OT Either stop locking threads or close the OT forum down

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
DaLincolnJones said:
So, if I apply the same standard to others that I apply to my self, (with exception of the bong, that was for comedic effect) Then I am a raciest?

Come on, get a grip. If I were to pick five guys to have to a BBQ and far too many beers, D would be on top of the list. I respect him as a man, as a father and as a poster.
Click to expand...

Yes.
It doesn't matter how you meant it. It reads as racism.
Cippy said Dviss was playing the black victim.
Cippy could've made his EXACT same point by saying Dviss was playing the victim. Except he decided to bring color into it.
You could've made the exact point by saying 'you believe Dviss is sitting at his cpu just trying to rile people up'.
Without saying he's the stereotypical hollywood black man.

Either you don't know, or you decided not to care.
Neither of which are okay.
 
riverman said:
let me try to answer....a black man tells you something is racist...that's back up enough ...just my opinion..for the record...I've got nothing else to add to the topic....don't care to debate it
Click to expand...

Okay, so I have a question for you.

If one guy said that using the term "black" is not okay and that you should say "African American" instead, but another guy said that being called "black" doesn't bother him, what would you do? Which one is right?

Or if a black person attacks a white guy because he has dreads and she says he is culturally appropriating that hairstyle, is that one person speaking for a whole group?

How can you tell who is right and who is wrong?
 
riverman said:
let me try to answer....a black man tells you something is racist...that's back up enough ...just my opinion..for the record...I've got nothing else to add to the topic....don't care to debate it
Click to expand...
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character”

It’s not a hard rule to live by...
 
honkicracker said:
Yes.
It doesn't matter how you meant it. It reads as racism.
Cippy said Dviss was playing the black victim.
Cippy could've made his EXACT same point by saying Dviss was playing the victim. Except he decided to bring color into it.
You could've made the exact point by saying 'you believe Dviss is sitting at his cpu just trying to rile people up'.
Without saying he's the stereotypical hollywood black man.

Either you don't know, or you decided not to care.
Neither of which are okay.
Click to expand...

Even the honky cracker dude gets it.....
 
Nate said:
It definitley seems like a thread will only get shut down, if dviss cry’s that we’re all white devils.

http://www.sportstwo.com/threads/lavar-balls-racist-comments.311593/

Take this thread for example; according to dviss, us white people cant even make an OT thread about racism. We just need to stfu, and gtfo.

No one was like “hey dviss, that’s actually pretty fucked up and racist to say”

I’ll just put dviss on ignore though from now on. The only reason I haven’t yet, is because of the meet and greets, but fuck it I guess lol.
Click to expand...

I didn't take it that way. As much as I like to have conversations and debates about important and controversial topics, I don't care and am not so foolish to argue the point of racism with @dviss1 As much as I would not like to be meshed in with my ancestors and the ancestors of other white people who treated African Americans less than humanely to put it midly, I understand as best I can where he is coming from. He's not saying all white people are racist. He is saying simply white people can't understand racism on the same level as a group of people who have suffered so greatly at the hands of it. I know I'm not racist, I have seen it, and it disgusts me and I have acted to call out those who are. But, I am connected through my blood and the color of my skin to people who were terribly racist and caused a terrible plight to the African American people. So yeah I am going to take a hint and not argue with @dviss1 about it.
 
Last edited:
honkicracker said:
Yes.
It doesn't matter how you meant it. It reads as racism.
Cippy said Dviss was playing the black victim.
Cippy could've made his EXACT same point by saying Dviss was playing the victim. Except he decided to bring color into it.
You could've made the exact point by saying 'you believe Dviss is sitting at his cpu just trying to rile people up'.
Without saying he's the stereotypical hollywood black man.

Either you don't know, or you decided not to care.
Neither of which are okay.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with "how I meant it"

I apply the same standard to all men. Has zero to do with race. Be careful on the high horse, bud, it is a long way down...and, oh, by the way, no BBQ invite for you!!!!!
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
Can I get an "amen"?

(or will my mention of something that could be viewed as religious get me banned?)
Click to expand...

No, unless someone is an actual god on here and you've personally insulted them.

(I am the only that comes close to being a god around here.)
 
HCP said:
Curious where the 3 people who LIKED your post grew up and who around? Honest question.
Click to expand...
I gave it a like because I too NEVER heard it used in a racial sense. It was straight up hillbilly talk. I grew up in inner southeast Portland (on the edge of what I considered the white “ghetto’). We didn’t have very many black people in my ‘hood, but we had more than our fair share of “hillbillies”. But again, I honestly thought @dviss1 was woofing when he called it rascist. And maybe it is since I associate it with “white trash”........
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
Can I get an "amen"?

(or will my mention of something that could be viewed as religious get me banned?)
Click to expand...

It is only religious if used properly.

can-i-get-a-r-amen-flying-spaghetti-monster.png
 
Natebishop3 said:
Okay, so I have a question for you.

If one guy said that using the term "black" is not okay and that you should say "African American" instead, but another guy said that being called "black" doesn't bother him, what would you do? Which one is right?

Or if a black person attacks a white guy because he has dreads and she says he is culturally appropriating that hairstyle, is that one person speaking for a whole group?

How can you tell who is right and who is wrong?
Click to expand...
When you're talking to the guy who prefers "black", say "black". When you're talking to the guy who prefers "african-american", say "african-american". If you forget who is who and get it wrong, apologize and say it was an honest mistake.

If a black person takes issue with a white person's hairstyle, then no, that person is not speaking for a whole group, and is being ridiculous.

Who is right and wrong? To me it always comes down to are they making effort to be considerate or not?

Nate and Cippy generally don't (seem to) care about how what they say makes other people feel. On the other hand, the same can often be said dviss in these race discussions. All would do well to make more effort to not escalate tensions.

Basically--you all suck, and I'm the only reasonable person here.
 
honkicracker said:
It doesn't matter how you meant it. It reads as racism.
Click to expand...

Isn't intent the main driving point behind insults? How else do slurs come to be? You take something that is totally harmless and make it into something hurtful. I mean.... Dan Issel was fired because he called someone a "Mexican piece of shit." When did calling someone a nationality become a slur? But it was, and it was all because of how he said it. Or you could be like New York and just take a slur and make it your baseball team name.

 
PtldPlatypus said:
When you're talking to the guy who prefers "black", say "black". When you're talking to the guy who prefers "african-american", say "african-american". If you forget who is who and get it wrong, apologize and say it was an honest mistake.

If a black person takes issue with a white person's hairstyle, then no, that person is not speaking for a whole group, and is being ridiculous.

Who is right and wrong? To me it always comes down to are they making effort to be considerate or not?

Nate and Cippy generally don't (seem to) care about how what they say makes other people feel. On the other hand, the same can often be said dviss in these race discussions. All would do well to make more effort to not escalate tensions.

Basically--you all suck, and I'm the only reasonable person here.
Click to expand...
This is what I’ve been gathering.

Dviss is a loud, angry, black man; so it’s ok for him to say racist stuff, hat might offend a lot of people.

BUT

I’m one of those more edumacated h’white folk, so I’m held to a higher moral standard.

Is that what’s going on?
 
Nate said:
This is what I’ve been gathering.

Dviss is a loud, angry, black man; so it’s ok for him to say racist stuff, hat might offend a lot of people.

BUT

I’m one of those more edumacated h’white folk, so I’m held to a higher moral standard.

Is that what’s going on?
Click to expand...

I would say "no" simply because I would not have held the first part of the bolded sentence to be true of you.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
When you're talking to the guy who prefers "black", say "black". When you're talking to the guy who prefers "african-american", say "african-american". If you forget who is who and get it wrong, apologize and say it was an honest mistake.

If a black person takes issue with a white person's hairstyle, then no, that person is not speaking for a whole group, and is being ridiculous.

Who is right and wrong? To me it always comes down to are they making effort to be considerate or not?

Nate and Cippy generally don't (seem to) care about how what they say makes other people feel. On the other hand, the same can often be said dviss in these race discussions. All would do well to make more effort to not escalate tensions.

Basically--you all suck, and I'm the only reasonable person here.
Click to expand...

But Riverman basically said that if it comes from a black guy, he takes it as gospel. So it's not as simple as calling that one guy black and the other guy African American. If you take the word of one person, he would henceforth call all people African American because he doesn't ask questions.

My point from the beginning is whether one person can make that determination. Obviously there are some words/insults that are universally accepted as being racist. Nobody would dispute that. But when one person tells me that a word is racist, and everything I have heard is to the contrary, I'm going to want some justification.

Hell, for the longest time I thought cracker was because we're white...... like a cracker. But I later found out that it's about the sound a whip makes. I did not know that until maybe a few years ago. So if Dviss had a justifiable reason why edumacate was racist, I just wanted to hear it.
 
Nate said:
This is what I’ve been gathering.

Dviss is a loud, angry, black man; so it’s ok for him to say racist stuff, hat might offend a lot of people.

BUT

I’m one of those more edumacated h’white folk, so I’m held to a higher moral standard.

Is that what’s going on?
Click to expand...
No, not at all. I think most of the stuff he says that you call racist, isn't. I read through the Ball thread. I don't know what you're objecting to in there. But if you'd like to PM me with specific examples, I'd be happy to discuss them with you.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Isn't intent the main driving point behind insults? How else do slurs come to be? You take something that is totally harmless and make it into something hurtful. I mean.... Dan Issel was fired because he called someone a "Mexican piece of shit." When did calling someone a nationality become a slur? But it was, and it was all because of how he said it. Or you could be like New York and just take a slur and make it your baseball team name.

Click to expand...


Yeah it sucks that people take everyday words or phrases and turn them into a racist slur because once a slur always a slur. So if someone calls an African American a chocolate ice cream then its a slur and I can no longer say I want a chocolate ice cream out loud around an african american or they'll be like what the hell did you just say...you racist son of a bitch. Then I'll be like sorry I'll take the vanilla. Then they'll say, "you racist son of a bitch."
 
PtldPlatypus said:
No, not at all. I think most of the stuff he says that you call racist, isn't. I read through the Ball thread. I don't know what you're objecting to in there. But if you'd like to PM me with specific examples, I'd be happy to discuss them with you.
Click to expand...
But you’re ok with the portion that you think is racist.
 
Natebishop3 said:
But Riverman basically said that if it comes from a black guy, he takes it as gospel. So it's not as simple as calling that one guy black and the other guy African American. If you take the word of one person, he would henceforth call all people African American because he doesn't ask questions.

My point from the beginning is whether one person can make that determination. Obviously there are some words/insults that are universally accepted as being racist. Nobody would dispute that. But when one person tells me that a word is racist, and everything I have heard is to the contrary, I'm going to want some justification.

Hell, for the longest time I thought cracker was because we're white...... like a cracker. But I later found out that it's about the sound a whip makes. I did not know that until maybe a few years ago. So if Dviss had a justifiable reason why edumacate was racist, I just wanted to hear it.
Click to expand...
And in my mind, that focuses too much on the academia, and minimizes the human aspect. I think it's excessive for dviss to say that the term was "racism 101". But if I say something that he or anyone else tells me offends them at a racial level, I'll accept that without question, because I'm more concerned with being in right relationship with that person than with just "being right".
 
PtldPlatypus said:
And in my mind, that focuses too much on the academia, and minimizes the human aspect. I think it's excessive for dviss to say that the term was "racism 101". But if I say something that he or anyone else tells me offends them at a racial level, I'll accept that without question, because I'm more concerned with being in right relationship with that person than with just "being right".
Click to expand...
So you’d rather let someone perpetuate retarded bullshit, than have an open conversation with him?

You think the convo might not go well or something?
 
Further said:
I think that’s the problem. It’s become common form for those that are racist to use terms that could be taken multiple ways. It gives the the “who me” act to play, and allows them to talk out of both sides of their mouths.

I think you are correct that the term isn’t in itself racist, if used it making fun of my own shortcomings and I’ve never heard it uttered with race in mind.

But when you hear or read those same words coming from Simone who is always tiptoeing on the racism line it should give pause and context should require a different reading.

On the other hand @dviss1 might be a little more touchy on the subject of racism than you or I. That’s totally understandable. For him (please correct me dviss if I’m wrong) he expects others who have read countless posts from a particular poster that step over the line to give dviss the credibility to call him out and have the rest of the community get his back from time to time.

These are blurry lines and I think both of you have excellent points and are smart enough to understand the weaknesses of your own arguments.
Click to expand...

Truth. Only one person in here, as a FUCKING, 6 Year old, had an ashtray dumped their head and been told they were gonna go to prison when they grow up.
HCP said:
He takes it to another level, but thats on him. I would say it is always in response to some out of line post though. Once again, it comes back to who you were raised around. And acknowledging that what you guys are saying is actually considered hurtful to him. I would hope you and the others on here that seem to rally around each other on certain topics don’t really enjoy hurting other people the way it seems. If it’s all just about fucking with people and having fun....thats one thing. But there sure seems to be a lot of hate coming from your guys’ posts that seems very authentic. Just hoping it’s not being passed along to a younger generation.
Click to expand...

Dog, I really want someone to quote thus so called hate I "spew"
 
Nate said:
But you’re ok with the portion that you think is racist.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not. But I also know that he and I have different definitions of the term, so it would most likely be fruitless for me to try to convince him that something I see as racist is so. That doesn't mean that I think it's OK, appropriate, or promotes healthy conversation. However, I've learned long ago that my standards for what should be OK in this forum differ from most others.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
No, I'm not. But I also know that he and I have different definitions of the term, so it would most likely be fruitless for me to try to convince him that something I see as racist is so. That doesn't mean that I think it's OK, appropriate, or promotes healthy conversation. However, I've learned long ago that my standards for what should be OK in this forum differ from most others.
Click to expand...
As long as we can all agree, that we’re just letting someone openly be a hateful person.

Thank you for admitting that he says racist shit though.
 
Nate said:
As long as we can all agree, that we’re just letting someone openly be a hateful person.

Thank you for admitting that he says racist shit though.
Click to expand...
I would disagree with hateful. Frustrated, angry at times, but not hateful. But that's my perspective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top