|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: Control of racism, how far is too far?
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
Growing up in America, I learned a very important truth at an early age, and apply it in my life daily. Wish other people would.
Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.
What a bullshit phrase. Better would be:
Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will break my heart.
Tis great for you if you can shrug off (or work through, or whatever) things that have been said about/to you. Those who are screwed over by them know their pain and their power.
And comparing the two, physical or mental pain, is redundant. People prefer the one they haven't experienced, or aren't currently experiencing.
Sarkycow
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
nonpropheteer:
Most of the groups you mention in your diatribe:
are not races so making a joke about them is not racist. In fact the only possible race there are the Macedonians, and I can't think of anything funny about them.
Making jokes about a nun is very different from making jokes about a black person, because the nun has never, as far as I know, been the recipient of enforced slavery, inferiority and societal exemption.
<<snip>>
That would make me a snob and a wanker.
I'm fairly certain you are a wanker anyway, but I could be wrong.
I dont see the difference between telling a joke that a nun would find offensive and telling one an arab would find offensive. Or one a woman would find offensive. Or one a white man would find offensive.
You see how upset Karl got just being reminded of the hazing he took. You think those comments, while probably not racist, failed to effect him? No race, sex, creed or color has any more or any less right than any other to be offended.
Take off your PC glasses and enjoy the view. There are a whole bunch of people out there that think differently and that you might not agree with, but that are perfectly capable of doing their jobs in a responsible and fair manner.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Just noticed the ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif) inserted by NP. He's an even nastier vindictive individual than I thought.
Seems like you learnt well from those who gave you verbal hassle. You've turned into one of them. A nasty little bully. Start with verbally destroying someone, then get at them for being upset by it. Shame you had to invent the waterworks.
You really are an unpleasant individual, aren't you?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
Just noticed the inserted by NP. He's an even nastier vindictive individual than I thought.
Seems like you learnt well from those who gave you verbal hassle. You've turned into one of them. A nasty little bully. Start with verbally destroying someone, then get at them for being upset by it. Shame you had to invent the waterworks.
You really are an unpleasant individual, aren't you?
Perhaps I am. Some people find me quite charming, while others despise me. Most people fall somewhere inbetween. One thing I am not, nor will I ever be, is a victim. If someone does something to me, or says something about me; that reveals something of their character, not mine. It only gives them power over me if I allow it.
Those people that hurt you were cruel, but those people don't exist anymore - they've grown and changed. Have you? Or do those people from back then still have power over you? It takes a whole lot more will power to hold on to something than to let it go.
Maybe I can do it easier than some people...I don't know, I'm just a guy living his life(hopefully) to the best of his ability.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
(ok, to continue the tangent)
Look, NP, my brother has severe Aspergers and I know that it caused (and causes) him to find it very difficult to fit in. He was often beaten-up at school and certainly didn't have many friends at all. He has always found face to face interation with others to be highly problematic because he cannot "read" people the way you and I can. This does not mean he found it easy to be the butt of everyone's oh so hilarious "jokes". To say that Aspergers syndrome causes no more social difficulties then being chubby and into D and D is complete and utter bollocks.
I should also point out that I am not attempting to speak for Karl. I have no idea how severe Karl's AS is or whether he experienced the same stuff my brother did. I am purely speaking for me when I say that I think you are coming across as a puerile little turd who knows shit all.
(end tangent)
Kenwritez - I think you are almost correct in what you say. I certainly can't claim to be devoid of all prejudice and it seems unrealistic to demand that no police officer has the slightest racial prejudice. However, I don't think BNP members or those who are openly and overtly racist should have a place in the ranks of the police for the reasons that Karl has already given.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
quote:
Quoth the nonpropheteer:
I'm fairly certain you are a wanker anyway...
Well, yes, but I am trying and by the grace of God, and with the constant help of people like you, I will achieve nirvana.
quote:
I dont see the difference between telling a joke that a nun would find offensive and telling one an arab would find offensive. Or one a woman would find offensive. Or one a white man would find offensive.
No difference whatsoever, but the question is 'would the nun in question find the joke offensive?' if she would then you don't play the joke.
Given that black people (for example) have been oppressed for generations and derided with nigger (for example) jokes I take it as given that such jokes would cause offence and would therefore not use them.
If I had a black friend who enjoyed the word 'nigger' I might us it with him, and only him. It's a case basis.
Call that PC if you want, I call it cultural respect.
quote:
You see how upset Karl got just being reminded of the hazing he took. You think those comments, while probably not racist, failed to effect him? No race, sex, creed or color has any more or any less right than any other to be offended.
followed by:
quote:
Take off your PC glasses and enjoy the view. There are a whole bunch of people out there that think differently and that you might not agree with, but that are perfectly capable of doing their jobs in a responsible and fair manner.
You have the incomparable ability to produce both a non sequiteur (look it up, you might be able to use it later in conversation) and recipreverse exclusion (you'll have to read the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy to get that one) in the same grammatic flow. That takes skill.
Nonprofiteer, it may well be that you are coming across badly in this thread, and that in real life you are a charming and debonaire individual, but at the moment you are sounding like a weasley little shit.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rosemary
Shipmate
# 100
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
Many races have endured slavery. Blacks are not alone in that distinction.
It may be worth noting that all humor involving race and/or Nationality isn't necessarily evil. In some cases, those very races may even champion those jokes. I have experienced this first-hand in the Jewish community where I live. There are some really hilarious Jewish Mother jokes that have been told to me by Jews during the High Holy Days! C'mon, now. Consistent truths about a particular group -- let's call them by their nasty little name -- stereotypes -- are played upon for their comic content because in some way they often contain a grain of appreciable truth. In some ways, to me, it's even a kind of celebration of some aspects of a group. When those stereotypes are twisted to the detrement of a race or group, sure, call foul and loudly. But, for pity's sake, you've got to concede a place for the humorous enjoyment of the very things that define the diversity to which we all contribute and that we all need and enjoy.
But this example is completely different from the issue in question. The Riv's example is of people making a joke about themselves and inviting others to laugh with them. The original issue is of one group making fun of another group with malicious intent.
rosemary
--------------------
"It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness." Confucius
Posts: 743 | From: cardiff | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sophs
Sardonic Angel
# 2296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
One thing I am not, nor will I ever be, is a victim. If someone does something to me, or says something about me; that reveals something of their character, not mine. It only gives them power over me if I allow it.
NP
Well good for you then
![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
We are studying Anti Semetism in History at the moment, comparing it throught a century ending in 1938. Whilst studying we talk about stuff that is happening now.
Last week we chatted about an undercurrent of Anti Semetism in France post the revolution and were asked if we thought that if you scratch the surface on our society today then would you find Anti-Semetism, or Racism? The whole class thought yes. And we have a mixed class, ranging from left wing to right wing and a couple of americans thrown in, we could all identify rascism bubbling under the surface.
If that is the case, surely it is even more important to stop the expression of it? Especially if the problem comes from something that is meant to represent and respect our society.
Posts: 5407 | From: searching saharas of sorrow | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
I, and my family and friends, have experienced so much racism from the police that it does not surprise me when some of them display their innate racism. Any police who have not dealt with the racism that is in them so that they throw it around the way this lot did should be out ASAP, instantly. Other police officers have been working hard to act respectfully to all of us, no matter what racial or ethnic background or colour we are from. They are the ones who should be kept in.
If police are racist when out boozing, or relaxing, it just shows how they would probably act surrepticiously or openly when they deal with us.
And I have relations in the Met, so I do know some of their difficulties, and I do respect some of them.
Bill MacPherson is also someone who is due respect - his family were never disrespectful or racist to anyone. So what he says is very worth listening to.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
'Justus'
Shipmate
# 2424
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
I was a chubby encyclopedia-reading Dungeons and Dragons geek. Some claim I still am. I much preferred the taunts over the bullies.
NP
NP
Geek you may be but the difference is that you chose to be a geek. You got to choose to play D&D and read encyclopaedia. People don't get the choice over aspergers, colour or gender. That’s why ridiculing someone for their disability, their ethnicity or their sex is so demeaning – it’s not what you chose to be it's who you are.
The reason racist jokes are an issue is what they beget. In order to commit genocide against a race the first step is to dehumanise them, to remove the characteristics of an individual and to replace it with a generalisation – they all stink, they’re all stupid, they’re all scroungers etc. etc. Remove the humanity and replace it with a stereotype. Once that’s done the real nasty stuff can begin
This isn’t about the thought police. It’s about those slights, slurs, jokes and countless small petty vindictive acts, which seen in isloation may be capable of justification, but when seen as a cumulative whole turn into the breeding ground of fascism.
It might be a long journey from telling an anti-Semitic joke in Berlin to the jackboots marching down the Champs Elysee, but join the dots and you’ll get there in the end.
I’m not saying everyone who tells a racist joke is a Nazi, but I believe acts of racist abuse have their roots in the joke once told and once appreciated that made the abuse seem justifiable enough to carry out.
Posts: 295 | From: York | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
3M Matt
Shipmate
# 1675
|
Posted
The current suggestion is that the Police should be banned from being members of the BNP.
Personally, I don't think this should happen unless the BNP is banned first.
From a legal standpoint (though not a moral one) the BNP is a legitimate political party.
We tread on very dangerous ground when the government (a group of people of one political party) start deciding what political persuasions it's police force are allowed to have.
The pressure to do this is coming from the Anti-Nazi League. Their name might imply that this group are "good guys", but in fact they are in many ways an extreme left wing organisation and not exactly whiter than white themselves.
The idea of political parties trying to ban each other or ban individual's membership is a deeply uncomfortable one for me.
It means putting up with some obnoxious twits like the BNP, but this is surely the smaller price to pay.
matt
--------------------
3M Matt.
Posts: 1227 | From: London | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
Matt,
The BNP are not just idiots, they are promoting wickedness - ethnic discrimination. So no policeman should be allowed to belong to that "party".
Police should be encouraging respect and law-abidingness.
sophs: excellent post!
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justus:
Geek you may be but the difference is that you chose to be a geek. You got to choose to play D&D and read encyclopaedia.
So If I could chose, right now, to be black - it would be less offensive for someone to call me a nigger?
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chris
Shipmate
# 111
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
quote:
Originally posted by Justus:
Geek you may be but the difference is that you chose to be a geek. You got to choose to play D&D and read encyclopaedia.
So If I could chose, right now, to be black - it would be less offensive for someone to call me a nigger?
NP
If you could choose, right now, not to be such a bastard, would it be less offensive for me to think you are still an arsehole?
--------------------
...and praise will come to those whose kindness leaves you without debt...
Posts: 194 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
KenWritez
Shipmate
# 3238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
The BNP are not just idiots, they are promoting wickedness - ethnic discrimination. So no policeman should be allowed to belong to that "party".
Who made you God? Who gave you the right to judge what political affiliations a policeman can have?
I guess on your planet every single member of every single organization wholly believes in every single plank in the organization's agenda. No reserved or conditional members, no siree.
--------------------
"The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd." --Quentin Tarantino, Pulp Fiction
My blog: http://oxygenofgrace.blogspot.com
Posts: 11102 | From: Left coast of Wonderland, by the rabbit hole | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
So no policeman should be allowed to belong to that "party".
Yeah, right. England, cradle of democracy. ![[Snore]](graemlins/snore.gif)
Ya know, I hate Republicans. I think Libertarians don't live in the real world (Yeah, I'm talking to you, Etheredge.)
But, by God, they've a right to their opinions, regardless of what their jobs are.
"Allowed"! "Allowed"! Do you hear what you're saying, daisymay?
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
Call me an asshole if you like, but the fact remains that none of you know who really is or isn't racist. Some people take every precaution to make sure they are not thought of as racist, when they actually are. Some people take the play the role of racist because of the environment they live in, though they are not in fact racist.
Racist jokes might be an indication of racist philosophy, but it probably just means the person has a inappropriate sense of humor. If you persecute people for telling jokes that are offensive, then you MUST persecute EVERYONE who tells a joke that some group finds offensive. Note the choice of the word persecute over prosecute; to my mind this is nothing short of a witch hunt.
I'll drop the premise that "words will never hurt me", and admit that they can hurt emotionally. Though I would still rather be beaten with words than sticks.
If you admit that words can hurt and hurting people is bad, then it logically follows that any words that hurt someone are bad. Jokes at someone else's expense are hurtful and therefore wrong, regardless of color of skin, sex, cultural heritage, states of physical and mental health, and political affiliation. That includes Chris Rock and Richard Pryor when they make fun of white people, Baptists when they make fun of Catholics, Democrats when they make fun of Republicans. And all of you who say you don't have some group that you taunt are lying. Whether you do it in front of members of that group is beside the point.
FYI: Race is defined as:
1 : a breeding stock of animals
2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock
2 b : a class or kind of people unified by community of interests, habits, or characteristics <the English race>
Ethnicity is defined as:
1 : HEATHEN
2 a : of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background <ethnic minorities> <ethnic enclaves>
2 b : being a member of an ethnic group
2 c : of, relating to, or characteristic of ethnics <ethnic neighborhoods> <ethnic foods>
So making fun of Americans is racist. Making fun of sheep is racist. Making a law that protects only one particular race or group from percieved offense is dangerous, and backwards.
I have never owned slaves, would never own slaves, and don't know anybody who has owned or has been a slave. Therefore I refused to be punished or censored or participate in the punishment or censorship of another human being solely because the butt of their joke is related to someone who might have been a slave 100 years ago. Also, careful review of crime statistics shows that interracial violence is not as big a problem (in the US) as the media and "liberal" thinkers would have you believe, though in 1998 there was a significantly greater % of blacks killing whites than whites killing blacks.
How do you control racism? You certainly can't do it by empowering the racist. Laws that offer more protection to minorities only lend a sense of rightness to a racist thinker. All laws and prosecutions should take into account only the deeds of the individuals, not the thoughts. Its called "Freedom of Speech", and is one of the things that has made america great.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
The BNP are not just idiots, they are promoting wickedness - ethnic discrimination. So no policeman should be allowed to belong to that "party".
Who made you God? Who gave you the right to judge what political affiliations a policeman can have?
Sometimes you have to weigh up the "freedom of the individual" against the "interests of the many", and if someone who is a member of the BNP joins the police then you have someone who is actively committed to wanting to "clean up" Britain and get it across to non-white people that they are an inferior species who are not welcome here. This is in direct opposition to the principles of the organization he works for. This person is now in a position of some responsibility. He will not believe in treating everyone equally or fairly, which makes him unsuitable for that job, and brings the police force into disrepute. It will alienate, even further, some sections of the community who are already antagonistic to the police, and create further racial disharmony. Would it, therefore, be a responsible act to permit such a person to join the police, or to permit them to stay if it was subseqently discovered that they were a paid-up member of the party?
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
OK - as Sarkycow predicted we are back to a trans-Atlantic split on this issue. No prizes for guessing which side I'm on, in that case ![[Biased]](wink.gif) , but I am working very hard to understand the "typical American" view on this (and I hope that that isn't seen as an offensive over-generalisation).
If I've understood this, and other threads correctly, the "typical American" view is that freedom of speech should not be limited. X has the right to say whatever X likes; if Y is offended that is Y's problem and they should grow a thicker skin, or find some way of verbally overcoming X. You cannot pass laws to protect Y's feelings, as this is an impossible task which could only be achieved if the Thought Police weer brought in. (First pause. Is that an accurate summary? If I have mis-represented this line of thought please let me know, as I am trying to get my mind round a concept that does not come naturally to me.)
Part of my problem with that can be best explained by using an analogy. If X and Y are both at school and X is bullying Y, what should the school do? The implication of the position outlined above seems to me to mean that the school should do nothing. Y should toughen up, or take self defence lessons so that they can beat up X in return; however the school should take no action to restict X's freedom of action. (Second pause. If that analogy is inaccurate - as I'm sure it is - what have I missed? If freedom of speech should not be limited, should freedom of action be treated differently?)
All of which may be too Purgatorial for this thread, but I am genuinely interested in trying to understand this very deep divide between our cultures. Having said that, I will shortly be wandering for a few days, so I may not be able to get back for a while. Apologies for asking and running (it is frightfully bad form, I know) but this thread has raised an issue I've been mulling over for quite a while now, and this seemed like a good time to air my confusion.
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Wanderer:
OK - as Sarkycow predicted we are back to a trans-Atlantic split on this issue.
<<SNIP>>
If I've understood this, and other threads correctly, the "typical American" view is that freedom of speech should not be limited.
Its not a "typical" American view anymore. The PC police have been doing a bang up job protecting the minority groups from their big bad white male oppressors. There are common sense limits on Freedom of speech, such as yelling "Fire" in a crowded movie theater. Its okay if there is a fire, very bad if there is not one. Also, a call to criminal action is forbidden under various statutes, and verbal threats are legally actionable. Especially if its a white male making the threat against a minority. I am not against these types of legal actions or laws. What I am against, and believe any reasonable human being should be against, is having a racial or any other kind of joke, phrase or word considered legally actionable. It puzzles me that Lenny Bruce and George Carlin fans can be so willing to allow society to censor words.
quote:
X has the right to say whatever X likes; if Y is offended that is Y's problem and they should grow a thicker skin, or find some way of verbally overcoming X. You cannot pass laws to protect Y's feelings, as this is an impossible task which could only be achieved if the Thought Police weer brought in.
If X and Y are both at school and X is bullying Y, what should the school do? The implication of the position outlined above seems to me to mean that the school should do nothing.
I would expect any authority figure to put a stop to the hazing of someone should they witness it. Any punishments doled out should be even handed regardless of the victims socio-cultural status. If you would give a white kid ten days suspension for calling a black kid "nigger", then the black kid should get ten days for calling the white kid "trailor trash" or "cracker". Similarly, if a black kid calls another an "uncle tom", he should be punished by the same rule. You should not pass a law to protect Y's feelings - the law should be applied equally and protect EVERYONE's feelings.
The policemen in question were not hazing anyone - they were telling jokes to each other, one of which has been labled racist in nature. This does not make them racists. If they were hazing someone, anyone, regardless of the reason, they should be reprimanded, perhaps fired. But simply telling a joke? Get over it.
quote:
If freedom of speech should not be limited, should freedom of action be treated differently?)
Thinking that its ok to steal is fine. Actually stealing, however, is bad. Would you want people in jail for thinking its ok to steal? Should we gather them up and put them in "re-education" camps?
Freedom of speech is one of the founding causes of America. We haven't always believed that the government has the right to throw us in prison or otherwise punish us for speaking our opinions. That attitude seems to be going the way of slow death though.
And who defines what is racist anyway? I have heard from educated people that African Americans cannot be racist. Just boggles the mind.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
So If I could chose, right now, to be black - it would be less offensive for someone to call me a nigger?
But you can't choose to be black so that's a great big cul de sac of an argument.
But for the sake of the analogy let us assume for a minute that you have chosen to be black, does that change anything...hmm.
Nope, you're still a pillock.
In an ideal world there would be even handed treatment of people; it used to piss me off that there was a free 'womens safe bus' into town from university when I had to pay for my transport, but the fact of the matter is that women feel less safe on public transport than do men.
In an ideal world a racist oppression of a white man would be just as unacceptable as racist oppression of a black woman, but the fact of the matter is that after centuries of disparity positive discrimination is here until the balance is redressed.
Any joke is fine as long as the subject isn't offended by it. The chances are that a black person, a disabled person, a person with Aspergers syndrome, will be offended by your joke, so out of respect and deference you do not tell the joke.
If the subject is unlikely to be offended; nuns, sheep, Anne Widdecombe, then the joke is fine. You can't tar everyone with the same brush.
In theory I would tell a racist joke to my black friend if he wasn't going to be offended by it. In theory I would tell a disabled-ist joke to my disabled friend if he wasn't going to be offended by it. But would I do it in public?
No. Because someone might get the wrong idea, be offended by it, etc.
Respect is where it's at.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
You have the incomparable ability to produce both a non sequiteur (look it up, you might be able to use it later in conversation) and recipreverse exclusion (you'll have to read the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy to get that one) in the same grammatic flow. That takes skill.
Does that put me in the same catagory as Warren Harding?
quote:
Nonprofiteer, it may well be that you are coming across badly in this thread, and that in real life you are a charming and debonaire individual, but at the moment you are sounding like a weasley little shit.
It is always better to blast someone for their grammer when you spell things correctly.
Non Sequitur
Nonpropheteer
The internet isn't real life?
Ok, maybe I was too harsh with Karl - but my point is that the words used against him hurt just as bad as the word "nigger" thrown at a black person. Why shouldn't we search out the people that hazed him, get them fired, destroy their reputations, and lable them "elitist snobs"?
As far as nuns go, don't you think they would be offended by all the nun=slut jokes that are out there? Don't they have as much right to be just as angry as Karl, black people, republicans, etc? Shouldn't we call an investigation if a police officer starts a conversation by saying "So these three nuns died and went to heaven...."? Perhaps he has anti-catholic leanings and will not protect catholic churches and communities as well as he would protestant communities.
I'm sorry, but that is an awful flimsy reason to spend tens of thousands of dollars conducting an investigation.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Atmospheric Skull
Antlered Bone-Visage
# 4513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
It is always better to blast someone for their grammer when you spell things correctly.
X X X IRONY OVERLOAD ERROR X X X
Posts: 371 | From: Bristol, UK | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
Nonpropheteer:
I was wondering when you would start to pick up on random spelling errors. People always seem to do that in on-line arguments when the tide is against them. I assume it makes them feel intellectually superior when in fact all it means is that they have nothing better to do.
I apologise unreservedly for spelling your name wrongly.
No, the internet is not 'real life' insofar as in a text medium it is very easy to come across badly when in real life, with context, you may actually be a nice guy.
You come across badly in some of your posts, that was my point.
Nuns may well be offended by nun-slut jokes. I wasn't aware that there were any nun-slut jokes. However there are lots of non-offensive nun jokes as well. I don't imagine there are many non-offensive racist jokes.
And yes, Karl has every reason to be angry, and if someone now was making fun of him for his Aspergers syndrome I would expect there to be repercussions. But you can't retrospectively apply that to kids at school 10 years ago (much as I would like to hunt down everyone who bullied me)
Racism in the police is an emotive issue. Far more so than nun mocking. A police officer must must be even handed and if they harbour racist attitudes they can't be trusted to excercise their duty with probity.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
In an ideal world there would be even handed treatment of people; it used to piss me off that there was a free 'womens safe bus' into town from university when I had to pay for my transport, but the fact of the matter is that women feel less safe on public transport than do men.
In an ideal world a racist oppression of a white man would be just as unacceptable as racist oppression of a black woman, but the fact of the matter is that after centuries of disparity positive discrimination is here until the balance is redressed.
You admit we don't live in an ideal world adn think "reverse discrimination" is going to make it all better? As long as you make these laws that protect minorities more than they protect the majority, you foster hatred and racism. Since we don't live in an ideal world, we should make every effort to either create less laws or ensure those we do make apply regardless of race, sex, and political affiliation. For example, Hate crime legislation in America punishes white offenders more harshly for killing a black person than if they had killed a white person. There have been many opportunities to apply this legislation when the offender has been black and the victim white, but to my knowledge it has never occurred. If white people are not allowed to offend black people, then blacks people should not be allowed to offend white people either.
With your philosophy, a black man could taunt me three ways till sunday, calling me every slur his oppressed brain could possibly think up - but if I say anything back to him, I'm the one that is in the wrong. He shouldn't persecuted for assailing me with racial jokes either, because one of his relatives might have been a slave, so he has a right to be angry and disrespectful to me.
That is grade A, jumbo size, dyed in the wool bullshit.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
Nonpropheteer:
I was wondering when you would start to pick up on random spelling errors. People always seem to do that in on-line arguments when the tide is against them.
Don't feel the tide is against me, don't care about spelling or grammer. You brought the subject up, so perhaps you felt the tide was against you?
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
Welcome, everyone, to the Nonpropheteer school of arguing.
Todays lesson, Advanced Arguing 101.
I know you are but what am I
This is a very powerful argument technique. If you are ever insulted, for example an apponent might call you 'stupid', you simply say "I know you are, but what am I?"
There is no effective comeback from such an advanced reposte.
The technique is flexible, too. Try it for yourself and see how many situations you can apply it to!
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
The BNP are not just idiots, they are promoting wickedness - ethnic discrimination. So no policeman should be allowed to belong to that "party".
Who made you God? Who gave you the right to judge what political affiliations a policeman can have?
I guess on your planet every single member of every single organization wholly believes in every single plank in the organization's agenda. No reserved or conditional members, no siree.
On my planet it's not God who makes the rules about political parties or which public employees are allowed to join them. Do you have a God who does that? Here it's the human beings who make laws - and work at getting them put into practice. Because they are imperfect, (being human beings - that's part of their definition) they know that they have to work sensibly and hard to counteract racism.
I wonder what a BNP God would be like? A shape-shifter who appeared very neat, suited and booted, then a tattooed skin-head, then a drunken cop?
![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
quote:
Who made you God? Who gave you the right to judge what political affiliations a policeman can have?
I guess on your planet every single member of every single organization wholly believes in every single plank in the organization's agenda. No reserved or conditional members, no siree.
On this occasion I disagree with the excellent Kenwritez. I hardly think that one can uphold the rule of law by day and be a member of a political organisation, whose members have been involved in racist violence and which advocates an end to parliamentary democracy and the establishment of a facist regime, by night. It's about as consistent as hiring a paid up member of the vegetarian society at MacDonalds. You kind of know that their deeply held beliefs clash rather violently with the ethos and objectives of the organisation.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
'Justus'
Shipmate
# 2424
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
For example, Hate crime legislation in America punishes white offenders more harshly for killing a black person than if they had killed a white person. There have been many opportunities to apply this legislation when the offender has been black and the victim white, but to my knowledge it has never occurred. If white people are not allowed to offend black people, then blacks people should not be allowed to offend white people either.
NP
A few statistics for you to ponder:
A Home Office research study of 1981 estimated that people of Afro-Caribbean origin were 36 times more likely, and people of Asian origin 50 times more likely to be the victims of racially motivated attacks than white people.
In 1990 the police in England and Wales recorded 6,459 racist incidents. This figure doubled to 13,878 in 1997/8, and doubled again to 23,040 in 1998/9 and 47,814 in 1999/2000. However, the British Crime Survey estimated that there were 390,000 racially motivated incidents in England and Wales in 1995, which fell to 280,000 in 1999
We know that ethnic minorities are the most likely to experience a racist incident. In fact the 2000 British Crime Survey found that the risk of victimisation for white people was 0.4 per cent, compared with 2.2 per cent for black people, 3.6 per cent for Indians and 4.2 per cent for Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.
The most recent (2000) British Crime Survey estimated that in 1999 only 40 percent of the racist incidents against minority ethnic victims, and 61 per cent of the incidents against white victims, were reported to the police.
Note the different reporting rates for white and minority ethnic victims. Note also that the law applies equally.
The research papaer form which these statistics are taken can be found here .
Posts: 295 | From: York | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alaric the Goth
Shipmate
# 511
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
Matt,
The BNP are not just idiots, they are promoting wickedness - ethnic discrimination. So no policeman should be allowed to belong to that "party".
Labour Party policy is (arguably) promoting immorality, and destruction of 'the family' : that is wickedness.
Conservative policy is (arguably) promoting love of money (which 'is the root of all evil') and of material wealth: wickedness again.
Green Party policy is (arguably) promoting economic stagnation leading to joblessness: what wickedness!
Better not let any of the police belong to THOSE wicked parties!
The problem is that 'racism' is seen as 'the greatest evil' by many of our politicians and media people. It's not: it's just one sort of evil. I think abortion, for example, is an evil, but that is one which most politicians of most parties have no intention of outlawing.
Posts: 3322 | From: West Thriding | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
Who made you God? Who gave you the right to judge what political affiliations a policeman can have?
I think you'll find that God actually commands people to act justly, to exercise a certain degree of judgment. But even at a basic humanist level, it is right that a society should be able to say that the enforcers of its laws should hold to certain patterns of behaviour, and that affiliation with racist political parties who advocate deportation and the subversion of democratic processes should be one of the things law enforcers should not be doing.
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
Alaric, that's a bit of a facile argument.
None of the parties you mention have a manifesto which purports to ethnically cleanse the UK. The BNP, however well it dresses it up in pompous verbal diarrhoea, does.
I would not be happy if a person entrusted with the safety and well being of my black neighbour was a paid-up member of the BNP. You can scream 'suppression of political liberty' if you like, but the way I see it ethos politic comes first.
Some jobs are unsuited to people with a particular political persuasion. If I was a member of the Green party I would be unlikely to work for Esso, and Esso would be unlikely to employ me. Likewise I don't expect a member of the BNP to work for the police, or for the police to employ a member of the BNP.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justus:
A few statistics for you to ponder:
A Home Office research study of 1981 estimated that people of Afro-Caribbean origin were 36 times more likely, and people of Asian origin 50 times more likely to be the victims of racially motivated attacks than white people.
<<SNIP>>
... in 1999 only 40 percent of the racist incidents against minority ethnic victims, and 61 per cent of the incidents against white victims, were reported to the police.
Note the different reporting rates for white and minority ethnic victims.
The research papaer form which these statistics are taken can be found here .
So then Brits are more racist than Americans?
How do they differentiate which crimes were racially motivated and which were crimes of opportunity? If a white man tells a joke with racist connotations, then later robs a black man, was his motivation cash or hate? How do you know?
One thing I've learned about statistics is that unless you know how the data was collected, they really tell you nothing at all. Statistics also do not prove facts, they only give indications of trends based on known variables.
From the 1998 Uniform Crime Report (DOJ) I can use statistics that "prove" that 1 in 400 black Americans are murderers, while only 1 in 7000 white Americans are murderers. Is that a legitimate use of statistics? Does it have the ring of truth to it? Of course not, but if I were so inclined, I could easily twist things around to prove whatever I want. I've even heard the same murder statistics used to "prove" that we are not a segregated society - because primarly, whites kill whites and blacks kill blacks. The argument was that if we were truly segregated, then there would be MORE interracial violence. I found this to be as full of shit as as my own use of the data.
Given society's reluctance to call a black offender a racist, and it's willingness to lable a white offender a racist, I have to believe these stats are skewed -probably for political reasons. Also, if 60% of racist incidents were not reported, how do they know? Its at best guesswork, at worst an outright lie.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:
I think you'll find that God actually commands people to act justly, to exercise a certain degree of judgment. But even at a basic humanist level, it is right that a society should be able to say that the enforcers of its laws should hold to certain patterns of behaviour, and that affiliation with racist political parties who advocate deportation and the subversion of democratic processes should be one of the things law enforcers should not be doing.
Hmmm... teachers and politicians shouldn't belong to such parties either. After all, do you want someone who is anti-catholic teaching your catholic child? Now we have three groups for the gestapo to keep an eye on. And what about those radical, free-thinking intellectuals? That is definately a dangerous bunch.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
Of course, NP, the Gestapo were actually full of racists and a fine example why you shouldn't allow them to have any role whatsoever in the administration of the law.
A person who advocates racism is not an appropriate person to deal with law enforcement. Period.
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
Hmmm... teachers and politicians shouldn't belong to such parties either. After all, do you want someone who is anti-catholic teaching your catholic child?
The depths of random shite in your arguments have begun to amaze me.
Do I want a racist teaching my kids? No. And someone with a racist attitude should not be allowed to teach.
Teachers are chosen for their non-partisan attitudes. A Christian RE teacher will teach about all faiths with equal verve.
So should a BNP member be in a position of public influence (police, teaching)? No.
Should an anti-catholic be employed to serve in a catholic school? No.
Should an anti-blackpeople be employed to serve in an area with black people? No.
Isn't it past your bedtime?
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sine Nomine:
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
So no policeman should be allowed to belong to that "party".
Yeah, right. England, cradle of democracy.
Ya know, I hate Republicans. I think Libertarians don't live in the real world (Yeah, I'm talking to you, Etheredge.)
But, by God, they've a right to their opinions, regardless of what their jobs are.
"Allowed"! "Allowed"! Do you hear what you're saying, daisymay?
I think I do.... if a police officer belongs to the BNP then they are allied to an openly racist agenda. Police are supposed to be upholding the law. The law in UK does not "allow" racism. So BNP police would be going against the law.
We want police who are able to deal with the whole community fairly, not pick on some groups or individuals. That's why police training colleges are training the cadets against racism.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Riv
Shipmate
# 3553
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rosemary:
quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
It may be worth noting that all humor involving race and/or Nationality isn't necessarily evil. <SNIP> ...for pity's sake, you've got to concede a place for the humorous enjoyment of the very things that define the diversity to which we all contribute and that we all need and enjoy.
But this example is completely different from the issue in question. The Riv's example is of people making a joke about themselves and inviting others to laugh with them. The original issue is of one group making fun of another group with malicious intent.
rosemary
But rosemary, the 'original issue' was shown to be a non-starter. The allegation (of racism via humor) was found not to involve a police officer (according to the OP's article). Granted, we've moved into deeper waters since then. Now, I'm already on record re: ethnic jokes and 'malicious intent.' Your comment begs the question, however, why one group would open themselves up to that kind of scrutiny by sharing stereotypical humor about themselves to those outside of that group(?). Because hidden within is some modicum of universality that all might appreciate, even if it's distinctive to just one group. It's okay. I've never been told a joke in the way you described with the caviat that it was off limits to me b/c I'm not a member of the group in question. I have repeated those Jewish Mother jokes from time to time w/out one Jew in the crowd and that hardly makes me a racist, b/c there was no malicious intent -- nothing disparaging. Is it pointing out an idiosyncracy? Sure, but I think most often for the mutual understanding, acknowledgement and appreciation of everyone. And with ALL humor, timing is everything, including issues of appropriateness, familiarity, context, etcetera.
Aside: Not sure yet why this popped into mi sleepy mind, but here's an admittedly provocative take on how refusing Egalitarianism does not necessarily make one guilty of what I might call Negative Discrimination. In Defense of Elitism.
--------------------
"I don't know whether I like it, but it's what I meant." Ralph Vaughan Williams
"Riv, you've done a much better job communicating your passion than your point. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about." Tom Clune
Posts: 2749 | From: Too far South, USA. I really want to move. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:
Of course, NP, the Gestapo were actually full of racists and a fine example why you shouldn't allow them to have any role whatsoever in the administration of the law.
A person who advocates racism is not an appropriate person to deal with law enforcement. Period.
A person who tells offensive jokes is not necessarily a person who advocates racism and it is inappropriate to treat them as if they are advocating hatred.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
I am dealing with the general point.
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alaric the Goth:
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
Matt,
The BNP are not just idiots, they are promoting wickedness - ethnic discrimination. So no policeman should be allowed to belong to that "party".
Labour Party policy is (arguably) promoting immorality, and destruction of 'the family' : that is wickedness.
Conservative policy is (arguably) promoting love of money (which 'is the root of all evil') and of material wealth: wickedness again.
Green Party policy is (arguably) promoting economic stagnation leading to joblessness: what wickedness!
Better not let any of the police belong to THOSE wicked parties!
The problem is that 'racism' is seen as 'the greatest evil' by many of our politicians and media people. It's not: it's just one sort of evil. I think abortion, for example, is an evil, but that is one which most politicians of most parties have no intention of outlawing.
That's a bit weak: the "arguably" is the weak bit. The BNP are definitely and openly racist. They have links with official neoNazis, even if they don't call themselves such because then the silly people who get conned by them would see them for who they are.
If cops are stupid enough to join them they are either very thick or distinctly racist. And racist does not just mean being prejudiced against someone of a different colour. The BNP is against many europeans too. BNP are bullshit.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:
Of course, NP, the Gestapo were actually full of racists and a fine example why you shouldn't allow them to have any role whatsoever in the administration of the law.
A person who advocates racism is not an appropriate person to deal with law enforcement. Period.
A person who tells offensive jokes is not necessarily a person who advocates racism and it is inappropriate to treat them as if they are advocating hatred.
NP
Why not? They are hiding their vicious agenda behind the "jokes".
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
A person who tells [racist] jokes is not necessarily a person who advocates racism and it is inappropriate to treat them as if they are advocating hatred
A person who is not racist will not tell racist jokes.
By its very definition, singling out a person based on the colour of their skin is racist whether it is positive, negative or joking. A joke which depends on the colour of the subject's skin is a racist joke and is innapropriate in anything but the most stringent of circumstances (by which I mean that I might tell a joke about a disabled person to my disabled friend if I knew they would find it funny and non-offensive. I would not tell such a joke to any one else)
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
The depths of random shite in your arguments have begun to amaze me.
Do I want a racist teaching my kids? No. And someone with a racist attitude should not be allowed to teach.
Teachers are chosen for their non-partisan attitudes.
In America, teachers are chosen based on their education and their willingness to be underpaid. They are not given psychological exams to see if they have any prejudices, and their joke telling at home is not monitored.
quote:
So should a BNP member be in a position of public influence (police, teaching)? No.
I have no idea what the BNP is - but I have gathered its some type of white supremacist movement. So what about the democratic process? Not only do you want to keep people from telling offensive jokes when amongst their friends, but now you want to deny them a political platform too? I do not advocate racism and would think it horrid if such a group came to power (though to hear some tell it, a version of that group is in power in every anglo controlled country anyway); but I will not deny them their political ideologies and agendas. It is actions that should damn people, not words or thoughts.
Let me ask you this: If the officers in question quit the BNP and ceased telling racial jokes, would that mean that they are no longer racist? Would the world be a much safer place for colored people and fluffy little bunnies? If you believe that, you know nothing of human nature. I would much rather have the people that don't like me admit it as publicly as possible. Its those secret enemies that shake your hand and smile at you that you have to be careful of.
quote:
Isn't it past your bedtime?
No. My bedtime is 11 am, EST. Thanks for the concern
NP
[ 05. November 2003, 11:43: Message edited by: nonpropheteer ]
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7
|
Posted
Have to say that I'm with Daisymay here.
The Police have to deal with racism as part of their job. Notwithstanding what nonpropheteer (appropriate name, hmm?) says, telling racist jokes is a symptom of racism. Sure, racism is not about behaviour, it's an attitude*.
But if the symptoms of that racism are apparent in those who are part of the force which has to be employed to deal with it, then it is a VERY BAD THING. And that includes being Borderline Nazis.**
Lives are in their hands. Anything which compromises that has to be taken seriously.
Yes, I still think the police made an example of them, and that it wouldn't normally have done so. But on balance, I now think that they were right to do what they did.
_____________
*What, you think being nice to black people is enough? Think again.
Oh and for all you Young Republicans out there: that's satire, kids.
**Oh, sorry. "Members of the BNP". Same difference.
--------------------
Narcissism.
Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
that Wikkid Person
Shipmate
# 4446
|
Posted
So you're carefully separating racism from hatred, then IBP?
--------------------
We have only one truth and one reality. Let's make the most of them.
Posts: 1007 | From: Almonte, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by that Wikkid Person:
So you're carefully separating racism from hatred, then IBP?
there are lots of different kinds of hatred, and while racism overlaps, not all racism is founded on hate. Sometimes it's founded on ignorance, stupidity, anti-Christian beliefs and bad science as well.
--------------------
Narcissism.
Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Riv
Shipmate
# 3553
|
Posted
daisymay, he said "not necessarily."
Good grief, people, the article says the allegations against cops in question were found to be false. Some of you are banging your heads against the wall over those poor guys.
--------------------
"I don't know whether I like it, but it's what I meant." Ralph Vaughan Williams
"Riv, you've done a much better job communicating your passion than your point. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about." Tom Clune
Posts: 2749 | From: Too far South, USA. I really want to move. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
that Wikkid Person
Shipmate
# 4446
|
Posted
Any racial jokes or terms I've heard in the last 10 years have come from rural, rusticly ignorant people who've mostly only seen non-white people on TV.
--------------------
We have only one truth and one reality. Let's make the most of them.
Posts: 1007 | From: Almonte, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
