|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:39 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
BTW, would you rather be a victim of PCism, or a victim of this:
|
An either/or eh? I'd rather they not be discriminated against and for PC to be rejected. I'm consistent in my values.
No comment on the wild black on white crime from you either. I assume it is acceptable to rape a white woman because her genetic kin might have harmed the perps genetic kin.
| Quote: |
| 1. You don't have to be a Jew to spell it G-d. |
I've never come across a Christian or muslim who does that. But, fine. What religion are you?
| Quote: |
| 2. My being straight or not wasn't the question. |
Yes, it was. CC's question, in the form of a statement, was
| Quote: |
| I assume you are a straight, white male |
To which you answered:
| Quote: |
| No and no. I'm not affected by PCism. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| Quote: |
BTW, would you rather be a victim of PCism, or a victim of this:
|
An either/or eh? |
That's the reality of the situation. I'm all for your idealized, discrimination free zone. But that's not the real world. So which is it? Would you rather face the slings and arrows of PCism or the lingering effects of real discrimination.
| Quote: |
| No comment on the wild black on white crime from you either. I assume it is acceptable to rape a white woman because her genetic kin might have harmed the perps genetic kin. |
 Yeah, that's right. Kill the whities. Rape their women. Steal their children. Fair is fair. It's payback time.
| bj wrote: |
| huff wrote: |
| 2. My being straight or not wasn't the question. |
Yes, it was. CC's question, in the form of a statement, was
| chimp wrote: |
| I assume you are a straight, white male |
To which you answered:
| huff wrote: |
| No and no. I'm not affected by PCism. |
|
Are you being intentionally obtuse, or can you not read? Questions end in a question mark. A statement is not a question.
| chimp wrote: |
is that what you like to do? Or are you one of the self-loathing ones?
I assume you are a straight, white male- therefore giving you one of these two options. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
That's the reality of the situation. I'm all for your idealized, discrimination free zone. But that's not the real world. So which is it? Would you rather face the slings and arrows of PCism or the lingering effects of real discrimination.
|
So EITHER we discriminate against whites OR we must discriminate against blacks.
I am starting to see. You believe that all whites are racist and as such MUST be kept under PC OR these inherently racist whites will violently oppress the blacks. You actually are a racist! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ChimpumCallao wrote: |
| Well, my mother and father were actually bankers- but I assume that to bigots like yourself, everyone in Latin American washes clothes for a living. |
Good for them. I'm sure you'd have been very successful following their footsteps. But without the liberals who make PCism and reverse discrimination a reality, you'd be doing it back in Peru.
In 1960, less than 4% of Americans were Hispanic. Less than 1% were foreign born Hispanics. And then a little liberal backed amendment came into effect. The Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965. Look it up. It's the only reason you're here today. I'm sure Ted Kennedy would love to get a thank you card from you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Explain to me, clearly, the link between political correctness and immigration reform.
It would seem to me that immigration reform was the liberalization of immigration laws (liberal in the European sense) and PC is the protection of non-whites (and others) from criticism from white, hetosexual men.
Ending a racist policy isn't PC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| Quote: |
That's the reality of the situation. I'm all for your idealized, discrimination free zone. But that's not the real world. So which is it? Would you rather face the slings and arrows of PCism or the lingering effects of real discrimination.
|
So EITHER we discriminate against whites OR we must discriminate against blacks. |
No, I'm asking which one you'd rather suffer through. I know the burden of PCism has been tough on all of us white folks, so it'd be a hard choice. Just tell us. Would you rather continue to live in the shoes of a white man, or would you trade them in to be a PC free black man? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| Quote: |
That's the reality of the situation. I'm all for your idealized, discrimination free zone. But that's not the real world. So which is it? Would you rather face the slings and arrows of PCism or the lingering effects of real discrimination.
|
So EITHER we discriminate against whites OR we must discriminate against blacks. |
No, I'm asking which one you'd rather suffer through. I know the burden of PCism has been tough on all of us white folks, so it'd be a hard choice. Just tell us. Would you rather continue to live in the shoes of a white man, or would you trade them in to be a PC free black man? |
You keep changing the topic. Why do you do that?
You are assuming that the "PC free black man" is at the mercy of racist whites. I do not believe that to be the case, now, in America. In other words, I reject the premise of the question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| Explain to me, clearly, the link between political correctness and immigration reform. |
It's all part of the liberal agenda. Or are you a Ted Kennedy fan now?
BTW, it's also what opened the door for Muslims immigrants. Still a fan? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| Explain to me, clearly, the link between political correctness and immigration reform. |
It's all part of the liberal agenda. Or are you a Ted Kennedy fan now?
BTW, it's also what opened the door for Muslims immigrants. Still a fan? |
You are one confused dude, eh?
Anyways, I don't even know a single position that Ted Kennedy holds. Cause his name is Kennedy, I assume he is a lefty, but all I know is he killed some girl in a drunk driving accident. I assume I agree with him sometimes and others not.
But now you are trying to equate the "liberal agenda" with political correctness. You keep trying to change to subject to something that you feel you can defend and I keep pulling you back.
Draw a clear line from PC to the "liberal agenda" to immigration reform. Are you saying that a liberal must support PC and someone who supports PC must support free immigration and someone who supports free immigration must support all of the "liberal agenda".
You can't just equate things that you think are 'good' with something that is being argued 'bad' in the hopes that the good will just rub off. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| Quote: |
That's the reality of the situation. I'm all for your idealized, discrimination free zone. But that's not the real world. So which is it? Would you rather face the slings and arrows of PCism or the lingering effects of real discrimination.
|
So EITHER we discriminate against whites OR we must discriminate against blacks. |
No, I'm asking which one you'd rather suffer through. I know the burden of PCism has been tough on all of us white folks, so it'd be a hard choice. Just tell us. Would you rather continue to live in the shoes of a white man, or would you trade them in to be a PC free black man? |
You keep changing the topic. Why do you do that? |
It's the same question I've asked three times now.
| Quote: |
| You are assuming that the "PC free black man" is at the mercy of racist whites. I do not believe that to be the case, now, in America. In other words, I reject the premise of the question. |
So the links I provided earlier are evidence of what exactly? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
The question you have asked is only being asked as you think that me giving answer "x" will prove that PC is necessary because you have framed it in an either/or manner. The assumptions of the question are racist, as well. I reject the question for those two very valid reasons.
But in the interest of moving this along so I can continue tossing around amateurish argumentation style of attempting to associate two largely unrelated things so that the 'good' of the one will rub off on the other, I will answer your question.
If the choice is a society that brutally oppress people "x" and the only possible other option is that the society limit the freedoms of people "Y" in a less brutal way, then I choose for people "Y" to have their freedoms limited. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| The question you have asked is only being asked as you think that me giving answer "x" will prove that PC is necessary because you have framed it in an either/or manner. |
Either you're black or you're not. That's the reality of America. Where's there a middle ground?
| Quote: |
| The assumptions of the question are racist, as well. I reject the question for those two very valid reasons. |
It's racist to assume racism in the world?
| Quote: |
| But now you are trying to equate the "liberal agenda" with political correctness. |
Here's your connection, in so many words:
http://www.spingola.com/trespassers.htm
| Quote: |
| Referring to the 1965 Immigration Reform Bill, Lyndon b. Johnson said: "This bill we sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not restructure the shape of our daily lives." The Great Society President was really the diminishing society snake oil pitchman. |
...
| Quote: |
| This deceptive law was designed and resulted in a wave of millions of immigrants, including trespassers, who arrived from the third world countries of Asia and Latin America. Unlike individuals coming from Europe, these individuals typically lacked the equivalent education level of the average American. In addition they required more social services - paid for by the American taxpayer through plundering politicians and their efforts to redistribute the wealth. Europeans were not motivated to emigrate because their countries were more modern and industrialized. |
...
| Quote: |
| Although we have been exposed to a brainwashing blitz of politically correct thinking/training it is not bigotry that motivates our wise rejection of unchecked immigration. It is self preservation and the preservation of our lifestyle that drives this fight against the adversary. The politicians who pretend to embrace diversity or multiculturalism are largely untouched by the mass migration that changes America�s neighborhoods and jeopardizes our ability to take care of our families. The real enemies, those who swore to uphold the Constitution, are entrenched in the ivory towers in Washington and the absurdity is that apathetic and uninformed Americans have installed them there. It is amazing to me that these Socialistic Senators keep getting re-elected. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Either you're black or you're not. That's the reality of America. Where's there a middle ground? |
Stupid fucking comment. Totally irrelevant.
| Quote: |
| It's racist to assume racism in the world? Rolling Eyes |
Emoticons? Are you a 9 year old girl? What music are you listing to now? Hows your mood?
You assume racism in a race. That is racist.
And your attempt to link pc with immigration reform is pathetic at best. Immigration reform ended a racist policy of excluding non-whites. This is not PC.
You might want to do some digging into this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChimpumCallao
Joined: 17 May 2005
Location: your mom
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| ChimpumCallao wrote: |
| Well, my mother and father were actually bankers- but I assume that to bigots like yourself, everyone in Latin American washes clothes for a living. |
Good for them. I'm sure you'd have been very successful following their footsteps. But without the liberals who make PCism and reverse discrimination a reality, you'd be doing it back in Peru.
In 1960, less than 4% of Americans were Hispanic. Less than 1% were foreign born Hispanics. And then a little liberal backed amendment came into effect. The Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965. Look it up. It's the only reason you're here today. I'm sure Ted Kennedy would love to get a thank you card from you. |
You brought immigration reform out of nowhere- what the hell are you talking about?
You said that without PC I would be washing dishes in Peru.
I think you are confused- PC makes it uncool and sometimes illegal for someone to call me a spic, or ironically enough, to degrade me by saying that I'm at best a clothes-washer.
Immigration reform was a topic never brought up by neither of us, until now, but I understand you pulling it out of your ass to save a statement that was quite bigoted by linking it to the opportunities Ted Kennedy has so kindly awarded me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
You fellows are stating that PC entails restricting what white males can say, and that is incorrect to some extent. Bill Cosby is not white, unless I am mistaken. He criticized certain segments of the African American community, and he wants an end to certain excuses for the problems some youth have, and he blasted some very bad acting segments in the community. Chris Rock in a comedy skit differentiated between a ni**er and a black man. He didn't mean what he said literally, but he was trying to make a point. They both got flack. Sometimes the PC culture entails shielding minorities from any negative publicity which is not helpful.
Back to the start of this thread, there is nothing wrong in putting a stop to people harassing people of another faith. That is called protecting minorities. In the U.S., there is a separation of church and state partially because there were different faiths such as the Episcopalians, Methodists, and Baptists, and they would fight. So, in a way, PC culture was intended to try to lessen divisions, but in some cases, but not all it has shielded people from criticism or people from expressing themselves freely.
Sometime ago, a black athelete in Canada who is American and plays for the CFL called people racist which is often a term used by many inner city African American kids in the inner city whenever they disagree with someone including a black person such as a teacher. The league called him on that and said what he said was unacceptable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
