-25-2013, 02:46 PM
Well, although you don't care which; since B) can affect how people on this board interact with me, it's definitely not B). That's the impression I get from PYB and AOD. I couldn't have punished my troops if I wanted too. Like many other POs and NCOs these days these days, my hands were tied behind my back. In fact, I'd actually often let my troops run wild just to rebel against the chain of command and show them the result of tying my hands.

Just wanted to make that clear.

Fair enough.

Secondly, so the removing of the NCO's balls is atleast an issue for 2 service components unfortunately.

Pullinteeth
02-25-2013, 03:01 PM
No strange adult; man, woman, young, or old; should be calling a strange child on the playground over to them. The only thing that the adult should be saying to any of those children should be asking where their parents are. I would think that any parent would react to any strange adult to talking to their children

I actually used to be a pizza deliveryman; did it for about two years. I've been robbed three times. None of those times were in the type of neighborhood that you described, even though I delivered to them. One of the times I got robbed was on the property of a Greek Orthodox church, when a I delievered to a priest in the rectory.

So you just wanted to tell a story? No answer to either question? I didn't say your kid was strange... I would like to say that I am shocked you missed the point but...

Punisher
02-25-2013, 03:12 PM
So you just wanted to tell a story? No answer to either question? I didn't say your kid was strange... I would like to say that I am shocked you missed the point but...

Is that what you're going to say every time you get a response that you don't like, or when your attempt at a rhetorical question is ineffective?

Strange = unknown to the person who sees him.

1st question, I'd react the middle age man in the van; but I'd also react to ANY adult - regardless of sex, age, or what they're driving - talking to my child without speaking to me first.

2nd question, would I be extra cautious in the neighborhood you described, moreso than others. Again, no. Experience tells me that there's no reason to be.

Your point (that you think I missed) is that everyone acts on prejudices, correct?

My point is "no," just you and the people who think like you.

Pullinteeth
02-25-2013, 03:24 PM
1st question, I'd react the middle age man in the van; but I'd also react to ANY adult - regardless of sex, age, or what they're driving - talking to my child without speaking to me first.

2nd question, would I be extra cautious in the neighborhood you described, moreso than others. Again, no. Experience tells me that there's no reason to be.

Your point (that you think I missed) is that everyone acts on prejudices, correct?

My point is "no," just you and the people who think like you.

You just said you would act on your prejudices. Being extra cautious=acting upon your prejudices.
If you think you don't you aren't too bright because if you didn't, you would be dead. Prejudice is just forming an opinion without all the evidence. If you see a stove and it says it is on, it is red, and the air above the burner is warm you form an opinion that the burner is hot without all the evidence. If as you say, you don't act on your prejudices, your dumb @$$ would physically touch the burner to see if it was hot. No matter how many times you burned yourself, your stupid @$$ would touch it EVERY single time. See a snake on the side of the road? Pick it up to see if it is poisonous.... You would be DEAD...

Punisher
02-25-2013, 03:31 PM
You just said you would act on your prejudices.

Where?


Being extra cautious=acting upon your prejudices.

Hmm...


2nd question, would I be extra cautious in the neighborhood you described, moreso than others. Again, no. Experience tells me that there's no reason to be.

Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!!!


If you think you don't you aren't too bright because if you didn't, you would be dead. Prejudice is just forming an opinion without all the evidence. If you see a stove and it says it is on, it is red, and the air above the burner is warm you form an opinion that the burner is hot without all the evidence.

Ah yes, the CLASSIC justification for prejudice. See this all the time. The snake one down below is actually the most common. And you know something else? They're lame!


If as you say, you don't act on your prejudices, your dumb @$$ would physically touch the burner to see if it was hot. No matter how many times you burned yourself, your stupid @$$ would touch it EVERY single time. See a snake on the side of the road? Pick it up to see if it is poisonous.... You would be DEAD...

You mad, bro?

TJMAC77SP
02-25-2013, 06:39 PM
.....


I actually used to be a pizza deliveryman; did it for about two years. I've been robbed three times. None of those times were in the type of neighborhood that you described, even though I delivered to them. One of the times I got robbed was on the property of a Greek Orthodox church, when a I delievered to a priest in the rectory.

I am assuming that the robber(s) weren't members of the clergy at the church. What description did you give the cops?

Pullinteeth
02-25-2013, 06:40 PM
I am assuming that the robber(s) weren't members of the clergy at the church. What description did you give the cops?

There you go acting on your prejudices again...you must be a racist.

Banned
02-25-2013, 08:15 PM
Not true at all... Most people act based on their prejudices every day. Prejudice isn't necessarily a bad thing.

For example, say you have young children and you see a middle aged man driving around the playground day after day in a panel van with no apparent reason to be there. You see that man call your daughter over to him... Do you act on your prejudice or do you do the morally superior thing and refuse to judge him based upon your prejudice?

Example 2, say you are transporting a large quantity of valuables (money or jewelry whatever) for your boss. You have to drive for 6 hours to reach your destination. Four hours into the drive sometime just after one in the morning, you are feeling a bit puckish and your bladder is demanding you return the coffee you rented an hour ago. You pull off the interstate and find yourself on MLK Boulevard. There is a dimly lit gas station still open but nothing else appears to be open. Off in the shadows, you see what appears to be a group of 6-8 males in their early to mid 20s with their pants sagging, white t-shirts or a-shirts and colored bandanas tied around their heads. You on the other hand are wearing gator shoes that go nicely with your business suit. What do you do?

So wouldn't this be a case of a person's ACTIONS being suspicious, not his demographic group?

You're grasping straws...

TJMAC77SP
02-26-2013, 11:52 AM
So wouldn't this be a case of a person's ACTIONS being suspicious, not his demographic group?

You're grasping straws...

Which example and what actions...........talking to a child or standing on a street corner?

Punisher
02-26-2013, 12:32 PM
I am assuming that the robber(s) weren't members of the clergy at the church. What description did you give the cops?

I didn't. I'm a fuck-the-police type and I believe that nothing was going to come of me calling them (I'm assuming that the rate at which muggers are caught and apprehended isn't much different than that of burglars). Plus, I was only out $15 dollars anyway; and with the tips I was racking up that night, I didn't really miss it.

Now, I'm not one to cop out; so if you were really asking me what race or ethnicity the mugger was, he was possibly Hispanic or Asian; likely Filipino if he was Asian (and, no, Pullinteeth, this isn't saying that Filipinos are more prone to crime than other Asians; this is saying that Filipinos are more likely to resemble Hispanics than other Asians).


There you go acting on your prejudices again...you must be a racist.

Dude, are you bitter because you ended up looking like the ass? You're keeping it up by posting crap like this.

But to address this, what person in their right mind would rob a pizza deliveryman on the property that they live on? Maybe you're that stupid. Doesn't mean others are.

TJMAC77SP
02-26-2013, 01:57 PM
I didn't. I'm a fuck-the-police type and I believe that nothing was going to come of me calling them (I'm assuming that the rate at which muggers are caught and apprehended isn't much different than that of burglars). Plus, I was only out $15 dollars anyway; and with the tips I was racking up that night, I didn't really miss it.

Now, I'm not one to cop out; so if you were really asking me what race or ethnicity the mugger was, he was possibly Hispanic or Asian; likely Filipino if he was Asian (and, no, Pullinteeth, this isn't saying that Filipinos are more prone to crime than other Asians; this is saying that Filipinos are more likely to resemble Hispanics than other Asians).



So the fact that it was on the grounds of a Greek Orthodox church was irrelevant?

Didn't your employer require you to report the robbery? Most do for their own insurance purposes.

Punisher
02-26-2013, 02:19 PM
So the fact that it was on the grounds of a Greek Orthodox church was irrelevant?

I never said that. What I was trying to tell Pullinteeth was that your assumption was a valid one, and not based on any prejudice. A priest robbing a pizza deliveryman on the doorstep of his own rectory would be plain stupid.


Didn't your employer require you to report the robbery? Most do for their own insurance purposes.

The only "insurance" that I can recall (this was in 1999) was that pizza delivermen are covered up to $15 plus the value of the food that they're delivering (that way you're not responsible for the cost of the food). I'm not sure if this was the restaurant coming out of its own funds, or if they have an outside insurance company to cover this.

But the restaurant kept cash boxes inside for us to store our tip money; and we weren't allowed to leave the restaurant on a delivery run with more than $15 for this very reason.

You do have to report it if you want to file the claim and get your money back and/or be absolved of your responsibility of the food. I'm sure you're required to report it regardless (I don't recall ever being told this, though).

TJMAC77SP
02-26-2013, 06:26 PM
I never said that. What I was trying to tell Pullinteeth was that your assumption was a valid one, and not based on any prejudice. A priest robbing a pizza deliveryman on the doorstep of his own rectory would be plain stupid.



The only "insurance" that I can recall (this was in 1999) was that pizza delivermen are covered up to $15 plus the value of the food that they're delivering (that way you're not responsible for the cost of the food). I'm not sure if this was the restaurant coming out of its own funds, or if they have an outside insurance company to cover this.

But the restaurant kept cash boxes inside for us to store our tip money; and we weren't allowed to leave the restaurant on a delivery run with more than $15 for this very reason.

You do have to report it if you want to file the claim and get your money back and/or be absolved of your responsibility of the food. I'm sure you're required to report it regardless (I don't recall ever being told this, though).

You never said what? You gave an example of a robbery and specifically stated it took place on the grounds of a Greek Orthodox church. What is there to dispute there?

My point was more aimed at your use of the example to refute Pullin's scenario regarding a bad neighborhood. He had a valid point which could not be dismissed entirely. We all act according to our own prejudices. Sometimes they are just plain stupid (all black males are criminals) and sometimes they are based on prevalent if not universal facts (a group of males hanging around a corner at night in a high-crime neighborhood). I may cringe at his specific characterization (MLK Blvd) but you just can’t dismiss it out of hand. There are (to regretfully borrow from Al Gore) ‘inconvenient truths’ in this world.

I cannot expand on the procedures of your unspecified employer but I find it incredulous that any employer would not have a policy of mandatory police reporting of any crime committed against an employee while on the clock. Certainly an insurance company would require it and my company, which is self insured does require it. Perhaps if you were a so-called ‘1099’ employee it would be a different matter.

Pullinteeth
02-26-2013, 06:31 PM
You never said what? You gave an example of a robbery and specifically stated it took place on the grounds of a Greek Orthodox church. What is there to dispute there?

My point was more aimed at your use of the example to refute Pullin's scenario regarding a bad neighborhood. He had a valid point which could not be dismissed entirely. We all act according to our own prejudices. Sometimes they are just plain stupid (all black males are criminals) and sometimes they are based on prevalent if not universal facts (a group of males hanging around a corner at night in a high-crime neighborhood). I may cringe at his specific characterization (MLK Blvd) but you just can’t dismiss it out of hand. There are (to regretfully borrow from Al Gore) ‘inconvenient truths’ in this world.

I cannot expand on the procedures of your unspecified employer but I find it incredulous that any employer would not have a policy of mandatory police reporting of any crime committed against an employee while on the clock. Certainly an insurance company would require it and my company, which is self insured does require it. Perhaps if you were a so-called ‘1099’ employee it would be a different matter.

Have you heard the Chris Rock stand-up in regard to MLK Blvd? Guess he must be a racist too....

Punisher
02-26-2013, 06:50 PM
You never said what? You gave an example of a robbery and specifically stated it took place on the grounds of a Greek Orthodox church. What is there to dispute there?

My point was more aimed at your use of the example to refute Pullin's scenario regarding a bad neighborhood. He had a valid point which could not be dismissed entirely. We all act according to our own prejudices. Sometimes they are just plain stupid (all black males are criminals) and sometimes they are based on prevalent if not universal facts (a group of males hanging around a corner at night in a high-crime neighborhood). I may cringe at his specific characterization (MLK Blvd) but you just can’t dismiss it out of hand. There are (to regretfully borrow from Al Gore) ‘inconvenient truths’ in this world.

TJ, Pullinteeth said that we all act on our prejudices, and he gave those two examples. He appears to be assuming that we'd all react the same way to those scenarios, when it just isn't true. Do you think everyone goes onto "MLK Blvd" ready to shit their pants?


I cannot expand on the procedures of your unspecified employer but I find it incredulous that any employer would not have a policy of mandatory police reporting of any crime committed against an employee while on the clock. Certainly an insurance company would require it and my company, which is self insured does require it. Perhaps if you were a so-called ‘1099’ employee it would be a different matter.

Like I said, all I know is that if you want your money back; you have to file the report. Highly likely that you have to report all incidents, but if I chose not to report one, then obviously that's a shame on me. I'd rather have kept on working and racking up those tips than to waste hours of my shift filing a report on someone who will never be identified and apprehended; when I was only robbed of $15.


Have you heard the Chris Rock stand-up in regard to MLK Blvd? Guess he must be a racist too....

Put a sock in it, chump.

TJMAC77SP
02-26-2013, 07:55 PM
TJ, Pullinteeth said that we all act on our prejudices, and he gave those two examples. He appears to be assuming that we'd all react the same way to those scenarios, when it just isn't true. Do you think everyone goes onto "MLK Blvd" ready to shit their pants?

No of course not (I try to avoid absolutes when I can) and I am not sure I read that in Pullin's example. Merely two examples of how some and maybe even the majority of people would act given a set of circumstances that very well could be very innocent but based on our own prejudices (which sometimes are based on very real facts) we act in a given way.

The problem lies occurs when the prejudice is applied too broadly (hence my reference about ALL black men being criminals).




Like I said, all I know is that if you want your money back; you have to file the report. Highly likely that you have to report all incidents, but if I chose not to report one, then obviously that's a shame on me. I'd rather have kept on working and racking up those tips than to waste hours of my shift filing a report on someone who will never be identified and apprehended; when I was only robbed of $15.

Ok, think we have beat this one to death.

JD2780
02-26-2013, 08:00 PM
TJ, Pullinteeth said that we all act on our prejudices, and he gave those two examples. He appears to be assuming that we'd all react the same way to those scenarios, when it just isn't true. Do you think everyone goes onto "MLK Blvd" ready to shit their pants?

Like I said, all I know is that if you want your money back; you have to file the report. Highly likely that you have to report all incidents, but if I chose not to report one, then obviously that's a shame on me. I'd rather have kept on working and racking up those tips than to waste hours of my shift filing a report on someone who will never be identified and apprehended; when I was only robbed of $15.

Put a sock in it, chump.

Nope, I bring my XD. MLK in LV looks like a warzone. Most places I've been MLK is run down and full drug activity and violence. Damn shame considering what that man did for our country.

Pullinteeth
03-19-2013, 08:10 PM
Heh...heh...heh...this guy claims he didn't know it was a Nazi salute... Odd to get that kind of punishment in a country that just elected a bunch of NAzis (literally-not kidding about that).

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/17/giorgos-katidis-banned-life-nazi-salute_n_2895619.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Best part? They didn't even say THAT was racist...just an insult to the victims of Nazi brutality....