Thread: Is it racism, (or sexism, or discrimination) even it it's the truth?

Originally Posted by alexa

No. I live in Scotland.

Ha ha, Well then you should have paid attention to my first line and read the whole thing before you answered.

Ah, I see.
Quite an unusual posting style then.

My father's family immigrated here from Scotland, in the late 1800's.
Most of them landed in the Carolinas, and then they spread outward and southward from there.
My grandfather married a Blackfoot Indian lady, and they settled near Sanford, Florida.

Outstanding satire.

And spot-ON.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=770_1346015186

Originally Posted by sparky2

We live in an overly-politically-correct society, in my opinion.
The United States in the 21st century has somehow become a place where plain truths are too uncomfortable to ponder, and frank-honest discourse is a thing to be feared and shunned.
(For fear of offending, I can only imagine.)

Weakness in parenting, weakness in company & corporate management, weakness on the part of our educators, and weakness even in our military leadership circles have conspired to help create a culture of trembly-kneed young men and women who are afraid to tell the truth. Especially when the truth could possibly be viewed or construed as racist, sexist, or somehow discriminatory.
....

A quick glance through this forum section indicates otherwise: expressions of racism and prejudice abound, people do not appear to be shy at all to spout the most absurd and ignorant gibberish.

Right, that's stupid to think that somebody is superior, subordinate or victime because of his sex, is origin, etc, etc...
People shoud juge people as people, not as a black, a white, a girl, a man, etc, etc...

I agree with anti-PC, not because I think insulting people is good, but because PC/anti-PC has become the entire conversation. We don't talk about race sex or anything else, we talk about whether or not a statement is racist or sexist. It's so much so a cognitive kill switch that we can't talk about fixing the problems that exist on both ends, because to deal with the existence of said problems is to be either "Racist" or "PC" so we essentially agree as a society to never talk about it. We're so busy defending against the PC or Racist labels that we're not dealing with PCism or Racism. The conversation changes from being about the situation to being about the people having the conversation. When it comes to bigotry, the whole conversation always ends that way -- "Yes I am", "no I'm not", "you're racist for thinking I'm racist" -- so we can't talk about race.

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2009/...ll_switch.html

Racial "problems" are being talked about all the time, and when it's done from a racist perspective I don't see why I shouldn't call it that.

It seems not only do people want to be able to spout the most offensive racist drivel, for which there is a lot of leeway here, but also to be free to do so without being called on it, which is not granted by the forum rules. lol

playing the race card.... the homophobe card.... the sexismcard happens and those who falsely use it have no issues using it to "get out of situations' they don't like.


Whether it's an online e-argument - ie - Chick-fi-a is allowed to donate to anyone they choose to because they are a private organization. Answered with, YOU MUST BE A HOMOPHOBE IF YOU SUPPORT CFA DONATING TO GAY HATE GROUPS (didn't realize Fellowship of CHristian Athletes/students was a hate group but I digress)

WHether it's the politics - If you vote for McCain/Romney and not Obama, it's simply because you are racist


The overuse of racebaiting, homo-baiting, is getting to the point that it was just as dangerous as being racist, homophobe.

I mean.... the goal of the social media smear campaign on CFA was to hurt their business "because they are homophobic". It didn't work when Romney called for the CFA appreciation day that Wednesday

Companies are painted into a corner with racial issues.... if two candidates with similar experience, education and backgrounds apply, one is black and the other is white... the tie almost has to go to black guy because if you don't, you run the financial risk of having to pay off the black guy if he sues. A quick settlement (ie - free money for the black guy) is in the best interest of the company since if it gets to the media, they could be labeled racist when in truth, maybe the white guy just had a better interview.

problem is... blacks are being taught when life throws them a curve, just shout "racist" and people will appease you.
same with gays.... get laid off from your job.... well, it surely couldn't have been because you didn't work well with others and had poor work ethic, it MUST have been because you were gay and the boss is just a homophobe.

I just love the irony of a black guy who gets upset at being labeled a lazy cotton picking n****** because he's black, but seems to have no issues when people assume he's well hung because he's black

Stereotypes are only "wrong" when it's hateful, I notice.

noone wants true equality, they simply want to be the one with the upper hand. There's a HUGE difference.

Originally Posted by JavisBeason

Stereotypes are only "wrong" when it's hateful, I notice.

No, it's rather that they are only "hateful" when they are hateful.

Otherwide they may just be wrong and/or amusing, like the stereotype about being well hung - would you like to hear it said to you once a week, whether true or not?

Originally Posted by stroll

No, it's rather that they are only "hateful" when they are hateful.

Otherwide they may just be wrong and/or amusing, like the stereotype about being well hung - would you like to hear it said to you once a week, whether true or not?

don't be a hypocrit about stereotypes.... You want all the benefits of stereotypes, but the bad ones are unacceptable and racist.

Do you think Asians like being told they are stereotypically the smallest hung?