And you type worse than I do.
You have the right to say things about race, but if they are wrong do not expect to have them go unchallenged.
Here I will provide an example that will show that a white man making factual claims can talk about race.
There is absolutely no biological basis for the sociological concept of race
The sociological impacts of the human construct of race are real and negatively impact peoples lives.
As a white male, the only risk for me if racism went away tomorrow is that I would need to compete on a level playing ground.
There is no intrinsic, biological reason that Africans were the ones to suffer most under chattel slavery in the US. They were the victims of this trade due to changing laws in Europe which were originally targeted at preventing christian slaves from being sold to non christians. Native Americans were spared industrial scale slavery due to papal decree. A large part of why Africans were the victims of slavery was due to them being classified as heathens and due to the historical triangle trade routes during the age of sail and not any valid biological difference.
People whom still use non-scientific, non-biological and disproven concepts of race to categorize and make assumptions about people are racist.
While I am sure I will get comments about the oversimplification and or accuracy of those statements I will not be chastised for making them.
If you make a claim that any group that you call a race is not the effect of the flawed and false social construct that created it, expect to be flamed. It is as intellectually and factually incorrect as a flat earth.
I never said there was no did I imply it. But the sociological concept is fait accompli. I refer to behavior and culture, which can be changed; genes cannot be, but I didn’t talk about genes.
We all know that race is a social “construct,” but its not just gonna “go away” or else, why after all, do people, Obama included, talk about it?
Because it is still a very real issue, and because people are still paying dearly for it.
Racism is destroying lives, and we have a GOP presidential presidential nominee whom just won a that role as a known bigot and racist.
We talk about problems, the cost of racism is very much still a problem. Just typically not for white males, except in insanely rare cases with lottery like odds.
Murder is a crime regardless of the motive. How many blacks were killed in six-eyed-Andy’s tale of 1990’s KKK activity? Have more blacks been killed by whites than whites by blacks since then?
What does this have to do with this discussion in any way whatsoever?
The stats on racially motivated murders was up the thread.
But let me ask you this, unless the murder was based on race what does it matter what color the victim or murder are?
While there is a known institutional bias in completion of convictions for black victims, is that justified by your numbers above?
Is a black person murdering a black person more or less awful than a black person killing a white person?
What is your point here?
FWIW,
If you think the KKK is ancient history you may have not noticed their attempted comeback due to the election noise.
How so, exactly? You face FAR more competition in jobs, housing, etc. from other white males.
I didn’t say it was a high cost, and yes I would be glad to pay that cost. It should have never been mine in the first place. The point is that it is the ONLY thing it would do, and the price is tiny vs. the benefit of improving the lives of millions.
here’s another reason to pit the '10s liberals: this idea that “no woman ever lies about rape/SA” is how Trump was able to bring those liars like Broaddrick, Jones, Wiley, etc to the debate. If Hillary hadn’t tweeted that thing from October about “all women should always be heard/believed,” Trump couldn’t have done it. But the leftists academic set, in their zeal to fight sexism, made up a noble lie, infested a once great party, one which HRC is trying to lead, had to take it up.
Ever heard of the Scottsboro Boys, liberals? Yes, there are false rape allegations.
OK, so you are arguing that we should screw justice for those 12 to 100 women whom are raped because one woman may have filed a false report?
According to the FBI false claims rates are similar to other felonies. Do we quit considering murder or fraud claims too? Or are sexual assault victims less worthy of justice than other types of victims?
How about we use our legal system, which has a presumption of innocence?
I’m not arguing we should screw justice, but no one should be saying that those who claim to be victims of some crimes should ALWAYS be believed (with the implication that some crimes should always be believed, some shouldn’t). How many times has anyone said victims of robbery or murder should ALWAYS be believed?
Once again you’re just lying about what liberals believe, you cowardly bigot. You are full of shit and you keep failing again and again. Most liberals don’t believe what you’re saying they do.
Virtually no one is saying accusers should ALWAYS be believed, you fucking idiot coward bigot.
That shirt was very inappropriate in a professional situation. Plenty of my male student workers (18-22 year old college students) know not to show up to shelve books at the library in a shirt with pin-up girls printed all over it. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a similar level of awareness of work appropriate and work inappropriate clothing by someone with an advanced degree.
Hey DerekMichaels00, **iiandyiii **is the calmest, most level -headed poster on this board. I’ve never seen him lose patience with a poster before, and his hobby is getting into discussions with trolls. I don’t know much about your posting background, but you must be an utter piece of shit to have **iiandyiii **speak to you this way. You should reconsider your life choices.
No matter what Jackie said, we should generally believe rape claims (by Zerlina Maxwell)
Clinton Campaign Hires Zerlina Maxwell For Digital Outreach
Says men should always be presumed guilty by society, shunned and fired from jobs until a rape is investigated and proven false. I wonder if First Gentleman counts as a job they should be fired from?
The real outrage should have been that a Hawaiian shirt was inappropriate, and that in particular, his was ugly. Had I been in his shoes, I’d probably have worn a polo shirt that day, even if I wasn’t expecting to be interviewed. If that was the case, probably a button-up shirt of some kind. He seems like the kind of academic doofus who just isn’t in touch with the real world enough to realize this, not some sort of arch-sexist who did it to deliberately demean or objectify women.
That’s I think the deciding thing here- nobody filtered this through any kind of rational filter before they pilloried this guy for something that was ultimately minor. Certainly not worth that level of vitriol, or the level of mea culpa on his part either.
Or if these people did think about it, then they deliberately chose to fuck this guy up over something that trivial, and that’s kind of chilling to me.
No, she didn’t say that, not exactly. She actually had a nuanced position – that investigators should assume that the person reporting a rape is being honest until the evidence suggests otherwise. You might disagree, but that sounds reasonable to me.
But even if she’s saying exactly what you say she is, I said “virtually no one”, and you’ve found one person. So it’s still virtually no one, unless you have data that suggests that many or most liberals feel this way.
But they didn’t actually fuck this guy up at all, did they? HE apologized and then it was done. In fact I imagine the offerandati have clung to this longer than he has.
Isn’t there a story: two Buddhist priests are traveling and they come to a river. The waters are flowing quickly and there’s a woman on their side who can’t make it across. So one of the monks picks her up and carries her across the river, and the monks continue on their way. But the other monk is stewing and eventually he says “we’re not allowed to touch women; why did you carry her?” And the other monk says “I put her down on the other side of the river. Why are you still carrying her?”
Since that is not what she said, we may continue to ignore your devotion to ignorance.
The actual tweet was
Not “every woman.” Every survivor of sexual assault. (That would include men, by the way.) A person bringing false testimony would not be a survivor of sexual assault.