Tiki Barber for President!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
302

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Well, I assume that you’re referring to me. So,
(1) When have I EVER said anything derogatory about black people? I rip black libs (and white) for their politics, which is not racism at all.
[/quote]

I’m sorry, ripping on MLK was only about politics not his personal life? Oh, my mistake. Idiot!

Did you understand ANYTHING I said. I said, and have said over and over again, that my opinion of you in this regard was based on a pattern of posts. You posted about MLK, Hastings (In which you attacked not only him, but the ENTIRE CBC) and then this one. Had you done them at separate times, I probably wouldn’t have paid attention to it. But you did it one behind the other. I said that this post appeared to be less than genuine based on the previous posts, which came one behind the other. You recently have followed them up by trying really hard to prove that you are not a racist. You even made a statement about (paraphrasing)“I have spoken highly about several Black Republicans”, which COULD be interpreted as “Hey, look at me! I like a few black people, when they act like I want them to. These are ‘good’ blacks.” That can also be viewed as negative and condescending as well, but I know that you were just trying to prove a point, so I didn’t view it that way. It is all about context. Probably in person, I wouldn’t think any of this about you, but all I have is your words on a screen.

This is where you will NEVER understand anything about this situation because it is absolutely about context. You DO get to pick the meaning of words when they are directed towards characteristics of people based on many things, including life experiences. What bubble do you live in? Do you honestly believe that’s how things work? We are not talking about a spelling test. We are talking about how words are used when they are directed towards people. Context matters whether you like it or not. Objective meanings applied to human characteristics only works in an academic setting and this isn’t an academic setting. Get over yourself already.

303

[quote]ALDurr wrote:

I don’t believe all white people are like that. In fact, I believe that it is only a fraction of a very small percentage out there that are like that.
[/quote]

I think that is a well thought out accurate conclusion. Unfortunately, others like professor x don’t seem to share this thought.

304

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
(2) A big point on this thread is that words have an objective meaning. You DO NOT get to pick the meaning you want because of your past life experiences, no matter how derogatory they may have been.

HH

This is where you will NEVER understand anything about this situation because it is absolutely about context. You DO get to pick the meaning of words when they are directed towards characteristics of people based on many things, including life experiences. What bubble do you live in? Do you honestly believe that’s how things work? We are not talking about a spelling test. We are talking about how words are used when they are directed towards people. Context matters whether you like it or not. Objective meanings applied to human characteristics only works in an academic setting and this isn’t an academic setting. Get over yourself already.[/quote]

I find it hard to believe that anyone is walking around thinking that words don’t have different meanings based on context, history, experience, and a host of other factors. To even think this isn’t the case must present itself as a social barrier because eventually, someone will take offense to the act of “objectively” using words as if no other factors exist. It shows a lack of tact…which for those who only rely on definitions means, “a keen sense of what to say or do to avoid giving offense; skill in dealing with difficult or delicate situations.”. A word like that would not exist if it didn’t have social meaning.

I honestly think much of what they are arguing is simply their lack of desire to acknowledge what others have dealt with. It must be very easy to walk through life believing that since you haven’t experienced something personally that this means you can respond to everyone else as if their experience has been the same. Yes, let’s casually discuss rape in front of rape victims. Let’s take an “objective” look at the Holocaust in front of survivors without thought as to how what you say could be perceived.

Life must be very easy when tact is a non-issue.

305

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Well, I assume that you’re referring to me. So,
(1) When have I EVER said anything derogatory about black people? I rip black libs (and white) for their politics, which is not racism at all.

I’m sorry, ripping on MLK was only about politics not his personal life? Oh, my mistake. Idiot!

[/quote]

How is ripping on someone’s personal life racist? That’s racist to you? Wow, you are wierd!

306

[quote]ALDurr wrote:

I don’t believe all white people are like that. In fact, I believe that it is only a fraction of a very small percentage out there that are like that. On this board, we can only go by what people type.[/quote]

Al, I think is the key. On this board, you can go by what people type - that makes sense.

But given that only a fraction of a very small percentage of whites actually engage in the kind of behavior we are talking about, it stands to reason that broad presumptions about whites are unjustified in the absence of something more specific, something more than a mere statement.

And I think that is where some of us differ - if only such a small percentage of whites are actually guilty of the sin, it seems irrational to start with a presumption that any white person is likely committing the sin. Which, plainly stated, is what assuming a word like ‘articulate’ being used by a white to describe a minority is - a presumption that any given white is acting racist.

Nor would I, as stated earlier, approve of a white man acting in reverse. Blacks have a higher crime commission rate per capita than whites - would it be fair then to presume that any black person is likely a criminal or about to commit a crime? Should I automatically get to assume a black man is a criminal until he proves otherwise? On the low standard offered by some here, that would be fine, even though only a minority of blacks commit crimes. I don’t think that presumption is ok. Do you?

If someone has a history or a character of which you have an insight - via posts for example - that is a fair context in which to weigh what they say. Call them on it. But the original fight went beyond that to automatic presumptions minus a higher level of context - and that is what myself and Pookie were contesting.

307

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Context matters whether you like it or not. Objective meanings applied to human characteristics only works in an academic setting and this isn’t an academic setting. Get over yourself already.[/quote]

I work in an ‘academic setting’. So, following your reasoning, I get to intrepret words as an academic, whether such is the universally accepted version of the word or not.

Fascinating!

308

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
But given that only a fraction of a very small percentage of whites actually engage in the kind of behavior we are talking about, it stands to reason that broad presumptions about whites are unjustified in the absence of something more specific, something more than a mere statement.[/quote]

I am very interested in how you came to the conclusion that you have any idea what percentage of all white people engage in the acts we are speaking of. In Varqanir’s example, do you think that the Asian’s who responded to him that way thought they were being “racist/culturalist”? I have no doubt they actually believed they were giving a compliment of the highest order. I don’t see you claiming that his perception was wrong. In fact, you haven’t even responded directly to his account at all.

309

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I am very interested in how you came to the conclusion that you have any idea what percentage of all white people engage in the acts we are speaking of.[/quote]

Well, genius, since I was responding directly to Al Durr, do yourself a favor and compare my phrasing to his - I was using what he said in my example.

I am very interested in what Varqanir had to say - he is bright and articulate - I just haven’t the chance to sit down and give the kinf of full reply I want to.

310

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I find it hard to believe that anyone is walking around thinking that words don’t have different meanings based on context, history, experience, and a host of other factors.[/quote]

I find it sad, but unfortunately not so hard to believe, that you resort to arguing about theoretical “anyones” who don’t exist, rather than stop pretending like the 1st page of this thread isn’t there or that you never defended an overly broad and sweeping proposition.

Until you figured out how foolish it made you look and started trying to convince everyone that you’d never held that position. It’s all about context, right? Well context is the exact reason why the initial proposition is completely untenable. For it to be true, you have to ignore all context at all times.

Your newfound timidity in naming either of us when responding is also very cute.

Enjoy your windmills.

311

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Professor X wrote:

I am very interested in how you came to the conclusion that you have any idea what percentage of all white people engage in the acts we are speaking of.

Well, genius, since I was responding directly to Al Durr, do yourself a favor and compare my phrasing to his - I was using what he said in my example.

In Varqanir’s example, do you think that the Asian’s who responded to him that way thought they were being “racist/culturalist”? I have no doubt they actually believed they were giving a compliment of the highest order. I don’t see you claiming that his perception was wrong. In fact, you haven’t even responded directly to his account at all.

I am very interested in what Varqanir had to say - he is bright and articulate - I just haven’t the chance to sit down and give the kinf of full reply I want to.[/quote]

I think Varq is a black man (really). You just insulted him, Thunder! :slight_smile:

312

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I think Varq is a black man (really). You just insulted him, Thunder! :)[/quote]

He was pretty white in that sledgehammer picture he used to have as an avatar.

Who knows, maybe he’d just converted to Judaism.

313

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Well, I assume that you’re referring to me. So,
(1) When have I EVER said anything derogatory about black people? I rip black libs (and white) for their politics, which is not racism at all.

I’m sorry, ripping on MLK was only about politics not his personal life? Oh, my mistake. Idiot!

How is ripping on someone’s personal life racist? That’s racist to you? Wow, you are wierd!

[/quote]

No, you dumbass. I didn’t say it was racist. You said you rip on them for their POLITICS. How is ripping on someone’s personal life related to their politics? Do you understand now?

314

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
Context matters whether you like it or not. Objective meanings applied to human characteristics only works in an academic setting and this isn’t an academic setting. Get over yourself already.

I work in an ‘academic setting’. So, following your reasoning, I get to intrepret words as an academic, whether such is the universally accepted version of the word or not.

Fascinating!

[/quote]

This was a stupid response and it illustrates that you are just here to stir shit. You have no desire to actually see the point.

315

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
ALDurr wrote:

I don’t believe all white people are like that. In fact, I believe that it is only a fraction of a very small percentage out there that are like that. On this board, we can only go by what people type.

Al, I think is the key. On this board, you can go by what people type - that makes sense.

But given that only a fraction of a very small percentage of whites actually engage in the kind of behavior we are talking about, it stands to reason that broad presumptions about whites are unjustified in the absence of something more specific, something more than a mere statement.

And I think that is where some of us differ - if only such a small percentage of whites are actually guilty of the sin, it seems irrational to start with a presumption that any white person is likely committing the sin. Which, plainly stated, is what assuming a word like ‘articulate’ being used by a white to describe a minority is - a presumption that any given white is acting racist.

Nor would I, as stated earlier, approve of a white man acting in reverse. Blacks have a higher crime commission rate per capita than whites - would it be fair then to presume that any black person is likely a criminal or about to commit a crime? Should I automatically get to assume a black man is a criminal until he proves otherwise? On the low standard offered by some here, that would be fine, even though only a minority of blacks commit crimes. I don’t think that presumption is ok. Do you?

If someone has a history or a character of which you have an insight - via posts for example - that is a fair context in which to weigh what they say. Call them on it. But the original fight went beyond that to automatic presumptions minus a higher level of context - and that is what myself and Pookie were contesting.[/quote]

Thunder,

I understand what you and Pookie were contesting and strictly in that context, I don’t believe you were wrong. I wasn’t even involved in that part of the discussion and I really don’t want to speak to it because it has been done to death. What I don’t think that you and Pookie understand, and I could be completely wrong, is that many black people have been treated a certain way by whites and after a while, many of you become victims of circumstance in how you are viewed by blacks. Much like the example you had above about blacks and crime (BTW, if you are going to make statements like this, a link to back it up would be helpful. Otherwise, it could look like you are making things up. I know you aren’t, but some others may think differently. ;)). Even though not all blacks commit crimes, many whites make the assumption that we are all criminals. I’ve seen this through non-verbal clues such as a posture changes, positioning of the body, grabbing purses and shifting them to the other side of their body, locking doors when they pull up next to me at stoplights and a myriad of other things.

Is is right, no. But wrong assumptions made by prior experiences and context happens all the time. And it happens on both sides of the color lines.

316

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
I understand what you and Pookie were contesting and strictly in that context, I don’t believe you were wrong.[/quote]

We don’t either. : )

Yet the point remains elusive to some, to timidly avoid naming them.

On the other hand, no one here knows anything about the lives of other people who post. To assume that all or most whites aren’t aware of racism, is just as bad as thinking that all blacks are making it up.

I can, of course, never know what it is like to be a black man. That doesn’t mean I’m not aware of the racist shit that goes on between races. I’ve been involved in hiring processes where people were going out of their ways to exclude a candidate simply because he was black. I’m pretty sure most blacks have never been in an all-white room discussing a black man.

My neighbor is a white man married to a black woman and we have been out to restaurants a few times. I’ve heard stupid remarks and I can only imagine what it’s like to get them everyday.

That’s not exclusive to blacks. I also happens with men vs. women or old people vs. young. When I was in college, I had to walk a fairly long stretch from the last bus to my house. I can’t count the number of time women would cross the street if I was walking behind them or approaching them from the same side. I didn’t check them all, but I’d assume most were white. It wasn’t racism in those case, but they still felt safer on the other side of the street. Similar situations would happen with people changing seats in the subway, for whatever reason.

Were these people assuming I could be a criminal? Maybe. Was it the heavy metal band t-shirt and the long hair? Maybe. I’ve had similar reactions wearing a leather coat with my hair cut to a quarter inch… whatever the reasons, I don’t think the reactions would’ve been much different had I been black. They most certainly would have been more numerous, but I can’t know. I didn’t assume those reactions were based on race, and I’d be silly too, since most incidents occurred with other white people. Had I been black, I might have assumed the reactions were race-based, but in many of those case, my assumption would’ve been wrong.

317

[quote]pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
I find it hard to believe that anyone is walking around thinking that words don’t have different meanings based on context, history, experience, and a host of other factors.

I find it sad, but unfortunately not so hard to believe, that you resort to arguing about theoretical “anyones” who don’t exist, rather than stop pretending like the 1st page of this thread isn’t there or that you never defended an overly broad and sweeping proposition.

Until you figured out how foolish it made you look and started trying to convince everyone that you’d never held that position. It’s all about context, right? Well context is the exact reason why the initial proposition is completely untenable. For it to be true, you have to ignore all context at all times.

Your newfound timidity in naming either of us when responding is also very cute.

Enjoy your windmills.
[/quote]

I stand by every statement I have made in this thread. I also think I have made it overly clear at this point why I have made each statement. Why would soemon e only look at the first page…as if the other TWELVE going into even greater detail didn’t exist?..Unless understanding was simply not your goal?

318

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

I am very interested in what Varqanir had to say - he is bright and articulate - I just haven’t the chance to sit down and give the kinf of full reply I want to.[/quote]

Well, I await that response that shows anywhere near the spite held by every similar response from me in this thread. My guess is, you won’t actually start to listen until a race you are a part of is no longer a part of the equation.

319

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I stand by every statement I have made in this thread.[/quote]

Then why spend eleven pages trying to make us forget the 1st one?

The eleven pages following the 1st one do not go into greater detail; they try and make us believe that you said otherwise than you did on the first one.

You’re just unable to come out and say that your 1st posting supporting Harris was too broad in scope.

Vroom sees it, Al Durr sees it. I’m sure you see it too; you’re just too proud to admit it.

320

[quote]pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
I stand by every statement I have made in this thread.

Then why spend eleven pages trying to make us forget the 1st one?

I also think I have made it overly clear at this point why I have made each statement. Why would soemon e only look at the first page…as if the other TWELVE going into even greater detail didn’t exist?..Unless understanding was simply not your goal?

The eleven pages following the 1st one do not go into greater detail; they try and make us believe that you said otherwise than you did on the first one.

You’re just unable to come out and say that your 1st posting supporting Harris was too broad in scope.

Vroom sees it, Al Durr sees it. I’m sure you see it too; you’re just too proud to admit it.

[/quote]

I’m not wrong so there is nothing to admit. Even if someone believes they are giving a true compliment, that doesn’t take away the fact that the act of giving certain compliments can show a racist thought or act.

Just as Varqinir wrote about, the asians “complimenting” him may very well believe they are giving a compliment. That doesn’t mean that BY GIVING ONE they aren’t showing their own racist/culturalist views of others like him.

Do you get it now?

Is the answer still no?

If so, save your response because I doubt it will get explained better than that.

321

First of all i would like to apologise to the the regulars(not you shithead) on this forum that have had to put up with the level of discourse that i have had with shithead.
I felt that the level of personal attack and slander that was reached by this poster was reaching Mr Push ups level.
It has been good to see that his post since then that level has not been reached again.
He needed to be called on it and judging by my pm’s it was appropriate and i will call him again if needed, hopefully he may learn how to discuss topics in a reasonable passionate and respectfull manner as been shown by the regular’s here.