I must really be screwed because I am a conservative, straight, white male whose ancestors were plantation owners in the pre-Civil War South.

mbro wrote: yawn

I guess it's that time of year.

Clark Kent wrote: mbro wrote: yawn I guess it's that time of year.

It's a Spring fever thing, I think ...

Spring ... when a young man's fancy turns to thoughts of RACISM!!!!

Personally, I am an equal opporunity bigot ... I hate all colors, creeds, religious choices, sexual orientations and paintball marker owners equally.

P.S. - Clark Kent, as a forum moderator, I am required to inform you that your sig pic is in voilation of forum policy, which allows 350 pixels wide and 150 pixels high.

Gasdrinker wrote: Its because you only have white people in your hill sig.

Thank God that my signature embraces diversity in all it's glory!

Live and let live, I say.

I could care less what a persons' skin colour is, what God they pray to, or who they sleep with at night. A good person is a good person, and a sphincter-clown is a sphincter-clown. PERIOD.

Reverse Racisim is nothing but a buzzword for "I didn't get what I thought I was entitled to."

brihard wrote: Tae Kwon Do wrote: Reverse Racisim is nothing but a buzzword for "I didn't get what I thought I was entitled to." Nonsense. Affirmative action has, in some places, compeltely usurped rightful meritocracy in favour of minorities. This isn't always the case, but when a less qualified person gets a job because he or she is subject to affirmative action and a white person gets screwed, that isn't just. People should earn things honestly and of their own merit, gender or race disregarded utterly except where a valid job qualification. Reverse discrimination is very much a reality.

And how often does this really happen?

Affirmitive Action is still, in forms, needed. All the people crying for the head of AA on a plate are further proof that it still is a very important and needed thing.

Also, no, reverse racisim is a buzzword, nothing more. Sorry.

High Voltage wrote: Hades wrote: So if a white person steals something from or murders a minority, does that make it reverse crime? hate crime.

Reverse hate crime.

Duh.

Linus wrote: Tae, believe what you want, but reverse racism is NOT just a buzzword.. its an actual pratice.

Methinks thou didth misseth the pointeth.

choopie911 wrote: WHITE POWER!

Instant classic.

Linus - racism is racism.  Inserting "reverse" in front of the word implies that "this" racism is somehow different from "regular" racism, when in fact it is just regular old racism.  In effect, even acknowling the term "reverse racism" is being bigoted about bigotry, as if there is bigotry and "the other" bigotry.

Clark Kent wrote: Linus - racism is racism.  Inserting "reverse" in front of the word implies that "this" racism is somehow different from "regular" racism, when in fact it is just regular old racism.  In effect, even acknowling the term "reverse racism" is being bigoted about bigotry, as if there is bigotry and "the other" bigotry.

My point exactly.

No matter WHAT direction it's pointed, racism and bigotry are wrong.

As previously stated, though, too many people from all of the affected groups seem determined to hong onto the concept for dear life.

As the Calvin & Hobbes cartoon so eloquently put it:

"The surest sign that there is intelligent life in the universe is that it hasn't tried to contact us."

Okay, I'm going to rant for a minute. (Long post warning)

Want to know what really makes me mad? I mean, what will make me madder than old people on the interstate?

I was listening to Comedy Central the other day. Can't remember the name of the comedian, but he was blasting white people. He used every stereotype possible. Then, he talks about racism being a problem in our country. What a lying hypocrite. People like this are just as much a problem as Jim Bob and his white power signs.

If a white comedian were to do the same, he'd be a racist. I don't have any problem with all-black colleges, radio stations, cable channels, websites, interest groups, etc. But why such the uprising from various interest groups which I need not name if a low-rated TV show doesn't have enough black characters on it?

The fact is there are just as many black racists as white. Really, Hispanics are the only group I know of that are rarely racist. I'm not saying they never are, but I don't know any. Sad part is they're usually the receiving end of the jokes.

Racism is wrong in any form, but lets really look at racism. Racism is disliking someone because of their color. So am I racist if I laugh at a black joke? No, I'm not. I laugh at South Park's religious and ethnic jokes, even when they're at my expense. Why? Because what's funny is funny. Get a sense of humor people, lighten up. If I say black people like watermelon, I'm instantly a racist. I can't say that at my job. It's in the videos I had to watch. I also can't say they like fried chicken. But I freakin love fried chicken and watermelon-it's like part of the south. It's true. Not all of them do, but it's true of some nonetheless.

And WTH is wrong with saying that? Nothing. But I can't make a general classification of another race becaues that's wrong. Other races, however, may point out that alot of white people like beer and nascar. I don't drink, and I hate Nascar. So should I sue any black comedian who points it out? No, it's true. 80% of the rednecks around me have Dale Earnhardt stickers on their car.

I don't hate anyone. For anything. I have very few people of any culture I dislike. But give up the racist crap-yeah, there are racist whites. But you can't change that-and the fact is black people have just as many rights as white people do, as do Hispanics, Jews, Asians, people from the Middle East, Native Americans, etc. 

Sorry if any of that didn't make senses, my rants rarely do.

Gatyr, Christopher Columbus: He's Portugueuse not even white. Fourth of july has nothing to do with race, its about the founding of our country. Thanksgiving is about the celebration of the indians helping the pilgrams, indian and white people, Christmas????? Hell I think jesus is Arab. All of those have nothing to do with race. Your an ignorant fool if you think so.

News stations dont cater to anybody, just because they dont have many black people as anchors your going to assume that they're catering to whites, in my eyes, thats pretty racist

White people owe black people nothing, none of the living generations have been slaves or owned slaves. So dont pull the well we inslaved them for thousands of years card. Because we didnt, our grand parents did so to their grandparents. I believe that the treatment of slaves is a vast exageration at the least. I know that alot of plantation owners and people beat slaves, but not as many as made to seem, I've read the diaries of my great great great grandpas slaves, and his jounals. In only about four or five instances in a year was a slave actually beaten like everybody likes to believe was a daily occurance, and those where when one of the slaves tried to rape his daughter, and another when three slaves got into a fight in the fields, I'm not saying slavery was a good thing, nor am I saying it wasnt bad. But I mean dang, most of the people brought here were sold to use from other africans, and, blacks in the USA wouldnt hardly be near half as many. Ill continue in the mornin, gotta go to bed.

Savage93fvss wrote: Gatyr, Christopher Columbus: He's Portugueuse not even white.

Nothing like starting off with a bizarrely ignorant statement to completely discredit whatever else you posted after this.

636andy636. wrote: Shoulnt Cracker be a censored word on the forum since it is the durogitory term for a white person?

Comparing the weight of hatred involved in the connotation of the "N" word, and "cracker" is not very intelligent.

First off - "cracker" and "nig.ger" are NOT comparable.  Yes, both are racial slurs.  But "darn" and "<well, you figure it out>" are both curse words, and they have nothing else in common.  One is filtered on the forum and gets children spanked, the other is spoken in church without second thought.

To say that just because two words fill the same function in a language they should be treated the same is just silly.

Hardly anybody is offended by "cracker" or "honkey" or anything of the kind.  Some people are offended by the apparent unfairness of being called "honkey" while they cannot retaliate with "nig.ger", but hardly anybody is offended by the actual use of the word.

"Nig.ger", on the other hand, is making people cringe just reading this post.

It has taken on a life of its own, much like the f-bomb, and cannot be compared to childish insults like "cracker".

As to the NAACP scholarship fund, and the other ignorant statements in karnivor's post - there are scholarship funds for every conceivable ethnicity out there.  I am personally involved in the distribution of a scholarship that is only available to a small subset of white people.  There are thousands others just like it.

As to the use of the "n-word" by black people - why is anybody surprised?  This is perfectly consistent with every other group behavior on the planet.  Lawyers tell lawyer jokes and laugh, but are offended when doctors tell lawyer jokes.  Doctors tell doctor jokes and laugh, but are offended when the lawyers tell them.  That's how the world works.  Why should this be any different?

I agree on locking this thread. It should have been locked on the opening post.

Bugg wrote: Tae Kwon Do wrote: 636andy636. wrote: Shoulnt Cracker be a censored word on the forum since it is the durogitory term for a white person? Comparing the weight of hatred involved in the connotation of the "N" word, and "cracker" is not very intelligent.   No one asked to compare the weight, but BOTH are racist and BOTH should not be tolerated, no matter who says it. Same with gringo.

• The "C" word is a derogatory word used to refer to a certain segment of society that in many cases is not offended by it's use
  
• Being from a somewhat "cracker" background I can attest to the fact that offense is taken from it's use based more on the econmic/social strata status of the user as opposed to the ethnic background
• The "N" word carries the baggage of an era of enslavement and suffering
• It's use by non-blacks, especially caucasions, is generally interpreted as an attempt to rub one's face in their past suffering and to indicate that the individual is still viewed as *sub-human or slave material.  Consequently it's use is considered very insulting. (*One of the more shameful rationalizations for slavery was that blacks were not really people and were more akin to beasts of burden, so they really didn't suffer from being enslaved.)
• The reason that many blacks use the word to refer to each other is a form of defense mechanism.  By taking the word and making it their own, they remove some of the sting from it's use.
  

Sammy wrote: Gatyr wrote: And let me ask you this: Would you rather be beaten, enslaved, killed, stereotyped against, or would you rather be denied of a "WET", or a white pride day? I think it's safe to say that most black people these days who watch BET have never been beaten, enslaved, or killed. And most whites have never beaten, enslaved or killed a black guy.

• I would not wish to be enslaved in any manner, even if the work was easy and the rewards great.  I, like many other people, value my personal freedom and am unwilling to relinquish it.
• While it is true that their are no slave holders or slaves in our country today, that is not a valid reason to ignore the past.  While I don't believe in any type of compensation for those actions, neither do I belive they should be forgotton.  Remembering and learning from the mistakes of the past is what keeps them from being repeated.
  

Savage93fvss wrote: Gatyr, Christopher Columbus: He's Portugueuse not even white.

Im not sure Clark was able to make you feel as stupid as you should by his post, so I'll let you read it to yourself once more.

Fourth of july has nothing to do with race, its about the founding of our country.

Then what does Cinco De Mayo have to do with race? Nothing. Its a national holiday celebrating the mexican(not the race, rather, the country) victory over the french in the French Intervention in Mexico. It was a step towards their independence, and as such, the people od Mexico are proud and celebrate their independence, similar to how we do on independence day, also konwn as the fourth of July.

Thanksgiving is about the celebration of the indians helping the pilgrams, indian and white people.

You said it yourself, a celebration about white people, and indians. You kind of proved my point and discredited yourself. 

News stations dont cater to anybody, just because they dont have many black people as anchors your going to assume that they're catering to whites, in my eyes, thats pretty racist

Where did I say anything about news stations? I said FOX, not FOX News, or CBS News, or NBC News. And I dont quite follow as to how what I said was racist. Elaborate for me? Even if I did mention a news station, ad I did call it a white network, how would that be racist?

Mack you’re awesome..... not. I love your philosophy and seem pretty confident in your statements. You say your thoughts, but to me you can't prove them. Your proof is theories you read prior to these posts you have made. These "proofs" are no more than quotes on theories.

Darur wrote:   but there is a good example of a derogatory word towards Whites.  See, the word in some forms is acctualy nothing bad, but most of the time its the equvilent of the n-word or any other racial slur you wouldnt say infront of your mother.

Ok...?

I think we can all agree that there are racial slurs enough to go around.

Cedric wrote: Linus wrote: Cedric wrote: Yes. You have absolutly NO RIGHT to say who gets offended by what. Some blacks get offended by the N word, and some dont. Some whites get offended by "cracker" and some dont. Yes, I actually do. Cracker is a term which was describing slave owners. It came from when the slave owners would crack their whips. Hence 'cracker'. Now, if you get offended by that, you're an idiot. Since N.igger applies to every black person, it is offensive.

• The "N" word applies to every black person so it is offensive
• The "C" word doesn't apply to every white person, thus
• It isn't offensive to those it doesn't apply to despite the fact that it compares them to slave owners (I'm assuming here that being compared to a slave owner is bad-given the negative connotations and the moral repugnancy of slavery, this is probably a valid assumption)
• It isn't offensive to those that it applies to because, since they own slaves, it is merely descriptive--oh wait, we no longer have slavery in most civilized nations

Clark Kent wrote: I think we can all agree that there are racial slurs enough to go around.