Political Correctness: Make a Judgment

Lash wrote:

I agree with Fox about Keltic.
Old recycled vitriol with no substance.

I also loved Bill's post.

And, snood is knocked around alot because he knocks around alot.
I think it's a distinct show of how we feel about him that we don't walk around on eggshells because he's black. We treat him just as shitty as we do the pale homies.

LOL

I loved Bill's post too and it really ticks me off because I've been trying really hard to be really mad at Bill. I'm not succeeding very well though.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

And then try really hard--okay it isn't too hard--to understand that KW absolutely 100% has missed the point re Lash and my black friends and how we relate to them

No, sweetie - KW gets the point perfectly well - and I agree that you and Lash calling your black person dear friends "ni**ers" stretches credulity to the twilight zone.

Quote:

and, because he has no black friends of his own--why is that do you suppose?--he presumes to build all kinds of straw men in order to dishonestly and maliciously mischaracterize the points we have made and relates them in ways that have absolutely no relevance of any kind, not even as metaphor or analogy, to anything Lash or I have ever said.

And it gets dang tiresome having him stalk the two of us bringing up the same lies continued from his remarks of many months ago.

Dang, how you flatter yourself. Of all the people on this forum, I can think of few less worth following anywhere.

Snood:

Quote:

Just one small point - KW didn't post here because he was "stalking" anyone. I asked him to post here. I PM'ed him and asked him to.

Foxfyre:

Quote:

I presume you told him what to say too?

No. (Is she being intentionally obtuse, or is she just not too bright?) I think you're intentionally obfuscating things... I said I asked him to the thread, because you accused him of following you here. You see how one thing logically answers the other? That has nothing to do with the content of what he said when he got here.

Quote:

And did you warn him that it was dangerous to PM any private correspondence to you?

Exactly what (gratuitously nasty thing) do you mean by that? Are you referring to a particularly unpleasant series of incidents over a year ago not involving you, that you are just mentioning to stir up trouble? Well, it's characteristic of you. At least we know what to expect from good ole Foxfyre, huh?

Quote:

Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that KW posted garbage and has done so now on several threads over a period of time. That he chose to insert it here too qualifies as stalking.

No, dear. No matter what you think you can redefine, stalking is when one person targets someone and then gives them a lot of unwelcome attention. Stalking isn't disagreeing with you, even regularly, or "posting garbage" as you so daintily put it.

0 Replies

You don't think a person can be a friend, snood, regardless of how that's accepted?

You don't think it's possible--or that people do that sometimes?

Hmmm...

0 Replies

Just can't help yourself, can you Lash?

snood wrote:

Well, I know of some people who would tell you that being african-american doesn't grant you any special insight or perspective or voice about issues specifically involving african americans. I had someone on this forum tell me that being an african american man gave me no better idea about how african american men are regarded in america. Still trips me out to this day...

He was immediately beset by four white people who turned this perfectly sensible statement into a long lecture about how dare Snood pretend that he can speak for EVERY black person in America. Instead of just granting the obvious-that a person on one side of the color line clearly has more knowledge of what it is like to live on that side of the color line than someone who is on the opposite side of it-he got several pages of lecture and rebuke.

All of this, from people who belong to the group who created the color line in the first place. With themselves on the upside. And Snood and his folks on the downside.

But the white people on this forum have NO IDEA why, despite the presence of several very popular black people on this forum, only Snood seems to ever be willing to engage white people here on racial topics to any great degree. They just can't figure it out.

0 Replies

Feel free to ignore me, keltic. You don't have any point of reference about who I am--and I'm not interested in knowing you.

You are incorrect in everything you wrote--and it feeds a separatist mentality.

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

Just can't help yourself, can you Lash?

snood wrote:
Well, I know of some people who would tell you that being african-american doesn't grant you any special insight or perspective or voice about issues specifically involving african americans. I had someone on this forum tell me that being an african american man gave me no better idea about how african american men are regarded in america. Still trips me out to this day...

He was immediately beset by four white people who turned this perfectly sensible statement into a long lecture about how dare Snood pretend that he can speak for EVERY black person in America. Instead of just granting the obvious-that a person on one side of the color line clearly has more knowledge of what it is like to live on that side of the color line than someone who is on the opposite side of it-he got several pages of lecture and rebuke.

All of this, from people who belong to the group who created the color line in the first place. With themselves on the upside. And Snood and his folks on the downside.

Gosh, it was the 4 of us who created the color line. Shocked

What racist bastards we must be! Rolling Eyes

Could you possibly imagine anything more ridiculous to speak ignorantly about?

kelticwizard wrote:

But the white people on this forum have NO IDEA why, despite the presence of several very popular black people on this forum, only Snood seems to ever be willing to engage white people here on racial topics to any great degree. They just can't figure it out.

This repeated idiocy still means nothing.

Snood is hardly the only black poster to opine on racial topics.
KW, the Omni caring white man couldn't possibly know the reasons other people of ANY color choose which subjects to opine about.
The idea that "black posters" all choose to avoid the subject for the same reason is absurd. (As if the black members all beat the same drum. )
I've seen Onyx and eoe post on racial issues countless times without EVER seeing them receive the type of responses the accused have put upon Snood. Why? Because neither they, nor their arguments are Snood's and none of the accused are operating off of a preconceived M.O. either.
On the other hand; I've seen Noah get attacked 10 times as fiercely as Snood ever has why? Because he came in swinging 10 times harder, that's why.

Absent from your holier than thou admonishments, is the recognition of the fact that Snood himself openly admits that he too enjoys the more candid discussions and openly invites them and even shows appreciation for said candor. Really. In your desire to present yourself as the deacon of decency; you've feigned a level of contempt that is laughably out of proportion to the discussion at hand. Really. As seems to be your new hobby, KW, you are speaking directly and completely out of your a$$. Really. Nice of you to stand up for your friend, really, but you're making a complete fool of yourself. Really.

Ps. Anybody else catch SNL's Weekend Update's "really" segment this week? Laughing

("Alberto Gonzales seems to have less memory than my Comodor 64 and that runs on bong water. Really.")

Pps. I know for a fact that Lash really does care about Snood and the light you're painting her in is unfair, as she's more a proponent of the downtrodden than most phonies who like to play PC Police. I was honored to be compared to her during a phone call from someone who agrees with very little either of us write, who had called nonetheless to offer the compliment. Really. :wink:

0 Replies

You "know for a fact" that one person cares about another? How does that work, exactly? Do you "look into their soul" ala Bush, or do ya just take their word for it, cause you wanna?

0 Replies

O'Bill:

Quote:

Gosh, it was the 4 of us who created the color line. What racist bastards we must be! Could you possibly imagine anything more ridiculous to speak ignorantly about?

Be fair, Bill. That isn't even what was said. KW said that white people created the color line, not your four white people. If you're so sanguine in your opinions and attitudes there's really no need to misrepresent like that.

Quote:

In your desire to present yourself as the deacon of decency; you've feigned a level of contempt that is laughably out of proportion to the discussion at hand. Really. As seems to be your new hobby, KW, you are speaking directly and completely out of your a$$. Really. Nice of you to stand up for your friend, really, but you're making a complete fool of yourself. Really.

"Deacon of decency"? "Omni caring white man"? Such bile. I think KW made a lot of much needed sense. I think, on the other hand, the anecdotes about these comfortable fuzzy moments when "ni**er" is just friendly banter from a white person are the statements that have proceeded forth from an anus, and I think those trying to put those anecdotes forth as slices of life from well-adjusted, "normal" peeps who us uptight, friendless folk just don't understand are the ones looking foolish.

And just one more little thing. I've talked to Eoe offline about why she doesn't confront more. I hope she doesn't mind me saying so, but she chooses not to, for reasons she explained to me. For you to characterize her as someone who has addressed racial issues "countless times" is disingenuous. You're saying KW's assertion that I'm the only one who confronts race issues regularly is "not true". It is so clearly true that I can only guess at why you would be in such denial about it, and good buddy, what I can come up with ain't flattering.

0 Replies

Bill--- Wish I could say what I feel about what you wrote--but hope thank you and a hand squeeze will speak for me.

(kiss)

0 Replies

snood wrote:

You "know for a fact" that one person cares about another? How does that work, exactly? Do you "look into their soul" ala Bush, or do ya just take their word for it, cause you wanna?

Got me. Fact was a little sloppy/strong. I am quite confident in the assertion, however, and not on account of anything she's said to me directly; it was clearly written between the lines. I'd wager 10 to 1 if there were a way to prove it factual.

snood wrote:

O'Bill:

Quote:
Gosh, it was the 4 of us who created the color line. What racist bastards we must be! Could you possibly imagine anything more ridiculous to speak ignorantly about?

Be fair, Bill. That isn't even what was said. KW said that white people created the color line, not your four white people. If you're so sanguine in your opinions and attitudes there's really no need to misrepresent like that.

You're being rather single sided in your desire for even handedness... and I can't say I blame you since it's probably getting difficult to tell where your ass ends and KW's head begins. (Pssst... you're not responsible for the vitriol I return to him; I am... and to a lesser extent, he is)

snood wrote:

Quote:
In your desire to present yourself as the deacon of decency; you've feigned a level of contempt that is laughably out of proportion to the discussion at hand. Really. As seems to be your new hobby, KW, you are speaking directly and completely out of your a$$. Really. Nice of you to stand up for your friend, really, but you're making a complete fool of yourself. Really.

"Deacon of decency"? "Omni caring white man"? Such bile. I think KW made a lot of much needed sense.

I would imagine you would since it was tailored for your ears. Hell, it's essentially a caricature of your own argument and whether you're not realizing it or just not admitting it out loud out of return loyalty I'm not sure.

snood wrote:

I think, on the other hand, the anecdotes about these comfortable fuzzy moments when "ni**er" is just friendly banter from a white person are the statements that have proceeded forth from an anus, and I think those trying to put those anecdotes forth as slices of life from well-adjusted, "normal" peeps who us uptight, friendless folk just don't understand are the ones looking foolish.

What precisely are you saying here? Are you offended that any white people and/or black people would trivialize such a significant issue to that point? Or are you calling them liars? I can't say I've gone there or would, myself, or even that I approve... but I have seen tight folks of multiple shades share enough "my nigga's" to know that it happens often enough. At any rate, I wouldn't presume to advise you how to feel about that and it certainly doesn't have any bearing on whether or not KW's been talking out of his a$$, which he has.

snood wrote:

And just one more little thing. I've talked to Eoe offline about why she doesn't confront more. I hope she doesn't mind me saying so, but she chooses not to, for reasons she explained to me. For you to characterize her as someone who has addressed racial issues "countless times" is disingenuous. You're saying KW's assertion that I'm the only one who confronts race issues regularly is "not true". It is so clearly true that I can only guess at why you would be in such denial about it, and good buddy, what I can come up with ain't flattering.

You're definitely the current torch carrier, no doubt, but KW indicated you were the ONLY one which simply isn't true. We've had straight ranters and you damn well know it. I don't happen to know the ethnicity of most A2Kers since most don't post their actual photos the way we do (I initially fell under the impression that Lash was black, because one of the first times I remember running in to her she was taking the boots to a bigot, absent the standard whitey overcompensation for sensitivities). I definitely wouldn't wish to offend eoe, but off the top of my head I remember her commenting on the subject in relation to Bill Cosby and Chris Rock's tendency to speak about race, more than once, I think, and I'm pretty sure I remember her showing up during at least one of Noah the African's rants as well... in other words; I lost count. Hence; countless. You were really close to calling me a liar there Snood. I think you know better, so check yourself.

Lash wrote:

Bill--- Wish I could say what I feel about what you wrote--but hope thank you and a hand squeeze will speak for me.

(kiss)

No need darlin and I feel ya. Your kindness isn't a secret, I wouldn't think, but your tongue is so sharp you probably don't hear it recognized too often... and you seemed due. I accept the platonic gestures, but that's it, because my virtual heart still belongs to Brooklyn. :wink:

0 Replies

I'd never outright call you a liar unless you outright lie, Bill. I think its fair to say you play fast and loose with your presumptuousness pretty often. I might call you paternalistic and arrogant, but that'd be about my harshest.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I'd never outright call you a liar unless you outright lie, Bill. I think its fair to say you play fast and loose with your presumptuousness pretty often. I might call you paternalistic and arrogant, but that'd be about my harshest.

I've been called worse, much worse. (probably by all 3 of the remaining offenders)(recently)(really)

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I think its fair to say you play fast and loose with your presumptuousness pretty often.

Given that your presumptuous statements triggered this silly brawl, that's rich. In fact, it now appears that you may have had ulterior motives in sparking a brawl, because you PMd others (at least two) in order to fuel the argument--although it does seem that you did not get exactly what you wanted.

You presumed to claim that you could speak, uniquely, to the experience of every black person in this country. Called on that, you sullenly acknowledged that you could not speak for all black people, while claiming that you had not actually said as much (although that was the implication when you make such statements without qualification), and you attempted to imply that there were damned few black people for whom you weren't able to speak, and with special insight.

You also claimed that the mere fact of your skin color meant you knew better how other people "regard" you. Since then, you've attempted to trim your sails by the dishonest expedient of substituting "treat" for "regard" as though those were interchangeable verbs--which they are not.

At bottom, you refuse to retreat from your claim that you have special insight into the lives of black people--all black people i would suspect, despite your grudging retreat from the absolute--and you refuse to retreat from you claim that you know how people regard you, just because of the color of your skin.

That's monumental presumption. Here, let me try that on. Using the special insight which being white gives me into how all other whites experience America, i claim that Snood don't know jack about how whites "regard" him--and my claim is unassailable, just because i'm white, and i claim that gives me special insight into how white folks regard Snood.

See how simple-minded and idiotic such presumption is, Snood?

0 Replies

setanta:

Quote:

At bottom, you refuse to retreat from your claim that you have special insight into the lives of black people--all black people i would suspect, despite your grudging retreat from the absolute--and you refuse to retreat from you claim that you know how people regard you, just because of the color of your skin.

"At bottom" is where you have been with the whole discussion, Setanta - or where you keep trying to drag it. I haven't ever said anything about me or black people having "special insight" into the lives of black people - just more insight than white people. You can twist it, or accept it, and you can have the last word on it, as that is something on which you insist anyway.

0 Replies

John Howard Griffin

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Using the special insight which being white gives me into how all other whites experience America, i claim that Snood don't know jack about how whites "regard" him--and my claim is unassailable, just because i'm white, and i claim that gives me special insight into how white folks regard Snood.

See how simple-minded and idiotic such presumption is, Snood?

Set, how you allowed yourself to be outslicked into joining this bunch of liars and fools I'll never know. Abandon ship and come back over to the light. We miss you.

There is nothing wrong-NOTHING-in someone with a great deal of experience in something claiming to know of it and to speak for it. It is done all the time. I will give you two examples.

EXAMPLE ONE.

Smith: Acme Ball Bearings is a lousy place to work, they treat people like hell.

Jones: Have you ever worked at Acme Ball Bearings?

Smith: No. But I know it is a lousy place to work. I overheard a couple of people say so.

Jones: I have worked there, for 20 years. They pay 50% more than the average wage for each employee's skill group, their benefit and retirement packages are well above average, and I have received every promotion I was qualified for. Moreover, they have a personnel department with an impartial review board who fully discusses every suspension and termination before it happens, and for all the years I have been there, I have never seen anyone get terminated unless they were drunk, on drugs, or clearly so incompetent that they were a detriment to the department they worked in. I have worked in all three divisions, and more than one department in each division. I know most of the supervisors personally, and a fairer or more decent group of people I have never met. The attrition rate is one of the lowest of any company in the nation. In fact, we have quite a few three-generation employees, where not only did the employee's parents work there, but their grandparents before them. The company has never been the subject of any civil or human rights investigations, and has received several awards from civil rights and women's groups for fairness in it's hiring and personnel practices.

Smith: Yeah, but did you get to know EVERY employee who worked there?

Jones: No.

Smith: Then where the HELL do you get off saying that Acme Ball Bearings is a good place to work? You have to know if EVERY EMPLOYEE there is happy before you can say that!!!

Well, folks, after all that, does Jones have the right to say Acme Ball Bearings is a good place to work or not? Does he actually have to know each and every employee there to be able to say so?

EXAMPLE TWO

Suppose Joe Schultz, an American, travels to an Asian country. While discussing the country there, Vikash, a citizen of that country says to Schultz, "We have arranged marriages over here. It is much better. Americans should try arranged marriages."

Schultz: Oh, Americans would never like the idea of arranged marriages.

Vikash: How do you know? Do you know if EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN would be against arranged marriages? If you don't, you an NEVER say that Americans would be against arranged marriages!!!

See how ridiculous this entire idea is of having to know every single member of a group before you speak for it actually is? It was just a dodge by Lash because she wanted to deny Snood his right to speak as a member of the group he belongs to. As a result, Snood, a black man, was beset by four ridiculous white people telling him what HE knows about black people, and what he doesn't. Unbelievable.

Set, will you please cut your losses, admit you got temporarily outmaneuvered, and abandon that position? It can only go downhill for you from here. Did you ever, in your entire life, think you would end up as part of a white gang surrounding a black person, a gang which had the arrogance to tell him what he does and does not know about the experience of being black in America?

Come back to us, Set.

.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

"At bottom" is where you have been with the whole discussion, Setanta - or where you keep trying to drag it.

This discussion never had much altitude to begin with. That you now acknowledge sending PMs to get others to participate suggests to me that you have an agenda, which i suspect is to attack Lash. Private Messages which you have in the past sent to me about Lash suggest to me that you are obsessed with Lash, and that you want to paint her in the worst possible hues which a concerted effort in tandem with your online buddies can accomplish. So it's pretty pathetic to have you comment on how low this discussion might be. It doesn't bother me, by the way, that you attempt to slur me. Both because your opinion has little value to me, and because i have consistently argued the specific terms of your statement, and it is only now that i see re-opening this "discussion" with the reinforcement you called for, that i have developed sufficient contempt for your exercise to sink to your level of personal invective.

Quote:

I haven't ever said anything about me or black people having "special insight" into the lives of black people - just more insight than white people.

That is a lie. This is the first part of your statement which began this discussion:

snood wrote:

Well, I know of some people who would tell you that being african-american doesn't grant you any special insight or perspective or voice about issues specifically involving african americans.

If you like, i'll go back and get a link for that post, so that no one can reasonably suggest that i've manufactured this quote. It is clear in that quote that you have not compared the "insight" of black people to the "insight" of white people, except inferentially. What is clear is that you are inferentially suggesting that anyone who denies that you as an African-American have that special insight is wrong.

Quote:

You can twist it, or accept it, . . .

I accept and have consistently spoken against the implications of your statement, in both of it's parts. I have also consistently referred to exactly what you wrote, which does not constitute "twisting" anything.

Quote:

. . . and you can have the last word on it, as that is something on which you insist anyway.

Pot, meet kettle . . .

0 Replies

Spare me your witless histrionics, KW. Either you did not read the entire course of my response to Snood, or you have decided to ignore it.

I acknowledged that Snood's experience of being black in America gave him better insight into how blacks experience America in most cases. I stated clearly that i considered that reasonable, but that i do not consider it reasonable for him to make a global statement--that i don't consider it reasonable for him to suggest that he knows how all blacks experience America.

His statement was in two parts, and in the second part, he claimed that being black meant that he knew better than others how he is regarded. He used the verb "to regard," not i. That was not something which i manufactured because i was hot to attack Snood. He has since attempted to change the term from "to regard" to "to treat." As his original statement was worded, he hadn't a logical leg to stand on. Now, he attempts to change the term so that he can make his claim appear more reasonable, and he's called in his reinforcement. It's a pathetic effort altogether, and your lurid appeal to "come back to the light" just displays how absurd it has become.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

[
You presumed to claim that you could speak, uniquely, to the experience of every black person in this country.

That's not actually what he said, or if it is, it isn't what you all have been quoting back to him.

Quote:

Called on that, you sullenly acknowledged that you could not speak for all black people, while claiming that you had not actually said as much (although that was the implication when you make such statements without qualification), and you attempted to imply that there were damned few black people for whom you weren't able to speak, and with special insight.

Careful, Set. You are being selective in applying the rules of implication. I can recall one of your unqualified statements in this very thread that you later asserted did not mean "all".

I think that if everyone here just took a deep breath and looked at what snood actually wrote we could end this conversation and get back to discussing the substance of this thread, which I think had been very interesting. While there is still clearly tension between Lash and snood, I think they were doing a pretty good job of dealing with that by themselves and we should leave them to it. If snood is unreasonable in his desire for "the black man badge" then the rest of us are just as unreasonable in our deep desire to deprive him of it. As usual, reason and fairness is somewhere in the middle.

I will just say right now that snood knows more about being a black man in America than I do. Having black friends doesn't bring it home for me, nor does it mean that I can't still espouse certain ways of racist thinking.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Setanta wrote:
You presumed to claim that you could speak, uniquely, to the experience of every black person in this country.

That's not actually what he said, or if it is, it isn't what you all have been quoting back to him.

Yes--absent any qualification--that is the implication of what he wrote.

Quote:

Careful, Set. You are being selective in applying the rules of implication. I can recall one of your unqualified statements in this very thread that you later asserted did not mean "all".

If you want to play this game, it will be a simple matter for you to quote posts in which what you allege is evident.

Quote:

I think that if everyone here just took a deep breath and looked at what snood actually wrote we could end this conversation and get back to discussing the substance of this thread, which I think had been very interesting.

I have consistently quoted what Snood "actually wrote." If you have a quibble with my response, it is a simple matter to quote what i've written, and, from the depths of your impartial wisdom, display my error. As for ending the conversation, it was ended, and the thread had moved on to other matters when Snood effectively resurrected the discussion by sending a private message to his bulldog who came in to stomp all over the thread.

Quote:

While there is still clearly tension between Lash and snood, I think they were doing a pretty good job of dealing with that by themselves and we should leave them to it. If snood is unreasonable in his desire for "the black man badge" then the rest of us are just as unreasonable in our deep desire to deprive him of it. As usual, reason and fairness is somewhere in the middle.

You don't need to throw "black man badge" up in my face. I did not use the term, and i have not attempted to defend its use.

Quote:

I will just say right now that snood knows more about being a black man in America than I do. Having black friends doesn't bring it home for me, nor does it mean that I can't still espouse certain ways of racist thinking.

It is reasonable for him to say that he knows more about how most black men experience America, but not all. And that is the only point i made with regard to that part of his statement. It is completely unreasonable and illogical for him to assert that being black means he knows how he is regarded--the point to which i most specifically objected. In my objection, i was careful to point out precisely why that claim is unreasonable.

As for racist thinking, Snood is no more immune from that pitfall than are either you or i.

0 Replies

Political Correctness: Make a Judgment

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know