DescentBB

Jesus Christ Will your exclamation point usage has really escalated off the charts. You should take a breath now and then from all the shouting and excitement.

I'm sorry you cannot seem to comprehend the point I've tried to make repeatedly. I can think of no other way to explain it, but it is clear you do not understand. However, I see that other people do understand and maybe they can explain it better? Oh well, I tried. Blacks are just bad people I guess.

callmeslick wrote:here's some more folks wrestling with stereotypes
http://news.yahoo.com/39-why-fried-chic ... 29517.html

When I eat fried chicken and watermelon I feel I'm in solidarity with my black neighbors.

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:here's some more folks wrestling with stereotypes
http://news.yahoo.com/39-why-fried-chic ... 29517.html

When I eat fried chicken and watermelon I feel I'm in solidarity with my black neighbors.

and, you relay this warm and fuzzy feeling to them, I trust?

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:here's some more folks wrestling with stereotypes
http://news.yahoo.com/39-why-fried-chic ... 29517.html

When I eat fried chicken and watermelon I feel I'm in solidarity with my black neighbors.

and, you relay this warm and fuzzy feeling to them, I trust?

Indeed. They call me "Bro" when they walk by.

vision wrote:?.. Oh well, I tried. Blacks are just bad people I guess.

For you to imply my point is any way based on your characterization that black people are just bad is ridiculous and proof that you don't see how your perspective is far out of realistic.
Really all you have done there is fall back on playing the race card! You don't address the individual challenges I made to your theory and instead imply I'm just a bigot. Typical.

All the science that supports your theory on the power of words is fine but you are taking it so far out proportion to the greater use of language as a whole and with respect to the specifics of this issue and the people who have created it.

It is like you have found the science that proves water is good for human well being but now, out of misguided intent and/or short sight zealotry, you want to force so much water into the daily diet that you literally cause harm by introducing too much liquid into the body you sought to improve!

A proper perspective would be one that can recognize distinguishing between races with language isn't always harmful.
As I said before, there is NO inherent or implied racism in the use of the identifier in this case.
And race relations can survive the duality of urging us toward acknowledging 'sameness' without forcing us to abandon the obvious, benign, and in this case, benificial recognition of differences.

No one complains of racism when you identify black people by saying a greater number of NFL coaches are black today...a greater number of millionaires are black today....or that Barack Obama is the first black president...

The identifier isn't the problem!!!

The stigma attached, improperly, is the problem.
And in this case we see the stigma can be attached by the alleged victim not an enemy. And now you want to grow that stigma and feed the false narrative that this is the work of bigots that cause black men to be identified as black men!

I don't see black people as 'just bad' as you tried to imply but you certainly seem to see them as incapable and too emotionally weak to survive some of the simplest of life's nuances.

vision wrote:I'm sorry you cannot seem to comprehend the point I've tried to make repeatedly. I can think of no other way to explain it, but it is clear you do not understand. However, I see that other people do understand and maybe they can explain it better? Oh well, I tried. Blacks are just bad people I guess.

Don't you mean dark brown people?

Too bad some people can’t tell the difference between disagreement and misunderstanding.

One points out that color should be use to describe person. Gets called a racist. Other points out you shouldn't use color to describe another race of peoples. Doesn't get called racist even though he says there are different races of humans. There is only one race of humans! Using a color to describe a human shouldn't bring all this so called racism to boil.

Like it or not if you subscribe to the notion that the are different races of humans on this planet that need to be protected makes you a racist.

Please use more exclamation points. All the best writers use tons of exclamation points.

Again, using race as a descriptor is helpful... until it isn't. Then you need to try a different approach.

Yea, like ID chips...

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

vision wrote:...

Again, using race as a descriptor is helpful... until it isn't.

Well, since in this case, it is clearly many orders of magnitude more helpful than harmful please stop trying to fix that which isn't broken.
No matter how shiny your pschobauble tool is it is the wrong one to fix the real problem!

So take your own advice and try a different approach. Irony abound...try to properly identify the problem and at least I won't demand useful data is withheld from your investigation.
In fact I have already provided you with the details. You've been lead to the well, now learn to think.

Will Robinson wrote:...try to properly identify the problem...

Judging from your posts I suspect you think the problem is much simpler that it actually is. If I were to describe the problem in any detail it would be book length. Do you want to read a book about race relations in the United States? I probably know enough to write it, but I wouldn't be contributing anything new. I'm just reiterating what is known.

So what other race is there Vision? You keep bring up race as a descriptor shouldn't be used. When there is clearly only one race of humans. So what is this other race of humans?

I suggest we use the word "Klingon" to describe black suspects. It's a macho race and what red blooded male Afro american couldn't identify with the Klingons. tlhIngan maH!

vision wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:...try to properly identify the problem...

Judging from your posts I suspect you think the problem is much simpler that it actually is. If I were to describe the problem in any detail it would be book length. Do you want to read a book about race relations in the United States? I probably know enough to write it, but I wouldn't be contributing anything new. I'm just reiterating what is known.

I'm sure you know volumes and reams of it.
And I know when someone is trying to cram a huge square peg into a tiny little round hole and refusing to acknowledge it doesnt fit.
No matter how much a master of the square peg you are you are still standing in front of the wrong type of opening to display your mastery...

Heretic wrote:So what other race is there Vision?

Race is a human construct. I don't recognize different races of human except conversationally. I don't recognize the human race as being any different from primates, mammals, vertebrates, animals, or any other living things, and in extreme cases, we are simply start stuff. However, we must all navigate these mental constructs of ours as best as possible, because, as you can see from this thread, they prevent us from liberation.

In short, if a label causes suffering, abandon it.

vision wrote:

Heretic wrote:So what other race is there Vision?

Race is a human construct. I don't recognize different races of human except conversationally.

And you do that, no doubt, because it is the best way to engage in the conversation. Like if a policeman refers to a black man as a black man when he is tasked with describing the black man who robbed a bank in an alert to get others in the 'conversation' to know what the person looks like that he is alerting them to look for....because he knows those 'others' would use the term black man too...

But are you, vision, a racist for using the descriptor in conversation if your intent wasn't to demean but rather to communicate. I think not. That would be ridiculous to call you a racist for using the description that way...

Which leads us to your next ill founded point:

vision wrote:... In short, if a label causes suffering, abandon it.

That will work...in a burn the books, one size fits all but-very-poorly-fit-all sort of way.

Surely the label is part of the equation though. And yes, you do have the vast scientific knowledge base to connect the dots between the suffering and the label. However, in this particular case ( as in, one size doesn't best fit all)...in this particular case, there are a whole lot of dots to connect before you get a path from 'label' to 'suffering'. So some of those other dots need you to back up and examine them.

All people on earth are labeled in lots of ways for lots of reasons, to facilitate quality conversation being a the core need for many of them.

So if, as in this particular case, we find that only a small sub set of one group is offended by the simplest benign use of a label that they can, at best, loosely associate themselves with, then maybe the label isn't the problem.
After all, in this particular case the descriptor "black" is used and certainly all black people can stop thinking right there and decide that any commentary that follows that descriptor is intended to effect them. They could, but that would be stupid.

They could, alternatively, consider the totality of the message and its context and find that although they are black they are not the person that just committed a crime! And then they would be free to disassociate themselves from any stigma attached to being the specific (as in: particular) individual black man that committed the crime that spurred the alert.

That power to disassociate themselves is what is lacking in this particular case.
In this particular case the students are hypersensitive to any use of the "black" label. It is the result of programming. Not the power of the words that you are so well learned to discuss.

You brought all that wealth of knowledge to the discussion but in this particular case only a bit of low level common sense was needed.

Proportion. Context. Logic. Those things are being twisted in the programming and for you to rush in and support the programmers by finding a way to fit your square peg into the round hole is just going to make the problem worse!

You have a choice here. Insist we only say 'Be on the lookout for a human...' and make the capturing of the criminals much harder.

Or do the smart thing and take that pile of knowledge you have and turn it on the people who capitalize on the programming of others by making them incapable of disassociating themselves from labels when there is no sound reason to be so offended by hearing a label that *could* include them but only if all the particulars applied.
Start fighting the wielders of powerful words that CREATE the problem instead of focusing efforts to address the symptoms artificially brought on by the exploitation of the ones caused to suffer!!

I put an extra exclamation point there just for you because in this particular case you really needed it.

I know, it's all a conspiracy by the race baiters to maintain power. The Afros need to suck it up. Got it. I'm contacting FOX News right now so they can interview you, the man who solved racism. Well done!

Well done. You're following the president's lead. Blame FOX for your inadequacy when you cant get people to fall lock step with your opinion BRAVO

CUDA wrote:Well done. You're following the president's lead. Blame FOX for your inadequacy when you cant get people to fall lock step with your opinion BRAVO

I almost typed CNN but thought FOX would be funnier. All the major US networks suck for news. Half the articles are advertisements and the other half are propaganda.

I don't care what you call them but there is definitely a difference, but only in appearance and color. Different clumps of dirt. Seems to me there's better ways to build that communities pride than putting a hedge around them.

EDIT: Just in case the question arises. Adaptation to environment and local food. Live on the Equator long enough and the pigments in your skin will darken and obviously that trait will continue to be passed along.

Honestly, I think the question should be where did white people come from and does it have anything to do with the 223 genes found in the human genome but found nowhere else in nature.

flip wrote:Honestly, I think the question should be where did white people come from and does it have anything to do with the 223 genes found in the human genome but found nowhere else in nature.

no

Lol! Just wondering :p I know some of those Skull and Bones weirdos think so !