Oh, I’d go farther than that. You don’t have to be in harmony with the word definitions he uses to describe power dynamics. You don’t have to feel bad if you primarily use your resources to try to fight socioeconomic inequality if the reason and evidence compel you in your altruism to think it’s the best way to ameliorate racial inequality. You don’t have to be terrified if the younger generations are becoming more colorblind and racially ambiguous (admixed) before you accomplished the goals you wanted. You don’t have to believe stories of purported injustice you hear in the news before looking into the details.
Yes. I did not suggest otherwise. Based on his reply, Fenris did not think I was suggesting otherwise. It was the latter part of my post that was in question, and he addressed it, and–as should be no surprise–acquitted himself thoroughly.
(IOW, ease down on the throttle a touch.)
Huey lies about what people say to make himself look like a bigger victim. Here’s an example:
And this is how Huey twisted it.
I didn’t say anything about race in my post. I just said that ‘lived experience’ is really bad evidence. It doesn’t matter what race you are or what you’re trying to prove. Lived experience is bad evidence. Period. For Huey to twist that into “The nigger’s personal experience etc…” is totally fucked up and dishonest.
If Huey lies so obviously here, where we can go back and check what was said, what are the odds that he’ll also lie about his own “lived experience”? Pretty damn high, I reckon.
Even if I was to be charitable and say he’s totally wrong but he’s not lying because he really believes that’s what I meant, it still doesn’t get him off the hook. Huey’s interpretation is obviously wrong and twisted even if he really believes it. If he’s that bad at working out what people are saying to him on a message board where he can take the time to look over what was said and think about it, what are the odds he’ll be any better at doing the same thing during a conversation? Pretty low, I reckon.
TLDR he’s either a liar or he’s got a massive persecution complex. Either way we should take everything he says with an iceberg of salt.
Could we take the pissing contest to a different thread and return this one to its purpose?
Sure, no problem! 
Or you could always start a new thread for this…either one.
Hey Hubert: you going to answer why you’re comfortable attacking people on the Internet with vile names but are too big of a sissy to gently confront someone in real life where it might actually do some good even if there’s a risk of offending them?
Or are you just a poser windbag blowhard Internet tough guy who doesn’t believe in his cause enough to actually take risks for it?
Dude won’t even go into the rest of the board – he only likes the Pit because he’s afraid of running afoul of the rules on the rest of the site, or something like that.
:shrug: Honestly, I find that entirely reasonable. I’ve spent years never* leaving the Pit, just because I couldn’t be fucked to moderate my tone and didn’t want a warning.
*Hyperbole for effect. But not by much.
No! No! He’s too busy. He is a busy, busy man.
Probably for the same reason that you probably wouldn’t talk to your boss with the tone that you just took.
Dude, you’re the bystander effect in this story as well as anybody else that was present, you can’t see that? And you need better friends if this actually happened to you. The paraphrased part doesn’t add up, tell us the full version, let’s see if it is as funny as you said the “white people” thought it was. Must be some low-life aquaintances you hang out with if this is remotely accurate of the perspective you give. I have my doubts.
You said it’s one of the whitest cities and one of the whitest states in the Union. Name it.
And hell, Huey, I thought you was more than just a keyboard warrior. This happened with you and Mrs. Freeman, and you said you did nothing. Not even a word? You know, maybe sometimes it’s best to do nothing, but this wasn’t a KKK rally. You were having dinner with people where, at a home, or in a restaurant? You just sat there being polite, and didn’t even leave. You talk about how hurt Mrs. Freeman was, I bet she was even more hurt because you did absolutely nothing! Bet your bed was cold that night.
I heard your lame excuse that it was your wife’s boss, but you had so many options here. It didn’t have to even be a physical altercation, far from it, even better you could have said many things, an articulate keyboard warrior like you is lost for words?! And Mrs. Freeman wouldn’t have got fired, had she, you would have had even more options, legally. But you just sat there, did ya?
From the gist of your thread of what little I’ve skimmed of it, it seems like you can’t find a single white person in America that isn’t racist, and if so, why do you even hang with them? Since you didn’t confront the white man or any of his white friends, did you even muster up enough courage to confront your wife’s female friend for laughing at the joke? If not then, at anytime afterwards? What if it was a child, could you have done something then? You seem to do just fine with another person’s daughter here on-line that isn’t present.
You not only let down yourself, you let your wife down. I hope your wife gives you a reality check from time to time, and she’s nothing like your on-line persona.
Why don’t you put in some, few or a small percentage of “white people” to qualify your statements, unless you do mean all of them?
Considering black guys get shot by the police for entering their own apartment or reaching for their own wallet…I think he gets a pass.
Well, your questions get into intention versus impact. I will answer your questions, but I know this well-worn path well. For white folks, racism is coupled with the idea that the racist person is intentional and is deliberately inflicting harm by his or her actions. So, for example, a white person would considerrunning over a black man with a pickup truck and referring to his dead body as "some nigger" on social media, as racism. But would not consider the firing of the meteorologist who accidentally referred to Martin Luther King asMartin Luther Coon King as racism. The societal structures of white supremacy force people of color to always gauge whether a white person is being intentional or unintentional in their racism. The idea is that people of color are not allowed to be upset about unintentional acts of racism, we can be upset (anger and outrage are not allowed) when it is an intentional act of racism. Even I fell into the trap and thought “we’re probably the only people of color this dude has ever broken bread with and he don’t know how to act”. But the problem is that this diminishes the impact of intentional and unintentional racism on people of color. People of color report higher levels of chronic stress which increases the risk of depression, diabetes, heart disease, and infant mortality. These actions lead to conditions that bring us all down with increased healthcare costs and decreased GDP output. Solving “the problem of the color line" benefits us all.
With that aside, let me answer your questions:
- I think the people there thought it was wise for the guy to hide the value of the ring.
- Yes, but this only happened once in my life. I’d be shocked if it ever happened again. I think those moments are once in a lifetime events (but could be wrong). Would be an interesting polling question for other people of color.
Regarding your other comment about white folks and being an oppressor. White folks are not the oppressor but they do insist on being the antagonist. Does that make sense?
Let me give you an example. If you ask what white folk want, they will say something like building a wall, cutting welfare, removing affirmative action, getting rid of abortion, freedom (which is white folk speak for “unfettered access to ammunition and firearms”), limited regulation (which is white speak for “don’t spend my tax money on people of color”), etc. From my vantage point, the common theme that underlies white folk’s happiness is hinged on inflicting humiliation and misery on people of color. That’s the platform that over 50% of them support. In contrast, if you ask people of color what they want, they will tell you “Justice, Jobs, and Peace”. No person of color campaigns on the platform of wanting to humiliate or cause misery to white folks. This paints an uncomfortable picture where white folks appear to not be concerned about a predictable set of issues but concerned about issues that effect other ethnic groups. It’s antagonism for the sake of antagonism. For example, I don’t believe white folks are opposed to universal healthcare because it’s a bad idea. I think white folks are opposed to healthcare because they’d rather die a thousand deaths than to have any of their tax dollars be used to provide healthcare for one person of color.
You assume all white people want those things, which is absolute fucking bullshit.
Yeah, it’s only about half of white folks.
I guess its a question of tactics.
I can understand the necessary outrage, that makes a black person attend a protest shouting “Fuck White people! Fuck the Police!”
But if a white person is standing next to them shouting “Fuck Racism! Black lives matter!” its not particularly helpful for that black person to turn to them and shout “No! Fuck you! You racist Motherfucker!”
You really are dumb as a fucking brick, aren’t you?
Lol, no way that happened. No man is going compliment another on his frigging wedding band let alone ask where the other guy bought it.
That made me laugh, not only was it just most brilliant, but a succint way of how to sum it all up. Well done.
It would have been nice just to end the thread there, but since it didn’t, and I’ve read through the rest of this crazy thing, as well as reading critical reviews of this woman’s book that inspired Huey, this Robin DiAngelo, I’ve learned a bit more about her and her book which has gave us some of these new accusatory and inflamatory words and phrases to use on white people that are generally seen as liberal or progressive, such as “white fragility” and white supremist" which the latter had only been used on actual white supremists in the past like David Duke types and his followers, but she pretty much extends it to all white people, and will flat out tell you all white people are racist. She must have invented a new definition for it because the standard definition of white supremists doesn’t fit the vast majority of white people at all.
Which brings us back to what you just said. I’m sure Robin DiAngelo would have used those same labels on Heather Heyer, even though she died standing alongside black and white protesting white nationalists.
Robin DiAngelo wants to judge us by our white skin. I’m convinced had Martin Luther King jr been alive today, he would not have agreed with her.
White folks are evil, if they weren’t we would all be like Scandinavia.
Your self-hate is repellant.