View Full Version : Outrage over historical films, TV shows, songs, etc.
I was reading earlier today about the 1939 film 'Gone With The Wind' being deleted (from Netflix I think?) due to its racially sensitive content, especially during the current climate.
I am kind of on the fence over this, as one half of me agrees with its deletion, but the other half of me wonders as to whether it may be a slight over-reaction, given it's a 'product of it's time' and should be viewed and interpreted within the context of it's era.
I also get a bit miffed when people get indignant over, say, the 1987 festive hit 'Fairytale Of New York' almost every Christmas because it contains a 'slur' that is also the name of a well-known and much-loved English meat dish from Mr. Brains, which ironically continues to be sold in supermarkets all over the country on a daily basis seemingly without anyone even giving it a second thought, yet most people don't even seem to bat an eyelid over a lot of stuff in the charts and on post-watershed TV over the past 20 years or so that is constantly littered with F and C-bombs and, depicting/referencing violence and aggression (e.g, Eminem, and a lot of the more recent drill-rap stuff), and seemingly no calls to ban them.
Yet people still get their knickers in a twist over the content of a lot of material produced before the 90s, most of which IMO, is pretty tame compared to a lot of stuff that has come since then. I really don't get it.
I have a tough time with this one, too. I don't really know what the right answer is. Although I see a benefit to eliminated confederate flags and statutes, I think movies and other cultural references fall into a different category. I feel like it's actually really important to remember our past and how we treated people so that we understand what needs to change. I watched the Disney Peter Pan with my daughter a few months ago and when they all started singing, "what makes the red man red," I was *horrified*. But, part of that horror was one more reminder of what we need to stop being like that. I'm white, though, so I'm not sure if others feel the same. Content like that is offensive but not directly to me, which I'm sure paints my reaction to it.
Its like Looney Tunes taking away Elmer Fudd's shotgun. Why? It always backfired on him anyway :shrug: I understand the background reasons but c'mon, its a classic cartoon! How can you hunt 'wabbits' with a sickle? :huh:
Positive thoughts
WiseMonkey
10-06-20, 22:19
As a whole, we've become more socially conscious as the years pass which is good as people are people despite our difference. Some countries have become far more multicultural which has helped the process. The same with sexism.
Films and movies are a record of our past, a reflection of the time, so that's why we can react so strongly to them because our attitudes have changed.
Yep the old cartoon are still as funny as ever, Road Runner is my fav but I don't see it as man trying to destroy the chaparral bird as it's based in fantasy, Roadrunner always wins the day anyway :D Wacky Races is another fav of mine with Dick Dastardly and Muttley :)
Pamplemousse
10-06-20, 23:40
Wacky Races is another fav of mine with Dick Dastardly and Muttley :)
I have a T-shirt for Dick Dastardly Motor Mechanics - "fairly reliable" !! :roflmao:
Now they're talking about retheming Splash Mountain at Disneyland and Walt Disney World because of its connection with Song of the South. But, seriously, I get the feeling that pretending Uncle Remus never existed would be so much worse.
Now it's statues and monuments.
I actually think it's probably appropriate to take down Confederate statutes and monuments, and I say that as someone with a huge number of Confederate ancestors. But, they lost a war against the United States that almost tore the nation apart, so I think it makes plenty of sense to not venerate them. I totally recognize that the Civil War was about a lot more than just slavery and that states rights are really important, but I think it's kind of silly to maintain this veneration for Confederate generals and the Confederate flag.
My dad and I have done a ton of work on our genealogy. My ancestors came to North America from England in the 1600s and set up shop both in what became Virginia and also in the Caribbean. They have a long and sordid past as not just slave owners. They were deeply entrenched in the slave trade across the continent. Many of them were also integral parts of formation of the United States as representatives at the Continental Congress, Generals in the American Revolution, and high ranking government officials in the Washington, Jefferson, and Adams administrations. I have a lot of pride in my family's past as builders of a new way of life, but also have had to grapple with the less than glorious (and in some cases downright heinous) parts of their lives.
I think this is really America's story - finding a way to balance pride in our history while still being able to recognize our wrong doing for what it was. This means, I think, holding on to things you value in your past while not building literal monuments to the darker pieces of your story. I think Americans have this insecurity about our past. We are sold such a mystical story about our founding that when we grow up and learn more details about it it feels really uncomfortable. Instead of admitting we're not perfect, we double down on the myth.
This has nothing to do with racial equality or justice of any kind. Blacks are being used as proxy warriors to spread anarchy so that order could be created out of chaos. Now, they're planning a Charlottesville type of false flag in Britain which will lead to racial violence and further tension. Both sides are being manipulated and controlled, BLM is funded by George Soros. This won't end well for black people, their culture has already been subverted through Gangsta rap which glorifies drugs, violence and crime. Rioting and destroying a few statues won't improve their socioeconomic situation in the long term.
MyNameIsTerry
11-06-20, 21:16
I actually think it's probably appropriate to take down Confederate statutes and monuments, and I say that as someone with a huge number of Confederate ancestors. But, they lost a war against the United States that almost tore the nation apart, so I think it makes plenty of sense to not venerate them. I totally recognize that the Civil War was about a lot more than just slavery and that states rights are really important, but I think it's kind of silly to maintain this veneration for Confederate generals and the Confederate flag.
My dad and I have done a ton of work on our genealogy. My ancestors came to North America from England in the 1600s and set up shop both in what became Virginia and also in the Caribbean. They have a long and sordid past as not just slave owners. They were deeply entrenched in the slave trade across the continent. Many of them were also integral parts of formation of the United States as representatives at the Continental Congress, Generals in the American Revolution, and high ranking government officials in the Washington, Jefferson, and Adams administrations. I have a lot of pride in my family's past as builders of a new way of life, but also have had to grapple with the less than glorious (and in some cases downright heinous) parts of their lives.
I think this is really America's story - finding a way to balance pride in our history while still being able to recognize our wrong doing for what it was. This means, I think, holding on to things you value in your past while not building literal monuments to the darker pieces of your story. I think Americans have this insecurity about our past. We are sold such a mystical story about our founding that when we grow up and learn more details about it it feels really uncomfortable. Instead of admitting we're not perfect, we double down on the myth.
I agree. I think those in the slave trade should be removed however I don't think it should be expanded out into colonialism and empire because they were all like that! The more you go back in history the more xenophobic and racist we all were. The world was built on conquest and all skin colours were enslaved by conquering nations and their resources pilfered. That's just how it was.
Black slavery is recent in our history and we are at a point in our own history where people are able to voice their opinions. In future centuries this won't be the same and maybe those generations won't think much of it if we have moved on?
But if purifying is the answer they had better start pulling down every portrait and statue going because I think they will struggle not to find bigoted attitudes in history. Go back even further and our father's were raping & pillaging swinging axes into each other's faces on battlefields.
But if purifying is the answer they had better start pulling down every portrait and statue going because I think they will struggle not to find bigoted attitudes in history. Go back even further and our father's were raping & pillaging swinging axes into each other's faces on battlefields.
Yes, I agree. I think that's part of the accepting our history and learning from it.
The other day someone was reading part of Langston Hugh's poem Let American Be America Again and this line is so striking:
O, let America be America again—
The land that never has been yet—
And yet must be—the land where every man is free.
I think it really sums us up - We have this idea of what America means, but we've never really achieved it. If we realize that we have hope of someday getting there. Instead, when terrible things happen - like rounding up immigrants or police brutality we all like to say, "that's unAmerican!" ... but it's really not, it's our entire history!
All,
I understand the sentiment of what you are all saying. You can’t delete history no matter how uncomfortable and we must never forget it nor fail to learn from the lessons it taught us. In fact, we should use these lessons to direct us to do better in the future.
The point of my message is to make you all think before you post. We are a totally inclusive site and there is no room for discrimination against any with protected characteristics. Indeed, we are all anxiety sufferers and know better than most what it’s like to feel invalid and isolated.
Hey, but what do I know? Only that we all deserve to be treated with fairness and dignity.
Pip x
This has nothing to do with racial equality or justice of any kind. Blacks are being used as proxy warriors to spread anarchy so that order could be created out of chaos. Now, they're planning a Charlottesville type of false flag in Britain which will lead to racial violence and further tension. Both sides are being manipulated and controlled, BLM is funded by George Soros. This won't end well for black people, their culture has already been subverted through Gangsta rap which glorifies drugs, violence and crime. Rioting and destroying a few statues won't improve their socioeconomic situation in the long term.
With regards to gangsta rap music, and it's obnoxious attributes, which also involves White persons (e.g, Eminem), hardly anyone seems to bat an eyelid, but people get all uptight over stuff like Fairytale Of New York and even classic 70s comedy dramas like On The Buses and Fawlty Towers.
And you're probably correct that certain factions of our population are using the BLM protests as some excuse to let rip, especially
those who are hell-bent on anarchy just for the sake of it and this is the latest 'trigger'.
Twas ever thus I suppose.
Panicattacka
12-06-20, 12:12
This is all the inevitable, logical outcome of 70 years of liberalism and progressivism in the West. It was always going to come to this. Whether you welcome this new phase or fear it, well...to each his own.
This is all the inevitable, logical outcome of 70 years of liberalism and progressivism in the West. It was always going to come to this. Whether you welcome this new phase or fear it, well...to each his own.
Perhaps we're kind of at fault for being so blase about a lot of issues for all these years, and inadvertently developing the blame game culture, when and where a lot of us ourselves should have instead been putting our own houses in order, rather than shrugging it off with the typical 'it's someone else's fault/problem'.
MyNameIsTerry
12-06-20, 16:02
With regards to gangsta rap music, and it's obnoxious attributes, which also involves White persons (e.g, Eminem), hardly anyone seems to bat an eyelid, but people get all uptight over stuff like Fairytale Of New York and even classic 70s comedy dramas like On The Buses and Fawlty Towers.
And you're probably correct that certain factions of our population are using the BLM protests as some excuse to let rip, especially
those who are hell-bent on anarchy just for the sake of it and this is the latest 'trigger'.
Twas ever thus I suppose.
I think Hollow means they are being used to give an excuse for stricter control of people. Agent provocateur style.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/13C14/production/_112861908_momohigherres.png
MyNameIsTerry
12-06-20, 21:31
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/13C14/production/_112861908_momohigherres.png
Hollow, we aren't mind readers so can you explain your point otherwise all I see here is an inflammatory post aimed at stoking things up?
Pamplemousse
13-06-20, 10:22
Hollow, we aren't mind readers so can you explain your point otherwise all I see here is an inflammatory post aimed at stoking things up?
Careful Terry, you can't suggest that someone here dwells under bridges or you'll get your post removed.
Careful Terry, you can't suggest that someone here dwells under bridges or you'll get your post removed.
I don't think Terry was suggesting Hol is a troll.
Hollow, we aren't mind readers so can you explain your point otherwise all I see here is an inflammatory post aimed at stoking things up?
I think it would be more apt to replace "UK" with "British Empire" in this case, for it was responsible for exporting slavery and misery to the 4 corners of the earth, under control of "The Crown". It was the very essence of "racism". Yet I don't see protesters outside palaces and toppling statues of Queen Victoria, under whose reign the savage East India Company operated.
There is no value in violent protests, looting or vandalism. None of this will bring those who suffered and died under police or colonial injustice back. All it does is further reinforce the division and hate.
All lives matter - equally.
Pamplemousse
13-06-20, 12:13
There is no value in violent protests, looting or vandalism. None of this will bring those who suffered and died under police or colonial injustice back. All it does is further reinforce the division and hate.
All lives matter - equally.
Agree wholeheartedly. And yet for some sections, saying "all lives matter" is racist - explain that...? Do you remember how Jeremy Corbyn drew flak when he refused to condemn any particular terrorist organisation by replying "I condemn all terrorism" or words to that effect?
Delilah001
14-06-20, 02:09
Saying all lives matter is deflecting from the issue.
Yes of course all lives do technically matter its just in society it seems black lives matter a lot less (blame racism for that).
Saying all lives matter makes it seem like we are all equal in life and although it should be we are simply not.
Saying all lives matter is deflecting from the issue.
Yes of course all lives do technically matter its just in society it seems black lives matter a lot less (blame racism for that).
Saying all lives matter makes it seem like we are all equal in life and although it should be we are simply not.
This the loftiest load of bull I've ever heard. The only place that black lives matter a lot less is in your head. You and your ilk have thrown the racism charge around so often you've rendered it meaningless. I think it's hilarious watching the left twist themselves into pretzels trying to prove they're not racist. Next thing you'll be talking about is reparations. Where people who never owned slaves pay money to people who were never slaves.
N.
Saying all lives matter is deflecting from the issue.
Yes of course all lives do technically matter its just in society it seems black lives matter a lot less (blame racism for that).
Saying all lives matter makes it seem like we are all equal in life and although it should be we are simply not.
No, N. What she's saying it exactly the truth. All lives should matter, and under the industrialized countries with democracies they are supposed to...except that they haven't. White privilege does exist, racism still exists, whether individual acts of racism or institutionally supported ones, and it's gotten to the point in some sectors of society that it's become normalized. That's why the movement is "black lives matter." It's not saying that other races don't matter, it's saying "Hey, black people are still marginalized, pay attention, we matter too!" If the problem against blacks and African Americans wasn't so bad, the message wouldn't have to be that specific.
MyNameIsTerry
14-06-20, 04:10
Agree wholeheartedly. And yet for some sections, saying "all lives matter" is racist - explain that...? Do you remember how Jeremy Corbyn drew flak when he refused to condemn any particular terrorist organisation by replying "I condemn all terrorism" or words to that effect?
In Mr Corbyn's case it would be his unwillingness to point to certain groups he doesn't want to upset. Why they chose him to lead this new left Labour I have no idea, other than because he was weak so could be manipulated, because this was always going to be one of his undoings.
He knew they were baiting him but his unwillingness to condemn without hiding it behind a wider group showed potential sympathies. I just think he didn't want to upset people and he's likely a very good MP to his constituents which makes him the opposite of front bench material.
MyNameIsTerry
14-06-20, 04:18
Careful Terry, you can't suggest that someone here dwells under bridges or you'll get your post removed.
I don't think Terry was suggesting Hol is a troll.
I think it would be more apt to replace "UK" with "British Empire" in this case, for it was responsible for exporting slavery and misery to the 4 corners of the earth, under control of "The Crown". It was the very essence of "racism". Yet I don't see protesters outside palaces and toppling statues of Queen Victoria, under whose reign the savage East India Company operated.
There is no value in violent protests, looting or vandalism. None of this will bring those who suffered and died under police or colonial injustice back. All it does is further reinforce the division and hate.
All lives matter - equally.
Just to confirm, KK is correct. I was giving Hollow a chance to add some comment about the picture. It can be regarded as baiting. I know from experience he posts pics and headlines without his own opinion.
I fully agree with the forum rules about troll calling. However I would point out that rule came from repetitive anxiety posters being called fake and not members retweeting political points. I wish Hollow would think about this being an anxiety site, he used to engage on anxiety boards.
I agree on the change to British Empire but then how can we say it was us that created racism through our colonialism when empires predate us and they did much the same? We certainly did our share of bad things to other peoples but it didn't start at that point in history just as slavery didn't. Are they to be defined in a different way to our racism?
Thank you, Delilah, beautifully put.
Of course all lives matter, but black lives are the ones that need help right now, and as responsible, compassionate human beings we need to do what we can.
Pamplemousse
14-06-20, 11:32
In Mr Corbyn's case it would be his unwillingness to point to certain groups he doesn't want to upset. Why they chose him to lead this new left Labour I have no idea, other than because he was weak so could be manipulated, because this was always going to be one of his undoings.
Entryism - most notably the "Three Quid Trots". I think a lot of people even on the moderate left were so pissed off at Blair's behaviour (the God-bothering, his cosying up to Bush Jr.) that they wanted to undo the attempt to turn the Labour Party into something resembling the German Christian Democrats. Of the four candidates on offer, Liz Kendall was an unknown Blairite at the time and so she stood no chance: Yvette Cooper (probably the best of them) would in the minds of the Tory Press and its supporters forever be "Mrs. Balls"; Andy Burnham would forever be tainted by the Mid-Staffs hospitals affair... and then there was Corbyn. Seen as a 'true' socialist who in fact never achieved anything in his time in Parliament (name a single bill he brought forward) and was in fact born into a very privileged white background and spent more time rebelling against party policy than supporting it, he was supported fervently by refugees from the SWP and just about every other bunch of extreme left-wingers, proto-anarchists and sundry other fringe elements who hoped that somehow they could seize power rather than convince the electorate to choose them democratically. Of course, it's difficult to get your message across when the Fourth Estate is quite right-wing in its views, mostly owned by non-dom tax exiles for whom his views would be anathema. Yet I saw no attempt to reintroduce Clause Four or anything like that, just an attempt to try and "level the playing field" (to use the modern vernacular) to reduce the massive disparity between rich and poor in this country. In that I see no wrong.
However Corbyn's personality was never going to win votes. Some say he's principled: I just see arrogance and a tendency to be oh so achingly worthy. By contrast, Starmer seems very dull but I think we've had enough of 'character' leaders now, don't you? In times of trouble you want a bank manager type to lead a country, not someone with a false 'buffoon' personality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0NFQUW08Z8
Should this movie be banned too? A very funny clip from the comedy film Bustin' Loose with the hilarious Richard Pryor. Back before everyone was so sensitive. Enjoy...if you can.
No, N. What she's saying it exactly the truth. All lives should matter, and under the industrialized countries with democracies they are supposed to...except that they haven't. White privilege does exist, racism still exists, whether individual acts of racism or institutionally supported ones, and it's gotten to the point in some sectors of society that it's become normalized. That's why the movement is "black lives matter." It's not saying that other races don't matter, it's saying "Hey, black people are still marginalized, pay attention, we matter too!" If the problem against blacks and African Americans wasn't so bad, the message wouldn't have to be that specific.
Hi AntsyVee
"Racism still exists" of course it does. You're not ever going to end it and neither am I. It exists on an individual level far more than it does as you imagine on an institutional level. That has pretty much ended in this country. And racism is not exclusive to the white race. It runs across every race and nationality and to say it does not is being disingenuous. Let's just take both of our places of employment. Is there institutional racism where you work? Because there isn't where I work.
Once again the Democrats are coming around to exploit the black community during election time. But in recent years the black community has taken a much closer look at what the Democrats have given them over the last 50 years. That is why the left is desperate to get illegal aliens the vote. They need a new group to exploit. Slavery existed in this world 2,000 years ago and it exists in this world today. But this country, at great cost I might add, a million-and-a-half casualties, ended slavery over a hundred and fifty years ago. Tell me who is more racist, the person that says a particular race needs all kinds of handouts and special programs to succeed or the person that says hey that guy or girl is at least as intelligent, strong and as capable as I am? Democrats have been condescendingly patronizing the black community for over 50 years. I'd be happy to get into it over the history of the democrat party and racism. Their track record isn't that good.
N.
Oh dear, this thread straying off into politics now!
ankietyjoe
14-06-20, 15:56
This the loftiest load of bull I've ever heard. The only place that black lives matter a lot less is in your head. You and your ilk have thrown the racism charge around so often you've rendered it meaningless. I think it's hilarious watching the left twist themselves into pretzels trying to prove they're not racist. Next thing you'll be talking about is reparations. Where people who never owned slaves pay money to people who were never slaves.
N.
Are you being deliberately provocative, or are you just a moron?
Your 'reparations' example has got nothing to do with what Delilah is talking about, and is just an extreme example of classic red herring diversion tactics.
LOL! Moron... that's a good one!
But be careful you might be getting close to hate speech...I'm running off to one of my safe spaces right now I'll get back to you after I hold a puppy for a while.
But actually the reparations example was just that... an example of the lunacy on the far left...of which you are a member...as is BLM.
N.
Knock it off, please, Noivous? You're making me uncomfortable, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Saying all lives matter is deflecting from the issue.
Yes of course all lives do technically matter its just in society it seems black lives matter a lot less (blame racism for that).
Saying all lives matter makes it seem like we are all equal in life and although it should be we are simply not.
Why don’t black lives matter ever seem to engage in protest when scores of young black men and women are murdered every day?
In late May, around about the time these protests started, Chicago in the US had the most violent day in 60 years, with dozens of black men and women murdered.
If black lives matter, that’s fine. For me, that should always be the case, not only when it happens to be a white guy who brings it to an end.
Knock it off, please, Noivous? You're making me uncomfortable, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Wait a minute BI. Knock it off? I'm making you uncomfortable? Well maybe you're making me and others uncomfortable. You did see that the guy just called me a moron that doesn't make you uncomfortable? You know you shouldn't shut somebody down just because you don't agree with them.
Or do you only get uncomfortable when someone challenges your viewpoint? Is this an open forum or not?
N.
It wasn't an order, it was a polite request. Neither was it an attempt to shut you down, just a heads-up in case you weren't aware of the fact.
Really not in the mood for conflict, I'm just aware that there are younger, non-white users on here and yes, I do worry about their feelings.
Okay fair enough. But I don't think I said anything offensive to them.
Boy it's been a really nice June though. The weather has been terrific.
Blue Iris I appreciate your compassion and consideration for others believe me.
N.
Thanks. Believe me, the last thing I'm looking for is a ruck right now; I don't believe in dishing out what I can't take.
Delilah001
14-06-20, 18:14
Why don’t black lives matter ever seem to engage in protest when scores of young black men and women are murdered every day?
In late May, around about the time these protests started, Chicago in the US had the most violent day in 60 years, with dozens of black men and women murdered.
If black lives matter, that’s fine. For me, that should always be the case, not only when it happens to be a white guy who brings it to an end.
Its about racism though specifically.
If a black person murders someone else that is black they didnt do it because they were black.
Although it is wrong to murder someone else AGAIN like novious you are deflecting from the issue at hand here
The issue being certain murders are racially motivated does that mean we should just ignore that?
Why are people supposed to brush off overt and covert racism all the time so that they dont come across as victims or liberal lefties.
Its a big issue for all black and african diaspora people that live in america and europe and they will face discrimination and that is just facts.
Please can we be respectful to each other and cease all heated debates about BLM/racism and politics in general as there is another thread for the former.
Thank you.
Its about racism though specifically.
If a black person murders someone else that is black they didnt do it because they were black.
Although it is wrong to murder someone else AGAIN like novious you are deflecting from the issue at hand here
The issue being certain murders are racially motivated does that mean we should just ignore that?
Why are people supposed to brush off overt and covert racism all the time so that they dont come across as victims or liberal lefties.
Its a big issue for all black and african diaspora people that live in america and europe and they will face discrimination and that is just facts.
I’m not deflecting anything, I just don’t understand why isolated incidences of racially motivated murder gets more attention attention than the constant murder of black people.
You’re saying we shouldn’t just ignore racially motivated murder, which I do agree with, but in the same way we shouldn’t ignore scores of incidences of murder within black communities either, should we?
As I said, black lives should always matter, not just when it’s a person with a different skin colour who happens to be the offender.
MRS STRESS ED
14-06-20, 19:15
There is enough horrible shit in the world at the moment without members falling out remember what the thread is about, agree to disagree guys and move on
best wishes
Please can we be respectful to each other and cease all heated debates about BLM/racism and politics in general as there is another thread for the former.
Thank you.
I'm not trying to be rude here, Lencoboy, but this thread is about the outrage over historical forms of media. Isn't most of the outrage over this media due to it's outdated depictions of race? How does BLM/racism not tie into that?
Delilah001
14-06-20, 21:21
I’m not deflecting anything, I just don’t understand why isolated incidences of racially motivated murder gets more attention attention than the constant murder of black people.
You’re saying we shouldn’t just ignore racially motivated murder, which I do agree with, but in the same way we shouldn’t ignore scores of incidences of murder within black communities either, should we?
As I said, black lives should always matter, not just when it’s a person with a different skin colour who happens to be the offender.
Your logic doesnt make any sense.
Are we going to talk about EVERY single black person that dies? No because that would be impossible.
Yes, justice should be served for all deaths of course and there are still people talking about non racially motivated murders that happen to people both black and white
Its just that people can ALSO talk about murders that are racially motivated and think about this for a second- think of all the murders and missing persons regarding black people that have been swept under the rug by systems supposed to protect them.
If we live in a world where humans are placed on a food chain with those of color lower at the bottom pretty much being symbols of opression then trust me when i tell you even the police dont care about justice for them.
Just face it.
So many people oppose black lives matter because its a bold statement against all forms of racism in the world.
People feel uncomfortable about this have been conditioned by the ways of opressors.
If racism is a disease there will be symptoms.
Another thing you've got to remember Gary, especially when talking about what's happening in Chicago, is that the black on black murders happening there are results of the same issues that BLM is addressing--poverty and inequality of the black community.
Delilah001
14-06-20, 21:59
Another thing you've got to remember Gary, especially when talking about what's happening in Chicago, is that the black on black murders happening there are results of the same issues that BLM is addressing--poverty and inequality of the black community.
I agree 100% antsy
Its interesting... I've been escaping from the world and watching old Johnny Carson clips on Youtube of Don Rickles, Robin Williams, Eddie Murphy, Richard Pryor and many other great comedians from that era. Many of them were close friends and watching them bust on each other was not only funny but were a left handed slap upside the head to modern day supporters of a certain someone.....
Sadly, not much has changed :weep:
FMP
Another thing you've got to remember Gary, especially when talking about what's happening in Chicago, is that the black on black murders happening there are results of the same issues that BLM is addressing--poverty and inequality of the black community.
Wow! That's quite a black and white statement from someone who sees the world through grey colored glasses.
N.
Sorry you feel that way, N. If I could make you understand any better, I would.
You'll never make me understand falsehoods.
Wow! This is something I never thought I would hear. There is hope.
It's those very reasons that civil rights attorney Leo Terrell has had enough of the Democratic Party.
"This is why I stopped drinking the Democrat Kool-Aid. I can’t take this hypocrisy anymore. It’s ridiculous," he explained during a Friday night segment on "Hannity."
"Richard Russell from the South was against integration. He was opposed to anti-lynching bills. That's what bothers me about this whole thing, that Democrats, just because of the D in their name, they could be a racist," Terrell explained. "That statement by Joe Biden is so offensive and then you have Spike Lee out there and say, 'It's okay.' That's offensive. If any Republican said the same thing they would be in trouble, big trouble."
"Joe Biden gave us the crime bill in 1994. President Trump gave us the First Step," he said. "The bottom line is this: I don't need the Democrats to insult me or try to placate me with African garb, Nancy Pelosi. Pass some laws. Pass some reforms. Show me something other than some kind of condescending act just because you're a Democrat. That doesn't follow anymore."
MyNameIsTerry
15-06-20, 04:38
I was reading earlier today about the 1939 film 'Gone With The Wind' being deleted (from Netflix I think?) due to its racially sensitive content, especially during the current climate.
I am kind of on the fence over this, as one half of me agrees with its deletion, but the other half of me wonders as to whether it may be a slight over-reaction, given it's a 'product of it's time' and should be viewed and interpreted within the context of it's era.
I also get a bit miffed when people get indignant over, say, the 1987 festive hit 'Fairytale Of New York' almost every Christmas because it contains a 'slur' that is also the name of a well-known and much-loved English meat dish from Mr. Brains, which ironically continues to be sold in supermarkets all over the country on a daily basis seemingly without anyone even giving it a second thought, yet most people don't even seem to bat an eyelid over a lot of stuff in the charts and on post-watershed TV over the past 20 years or so that is constantly littered with F and C-bombs and, depicting/referencing violence and aggression (e.g, Eminem, and a lot of the more recent drill-rap stuff), and seemingly no calls to ban them.
Yet people still get their knickers in a twist over the content of a lot of material produced before the 90s, most of which IMO, is pretty tame compared to a lot of stuff that has come since then. I really don't get it.
Wasn't the use of the F in that song an Irish term used in a different way? Considering you can buy the sausage why couldn't they see the word could be used in different ways? The N word isn't quite the same, it's much more emotive, and as used with black or brown in colour description you can understand why there isn't a case to use it other contexts since it never really described anything other than a comparison to certain skin colours.
* no, the N word isn't Noivous! :biggrin:
You'll never make me understand falsehoods.
LMAO Ohh, N. You crack me up.
Would it help if I explained it while doing a Trump impression?
Panicattacka
15-06-20, 08:24
To a large extent the current mess the US finds itself in was baked in the cake from the get-go. When you have a "proposition" nation explicitly founded on enlightenment values of mass-equality and individual rights and, more recently, mass consumerism and the agglomeration of massive personal wealth as the defining factors of a good life, then any citizen who does not feel they have access to the same opportunities and outcomes is going to feel aggrieved and majorly pissed off. There aren't many other examples of such proposition nations; most countries evolved organically over time and went through many stages of political systems. The only similar nation in terms of size and importance is France, after their explicitly "proposition" revolution, and they also have big problems today.
So either America (and to a lesser extent France) finds a way of ensuring everyone at least feels like he/she is at the feast, or this current disorder gets worse and the result is likely to be some kind of break up like the collapse of the USSR.
You'll never make me understand falsehoods.
"Alternate facts"? Sadly, I've realized a long time ago, you can't argue with a Trump supporter (notice I didn't say republican). Its like playing chess with a monkey. They jump on the board, knock over all the pieces, throw poo at you and strut around like they won.
On an interesting note: A statue of former KKK leader and Confederate soldier Nathan Bedford Forrest that has been in the Tennessee capitol for over 40 years could be replaced by another famous Tennessean. Local lawmakers are considering options to replace Forrest and according to reports, Dolly Parton is one candidate ;)
Positive thoughts
Yep Dolly Dolly Parton:yesyes:what a great bust or statue that would be.:D
Oh, yes! That'd be fantastic!
Yep Dolly Dolly Parton:yesyes:what a great bust or statue that would be.:D
The country band I toured with in the 80's played at Dollywood several times. She always came by the band stand and said hello. She's a very sweet woman :)
Positive thoughts
FMP, that's lovely to know! I always got that impression and it's great to hear it's an accurate one.
The country band I toured with in the 80's played at Dollywood several times. She always came by the band stand and said hello. She's a very sweet woman :)
Positive thoughts
I went to her Concert in The Hunter Valley and had a meet and greet what a lovely kind woman,even bought 2 t-shirts with It Costs a Lot Of Money To Look This Cheap:yesyes:
To a large extent the current mess the US finds itself in was baked in the cake from the get-go. When you have a "proposition" nation explicitly founded on enlightenment values of mass-equality and individual rights and, more recently, mass consumerism and the agglomeration of massive personal wealth as the defining factors of a good life, then any citizen who does not feel they have access to the same opportunities and outcomes is going to feel aggrieved and majorly pissed off. There aren't many other examples of such proposition nations; most countries evolved organically over time and went through many stages of political systems. The only similar nation in terms of size and importance is France, after their explicitly "proposition" revolution, and they also have big problems today.
So either America (and to a lesser extent France) finds a way of ensuring everyone at least feels like he/she is at the feast, or this current disorder gets worse and the result is likely to be some kind of break up like the collapse of the USSR.
Hey that's pretty good Panicattacka. Going to give it a little thought. Thanks
I went to her Concert in The Hunter Valley and had a meet and greet what a lovely kind woman,even bought 2 t-shirts with It Costs a Lot Of Money To Look This Cheap:yesyes:
Well you understand she needs two tee shirts right?
Here's another great quote from her:
"I was the first woman to burn my bra — it took the fire department four days to put it out.”
"Alternate facts"? Sadly, I've realized a long time ago, you can't argue with a Trump supporter (notice I didn't say republican). Its like playing chess with a monkey. They jump on the board, knock over all the pieces, throw poo at you and strut around like they won.
On an interesting note: A statue of former KKK leader and Confederate soldier Nathan Bedford Forrest that has been in the Tennessee capitol for over 40 years could be replaced by another famous Tennessean. Local lawmakers are considering options to replace Forrest and according to reports, Dolly Parton is one candidate ;)
Positive thoughts
Yes FMP I remember when you called me a shit flinging monkey. It was a pretty funny line actually. But like most lefties, to steal a line from Tom Cruise, you can't handle the truth. And your defense is to either run away or shut the conversation down. But I keep fighting. And I don't support Trump for love of Trump I support Trump for love of country. What you and your ilk don't realize is that the American working class of this country (of all colors BTW) finally got someone who will stand up and fight for them. And if you lefties want to get down in the mud with Trump you have to realize that he is the greatest mud wrestler of all time. And I believe he's going to win...again.
Wow, N. Those are some mental images I could've lived without...Tom Cruise and Trump mud wrestling.
But it's okay, buddy. When I take over, to quote a line from the Simpsons, you'll be the first signed up for my "re-Ned-ucation Center" ;)
LOL! so you do drink on your vacation! I don't blame you you work hard throughout the year but it is a little early in the day especially where you are. But I would never accuse you of trying to shut down the conversation that's one thing I like about you. You can bring it!
It's always five o'clock somewhere. ;) And it's not shutting down the conversation...it's bringing the more pertinent issues to light! ;)
Back in the day I was a bartender for about 10 years at one of the busiest bars in the country. Myself and one of my fellow bartenders used to have a thing called the 2:30 special. I would often ask him at about 9 a.m. what time is it Russell? And he would respond it's 2:30. The rest is history. Some people think I belong behind bars.
It's always five o'clock somewhere. ;) And it's not shutting down the conversation...it's bringing the more pertinent issues to light! ;)
And are you the official deemer of all that is pertinent?
And are you the official deemer of all that is pertinent?
Duh. :doh:
Duh. :doh:
Ok fine. But what if you're drunk... which is probably going to be most of the summer...then I'll stand in.
No, no, no. There is a definite pecking order. I am the Dearest Leader. I can still perform while drunk ;) If I am incapacitated, leadership temporarily reverts to Agent P because she has curried the most favor and she knows how to use explosives. After that, it's BlueIris because she's the Minister of Ideology. Terry is in charge of TV. KK is in charge of complaints. Frank gets to launch the nukes. Hollow is Minister of Conspiracies. Ian is in charge of keeping me medicated.
Now, N, i'm not saying that there isn't a position for you in the new regime. But you're going to have to get off the Trump payroll first. There's only room for one narcissist here!
Whew! Had me scared there when you said you had a position for me.
Well I will say a drunk you has to make more sense than a sober you.
Ok I don't mind being a grunt. But can't give up my Trump card... I mean haven't you heard of diversity after all?
We're diverse. I let some of the Kiwis in. And Hollow. He's unique. ;)
But yeah, Trump probably pays better than I do. And I heard some employees like his policies on sexual harassment, or erm, the fact it's not called harassment. Something about being able to grab other peoples' privates and that being okay. But hey, the Bill Clinton employees had to go somewhere! ;)
Actually I'm giving money to Trump if you can believe that.
No no no...now say it right...his employees will "let" you grab their privates.
Oh, N. You walked right into that one. You do realize how many sick jokes I can make about you now? Does your wife know what you've "let" be done to you? ;)
MyNameIsTerry
16-06-20, 04:11
No no no...now say it right...his employees will "let" you grab their privates.
I ain't joining that army...well, that might depend on any hot lady bosses :whistles:
MyNameIsTerry
16-06-20, 04:13
We're diverse. I let some of the Kiwis in. And Hollow. He's unique. ;)
But yeah, Trump probably pays better than I do. And I heard some employees like his policies on sexual harassment, or erm, the fact it's not called harassment. Something about being able to grab other peoples' privates and that being okay. But hey, the Bill Clinton employees had to go somewhere! ;)
Blofeld strokes one fluffy white pussy and suddenly he's a monster...https://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/kitten/t09039.gif
MyNameIsTerry
16-06-20, 04:15
No, no, no. There is a definite pecking order. I am the Dearest Leader. I can still perform while drunk ;) If I am incapacitated, leadership temporarily reverts to Agent P because she has curried the most favor and she knows how to use explosives. After that, it's BlueIris because she's the Minister of Ideology. Terry is in charge of TV. KK is in charge of complaints. Frank gets to launch the nukes. Hollow is Minister of Conspiracies. Ian is in charge of keeping me medicated.
Now, N, i'm not saying that there isn't a position for you in the new regime. But you're going to have to get off the Trump payroll first. There's only room for one narcissist here!
I'm ready with the zapper, Your Imperial Vee-ness https://yoursmiles.org/psmile/military/p0261.gif
I'm ready with the zapper, Your Imperial Vee-ness https://yoursmiles.org/psmile/military/p0261.gif
See, N. This is why Terry gets a job and you’re on the waitlist :p
MyNameIsTerry
16-06-20, 21:48
See, N. This is why Terry gets a job and you’re on the waitlist :p
Thank you, Your Imperial Vee-ness https://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/religion/t0806.gif
Whilst I have the attention of your most imperialist wonderfulness I need to report an update from an officer of your imperial military. He confirms the Vee Star is in place over Washington with sights trained on the White House but is unsure whether you requested he open the rubbish chute or fire the Orgasmatron? He requests your permission to fire which weapon you prefer if you could contact him, Major Ass-Hole, at your earliest convenience https://yoursmiles.org/hsmile/starwars/h15117.gif
Rubbish chute.
Ass-hole isn't responding to my hails. But don't worry. We'll get him eventually ;)
Haha yes I realized that when I wrote it. But you should have included Creepy Uncle Joe Biden along with Trump and Clinton. I noticed once Uncle Joe was charged with misbehavior the Me Too movement disappeared. What a bunch of frauds.
Another thing you've got to remember Gary, especially when talking about what's happening in Chicago, is that the black on black murders happening there are results of the same issues that BLM is addressing--poverty and inequality of the black community.
I wanted to come back around to this one. Do you know who Big Bill Thompson is Vee? He's the last Republican mayor of Chicago. His term ended in 1931. That was over 89 years ago. So it can't be lost on folks that all this mayhem that's going on in Chicago (and any other major city in the country) is happening under Democrat administration's... political machines that have been in power for decades and decades. This systemic racism you preach, if it exists, is owned by the Democrats. You realize that yes?
N.
It gets worse doesn't it?
There are now calls to ban the Kellogg's breakfast cereal Coco Pops due to (sudden) racist connotations and also The Guardian newspaper because said publication is now (also suddenly) believed to be linked to 'historical' slavery!!
Where and when does it all end?
What will be the next thing our society suddenly starts getting indignant about and inadvertently demands its outright erasure, especially if previously considered innocuous and harmless?
Yeah, Joe Biden wasn't my pick.
Hey, don't bash on the #MeToo movement. It's a worthy cause N, but it can't stand up to the two party system.
N, I've never said that Democrats don't have blame. As you know, I'm not a fan of our two-party system. The two-party system has been designed to perpetuate itself; neither party is blameless, and quite frankly sometimes it's splitting hairs to figure out which one is the lesser evil.
The 2020 election will suck for me because I only have the choice between one old creeper or the other old creeper. But I don't agree with the vast majority the incumbent old creeper is doing, so I'm going to choose the new old creeper and see where that gets us.
Lencoboy, I don't think anyone is going to erase your culture. I say this gently, as something to self-reflect on, but perhaps do you think your fear of things changing, and perhaps others' fear of things changing, has been what's kept some racist cultural items intact?
I can only give an example from my country, as I don't live in the UK, but let's use the movie "Gone with the Wind." It's a movie based on a historical romance book. While the primary story is the relationship of the two main characters, the secondary story is the change in the environment of the antebellum to the post-civil war South. It's this secondary part that's the problem. The change has a negative connotation because it causes the main character to move from wealth to poverty. It's also romanticized. The main character views the past through rose-colored glasses. It doesn't show what it was like for those not in power. Does this mean the movie is racist? Yes and no. The romanticism of the antebellum by the main character isn't really because she would have felt that way. However the black characters that are in the movie are caricatures. They're not really given any depth and we never see truly what they've had to face.
Here's why the movie can be dangerous. If someone who was ignorant and uneducated were to watch this movie, they could easily believe that the antebellum South should be romanticized...they might believe that was actually how things were. They might not believe that slavery was so bad.
I use "Gone with the Wind" in my classroom to explain to students why some people in the South in the US like to keep the Confederate flag up and why many of them say, "The South shall rise again." The kids don't understand why anyone would want to keep symbols that represented slavery. And I have to show them "Gone with the Wind" to explain to them how some of these Southern people have romantic notions of the antebellum. Only after I show the first part of that movie, do they understand how those people think.
So I agree with the decision to take the movie down until a message of historical context and a warning can accompany the movie.
Lencoboy, I don't think anyone is going to erase your culture. I say this gently, as something to self-reflect on, but perhaps do you think your fear of things changing, and perhaps others' fear of things changing, has been what's kept some racist cultural items intact?
I can only give an example from my country, as I don't live in the UK, but let's use the movie "Gone with the Wind." It's a movie based on a historical romance book. While the primary story is the relationship of the two main characters, the secondary story is the change in the environment of the antebellum to the post-civil war South. It's this secondary part that's the problem. The change has a negative connotation because it causes the main character to move from wealth to poverty. It's also romanticized. The main character views the past through rose-colored glasses. It doesn't show what it was like for those not in power. Does this mean the movie is racist? Yes and no. The romanticism of the antebellum by the main character isn't really because she would have felt that way. However the black characters that are in the movie are caricatures. They're not really given any depth and we never see truly what they've had to face.
Here's why the movie can be dangerous. If someone who was ignorant and uneducated were to watch this movie, they could easily believe that the antebellum South should be romanticized...they might believe that was actually how things were. They might not believe that slavery was so bad.
I use "Gone with the Wind" in my classroom to explain to students why some people in the South in the US like to keep the Confederate flag up and why many of them say, "The South shall rise again." The kids don't understand why anyone would want to keep symbols that represented slavery. And I have to show them "Gone with the Wind" to explain to them how some of these Southern people have romantic notions of the antebellum. Only after I show the first part of that movie, do they understand how those people think.
So I agree with the decision to take the movie down until a message of historical context and a warning can accompany the movie.
I'm not necessarily fearing change per se, I'm just peeved that all of a sudden certain things that most people previously didn't give a second thought to are now cursed, particularly a breakfast cereal that kids have enjoyed for donkeys years suddenly being disdained.
How about going the whole hog and banning Mr. Brain's Faggots to appease the homosexuals of this world who so far (AFAIK) haven't even appeared to bat an eyelid over said dish that's also been around for donkeys years.
BTW, I'm not acting as an apologist for gay-bashers as I deplore homophobia just the same as racism.
Maybe it would be better if they were re-named, though, given the way that the word has shifted in meaning. Language evolves as we do, it's a fluid thing.
I'm necessarily fearing change per se, I'm just peeved that all of a sudden certain things that most people previously didn't give a second thought to are now cursed, particularly a breakfast cereal that kids have enjoyed for donkeys years suddenly being disdained.
How about going the whole hog and banning Mr. Brain's Faggots to appease the homosexuals of this world who so far (AFAIK) haven't even appeared to bat an eyelid over said dish that's also been around for donkeys years.
BTW, I'm not acting as an apologist for gay-bashers as I deplore homophobia just the same as racism.
Well, I think the names should have been changed a long time ago. But they weren't because unfortunately, I think it's taken this long for the masses to recognize unconscious bias. That's why it might seem "all of a sudden" to you. But yes, I think the Mr. Brain's Faggots should be changed.
I'm a proudly woke snowflake, and that image is obscene.
Well, I think the names should have been changed a long time ago. But they weren't because unfortunately, I think it's taken this long for the masses to recognize unconscious bias. That's why it might seem "all of a sudden" to you. But yes, I think the Mr. Brain's Faggots should be changed.
Perhaps you're right, given that our language constantly keeps evolving over time, a name change may be a more logical compromise over banning the actual products outright.
I'm a proudly woke snowflake, and that image is obscene.
Absolutely BlueIris, and a grave insult to the good and genuine Black people of this world, who not only defy the long-standing negative stereotypes of said ethnicity, but also far outnumber the not-so-good Black people, who are historically and woefully over-represented by the media. MLK was a highly influential and inspirational figure who should be celebrated, not insulted and villified through extremely childish memes like that!!
Give credit where it's due.
Well, I think the names should have been changed a long time ago. But they weren't because unfortunately, I think it's taken this long for the masses to recognize unconscious bias. That's why it might seem "all of a sudden" to you. But yes, I think the Mr. Brain's Faggots should be changed.
Quite right! Plus, they're horrid anyway. A no-brainer :lac:
What exactly are they? I know they're pork, so I've never eaten one, but are they like Spam?
MyNameIsTerry
17-06-20, 22:10
Well, I think the names should have been changed a long time ago. But they weren't because unfortunately, I think it's taken this long for the masses to recognize unconscious bias. That's why it might seem "all of a sudden" to you. But yes, I think the Mr. Brain's Faggots should be changed.
That has been known about for a long time now and has been involved in the argument. People were asking why is the word being banned when it is valid for a product? It's not new.
MyNameIsTerry
17-06-20, 22:18
I'm not necessarily fearing change per se, I'm just peeved that all of a sudden certain things that most people previously didn't give a second thought to are now cursed, particularly a breakfast cereal that kids have enjoyed for donkeys years suddenly being disdained.
How about going the whole hog and banning Mr. Brain's Faggots to appease the homosexuals of this world who so far (AFAIK) haven't even appeared to bat an eyelid over said dish that's also been around for donkeys years.
BTW, I'm not acting as an apologist for gay-bashers as I deplore homophobia just the same as racism.
I wonder if anyone has asked the LGBT+ community? It doesn't seem a burning agenda for them.
If everything connected to racism in the UK needs to be erased it would make more sense to start with a blank canvas since so much of our current society was involved at some point.
Can't the same be said for the US and every Western country? Scrap that, every country.
All this will create is more angry people. Pick the targets, don't go after everything because it will only create a division because people willing to support the movement will see it going too far.
A day of mental gymnastics required by The Guardian, the very paper that prides itself on wokeness.
Just read today that Quaker Oats is doing away with Aunt Jemima branding and Uncle Ben's is changing the logo as well.
Positive thoughts
Since I don't understand what those pork things are in the first place, can you tell me how it's a valid word for that product?
I don't think we need to start with a blank canvas, and I don't think that's really feasible in the first place. It's just that somethings that have been kept "because of tradition" need to be updated for a more conscious society.
I'm so glad that Aunt Jemima is being removed as a brand of syrup here. That one was around for way too long. I've been wanting to get rid of that ever since I was a kid and my parent explained what that really meant.
What exactly are they? I know they're pork, so I've never eaten one, but are they like Spam?
Bits of pig offal I think :wacko:
The point is that the word for this dish has existed for a long time, and was stolen, only to be used in a derogatory and highly offensive way. It's not a brand name that can simply be renamed (although "Mr Brains" doesn't help much either IMO). It would be like banning/changing the name "Sissy" because of its pejorative use, although I know it's not common now for obvious reasons.
Each to their own of course...
I don't know about movies but Aunt Jemima Maple Syrup is toast!
Actually I should have said French toast... unless that's derogatory too...to toast! I can't keep up anymore!
Hot dogs
Armor Hot dogs
What kind of kids eat Armor Hot Dogs?
Fat kids skinny kids
Kids that climb on rocks
Tough kids sissy kids
Even kids with chicken pox
Love Hot Dogs
Armor Hot Dogs
The dogs kids love to bite!
oh I wish I were an Oscar Meyer Weiner that is what I'd truly love to be-e-e
cuz if I were an Oscar Meyer Weiner. Everyone would be in love with me!
Hot Dog!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fQwJdXFQlU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNddW2xmZp8
Looks like N finally went off the deep end...too much Fox News’ll do that to a person ;)
MyNameIsTerry
18-06-20, 04:40
Bits of pig offal I think :wacko:
The point is that the word for this dish has existed for a long time, and was stolen, only to be used in a derogatory and highly offensive way. It's not a brand name that can simply be renamed (although "Mr Brains" doesn't help much either IMO). It would be like banning/changing the name "Sissy" because of its pejorative use, although I know it's not common now for obvious reasons.
Each to their own of course...
Thanks for explaining that, KK.
I'll add pansy, a common one for effeminate men often used to emasculate a straight guy, but also a well known flower.
Possibly one reason why there isn't as much offence as you would think over that pork product is the F is more a US thing. I'm not if that correct but in my experience it's used little outside of US films, at least looking back to my earlier days. There were very common terms used to label someone gay, lesbian, etc (because they were more the focus) in old comedies on UK TV and these, amongst others, were certainly very commonly heard and are still used. Outside of online I don't see the F word.
Maybe it differs by region, some things do?
Well, a cock used to be a rooster. Should I keep my cookbook called “60 Ways to Eat Cock?” Or just give it out at bachelorette parties?
MyNameIsTerry
18-06-20, 04:49
Well, a cock used to be a rooster. Should I keep my cookbook called “60 Ways to Eat Cock?” Or just give it out at bachelorette parties?
:roflmao: Surely a pressie for the mother-in-law :blush:
MyNameIsTerry
18-06-20, 04:51
Looks like N finally went off the deep end...too much Fox News’ll do that to a person ;)
I think he's just been watching the film, Demolition Man. An interesting choice of film given a discussion about how far do we go.
My point is that my 60 Ways to Eat Cock cookbook wouldn’t be on the display shelves because cock now means a penis, even though it only contains chicken recipes. People who didn’t know cock meant chicken would find it offensive.
Many people think it’s great that discrimination against people of color is getting a spotlight. But we can’t change anything? We can’t change things because it makes people who got used to things a certain way uncomfortable? Think about how uncomfortable you’d feel as a black person knowing that most Americans put syrup on their pancakes and the name of it referred to slaves that had to say, “I ain’t your mama” that took care of other people’s children for no pay.
Exactly, Vee, society grows and evolves. Nostalgia is powerful, but maybe it shouldn't be.
Well, a cock used to be a rooster. Should I keep my cookbook called “60 Ways to Eat Cock?” Or just give it out at bachelorette parties?
:roflmao:
Pamplemousse
18-06-20, 08:13
Returning to the tasty pig's liver dish - 'faggot' has a much older origin, discovered when I was reading a book on the construction of the Great Northern Railway across a particularly boggy bit of land, the edge of the now-lost Whittlesea Mere.
In it, reference was made to the use of faggots being sunk into the ground to stabilise it - these being bundles of sticks. See https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/67623 for more details.
And I can certainly remember the older Regional English usage for it to describe a naughty child, having been called it by my mother on numerous occasions! (As in "you little faggot, I'll skin yer!")
Is it still PC to order Spotted Dick for pud?
Pamplemousse
18-06-20, 10:04
Is it still PC to order Spotted Dick for pud?
Yes.
Visit the ‘Black Country’ (not racist!) in England’s West Midlands and ask for faggots (not derogatory!) and peas (pronounced ‘pays’, apparently). Someone will direct you to a place selling meat balls (not derogatory!) and pureed green mush (possibly peas!). If you ask what the faggot (not derogatory!) contains, you might feel a little queer (not derogatory!) at the thought of eating chopped up pork offal wrapped in a piece of stomach lining and served in thick (not derogatory!) onion gravy. While you’re waiting for this colloquial dish to be prepared and cooked, you can go outside and have a quiet fag (un-PC but not derogatory!).
Let’s stop all this over-sensitive pussy-footing (not derogatory or suggestive!) and call a spade a spade (not racist!). Surely it’s the intended meaning with which the word is used rather than the word itself that’s important…? Where’s Noam Chomsky when he’s needed?
PS: 'Mr Brains' is a trade name for some factory-produced version.
Couldn’t agree more and very well said.
There’s nothing wrong with bringing the world into a more modern accepting place but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. We can’t start becoming offended by everything that could be taken the wrong way, there’s no end to that. A little common sense must apply, surely?
Is it still PC to order Spotted Dick for pud?
In that particular context, yes.
I fear the male name Richard (which incidentally is my first name) is likely to become derided and stigmatised in the same way in the not-too-distant future, especially as 'Dick', one shortened variation of the name is another slang term for a male 'private' part. I'm sure 'Richard head' is now already in use as a pejorative term. Likewise, the female name Karen now also seems to be used as some kind of pejorative term.
Couldn’t agree more and very well said.
There’s nothing wrong with bringing the world into a more modern accepting place but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. We can’t start becoming offended by everything that could be taken the wrong way, there’s no end to that. A little common sense must apply, surely?
Definitely Gary.
It's all about context at the end of the day and proper education is the key, rather than dumbing down on everything. I will never forget the big hoo-ha over Birmingham City Council's decision to brand their Christmas festival 'Winterval' back in 1997, because it was speculated by the press that the term Christmas may have offended certain faiths and cultures, even in that still more innocent and carefree era, but that was actually a load of old pony!!
Fake news of its time!!
I'm going to board this train of thought if you don't mind. Absolutely right. And where does it end? Nobody has a right to not be offended because once that right is established you can take a free press and the ability to speak freely and flush them right down the toilet. Many people are offended by the truth. It's a means of shutting down conversation and driving an agenda. That's what's going on.
N.
It's not driving an agenda. It's about recognizing that there are some offensive products and traditions that are still around, and it's okay to change. It doesn't mean your culture will suddenly fall apart.
I wish I could make you all understand how it feels. Are any of you non-white or non-Christian males on this thread?
I'll try one more time here. You all know how Richard's name got hijacked by the nickname for it, Dick, which now means to most young people a penis? Well that must be horrible for him. It's probably very insulting to be associated with male anatomy all the time. That's how people of color feel when we continue to use things that once brought insult to them (like I gave the example with the Aunt Jemima syrup yesterday).
It's also not just about insults; it's about inclusivity. Lecoboy, you think its ridiculous that Birmingham changed their festival name to "Winterval". I, as a Jewish person, think it's touching. It's not that I found a Christmas festival insulting. Millions of people all over the world celebrate Christmas. But by calling it "Winterval" they're also including me. They're saying, "Yes, we recognize that not everyone might celebrate the same holiday, but let's get together and all celebrate something."
I hope you all can open your minds a little more and instead of being scared that things you're used to might change, think about how many more people will feel included.
I'm with Vee (although I'm only half Jewish) - what's wrong with helping people feel more included? I get that change is scary, but that doesn't mean it doesn't need to happen.
I knew there was a reason that I made you Minister of Ideology in the new regime, Iris ;) :hugs:
(now that's what's called an agenda, N)
It's not driving an agenda. It's about recognizing that there are some offensive products and traditions that are still around, and it's okay to change. It doesn't mean your culture will suddenly fall apart.
I wish I could make you all understand how it feels. Are any of you non-white or non-Christian males on this thread?
I'll try one more time here. You all know how Richard's name got hijacked by the nickname for it, Dick, which now means to most young people a penis? Well that must be horrible for him. It's probably very insulting to be associated with male anatomy all the time. That's how people of color feel when we continue to use things that once brought insult to them (like I gave the example with the Aunt Jemima syrup yesterday).
It's also not just about insults; it's about inclusivity. Lecoboy, you think its ridiculous that Birmingham changed their festival name to "Winterval". I, as a Jewish person, think it's touching. It's not that I found a Christmas festival insulting. Millions of people all over the world celebrate Christmas. But by calling it "Winterval" they're also including me. They're saying, "Yes, we recognize that not everyone might celebrate the same holiday, but let's get together and all celebrate something."
I hope you all can open your minds a little more and instead of being scared that things you're used to might change, think about how many more people will feel included.
Personally I couldn't care less about the 'Winterval' thing and it's branding, both then and now. It was purely a myth that was engineered by the press at the time, obviously in pursuit of £s and nothing to do with appeasement/inclusivity. And this even predated the (post-9/11) hysteria pertaining to certain Muslim factions and terror threats.
It's not driving an agenda. It's about recognizing that there are some offensive products and traditions that are still around, and it's okay to change. It doesn't mean your culture will suddenly fall apart.
I wish I could make you all understand how it feels. Are any of you non-white or non-Christian males on this thread?
I'll try one more time here. You all know how Richard's name got hijacked by the nickname for it, Dick, which now means to most young people a penis? Well that must be horrible for him. It's probably very insulting to be associated with male anatomy all the time. That's how people of color feel when we continue to use things that once brought insult to them (like I gave the example with the Aunt Jemima syrup yesterday).
It's also not just about insults; it's about inclusivity. Lecoboy, you think its ridiculous that Birmingham changed their festival name to "Winterval". I, as a Jewish person, think it's touching. It's not that I found a Christmas festival insulting. Millions of people all over the world celebrate Christmas. But by calling it "Winterval" they're also including me. They're saying, "Yes, we recognize that not everyone might celebrate the same holiday, but let's get together and all celebrate something."
I hope you all can open your minds a little more and instead of being scared that things you're used to might change, think about how many more people will feel included.
It has everything to do with driving an agenda. You can't see the forest for the trees. As I just said nobody has the right to not be offended. Just because one perceives a product as racist doesn't mean it is racist. It is a massive stretch to remove Aunt Jemima Maple syrup from the shelves. how about Betty crocker maybe the feminazis find her offense of working in the kitchen making cookies? That is about power and making corporations kowtow. I'm all for trying to get people to feel comfortable but you don't do it by fiat. and you don't do it by not telling them the truth. And it's very condescending to say I wish I could make you all understand. I do totally understand where you're coming from I just totally disagree with your assessment. If you have the right to be offended then free speech and freedom of the press goes down the toilet.
And the term dick has been used for prick since I was a boy it's not new.
I stole that turn from a guy on the radio pretty funny
Hey the left calls Trump a Nazi everyday.
Doesn't feel good does it.
Just because one perceives a product as racist doesn't mean it is racist. It is a massive stretch to remove Aunt Jemima Maple syrup from the shelves.
But the thing is, it's not just me saying it's racist. I don't see it as a massive stretch, and a lot of others don't either. They may not be on this thread, but they're out there.
feminazis Now that is pretty offensive.
That is about power and making corporations kowtow Not for me, but if you want to believe that, go for it. I'm already a "feminazi" I guess. "Corporate bitch-slapper" sounds better to me, so I'll take it.
And it's very condescending to say I wish I could make you all understand. I do totally understand where you're coming from I just totally disagree with your assessment. If you have the right to be offended then free speech and freedom of the press goes down the toilet.
I'm not trying to be condescending. I'm just saying I wish I could make you understand my point of view. Many times I don't think that you do. You have every right to disagree with me. I don't get all huffy puffy and block you or start calling you names or any of that crap just because you don't agree with me. By changing a product's offensive name does not mean you're blocking free speech or freedom of the press. Everyone can still say what they want. The corporation can still say what it wants. Changing the name just means that the corporation is getting rid of a product name that many people find offensive. That's it. There's no agenda for regular people like me.
Hey the left calls Trump a Nazi everyday.
Doesn't feel good does it.
Where on this thread did we call Trump a Nazi?
I do feel that many people today feel the need to be "outraged" on a regular basis.
But the thing is, it's not just me saying it's racist. I don't see it as a massive stretch, and a lot of others don't either. They may not be on this thread, but they're out there.
Now that is pretty offensive.
Not for me, but if you want to believe that, go for it. I'm already a "feminazi" I guess. "Corporate bitch-slapper" sounds better to me, so I'll take it.
I'm not trying to be condescending. I'm just saying I wish I could make you understand my point of view. Many times I don't think that you do. You have every right to disagree with me. I don't get all huffy puffy and block you or start calling you names or any of that crap just because you don't agree with me. By changing a product's offensive name does not mean you're blocking free speech or freedom of the press. Everyone can still say what they want. The corporation can still say what it wants. Changing the name just means that the corporation is getting rid of a product name that many people find offensive. That's it. There's no agenda for regular people like me.
Why would you be offended by something I didn't call you? You see that's the problem you're taking offense by something I didn't even direct toward you. I have no idea if you're a radical feminist or not.
Do you think the makers of Aunt Jemima maple syrup are doing it to be racist? and please connect the dots for me on exactly why a picture of a folksy black woman from days gone by in the kitchen is racist. You're telling me that a picture of a white woman in the kitchen doing the same thing is no problem? See if you can "make me understand". You see just because you take offense by it doesn't make it offensive. Don't you think there are lots of things that offend me in the world today? you don't have the right not to be offended.
I just took a little pole at work among three black co-workers. Two guys in their thirties and a woman in her sixties. I asked them about the Aunt Jemima kerfuffle. One of the guys said he agreed with removing the product. The other guy said he thinks it's stupid to remove the product. And the woman looked at me and just rolled his eyes, meaning it's ridiculous to remove the product. I love her.
So again I didn't call you a feminazi... I didn't even call you a soup nazi. So don't be offended by something that wasn't directed toward you...unless you want to be.
Why do you NOT feel it's offensive?
It's not driving an agenda. It's about recognizing that there are some offensive products and traditions that are still around, and it's okay to change. It doesn't mean your culture will suddenly fall apart.
I wish I could make you all understand how it feels. Are any of you non-white or non-Christian males on this thread?
I'll try one more time here. You all know how Richard's name got hijacked by the nickname for it, Dick, which now means to most young people a penis? Well that must be horrible for him. It's probably very insulting to be associated with male anatomy all the time. That's how people of color feel when we continue to use things that once brought insult to them (like I gave the example with the Aunt Jemima syrup yesterday).
It's also not just about insults; it's about inclusivity. Lecoboy, you think its ridiculous that Birmingham changed their festival name to "Winterval". I, as a Jewish person, think it's touching. It's not that I found a Christmas festival insulting. Millions of people all over the world celebrate Christmas. But by calling it "Winterval" they're also including me. They're saying, "Yes, we recognize that not everyone might celebrate the same holiday, but let's get together and all celebrate something."
I hope you all can open your minds a little more and instead of being scared that things you're used to might change, think about how many more people will feel included.
This has nothing to do with being scared of change, it’s about being exasperated at people going out of their way to be offended. I think it’s VERY condescending to assume that all of us dumb white males are basically Neanderthals because we aren’t campaigning against everything that might be deemed remotely offensive by the safe space brigade.
Racism is a whole different matter, and if something has evidence of being linked to racial discrimination, yes, get it out of here. If a food, like a “faggot”, has always been called that but now it must be changed just in case someone genuinely has the time to be offended by a food, we’ve hit the point of being overly sensitive whiny children.
I’m not a Christian myself, but I do find it odd that the responsibility seems to always land on Christians to change their religious festival to reduce offence to other faiths. I wonder what would happen if Christians began taking offence to Ramadan or Chanukah. I wouldn’t mind betting that would be called racist.
This has nothing to do with being scared of change, it’s about being exasperated at people going out of their way to be offended. I think it’s VERY condescending to assume that all of us dumb white males are basically Neanderthals because we aren’t campaigning against everything that might be deemed remotely offensive by the safe space brigade.
Racism is a whole different matter, and if something has evidence of being linked to racial discrimination, yes, get it out of here. If a food, like a “faggot”, has always been called that but now it must be changed just in case someone genuinely has the time to be offended by a food, we’ve hit the point of being overly sensitive whiny children.
I’m not a Christian myself, but I do find it odd that the responsibility seems to always land on Christians to change their religious festival to reduce offence to other faiths. I wonder what would happen if Christians began taking offence to Ramadan or Chanukah. I wouldn’t mind betting that would be called racist.
Gary, no where did I call you a "dumb white male". I'm just trying to explain why maybe it might be difficult to see the other side.
And no where did I say that Christmas offended me. I don't think that the festival had to change it from Christmas to Winterval. I just said that it was nice that they did because in changing it, it actually included more people.
Why would you be offended by something I didn't call you? You see that's the problem you're taking offense by something I didn't even direct toward you. I have no idea if you're a radical feminist or not.
Do you think the makers of Aunt Jemima maple syrup are doing it to be racist? and please connect the dots for me on exactly why a picture of a folksy black woman from days gone by in the kitchen is racist. You're telling me that a picture of a white woman in the kitchen doing the same thing is no problem? See if you can "make me understand". You see just because you take offense by it doesn't make it offensive. Don't you think there are lots of things that offend me in the world today? you don't have the right not to be offended.
I just took a little pole at work among three black co-workers. Two guys in their thirties and a woman in her sixties. I asked them about the Aunt Jemima kerfuffle. One of the guys said he agreed with removing the product. The other guy said he thinks it's stupid to remove the product. And the woman looked at me and just rolled his eyes, meaning it's ridiculous to remove the product. I love her.
So again I didn't call you a feminazi... I didn't even call you a soup nazi. So don't be offended by something that wasn't directed toward you...unless you want to be.
I don't think the makers of Aunt Jemima did it to be racist, per se, in the beginning. I think they did it because they felt it would sell syrup. It's not the picture that's racist. It's the name. It stands for "I ain't your mama"; something female slaves had to tell to children they were forced to take care of. I've felt it was offensive even before BLM. That's why I think the product should be renamed. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If a couple of your coworkers don't agree. That's fine. I'm just trying to make you all understand why some people would think it's offensive because most people on this thread don't see why it would be.
I think the term "feminazis" is offensive because it implies that feminists are nazis. I think the original person who said it meant for it to be offensive. That person wanted to imply that feminists were controlling other people. I believe that you also think it's offensive, N. Why else would you come back with the retort about Trump being called a nazi?
There are probably things that do offend you, N. It's okay if you want to talk about them on here. I think we as a society don't spend enough time talking about things that make us uncomfortable.
MyNameIsTerry
18-06-20, 19:15
Perhaps we need to consider differences in our society? Language differs.
Even now we say "I'm going for a fag" and it's not offensive and, without word reclaiming, gay men will say it without a care. Isn't this because it is a US thing?
We may smirk when Americans talk about their fanny pack, which is a bumbag to us, since over here you talking about your vagina. We can grow up and allow Americans their words or we can take offence.
Even in the UK we have long used the pansie slur but it's a massive stretch to change all those flowers because, and it may only be some men, it offends some?
Do Americans still say bummer? I don't know about other areas of the UK but here that's a slur for a gay man. Is it ever said about a person e.g "you're a right bummer you are".
I agree with some things such as references to mistreatment of peoples. Racism being obvious. Sometimes we won't know why something is wrong and whilst we may moan at first, because there are many people looking for offence in anything getting media time, but we adapt and things move on. But it shouldn't mean anyone clutching their pearls is right and that's where things like the sausages and flowers come in.
Usage is important. Aren't watermelons used in a racial slur? But why would you want to rename a whole fruit? Isn't it better to educate about the differences? Some will want the change but are they right?
I wonder how many want Churchill's statue down? Will that cause more backlash as one of the heroes of the nation?
As for Wintervall I think inclusivity is a good thing but councils can be terrified of accusations of racism so change can also be to prevent negative brand damage as opposed to for integration. How many of us know Muslims that aren't bothered by Christmas, since they aren't prevented having Ramadan, and some that take part? I do. So why remove something for inclusivity when each can still have their festival? And for most of us Christmas has little connection with Christianity.
I'm not female but perhaps I can understand? I can listen to women and I've heard enough thinking the same.
No it does not imply that at all Vee. The term implies the extreme radicalness of some feminists. You don't think for one second it means that feminists want to exterminate 6 million Jews do you? It's hyperbole.
Just throwing this out there do you think that it's at all possible that you might be a little bit hyper sensitive?
Gary, no where did I call you a "dumb white male". I'm just trying to explain why maybe it might be difficult to see the other side.
And no where did I say that Christmas offended me. I don't think that the festival had to change it from Christmas to Winterval. I just said that it was nice that they did because in changing it, it actually included more people.
If the other side is ridding the world of genuine racial inequality, great, sign me up.
However, if that also means that I have to agree with the ridiculous notion of food being intolerant and racism being the underlying cause of everyone’s problems then I’m not going for it.
If people want inclusion and unity then that should go across the board. Why is there a black history month? Why is there music of black origin? University Campuses across the globe have black student unions. Why? Replace the word “black” with the word “white” in any of those examples above and it’s seen as racist.
Personally, I think black people do a fair job of segregating themselves without any white person having to bother trying. For years young black men and woman have been force fed this idea that they aren't going to succeed and there’s little to no opportunity out there due to the colour of their skin. This idea has been fed to them by groups like BLM, ironically the only people who actually agree with this absurd idea are white supremacists.
Me? I believe in empowering people. Don’t like something? Change it. Work hard. Put your mind to it and you can achieve anything. Stop telling these young men and women that their skin colour is preventing them getting on, they’ll never succeed with that idea imprinted in their brains.
My favourite musical artist is black, my favourite actor is black, my favourite scientist is black. Are these people only what they are in spite of racism? Or is it that they simply wanted something so bad they got on with achieving it without looking for an excuse not to?
Just throwing this out there do you think that it's at all possible that you might be a little bit hyper sensitive?
I guess I could be. Being Jewish, I typically don't like the term "nazi" thrown around lightly. But I also don't think I'm just being just over-sensitive. I could understand why others wouldn't like it either. I think it would have been better to say "radical feminists" than call them "feminazis".
Gary, I'm just arguing the other side here. You don't have to agree with me. I think you can ask N and verify that I'm not the type of person that has to cram down their views down people's throats. Lencoboy originally asked about people changing media due to outrage. I've just been trying to show why people might find these outrageous using the examples, like Aunt Jemima, that I personally find offensive, because that's the minority opinion on the thread. Someone asked about Mr. Brain's Faggots, and I also said that I could see why people might want it changed. The other examples, I don't know enough about to say one way or the other.
I wish we could get to the point in our society where we could have White Student Unions and Caucasian Cultural Clubs alongside all the other ones. Unfortunately, white supremacists have gotten too much traction in our past and have ruined this from every happening any time soon.
I believe in empowering people too. It's why I teach. There's nothing more empowering than an education. I also think it's okay to take into consideration environmental factors that affect my students, like racism. Learning about those factors is good, IMO. How else do you keep improving society other than continuing to talk about some things that can be improved?
This thread is good. We're all here talking about racism. We're not avoiding these issues because we might make each other uncomfortable. Others should be doing what we're doing.
Speaking as a white so-called "privileged" female I'll be honest and say that I think we talk too much about racism now. It gets dragged into everything no matter what..I'm afraid to say anything remotely derogatory about any person of colour in case I'm accused of being racist. I'd think the same of a white person if they had disappointed me or acted out of line. It's getting so ridiculous now. I'll add that my sister's partner is from Cape Verde and she has dual nationality. Things were very different when she married him 30 years ago and was ostracised by her immediate community. Now there's over-compensation and it's gone the other way.
You make a good point, Terry. Each country has their own usages and media or products that are controversial. As for me, I approve of the contextualization being added to Gone with the Wind and the changing of Aunt Jemima syrup. The Mr. Brain's Faggots, I could see how people in your country would want it changed, but that is ultimately a UK thing.
As for Wintervall I think inclusivity is a good thing but councils can be terrified of accusations of racism so change can also be to prevent negative brand damage as opposed to for integration. How many of us know Muslims that aren't bothered by Christmas, since they aren't prevented having Ramadan, and some that take part? I do. So why remove something for inclusivity when each can still have their festival? And for most of us Christmas has little connection with Christianity.
I think maybe the idea was to have festival where everyone would feel welcome, regardless of belief. Instead having separate religious functions, there could be one secular function.
What's wrong with having separate festivals though?
What's wrong with having separate festivals though?
Nothing, I'm just speculating as to why it could have been changed.
I wish we could get to the point in our society where we could have White Student Unions and Caucasian Cultural Clubs alongside all the other ones. Unfortunately, white supremacists have gotten too much traction in our past and have ruined this from every happening any time soon.
See this is where my head starts to spin a bit. I don’t think we need white/black/Asian/Jewish/Christian/Muslim student unions. I’d much prefer just to have student unions for, you know, students.
Isn’t that the best way to include everyone? Stop slapping labels on ourselves that separate us from our fellow human beings?
This is why I’m against the idea of black history month etc. I can’t understand how any black man or woman can complain about exclusion and inequality when things like that exist.
It doesn’t bother me that these things exist but it does bother me when you yourself put yourself in a box exclusively designed for you and your ethnic group and then complain about society excluding you based on your ethnicity. It’s a complete double standard in my book.
In my city, we have a huge problem with sectarianism. Catholic’s and Protestants are often imprisoned due to sectarian offences and slurs. It’s been a problem for as long as I can remember.
However, I can’t abide councillors and such preaching tolerance and togetherness when those same people constantly separate kids, at 4 and 5 years of age, and send them to denominational schools. These kids are best friends then they get to a certain age and they’re pulled apart and told it’s because they’re different. They preach togetherness and multiculturalism but they’re the very ones who tell us we’re different from each other when we’re too young to care.
Personally, I think society has to grow the hell up. Racism is a petty, ugly disease and while it should never be ignored, it should never be used to explain away absolutely everything. Pulisa is right, it gets to a point where an accusation of racism starts to lose meaning due to the amount of times it’s used.
MyNameIsTerry
18-06-20, 22:02
But why remove the right of Christians and not everyone else? Muslims have no need to celebrate. Did the council make Ramadan secular for the rest?
Speaking of staff I have known in schools it came from the potential for a Christian festival that didn't represent the multicultural make up of the school. Many of the school were Asian children who may be encouraged to take part in activities of another religion. This won't bother many non religious people but it will the religious parents.
So we get a secular event. That's fine but let's have some consistency and do the same to Diwali, Ramadan, Chinese New Year, etc. And why should they be celebrating outside of their religious and cultural events? Doesn't that still signify the need to celebrate a Christian time of the Year?
It ends up being one that twists itself in knots and always upsets someone. But with schools they can simply remove these events and they wouldn't have celebrated those of other cultures before (How do they do this now?) who may have felt marginalised.
What is the answer? Do countries like India take their biggest event of the year and make it secular?
Now I'm twisted in knots :wacko: But councils should consider the message of removing one and forgetting about making others secular to prevent going to far as pulisa talks about.
See this is where my head starts to spin a bit. I don’t think we need white/black/Asian/Jewish/Christian/Muslim student unions. I’d much prefer just to have student unions for, you know, students.
Isn’t that the best way to include everyone? Stop slapping labels on ourselves that separate us from our fellow human beings?
So there is a debate among sociologists about that has raged for years, that you're touching on here, Gary. They called it the "color blind perspective" versus the "multicultural perspective." The color blindness perspective says that we should just treat everyone the same, no labels, no differences, we say we're a society where these labels shouldn't matter, so let's not use them. The multiculturalism perspective says that society consists of several races, cultures, ethnicities, and many other minority groups, and those differences should be acknowledged to affirm the identities and inclusion of these groups, especially when one culture dominates the societal and political system. Colorblind supporters say if we put it into action, eventually we will get there. Many multiculturalists say that the color blind perspective only exacerbates racism (like this example https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/culturally-speaking/201112/colorblind-ideology-is-form-racism
(https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/culturally-speaking/201112/colorblind-ideology-is-form-racism)This is why many high school and universities are now required ethnic studies courses as a graduation requirement.
Personally, I think society has to grow the hell up. Racism is a petty, ugly disease and while it should never be ignored, it should never be used to explain away absolutely everything. Pulisa is right, it gets to a point where an accusation of racism starts to lose meaning due to the amount of times it’s used.
I think people use racism as a catch-all sometimes for all forms of prejudices and privileges that they don't know how else to express. Now I'm just speaking for American society here (as I don't live in the UK) but I see areas ones that can make some big differences in people's lives. They're all areas we're born into, not things we earn, that for some give opportunity and privilege (this is where the term white privilege comes from) and for others mean challenges or discrimination.
Citizenship--being born in the US gives you opportunities others don't have.
Class--being born with wealth can help you get better health care, education, safety and future opportunities
Ability--by being born able-bodied, your life doesn't have to be planned around your handicap
Sex--by being born male, you may be able to go places or participate in activities restricted for females. You statistically have less of a chance of being impacted by sexual assault.
Sexual Orientation--if you're born straight, then you get a lot more protections from the law. Statistically you're more likely to be accepted by your community.
Gender--if you're cisgender (meaning you agree with the gender you were assigned with at birth) you're much more accepted by your community. You don't usually have to worry about being denied access to the locker room or bathroom of your choice.
Religion--if you're a protestant Christian, you're much more likely in the US to see community events that reflect your beliefs, you're less likely to have to take off work for your holidays or explain to people what your beliefs are
And then there's race. People argue what the privileges of being white are, but here are the big ones I see: if you're white, when you learn about history, you're showed that your people were the major contributors. If you're white, you're more likely to see people on TV and in movies that look like you. If you're white, and a cop pulls your over, generally you can be assured that the outcome of that encounter wasn't based on the color of your skin.
The thing is there is a lot of intersectionality, and everything on this list must be taken into consideration. You could have poor white cisgender female that grew in a trailer without running water in West Virginia. This person may not believe that white privilege exists because they're poor; they were probably picked on at school because of it. Being poor, and female, they were more likely to be a victim of sexual assault. They may not have had anyone successful or educated in their family as a role model. All their relatives compensated with drugs and alcohol. So when you tell this lady that there's racism and she has white privilege, she probably wants to tell you to F off.
But the thing is, she does have some privileges. She's cisgender; she's given access to opportunities because she's a citizen; she's able-bodied; and she's white, so chances are that her race didn't deny her opportunities.
And this is how I think we need to thing about things. Like you said Gary, there are people who just lump every problem under racism, and in truth, we all have privileges and disadvantages based on what categories we were born into.
Sorry for all the reading material LOL
MyNameIsTerry
19-06-20, 04:37
But is one argument that by stating even the poorest of white people that they have a privilege over someone who is black that we create a mentality that black always means worst off? Surely that can't be the case? Surely there are a combination of factors that add up to determine who is worst off? For instance, would I rather have some privileges and be black e.g. able bodied & well, financial sound family, decent education, etc or have white privilege but be born with serious health issues?
When we consider some of those other factors doesn't it start to get very complicated? You could be black but rich. Does white privilege cancel out all of the other privileges?
So going back to your example of the white woman who grew up poor and was abused I find it hard to look at how that is somehow better than being black with a more stable life. Both experience traumatic events in there life but the impact of them surely has to be judged?
This is something I think causes problems. Obviously there is always a spectrum of beliefs about this within any group so I am careful in separating less reasonable arguments (the harder end of scales who won't consider the above factors) and maybe this is what is being lost? It's not about comparison but lifting people up to equality. But do some wear the badge to justify internal problems that need resolution due to their life experiences or ignorance?
I'm not saying the white woman has a better life than the black man. You understood what I was saying, Terry. I was trying to point out exactly what you said; you have to consider the other factors. It is very complicated.
I was also trying to explain that for people who don't think about it this way, sometimes they just lump everything under "racism".
I don't think white privilege cancels out any other privileges. It's just one of many. In certain times in history and maybe in some places over others, it has weighed more. But as a light-skinned person myself, I have white privilege most of the time. I was just trying to explain how things have come to be.
MyNameIsTerry
19-06-20, 04:51
You make a good point, Terry. Each country has their own usages and media or products that are controversial. As for me, I approve of the contextualization being added to Gone with the Wind and the changing of Aunt Jemima syrup. The Mr. Brain's Faggots, I could see how people in your country would want it changed, but that is ultimately a UK thing.
I think maybe the idea was to have festival where everyone would feel welcome, regardless of belief. Instead having separate religious functions, there could be one secular function.
I must admit anyone sticking Mr Brains on a good product just makes me see a can of brains!
Maybe. I confess to needing a refresher on that incident but we have had problems with swings as pulisa has mentioned. Some organisations went from racism to fear of being labelled. This caused problems in communities and our on going court cases have revealed how this can be taken advantage of by the worst.
I'm skeptical of authorities doing this. Recently we even had a case of positive discrimination where the white recruit won in court but only because his father was also employed by the same authority and had seen written evidence of candidate selection. Any discrimination being illegal.
MyNameIsTerry
19-06-20, 05:03
I'm not saying the white woman has a better life than the black man. You understood what I was saying, Terry. I was trying to point out exactly what you said; you have to consider the other factors. It is very complicated.
I was also trying to explain that for people who don't think about it this way, sometimes they just lump everything under "racism".
I don't think white privilege cancels out any other privileges. It's just one of many. In certain times in history and maybe in some places over others, it has weighed more. But as a light-skinned person myself, I have white privilege most of the time. I was just trying to explain how things have come to be.
Vee, sorry if that came across as implying you were stating that. It wasn't my intention. But I posed it because I often question what others believe. I suspect some do feel that way.
It's another reason I've asked about representation in the past. These movements cover minorities but as an outsider I wonder whether they do? Within any group there are always subgroups who feel their cause is more important, more urgent or in greatest need.
Just looking at the LGBT+ arguments demonstrates this. It's sad to see Pride be marred by tension between groups, and they seem more to the fringes of their subgroups, because one group believes their change outweighs another. Going back to that radfem discussion earlier it's ugly between them and some transgender activists. And ugly between gay women and transgender activists.
So the leaders of a movement such as the BLM have a difficult job in moving us all forward into more equality without some of the behaviour we are seeing in the streets. Those types might include those less willing to accept the complexity you raised?
You're fine, Terry. Yeah, I dunno Terry how things will move forward. And here in the US, sometimes it depends on what state you live in to what route things take. But obviously I'm a firm believer in education and communication. I think the more we educate ourselves and the more we talk about the difficult things, the better it will get. People offend each other and they just shut down. The conversation has to keep going. If you talk to someone long enough, you usually see what you have in common more than what differences you have.
One of my favourite ever quotes is from Abe Lincoln: "I do not like this man. I must get to know him better."
Communication lets us discover what we share; it breaks down barriers because it removes the fear of the unknown. We as anxiety sufferers should be more aware than most that the worst fears are the ones you don't ever confront.
You know, I was just thinking, Terry, that one thing I should point out about those environmental factors that I listed, is that some are obvious and some are not. This obviousness also makes a big deal about their impact.
For example, I'm Jewish, but unless I'm wearing my Star of David or parading down the street in my ugly Chanukah sweater, no one knows I'm Jewish until I open my mouth. But if I'm black or if I'm in a wheelchair, I can't hide those things.
I think the example of “colour blinded thinking” in the article you linked ends up going around in a bit of a circle. It somehow reaches the conclusion that a society that does not judge people on the colour of their skin will end up ignoring racism. The point they’re missing is that a society that does not judge people based on skin colour won’t be racist in the first place, so what’s to ignore?
We keep hearing that racism is learned behaviour so if it’s learned, let’s try and change it. Nobody said that we can’t acknowledge differences in appearances, but in the same way someone has a different hair colour or whatever.
Far too much attention is placed on race. White people are constantly told that they are “privileged” and almost racist by default. Black people are told that they will struggle due to constant oppression from those with a different colour of skin. For me, all that does is create a self fulfilling prophecy.
White kids will grow up believing they’re privileged and either walk around feeling superior to black people, or live their lives riddled with guilt. Black people will believe that every failing in their life is down to white oppression, and will either allow that idea to stop them from pushing themselves or they’ll lash out.
Literally nothing good can come from this idea of white privilege and black oppression, it just cements the idea that we are different and puts a whole load of negative stereotypes into action.
I think the example of “colour blinded thinking” in the article you linked ends up going around in a bit of a circle. It somehow reaches the conclusion that a society that does not judge people on the colour of their skin will end up ignoring racism. The point they’re missing is that a society that does not judge people based on skin colour won’t be racist in the first place, so what’s to ignore?
We keep hearing that racism is learned behaviour so if it’s learned, let’s try and change it. Nobody said that we can’t acknowledge differences in appearances, but in the same way someone has a different hair colour or whatever.
Far too much attention is placed on race. White people are constantly told that they are “privileged” and almost racist by default. Black people are told that they will struggle due to constant oppression from those with a different colour of skin. For me, all that does is create a self fulfilling prophecy.
White kids will grow up believing they’re privileged and either walk around feeling superior to black people, or live their lives riddled with guilt. Black people will believe that every failing in their life is down to white oppression, and will either allow that idea to stop them from pushing themselves or they’ll lash out.
Literally nothing good can come from this idea of white privilege and black oppression, it just cements the idea that we are different and puts a whole load of negative stereotypes into action.
I guess the same also applies to people with disabilities (of all ethnicities). I remember some 30 years ago attending a local summer play scheme at a local leisure centre with our local LD group run by our then-LD community nurse, who was a bit power-mad herself, and I vividly remember being physically and verbally abused in the toilets and (unsupervised) changing rooms there by other boys with non-learning disabilities outside of our group and the community nurse saying that I probably asked for it, because I might have been behaving oddly (due to my disability) and I was expected to learn to be 'normal'. That has most certainly scarred me ever since, particularly as the attitudes of even the professionals back then was condescending towards people with disabilities, whilst those bully boys obviously got off scot-free!!
This most certainly provoked a self-fulfilling prophecy that was people with disabilities were hopeless, useless and lepers of society, which in turn encourages learned helplessness. Thank God the attitudes of professionals have moved on since then!!
I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one, Gary. For me, I see acknowledging those environmental factors that I mentioned yesterday as a way to keep working on the inequalities in our society. As an educator, I don't teach my students of color or students with disabilities or LGBT students that there is no hope. I teach the mindset that "Yes, there may be some extra things that you have to overcome, but take pride in who you are. Get an education; it will open doors for you. And when you get older, if there are some things you feel were unequal, work to change them."
Not that easy when you have a disability, Vee. All the work in the world won't change the limited opportunities available. These are true inequalities which won't be highlighted by tearing down statues.
I know, P. But I'm not ready to give up yet. :hugs:
For what it's worth, Pulisa, there's a lot of new legislation coming in to ensure accessibility in educational materials.
I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one, Gary. For me, I see acknowledging those environmental factors that I mentioned yesterday as a way to keep working on the inequalities in our society. As an educator, I don't teach my students of color or students with disabilities or LGBT students that there is no hope. I teach the mindset that "Yes, there may be some extra things that you have to overcome, but take pride in who you are. Get an education; it will open doors for you. And when you get older, if there are some things you feel were unequal, work to change them."
I don’t necessarily disagree with what you’re saying, and to be fair to you your part of the world is most likely a lot different to mine so perhaps it’s just down to lived experiences.
The racism issue gets to a point of wearing me down as I personally view it as a complete nonentity. Not that it doesn’t exist or happen, it’s just an alien concept that you judge a person on nothing more than the amount of melanin they have in their skin. It’s a bizarre world we live in, it truly is.
Okay so here's the most recent list of prominent democrats caught wearing blackface. Um one question...why are they still working?
Ralph Northam (https://www.breitbart.com/social-justice/2019/09/19/nolte-7-trump-haters-who-love-them-some-blackface/) (D-VA)
The Washington Post Party Guest We Call The Blackface Lady (https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2020/06/18/nolte-backbiting-and-blackface-the-washington-post-offers-a-glimpse-into-its-woke-taliban-occupied-workplace/)
Tom Hanks’s Pal (https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2012/03/20/tom-hanks-race-jokes-blackface/)
Aging View Co-Anchor Joy Behar (https://www.breitbart.com/social-justice/2019/09/19/nolte-7-trump-haters-who-love-them-some-blackface/)
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (https://www.breitbart.com/social-justice/2019/09/19/nolte-7-trump-haters-who-love-them-some-blackface/)
#Virginia (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Virginia?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) governor #Northam (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Northam?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) black face pic.twitter.com/8XOtOez3HH (https://t.co/8XOtOez3HH)
— Christopher's Anti-dumbass on this timeline (@staticdriver33) June 18, 2020 (https://twitter.com/staticdriver33/status/1273720835337932800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
Aging Frat Boy Howard Stern (https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2020/06/13/howard-stern-under-fire-over-old-blackface-n-word-sketch/)
Basement-Rated Jimmy Kimmel (https://www.breitbart.com/social-justice/2019/09/19/nolte-7-trump-haters-who-love-them-some-blackface/)
Tonight Show host Jimmy Fallon (https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2020/05/26/jimmy-fallon-under-fire-as-blackface-video-surfaces-from-snl-in-2000/)
Emmy Winner Ted Danson (https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/dansons-racist-humor-appalls-crowd-at-roast)
Comedienne Sarah Silverman (https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/08/12/sarah-silverman-fired-from-movie-over-blackface-photo/)
Sarah Silverman in blackface. pic.twitter.com/1D669hk0jp (https://t.co/1D669hk0jp)
— Paul Rubino (@PaulRubino6) June 12, 2020 (https://twitter.com/PaulRubino6/status/1271530140527452172?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
Attorney General Mark Herring (https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/02/06/virginia-ag-mark-herring-admits-wearing-blackface-in-college/)(D-VA)
State Assemblyman Dov Hikind (https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&cx=partner-pub-9229289037503472:6795176714&q=https://www.breitbart.com/news/da4ltl382/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwizjqyc9Y3qAhWineAKHWWIAIEQFjACegQIBRAC&usg=AOvVaw1WhYFZYE2WQXm0PQUMtOgL) (D-NY)
Actor Colton Haynes (https://www.insider.com/celebrities-who-wore-blackface-2018-10#colton-haynes-painted-his-face-and-body-for-a-kanye-west-costume-1)
Actor/comedian Billy Crystal (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/crystal-criticized-for-blackface-at-oscars/)
Comedian Fred Armisen (https://www.insider.com/celebrities-who-wore-blackface-2018-10#colton-haynes-painted-his-face-and-body-for-a-kanye-west-costume-1)
Real Housewives of New York City star Luann de Lesseps (https://www.etonline.com/luann-de-lesseps-responds-to-blackface-allegations-ahead-of-rhony-season-10-premiere-exclusive)
Fashion model Gigi Hadid (https://www.insider.com/celebrities-who-wore-blackface-2018-10#gigi-hadid-came-under-fire-for-her-darkened-skin-tone-on-the-cover-of-vogue-italia-14)
Folk singer Joni Mitchell (https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-37781800)
Actress Julianne Hough (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/julianne-hough-apologizes_n_4170289)
I think one approach to overcoming perceived differences when it comes to race is simply integrating on as many levels as possible, though whether that works in practice I'm not sure. My 21 year old daughter has had two longer term boyfriends who were both Nigerian and both black. Now I'll admit from the off that when she started seeing the first lad, I was wondering whether she was doing this deliberately, that it was some kind of rejection. Either of her racial heritage, myself and her mother, or was she simply a product of 'her time' i.e her culture being almost entirely a black one, rap and grime artists. However it soon emerged that he had been cheating on her by seeing multiple other girls so that was that.
It was however interesting to note that the lad's father was disappointed to find out his son was dating a white girl, so his reaction appeared to mirror mine. The second lad was a good kid, I really liked him and we welcomed him here but never got to meet his family despite them only living in another town about 12 miles away. He would stop over here regularly, I cooked for him on many occasions, drove him back and forth to his workplace and his father's flat. But never once did I see his father, not once did his father provide transport or contribute to their relationship.
As time went by it became obvious things were not going well between daughter and boyfriend, she would emerge sobbing from her bedroom after he had been flirting on social media despite my daughter repeatedly telling him it upset her. Eventually I'd had enough and told him he was disrespecting my daughter and my family. That's the last we saw of him.
I learned after these events that the Nigerian culture is one where men have multiple partners. Now I've just run through a short history of my daughter's experiences but find myself dreading to make any kind of judgement for fear of walking into a minefield. I think race was the reason I stood back and watched my daughter have her confidence broken, called the doctor after she'd taken a handful of anti-depressants, but I dare not speak out. Had these lads have been white I'd have been free to say what I thought, would have felt empowered to intervene.
fishman, I think it might have been best that you never intervened anyway. She's going to date a lot of "losers" until she finds a nice guy she wants to marry. I know as a parent that's hard to watch, but she's an adult, and she's gotta learn through trial and error what kind of person she wants. We all go through it. All you can do is give your advice and set good examples with your own relationship with your partner. If you'd intervened, she might have kept dating one of them just to spite you.
It also doesn't mean she can't date someone of Nigerian heritage again. But if she does, she will have to make it clear up front that she expects monogamy. If the guy isn't on board with that, then she shouldn't date him.
I think one approach to overcoming perceived differences when it comes to race is simply integrating on as many levels as possible
I think this statement you made is so true. It's much easier to be prejudiced against a group of people you've never come into contact with.
Statues: why not get rid of all of them? It’s not as if they’re any use… other than as toilets for birds, focus points for vandals and somewhere for the dust and dirt of time to accumulate. Break them up; the bronzes can be used to make coins and the stone crushed for construction hardcore…. And while we’re at it, let’s get rid of all those museums and art galleries. They’re just full of old-fashioned tat nobody needs or wants anymore, such as oil paintings, assorted knick-knackery and boring clicheed exhibitions. The buildings can be turned into something really useful, like shops and superstores. The written word: folks aren’t interested in that old stuff nowadays, if they ever were – when was the last time you read Magna Carta or The Declaration of Independence or any of that other ancient rhetoric? In fact, let’s go for it – let’s get rid of all history. I mean, the Taliban had the right idea, eh? destroy all of the past that offends or isn’t relevant to the here and now – culturally, socially, religously, and above all, traditionally . There’s about 6000 years of recorded history to be obliterated and forgotten, so we’d better get cracking.
Where shall we start? Well, first off, let’s deal with all that nasty stuff like wars, killings and the like…. Actually, history is just a long line of mostly unpleasantness, or to use some cool modern idiom: Buzzkill.
Yeah, the past is history and we just don’t need it in future.
I think that getting rid of all statues, monuments, museums, art galleries, etc would be overdoing it in the extreme, as not only are many major tourist attractions (during normal times), but also highly educational to all, especially in historical context, rather than highly opinionated websites and sad cases on social media giving out often false and distorted info and also with a desire to whitewash history.
Yes history can be unpleasant and brutal but it's important to be educated about our often unsavoury past in order to avoid similar mistakes in the future. Also erasing all traces of history doesn't address the problems of today and tomorrow, and can inadvertently lead to complacency of the highest order.
And the idea of converting museums and art galleries into shops is ludicrous and naive, especially at a time when many shops in general are hardly in high demand.
Lenco, I think he's being sarcastic.
Lenco, I think he's being sarcastic.
Perhaps he is, but I still think the idea of turning museums and the like into shops and superstores just seems totally unrealistic and beyond the pale, especially in this current climate.
fishman, I think it might have been best that you never intervened anyway. She's going to date a lot of "losers" until she finds a nice guy she wants to marry. I know as a parent that's hard to watch, but she's an adult, and she's gotta learn through trial and error what kind of person she wants. We all go through it. All you can do is give your advice and set good examples with your own relationship with your partner. If you'd intervened, she might have kept dating one of them just to spite you.
It also doesn't mean she can't date someone of Nigerian heritage again. But if she does, she will have to make it clear up front that she expects monogamy. If the guy isn't on board with that, then she shouldn't date him.
I think this statement you made is so true. It's much easier to be prejudiced against a group of people you've never come into contact with.I probably shouldn't have intervened Vee but this was after standing back for a long time. The first time I found out he was interested in other girls I thought 'you idiot, you've got one right here who adores you'. But then he was young and life is long, and there is time to kill today.
All I felt though was sadness, not just for my daughter but him too. He wasn't a bad kid by any means, he even liked my cooking for goodness sake.
Yeah, it’s tough. I got really attached to a gal one of my brothers dated awhile ago. It was hard to see her go. Not much I could do. She was too much like me and not enough like my bro.
I think that getting rid of all statues, monuments, museums, art galleries, etc would be overdoing it in the extreme, as not only are many major tourist attractions (during normal times), but also highly educational to all, especially in historical context, rather than highly opinionated websites and sad cases on social media giving out often false and distorted info and also with a desire to whitewash history.
Yes history can be unpleasant and brutal but it's important to be educated about our often unsavoury past in order to avoid similar mistakes in the future. Also erasing all traces of history doesn't address the problems of today and tomorrow, and can inadvertently lead to complacency of the highest order.
And the idea of converting museums and art galleries into shops is ludicrous and naive, especially at a time when many shops in general are hardly in high demand.
Well I don’t like old relics anyway,don’t need no bloody statue of some old b a s terds looking down on me.
Can still be educated on past events without all the old relics.I have painted on the statue of Captain Cook and felt no remorse.
Well I don’t like old relics anyway,don’t need no bloody statue of some old b a s terds looking down on me.
Can still be educated on past events without all the old relics.I have painted on the statue of Captain Cook and felt no remorse.
I personally wish all rap music was banned, but that ain't ever gonna happen and would be extremely unrealistic and indeed selfish of me to expect so.
Also 'da yoof' would be indignant over the banning of such music because it would be considered a violation of 'free expression'!!
I personally wish all rap music was banned, but that ain't ever gonna happen and would be extremely unrealistic and indeed selfish of me to expect so.
Also 'da yoof' would be indignant over the banning of such music because it would be considered a violation of 'free expression'!!
Some of the "beats"/"melodies" can be good but the content is frequently highly offensive and nihilistic. Some clearly incite hate and violence.
Yet what strikes me is that the use of offensive words such as n***er can be used in the name of artistic expression, while being totally racist and offensive in everyday parlance. I've also witnessed some black people using the word in reference to another black person, and this is where the double standards lurk, as a white person using the word would immediately be called a raging racist.
There are also examples of this in the gay community where the use of offensive words is OK - as long as you are gay yourself.
I think that pretty much goes for most racial/ethnic/sexual slurs, KK. I know white guys who call each other "cracka", but I'm sure they wouldn't appreciate non-whites calling them that. I have female friends that call each other "ho", but they'd slap any man who called them that. I know Mexican Americans that call each other "beaner", but would fight anyone else who dared called them that. I don't think it just applies to one group.
Seriously, Lenco? Do you actually know much about rap music?
I think that pretty much goes for most racial/ethnic/sexual slurs, KK. I know white guys who call each other "cracka", but I'm sure they wouldn't appreciate non-whites calling them that. I have female friends that call each other "ho", but they'd slap any man who called them that. I know Mexican Americans that call each other "beaner", but would fight anyone else who dared called them that. I don't think it just applies to one group.
There are still rules between races which should be respected even though we should all be equal..but still be allowed to be different..
I think that pretty much goes for most racial/ethnic/sexual slurs, KK. I know white guys who call each other "cracka", but I'm sure they wouldn't appreciate non-whites calling them that. I have female friends that call each other "ho", but they'd slap any man who called them that. I know Mexican Americans that call each other "beaner", but would fight anyone else who dared called them that. I don't think it just applies to one group.
Of course there are many examples of such double standards but that doesn't make it right. I'm sure you'd agree that the n-word is also far more loaded in terms of offence due to how the word was originally used - ie evoking the suffering of slavery and/or extreme discrimination in 50/60s. Furthermore, if you or I called a black person the n-word I'm sure we'd get more than just a slap.
As Gary pointed out in an earlier post, we should also be able to take responsibility for our own behaviour. Some ethnic groups, mostly the younger generation, conflate racial discrimination with self-entitlement, and this is dangerous. Discrimination exists for sure, and we should speak out against it, but we also have to make the best of what we have, rather than lash out about what we should have.
Perhaps part of the problem is the anger and nihilism created by poverty which can be seen in black and white groups. Poverty creates a sense of worthlessness and hopelessness, and this is what needs to be addressed most urgently: the ever-widening inequality we have in society. Then we can all come together - black and white - and stand up for equal rights - for all.
EDIT: I want to add that the n-word is nearly always used by the younger generation - the 3/4 generation - not the older black people who would have experienced/lived through racism of the 50-60s.
MyNameIsTerry
21-06-20, 22:00
Does word reclaiming give them something? Do they feel empowered by changing the use of the word within their (black, gay, etc) communities?
Do some revel in the label as an excuse to be a certain way e.g. I'm never going to be anything so I'll do what I want to people, be like the guy in the music?
It's interesting. Take two women calling each other hoes. They would take offence at someone else saying it. But using that label in public would invite others to view them that way. It's like the old male way of the fist bump or slap to the shoulder whilst using a pejorative in a friendly way. Don't feminists tell us this is toxic masculinity? :shrug:
I can't help thinking of this film whenever someone mentions hoes and rap...:roflmao:
https://66.media.tumblr.com/9859b4585840875941002aa400caf19e/tumblr_mj82v5cXTf1rnx1pbo1_400.gifv
EDIT: I want to add that the n-word is nearly always used by the younger generation - the 3/4 generation - not the older black people who would have experienced/lived through racism of the 50-60s.
Yes, this is very true. It's also true in my family. And I don't allow slurs of any kind to be said in my classroom.
However, I do think Terry has a point about empowerment. I know many people who say that using words that were once offensive to their group/community gives them the feeling of taking back their lives. I definitely know that has happened with the word "queer" in the LGBTQ+ community. The Q stands for queer and questioning now. In my dad's generation, queer was a derogatory term.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't know the answer on that one.
Perhaps part of the problem is the anger and nihilism created by poverty which can be seen in black and white groups. Poverty creates a sense of worthlessness and hopelessness, and this is what needs to be addressed most urgently: the ever-widening inequality we have in society. Then we can all come together - black and white - and stand up for equal rights - for all.
I do really agree with this ^^^. That's one of the reasons I brought up all of those environmental factors when I was discussing privilege with Gary. I think we would all get a lot more done politically in our countries too, if we focused on the "ever-widening inequality" among the classes. Here in the US, it would help with any racism as well, as most racial minorities are among the lower class.
MyNameIsTerry
23-06-20, 05:05
An interesting article raising some concerns over BLM UK:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8443669/amp/ESTHER-KRAKUE-dared-question-aims-Black-Lives-Matter.html
I particularly like how they claim Covid-19 is racist because more black people are affected. :doh:
I think the first time I really noticed the UK branch was the airport protest. I remember wondering why every protestor was white. I remember reading an article that told us their background to find they were all from privileged families.
It does make you wonder if BLM, UK branch at least, is not about what the US branch intended? I remember seeing the US branch explaining this after the airport protest and how it had been taken over and away from advancing black issues.
Certainly their Go Fund Me page seems about far left politics. I wonder how that works with ethnic minorities who don't share their other beliefs? I doubt they would fit in well if they had religious beliefs, for instance, since the farther left you travel the more intolerant of religious belief they can often become.
Pamplemousse
23-06-20, 10:11
Certainly their Go Fund Me page seems about far left politics. I wonder how that works with ethnic minorities who don't share their other beliefs? I doubt they would fit in well if they had religious beliefs, for instance, since the farther left you travel the more intolerant of religious belief they can often become.
Whereas the Right are blameless...? :whistles:
Yes, this is very true. It's also true in my family. And I don't allow slurs of any kind to be said in my classroom.
However, I do think Terry has a point about empowerment. I know many people who say that using words that were once offensive to their group/community gives them the feeling of taking back their lives. I definitely know that has happened with the word "queer" in the LGBTQ+ community. The Q stands for queer and questioning now. In my dad's generation, queer was a derogatory term.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't know the answer on that one.
I do really agree with this ^^^. That's one of the reasons I brought up all of those environmental factors when I was discussing privilege with Gary. I think we would all get a lot more done politically in our countries too, if we focused on the "ever-widening inequality" among the classes. Here in the US, it would help with any racism as well, as most racial minorities are among the lower class.
Whoa! Has the world been knocked off it's axis?! Did you say you don't know something?! Wow!
Antsyvee, I think you and people who are like minded could benefit from this new film. You could show it in your class. Let me know what you think. There are three teasers you can check out.
https://uncletom.com/
You know my childhood hero wasn't Superman or Batman believe it or not it was Sherlock Holmes. I used to watch the old Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce movies and loved them as a child (by the way in my mind Rathbone is still the best Sherlock Holmes of all time even though the movies were kind of hokey). And my grandmother gave me The Complete Sherlock Holmes when I was just a boy which still sits next to my bed. I know the stories by heart. Anyway the thing about Conan Doyle's stories are that there was a lot of history in them. Actual history. The quote below is from his short story entitled "The Adventure of the Five Orange Pips." It was published in 1891. Not 30 years after the civil war.
"He had made a very considerable fortune in the States, and his reason for leaving them was his aversion to the negroes, and his dislike of the Republican policy in extending the franchise to them."
It reflects the actual true history of the Republican party and blacks in America. Revisionist history totally wiped out the fact that the Democrat party has been using the black race for over a hundred and fifty years and continues to do so on their Urban plantations. You can almost set your watch by it. It's election season so we get upheaval in the black community spurred on by Democratic machines in major cities in the United States.
N.
https://magatoon.com/
Hey, these cartoons are hilarious. LOLa you'll love them!
https://magatoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/high-ed-600x429-1.jpg?v=1592858837
This one is one of my all-time favorites!
5091
https://magatoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/07-biden-basement-li-600-600x429-1.jpg?v=1592838133
Dude, I'm not into bondage...sorry!
This one is one of my all-time favorites!
5091
LOL!! Is that us?
Good to hear me neither. I hate pain...especially my own!
MyNameIsTerry
23-06-20, 21:41
Whereas the Right are blameless...? :whistles:
Which is probably why I didn't say they were. The point is the farther left or right you travel on the spectrum the closer you get to closed minds, true believers & martyrs, and so often hate of those who don't agree with them.
Having an anti capitalist agenda within others may attract a certain type of leftist. Is that why we are seeing their typical behaviour in vandalizing statues and aggressive protest? And the immediate opposite respond with the same, violence.
If certain groups turn it into aggressive protest how many will see the movement negatively? Doesn't it become about grievance and more level headed members may get tarred with that brush unfairly?
MyNameIsTerry
23-06-20, 21:44
LOL!! Is that us?
You wish :roflmao:
Lol, did you show him the hat we picked out for him, Terry?
I already have a hat! MAGA!
But I'll take it anyway.
You know my childhood hero wasn't Superman or Batman believe it or not it was Sherlock Holmes. I used to watch the old Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce movies and loved them as a child (by the way in my mind Rathbone is still the best Sherlock Holmes of all time even though the movies were kind of hokey). And my grandmother gave me The Complete Sherlock Holmes when I was just a boy which still sits next to my bed. I know the stories by heart. Anyway the thing about Conan Doyle's stories are that there was a lot of history in them. Actual history. The quote below is from his short story entitled "The Adventure of the Five Orange Pips." It was published in 1891. Not 30 years after the civil war.
"He had made a very considerable fortune in the States, and his reason for leaving them was his aversion to the negroes, and his dislike of the Republican policy in extending the franchise to them."
It reflects the actual true history of the Republican party and blacks in America. Revisionist history totally wiped out the fact that the Democrat party has been using the black race for over a hundred and fifty years and continues to do so on their Urban plantations. You can almost set your watch by it. It's election season so we get upheaval in the black community spurred on by Democratic machines in major cities in the United States.
N.
N.
Yes, this is very true. It's also true in my family. And I don't allow slurs of any kind to be said in my classroom.
However, I do think Terry has a point about empowerment. I know many people who say that using words that were once offensive to their group/community gives them the feeling of taking back their lives. I definitely know that has happened with the word "queer" in the LGBTQ+ community. The Q stands for queer and questioning now. In my dad's generation, queer was a derogatory term.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't know the answer on that one.
I do really agree with this ^^^. That's one of the reasons I brought up all of those environmental factors when I was discussing privilege with Gary. I think we would all get a lot more done politically in our countries too, if we focused on the "ever-widening inequality" among the classes. Here in the US, it would help with any racism as well, as most racial minorities are among the lower class.
Yes and before your dads day queer meant strange. It's actual original meaning.
An interesting article raising some concerns over BLM UK:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8443669/amp/ESTHER-KRAKUE-dared-question-aims-Black-Lives-Matter.html
I particularly like how they claim Covid-19 is racist because more black people are affected. :doh:
I think the first time I really noticed the UK branch was the airport protest. I remember wondering why every protestor was white. I remember reading an article that told us their background to find they were all from privileged families.
It does make you wonder if BLM, UK branch at least, is not about what the US branch intended? I remember seeing the US branch explaining this after the airport protest and how it had been taken over and away from advancing black issues.
Certainly their Go Fund Me page seems about far left politics. I wonder how that works with ethnic minorities who don't share their other beliefs? I doubt they would fit in well if they had religious beliefs, for instance, since the farther left you travel the more intolerant of religious belief they can often become.
Were those BLM airport protests you are referring to the ones that happened in the summer of 2016 where the protesters were lying down on motorways in close proximity to some of the UK's major airports, and even managing to gatecrash the runways and climb onto the wings of (stationary) aeroplanes and thus disrupting flights?
Don't wish to tempt fate by saying this but the BLM UK protests appear to have died down since the weekend of 13-14th June, or if any have since occurred at all they must have been relatively low-key, both in stature and media reporting.
Also, I wonder what happened to XR during the events of the past few weeks? No doubt they will be creeping back out of the woodwork to protest again soon!!
S - Ship
H - High
I - In
T - Transit
MyNameIsTerry
25-06-20, 04:57
Lol, did you show him the hat we picked out for him, Terry?
I already have a hat! MAGA!
But I'll take it anyway.
You're in luck, N. Two birds with one stone...
This one? :yesyes:
https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6I mh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy81ODE1MzIwL29yaWdpbi5 qcGciLCJleHBpcmVzX2F0IjoxNjIxOTg3OTIyfQ.khWwWZCAVa vlOQcs6pGUtw0OXvvY15jiDrKR5sxEnw4/img.jpg?width=1200&coordinates=0%2C24%2C0%2C23&height=600
They just announced a Princess and the Frog theme is actually going to replace Splash Mountain for real. SHOCKING!
Disneyland has to open back up first.
Well yeah, but even that's been postponed.
But this confirms to me that we're so ashamed of our past that we're willing to systematically erase our records of it - much like we did in the wake of the last civil rights movement. Remember when we cut the woman out of all those Tom & Jerry cartoons?
Frank, the woman cut out of Tom and Jerry was "Mammy." If you don't know the black "Mammy" stereotype you need to educate yourself. Those hateful stereotypes need to be erased.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammy_archetype_in_the_United_States
You're in luck, N. Two birds with one stone...
Terry!
LOL! Well I heard that the milloonials weren't reproducing as much as their parents were.
How about MAMA! Make America Mate Again!?
Frank, the woman cut out of Tom and Jerry was "Mammy." If you don't know the black "Mammy" stereotype you need to educate yourself. Those hateful stereotypes need to be erased.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammy_archetype_in_the_United_States
Just wondering - did black mammy's really exist? I like the Celtics. Should I be offended by there logo because I'm of Irish descent?
No one has a right to not be offended.
Just wondering - did black mammy's really exist?
Why don't you read the info, N?
Does the Celtic logo offend you?
I do.
Whether it does or doesn't is insignificant. That's the point.
What offends you may please me. Why should you be able to take down something that I find pleasing?
BTW did you watch the trailers on the uncletom.com movie coming out?
I do.
Whether I does or doesn't is insignificant. That's the point.
What offends you may please me. Why should you be able to take down something that I find pleasing?
The person who owns the content gets to make the decision about whether it's up or not. Unfortunately, there are people who make content who don't realize how offensive it is to others. Once they're informed about it, they often edit, or take it down. Some don't. Others who are associated with it may choose to boycott or not display that content. If it's public content, then usually the city council or local association make the decision.
But here's the thing, N. You can be a supporter of the first amendment and still be socially considerate. You can be a supporter of the first amendment and be a as$hole. Neither are mutually exclusive.
Example: You could put a swastika up as your avatar picture on here. I would find that offensive. It may please you. Yes, it's your right to take it down or leave it up. But by leaving it up, you're basically giving me the finger. If you're okay with that, and you don't mind showing imagery that supports white supremacy, then you can leave it up. But you've got to be naive if you don't think I'd be the only one offended. And because of that, NMP would probably not allow you to leave it up, especially since they don't support it either. If NMP made you take it down, and you felt they didn't support your first amendment rights, then it sucks to be you, because you didn't read the agreement upon joining.
If Frank feels that having Mammy taken out of his Tom and Jerry cartoons makes him lose part of his culture, then he can feel that way. But maybe he didn't realize how racist the Mammy caricature was...and now he will realize that it's probably not a good character to feel nostalgia for.
Frank, the woman cut out of Tom and Jerry was "Mammy." If you don't know the black "Mammy" stereotype you need to educate yourself. Those hateful stereotypes need to be erased.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammy_archetype_in_the_United_States
I am well aware of the stereotype. I agree we have to erase it from modern society. But we need some sort of reminder that we were so hateful one time. We need to be reminded not to do it again. To do otherwise would be akin to claiming that these prejudices never existed in the first place. And then we'd end up going through the same thing again. Again, I don't condone it in any way, but we can't just remove it and forget it.
I am well aware of the stereotype. I agree we have to erase it from modern society. But we need some sort of reminder that we were so hateful one time. We need to be reminded not to do it again. To do otherwise would be akin to claiming that these prejudices never existed in the first place. And then we'd end up going through the same thing again. Again, I don't condone it in any way, but we can't just remove it and forget it.
Okay, that's fine with me. I don't mind having the Tom and Jerry episodes with Mammy up as long as there as a disclaimer or contextual statement with it...similar to what's being done with Gone with the Wind. Just be clear about that. The way you said it before made it seem like you wanted it back out of nostalgia.
MyNameIsTerry
25-06-20, 22:15
Okay, that's fine with me. I don't mind having the Tom and Jerry episodes with Mammy up as long as there as a disclaimer or contextual statement with it...similar to what's being done with Gone with the Wind. Just be clear about that. The way you said it before made it seem like you wanted it back out of nostalgia.
They do that every time they show Dambusters now due to the name of the dog. It's usually an afternoon type of film.
But in some cases they just pull entire episodes of things. One reason might be because they are comedies so it would be inappropriate to show something in a humorous way, although some old comedies were actually taking the piss out of the bigot, or it may simply be about brand damage. The latter is more likely in my opinion.
The person who owns the content gets to make the decision about whether it's up or not. Unfortunately, there are people who make content who don't realize how offensive it is to others. Once they're informed about it, they often edit, or take it down. Some don't. Others who are associated with it may choose to boycott or not display that content. If it's public content, then usually the city council or local association make the decision.
But here's the thing, N. You can be a supporter of the first amendment and still be socially considerate. You can be a supporter of the first amendment and be a as$hole. Neither are mutually exclusive.
Example: You could put a swastika up as your avatar picture on here. I would find that offensive. It may please you. Yes, it's your right to take it down or leave it up. But by leaving it up, you're basically giving me the finger. If you're okay with that, and you don't mind showing imagery that supports white supremacy, then you can leave it up. But you've got to be naive if you don't think I'd be the only one offended. And because of that, NMP would probably not allow you to leave it up, especially since they don't support it either. If NMP made you take it down, and you felt they didn't support your first amendment rights, then it sucks to be you, because you didn't read the agreement upon joining.
If Frank feels that having Mammy taken out of his Tom and Jerry cartoons makes him lose part of his culture, then he can feel that way. But maybe he didn't realize how racist the Mammy caricature was...and now he will realize that it's probably not a good character to feel nostalgia for.
So are you comparing aunt Jemima to a swastika? It's a poor example you use. Use something benign that's actually being removed right now. It's a tactical move of the left to bring an argument to the extreme fringes.
You ever hear of an artist named mapplethorpe? If not look him up. A vile human being who's "art" offended millions of Christians. Of course the left embraced him. But he still had his art shows. No one has a right to not be offended.
And I don't believe mammy is racist? Do you think every non black person who ever saw mammy thought all black women were like her? If you think that then you're stereotyping. There were women like mammy in this world you know that right? And BTW stereotypical characterisations exist for a reason...like let's say...oh he's your average middle aged white guy...ever hear that one? It's open season on them. But they're tough they can take it. Or, he's your stereotypical Marine Sargent. It conjures up an image. As a matter of fact Obama said of his own grandmother - "oh she's your average white person."
So what.
N.
Aunt Jemima isn't benign.
It's a tactical move of the left to bring an argument to the extreme fringes
You brought up "extreme fringes" with the use of "feminazi" a few days ago.
I like how I'm "the left" now. I'm a whole group of people, apparently. I encompass all people "left" of you, I guess. Wow, my world domination plans are coming along, then. I haven't met anyone on here "right" of you, so I sure represent a lot of people now.
And I don't believe mammy is racist? Do you think every non black person who ever saw mammy thought all black women were like her? If you think that then you're stereotyping. There were women like mammy in this world you know that right? And BTW stereotypical characterisations exist for a reason...like let's say...oh he's your average middle aged white guy...ever hear that one? It's open season on them. But they're tough they can take it. Or, he's your stereotypical Marine Sargent. It conjures up an image. As a matter of fact Obama said of his own grandmother - "oh she's your average white person."
I never said any of these things either.
So that.
Vee
MyNameIsTerry
26-06-20, 04:50
The person who owns the content gets to make the decision about whether it's up or not. Unfortunately, there are people who make content who don't realize how offensive it is to others. Once they're informed about it, they often edit, or take it down. Some don't. Others who are associated with it may choose to boycott or not display that content. If it's public content, then usually the city council or local association make the decision.
But here's the thing, N. You can be a supporter of the first amendment and still be socially considerate. You can be a supporter of the first amendment and be a as$hole. Neither are mutually exclusive.
Example: You could put a swastika up as your avatar picture on here. I would find that offensive. It may please you. Yes, it's your right to take it down or leave it up. But by leaving it up, you're basically giving me the finger. If you're okay with that, and you don't mind showing imagery that supports white supremacy, then you can leave it up. But you've got to be naive if you don't think I'd be the only one offended. And because of that, NMP would probably not allow you to leave it up, especially since they don't support it either. If NMP made you take it down, and you felt they didn't support your first amendment rights, then it sucks to be you, because you didn't read the agreement upon joining.
If Frank feels that having Mammy taken out of his Tom and Jerry cartoons makes him lose part of his culture, then he can feel that way. But maybe he didn't realize how racist the Mammy caricature was...and now he will realize that it's probably not a good character to feel nostalgia for.
Another example of a hijacked symbol: the swastika.
It's also something that highlights how we aren't educated properly. We all understood it was a Nazi symbol and regarded it as evil. But did we know they just nicked something already there, a symbol for good in our workd and from many spritual & religious practices, and made it symbol for modern day evil?
In countries practicing those religions have they excluded it's use since the war? I've no idea.
MyNameIsTerry
26-06-20, 05:26
When I think back I remember seeing Mammy in Tom & Jerry as a black female but American stereotype. I wasn't aware of anything beyond that as a child. I didn't think of anything negative, only a nice old lady.
Aunt Jemima isn't benign.
You brought up "extreme fringes" with the use of "feminazi" a few days ago.
I like how I'm "the left" now. I'm a whole group of people, apparently. I encompass all people "left" of you, I guess. Wow, my world domination plans are coming along, then. I haven't met anyone on here "right" of you, so I sure represent a lot of people now.
I never said any of these things either.
So that.
Vee
Oh, I thought you thought aunt Jemima was some sort of racist symbol. My bad.
Then you do agree with my assessment of stereotyping.
Glad we cleared that up.
N.
No, the term feminazi was hyperbole. What you were doing was an analogy.
I already went over the Aunt Jemima situation several times. I'm gonna tell you what I tell my students, N... Go back and read it ;)
The point about the "feminazi" is that you went there first. You used the "extreme" example of the nazis first, and then accused me of going to the extreme first. But hey, at least you know your literary devices ;)
WiredIncorrectly
26-06-20, 17:17
I'm white. My brother mixed race. My cousins mixed race. Stepdad was black (RIP). My best friend as a child was black.
Growing up with black folk in my family has meant I've grown up seeing no distinction between black and white. I see racism from a different, and maybe unique, perspective.
I've had this conversation with my brother who said "It's stupid. Just another excuse for a story". I'm with him on that one.
I'm not a black sympathizer. There's nothing to sympathize over. Let history be what it is and move forward. Blacks and whites involved in this "movement" are the ones causing the racism divide.
Until the racism narrative dies, you can always expect a harsh division between black vs. white, or white vs. Muslim, poor vs. rich etc.
I'm white. My brother mixed race. My cousins mixed race. Stepdad was black (RIP). My best friend as a child was black.
Growing up with black folk in my family has meant I've grown up seeing no distinction between black and white. I see racism from a different, and maybe unique, perspective.
I've had this conversation with my brother who said "It's stupid. Just another excuse for a story". I'm with him on that one.
I'm not a black sympathizer. There's nothing to sympathize over. Let history be what it is and move forward. Blacks and whites involved in this "movement" are the ones causing the racism divide.
Until the racism narrative dies, you can always expect a harsh division between black vs. white, or white vs. Muslim, poor vs. rich etc.
As we've talked about this on here before, I wonder if the experience is different depending on the country you grow up in?
WiredIncorrectly
26-06-20, 20:46
As we've talked about this on here before, I wonder if the experience is different depending on the country you grow up in?
That's a valid point Antsy. In the UK there isn't police brutality towards black people. It tends to be police are brutal whatever sort of d**khead you are :ohmy: But, never to the extreme US officers go to. I think the problem is amplified in the US because of it's shear size and numbers. We're a dot on the map in comparison.
The problem isn't racial. It's elitism. Police think they're above the law and use their personal racial believes on the job. Fights against clans and races have existed since man could write. We're the generation that thinks we can solve the "problem". Nope. It's better to not entertain the ideas and movements that way they can't gain traction to cause disruption via the media.
That's a valid point Antsy. In the UK there isn't police brutality towards black people. It tends to be police are brutal whatever sort of d**khead you are :ohmy: But, never to the extreme US officers go to. I think the problem is amplified in the US because of it's shear size and numbers. We're a dot on the map in comparison.
The problem isn't racial. It's elitism. Police think they're above the law and use their personal racial believes on the job. Fights against clans and races have existed since man could write. We're the generation that thinks we can solve the "problem". Nope. It's better to not entertain the ideas and movements that way they can't gain traction to cause disruption via the media.
I think you could be right there WIC.
I also think the issue is more down to the small minority of 'bad apples' in the force who aren't quite right in the head themselves in general, rather than systemic racism. The same can also apply to other public 'professionals' who are a bit 'power-mad' such as school teachers, social workers, doctors, nurses, day centre staff, local council workers, shop workers, you name them. Twas ever thus I suppose.
And like I said the other day in another thread our police officers for the most part aren't trigger-happy in this country, and only tend to use firearms as an absolute last resort, and in exceptional situations such as dealing with that hotel incident in Glasgow yesterday.
Black and White
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_2YcMlKVPQ
Another example of a hijacked symbol: the swastika.
It's also something that highlights how we aren't educated properly. We all understood it was a Nazi symbol and regarded it as evil. But did we know they just nicked something already there, a symbol for good in our workd and from many spritual & religious practices, and made it symbol for modern day evil?
In countries practicing those religions have they excluded it's use since the war? I've no idea.
Likewise, I think the term 'Nazi' is greatly overused and especially as a pejorative term to describe a person or organisation someone doesn't like or agree with, even if they are actually nothing of the sort.
Same with the word 'chav', which continues to be used in a hyperbolic manner to describe virtually all young people who are being a bit boisterous, even if they're not wearing hoodies, baseball caps, tracksuits, bling, and indulging in 'happy slapping' to upload onto YouTube/
Facebook/Twitter, etc, which is probably harder to get away with now, compared to 10-15 years ago when it was all the rage.
What about this classic bit from the legendary sitcom Seinfeld?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2lfZg-apSA
This is an e-mail sent to Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune after an article he published concerning a name change for the Washington Redskins
Dear Mr. Page: I agree with our Native American population. I am highly jilted by the racially charged name of the Washington Redskins. One might argue that to name a professional football team after Native Americans would exalt them as fine warriors, but nay, nay. We must be careful not to offend, and in the spirit of political correctness and courtesy, we must move forward.
Let's ditch the Kansas City Chiefs, the Atlanta Braves and the Cleveland Indians. If your shorts are in a wad because of the reference the name Redskins makes to skin color, then we need to get rid of the Cleveland Browns.
The Carolina Panthers obviously were named to keep the memory of militant Blacks from the 60's alive. Gone. It's offensive to us white folk.
The New York Yankees offend the Southern population. Do you see a team named for the Confederacy? No! There is no room for any reference to that tragic war that cost this country so many young men's lives. I am also offended by the blatant references to the Catholic religion among our sports team names. Totally inappropriate to have the New Orleans Saints, the Los Angeles Angels or the San Diego Padres.
Then there are the team names that glorify criminals who raped and pillaged. We are talking about the horrible Oakland Raiders, the Minnesota Vikings, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Pittsburgh Pirates!
Now, let us address those teams that clearly send the wrong message to our children. The San Diego Chargers promote irresponsible fighting or even spending habits. Wrong message to our children.
The New York Giants and the San Francisco Giants promote obesity, a growing childhood epidemic. Wrong message to our children. The Cincinnati Reds promote downers/barbiturates. Wrong message to our children.
The Milwaukee Brewers. Well that goes without saying. Wrong message to our children.
So, there you go. We need to support any legislation that comes out to rectify this travesty, because the government will likely become involved with this issue, as they should. Just the kind of thing the do-nothing Congress loves.
As a die-hard Oregon State fan, my wife and I, with all of this in mind, suggest it might also make some sense to change the name of the Oregon State women's athletic teams to something other than "the Beavers (especially when they play Southern California. Do we really want the Trojans sticking it to the Beavers???
I always love your articles and I generally agree with them. As for the Redskins name I would suggest they change the name to the "Foreskins" to better represent their community, paying tribute to the dick heads in Washington DC.
MyNameIsTerry
05-07-20, 04:35
Tut tut, wouldn't foreskins get you in hot water religiously as they wouldn't be inclusive? :winks: Just imagine the commentary when 'a foreskin has been removed' :ohmy::blush: All the men would be wincing for a start :roflmao:
Anyway I object to this world series title. :whistles:
They could be the Washington Mohels... ;) They're the ones that remove the foreskins.
Evidently the PM has stones:
Boris Johnson today made clear he would not ‘take the knee’ with Black Lives Matter protesters – insisting people should not be ‘bullied’ into making ‘gestures’.
The PM said he was focused on the ‘substance’ of changing social attitudes and improving opportunities for ethnic minorities.
The comments, in a phone-in on LBC radio, came after Dominic Raab said last month that he would not personally ‘take the knee’ – a demonstration of support that has swept the world since the death of George Floyd in the US.
WiredIncorrectly
05-07-20, 12:50
This has nothing to do with racial equality or justice of any kind. Blacks are being used as proxy warriors to spread anarchy so that order could be created out of chaos. Now, they're planning a Charlottesville type of false flag in Britain which will lead to racial violence and further tension. Both sides are being manipulated and controlled, BLM is funded by George Soros. This won't end well for black people, their culture has already been subverted through Gangsta rap which glorifies drugs, violence and crime. Rioting and destroying a few statues won't improve their socioeconomic situation in the long term.
I've got to side with Hollow on this one. This is most definitely a likely cause. Soros is an evil, horrible, man. He also funded/funds Antifa which is the far left's version of the far right.
Great points by all!
There's actually talk of a black national anthem now. Um...ok didn't folks fight for years to conquer segregation? Everything I see going on now is doing nothing but re-segregating.
And you're right, there are evil forces behind this mayhem...definitely Soros for one.
A woman said to me the other day I never in my life looked at skin color but now that's all I see.
N.
Great points by all!
There's actually talk of a black national anthem now. Um...ok didn't folks fight for years to conquer segregation? Everything I see going on now is doing nothing but re-segregating.
And you're right, there are evil forces behind this mayhem...definitely Soros for one.
A woman said to me the other day I never in my life looked at skin color but now that's all I see.
N.
Precisely.
It's getting ridiculous.
MyNameIsTerry
06-07-20, 04:57
They could be the Washington Mohels... ;) They're the ones that remove the foreskins.
Back in my childhood you could go in for your tonsils out and have a doctor recommending your child be 'cut'. :ohmy:
See, here in the US and Canada, it’s pretty normal. Most Christian men here get it done just like Jews and Muslims. How come it’s not done in the Anglican Church?
Back in my childhood you could go in for your tonsils out and have a doctor recommending your child be 'cut'. :ohmy:
Oh how times have changed!!
When I had my adenoids removed at the age of 4 back in the autumn of 1981 (IIRC), I was in hospital for about a week, which in all but the most serious of cases would be pretty much unthinkable nowadays, not only due to the usual financial pressures facing the NHS, but also due to greater advances in modern medical techniques.
The doctors recommending children being 'cut' back in the day would probably be considered a totally unnecessary operation today (and taking right liberties) and for non-existent ailments in particular, I most certainly wouldn't want to go through all the rigmarole of kipping in a hospital ward full of strangers (and at the mercy of irate staff members), having a general anaesthetic, having the surgery, vomiting when I come round, which happened to me back in 1981, but might not happen as much nowadays, due to likely improvements in the anaesthetic agents in use today, that probably have less undesirable side effects.
See, here in the US and Canada, it’s pretty normal. Most Christian men here get it done just like Jews and Muslims. How come it’s not done in the Anglican Church?
For non Jews it's become a thing of the past for the most part.
It was sold as a hygiene thing to non Jews in the middle part of the 20th century in the US, so many young couples ran out and had their new sons chopped. Ouch!
N.
Arthur Spooner lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGFuQxIn1IE
For non Jews it's become a thing of the past for the most part.
It was sold as a hygiene thing to non Jews in the middle part of the 20th century in the US, so many young couples ran out and had their new sons chopped. Ouch!
N.
I'm pretty sure it's still common for Muslims.
Ms Vee…
It depends on whether the parents want their son to be a cavalier or a roundhead, so to speak:shades:
I understand, Pain ;) I'm not prejudiced, I welcome all ;)
I don't know if you all saw, but a statue was removed of Frederick Douglass in NY last night. He was a former slave, abolitionist, author and orator. No one has claimed responsibility for it. Trump says it was "anarchists". Locals think it was white supremacists.
Trump is right no matter which group did it. It was anarchists.
I did see that BTW.
Back in my childhood you could go in for your tonsils out and have a doctor recommending your child be 'cut'. :ohmy:
There has got to be a joke in there somewhere, Terry.
MyNameIsTerry
07-07-20, 05:27
See, here in the US and Canada, it’s pretty normal. Most Christian men here get it done just like Jews and Muslims. How come it’s not done in the Anglican Church?
Oh how times have changed!!
When I had my adenoids removed at the age of 4 back in the autumn of 1981 (IIRC), I was in hospital for about a week, which in all but the most serious of cases would be pretty much unthinkable nowadays, not only due to the usual financial pressures facing the NHS, but also due to greater advances in modern medical techniques.
The doctors recommending children being 'cut' back in the day would probably be considered a totally unnecessary operation today (and taking right liberties) and for non-existent ailments in particular, I most certainly wouldn't want to go through all the rigmarole of kipping in a hospital ward full of strangers (and at the mercy of irate staff members), having a general anaesthetic, having the surgery, vomiting when I come round, which happened to me back in 1981, but might not happen as much nowadays, due to likely improvements in the anaesthetic agents in use today, that probably have less undesirable side effects.
It was the same here as N mentioned: recommended as a health thing. I was a victim of this 'upselling' when I went in for a hernia as a young boy.
But my dad tells me my journey is only half way as a man, I'm not married so I'm yet to have my balls chopped off :roflmao:
MyNameIsTerry
07-07-20, 05:32
There has got to be a joke in there somewhere, Terry.
Yes, it does sound like one. But I've got another in the same male area.
A man goes into a hospital to have a hernia op. He wakes post operation to find his surgeon has some bad news for him.
Doctor: "Mr Terry, I'm afraid I've got some bad news for you. It appears your medical chart got mixed up and you ended up having another patient's operation. I'm afraid you've had the full sex change."
Patient: "So you're telling me I'll never get another erection?"
Doctor: "Of course you will, it just won't be yours"
:winks::roflmao:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.