Beamer wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 08:56:

WannaLogAlready wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 07:24:

Razumen wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 03:39:

Beamer wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:11:

White people haven't experienced racism on any widescale, or even small scale, level, Quinn.

Lol, this isn't even close to having an iota of truth to it.

Sorry, now I'm more confused than my usual.
How did the name Quinn get into the conversation, mistyping or double persona stuff, uh ?

Quinn, a poster that doesn't live in the US and never has, us frequently adamant that racism against white people is as much an issue in the US as racism against other races.

It's hysterical, and comparable to what were seeing here. Also, I see Captain Stolen Valor entered the chat, assuredly with something histrionic and overly emotional, as well.

Anyone claiming white people in any wester country (and that's what's being discussed here) encounter significant racism is out of their gourd.

Spoken like someone who's never actually been to the ghetto, lived in a community without white people, or been to another western country that isn't a tourist attraction. I guarantee by the time you get to the end of my street you will have experienced racism toward a white person and possibly been robbed.

NKD wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 14:09:
Boy this sure blew up. Gonna have to start putting trigger warnings on my posts for Porcelain-Americans like Razumen so they don't have to freak out and make 30 posts in the same thread.

LOL. Yeah, I'm sure the lack of a trigger warning was the "real" problem with your post.
I'm not even American, and you guys couldn't help but also assume my skin color as well. So fudging hilarious.

NKD wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 14:09:
Boy this sure blew up. Gonna have to start putting trigger warnings on my posts for Porcelain-Americans like Razumen so they don't have to freak out and make 30 posts in the same thread.

Thanks for not calling him fragile or there’d be another 30 post’s.
Wait a second, is porcelain fragile…you sneaky dog.

Boy this sure blew up. Gonna have to start putting trigger warnings on my posts for Porcelain-Americans like Razumen so they don't have to freak out and make 30 posts in the same thread.

The only hysterical thing here is how desperate people were to jump to the defense of prejudice, going as far to use an intellectually vapid and implicitly racist term created solely to defend said statements.

Thanks, Beamer.

This comment was edited on Sep 6, 2021, 11:28.

WannaLogAlready wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 07:24:

Razumen wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 03:39:

Beamer wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:11:

White people haven't experienced racism on any widescale, or even small scale, level, Quinn.

Lol, this isn't even close to having an iota of truth to it.

Sorry, now I'm more confused than my usual.
How did the name Quinn get into the conversation, mistyping or double persona stuff, uh ?

Quinn, a poster that doesn't live in the US and never has, us frequently adamant that racism against white people is as much an issue in the US as racism against other races.

It's hysterical, and comparable to what were seeing here. Also, I see Captain Stolen Valor entered the chat, assuredly with something histrionic and overly emotional, as well.

Anyone claiming white people in any wester country (and that's what's being discussed here) encounter significant racism is out of their gourd.

Razumen wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 03:39:

Beamer wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:11:

White people haven't experienced racism on any widescale, or even small scale, level, Quinn.

Lol, this isn't even close to having an iota of truth to it.

Sorry, now I'm more confused than my usual.
How did the name Quinn get into the conversation, mistyping or double persona stuff, uh ?

Beamer wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:10:

Razumen wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:01:

Beamer wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 21:17:
"reversing" entirely abandons context. So, to Quiboid's point, if someone thinks you can just reverse something, they're basically condoning racism.

Frankly, I love eating pork. But if you change the word "pork" to "babies," it means something very different. That doesn't mean the first statement is wrong. Context matters.

White fragility is also about ignoring context because it's painful to admit to. We can argue about whether it's a word, but man, so much of whatever you want to call it is on display

No it doesn't, racism is racism, and all should be condemned equally. And it IS Contextually and unequivocally racism.

Calling out racism isn't racism.
And when white people are calling out other white people, it especially isn't.

Or, I'm sorry, is calling out your fragility leading to you getting fewer job opportunities, or getting shot by the police?

You're being fragile. You can feel otherwise, but facts don't care about your feelings. Calm the emotions and recognize how badly your being fragile derailed any conversation about this topic and turned into a discussion about how hurt your feelings are.

I never said calling out racism is racism, just...wow.

And considering I'm ONE person defending himself against like, six others, for calling out a racist comment, simply because y'all don't want to own up to your own words. It's quite apparent I'm not the one being fragile here.

You could've just said, "yeah, that isn't right", because it wasn't, and this thread would've went nowhere. But nope, gotta uphold those double standards.

But fine, it's all about how angry and emotional and hurt you are at anyone acknowledging racism is real.

Beamer wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:11:

White people haven't experienced racism on any widescale, or even small scale, level, Quinn.

Lol, this isn't even close to having an iota of truth to it.

Beamer wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:11:

White people haven't experienced racism on any widescale, or even small scale, level, Quinn.

What you're so hurt by here isn't near the level of the initial article.

But fine, it's all about how angry and emotional and hurt you are at anyone acknowledging racism is real.

The Irish probably would have some thoughts about that comment.
White fragility is just another word used to cancel out any sort opposing discussion; straight to making someone's opinion not count if they happen to be white. For bonus irony the term was made popular by an incredibly racist book. We've been talking about racism for a long time, and progress has been made with the original Civil Rights movement. When people see this "new" CRT nonsense (which the core basically thinks the Civil Rights movement didn't do anything) many feel, hey this is just repackaged racism and marxism; that doesn't mean they are "fragile" or don't think racism exists...

Amusingly ya'll probably missed it, but at the end of the last link:
The Reason This "Racist Soap Dispenser" Doesn't Work on Black Skin

"Earlier this year(2015), Google Photos' auto-labeling system misidentified two black friends as "gorillas" in their photos together, setting off both a social media uproar and a demand for Google to step up its technology to be more sensitive about the words it uses in photos of people.

Flickr's auto-tagging feature also egregiously mislabeled an African-American man as "animal" and "ape" before the Flickr team went in to remove the tags, claiming the algorithm was still learning how to recognize images."

Guess this latest facebook story must be those racist forced diversity silicon valley companies conspiring again.... It's almost as if people are looking for things to call "racism" so they can make clickbait articles and virtue signal on twitter.

Razumen wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:08:

Quboid wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 20:49:
I know what you originally got upset about, I'm just abridging it because it's not worth the bother. It's not like a long winded explanation is going to help you.

that wouldn't fly if the cards were reversed

And this is exactly why you just don't get it.

No I get it, quite well actually, you just want there to be "acceptable" and "unacceptable" racism. Well, in some places that's called having double standards.

But, have fun judging a particular group of people based solely on their skin color without taking their own experiences, thoughts and merits into account, I'm sure that'll get you far in life.

White people haven't experienced racism on any widescale, or even small scale, level, Quinn.

What you're so hurt by here isn't near the level of the initial article.

But fine, it's all about how angry and emotional and hurt you are at anyone acknowledging racism is real.

Razumen wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 00:01:

Beamer wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 21:17:
"reversing" entirely abandons context. So, to Quiboid's point, if someone thinks you can just reverse something, they're basically condoning racism.

Frankly, I love eating pork. But if you change the word "pork" to "babies," it means something very different. That doesn't mean the first statement is wrong. Context matters.

White fragility is also about ignoring context because it's painful to admit to. We can argue about whether it's a word, but man, so much of whatever you want to call it is on display

No it doesn't, racism is racism, and all should be condemned equally. And it IS Contextually and unequivocally racism.

Calling out racism isn't racism.
And when white people are calling out other white people, it especially isn't.

Or, I'm sorry, is calling out your fragility leading to you getting fewer job opportunities, or getting shot by the police?

You're being fragile. You can feel otherwise, but facts don't care about your feelings. Calm the emotions and recognize how badly your being fragile derailed any conversation about this topic and turned into a discussion about how hurt your feelings are.

Quboid wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 20:49:
I know what you originally got upset about, I'm just abridging it because it's not worth the bother. It's not like a long winded explanation is going to help you.

that wouldn't fly if the cards were reversed

And this is exactly why you just don't get it.

No I get it, quite well actually, you just want there to be "acceptable" and "unacceptable" racism. Well, in some places that's called having double standards.

But, have fun judging a particular group of people based solely on their skin color without taking their own experiences, thoughts and merits into account, I'm sure that'll get you far in life.

Beamer wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 21:17:
"reversing" entirely abandons context. So, to Quiboid's point, if someone thinks you can just reverse something, they're basically condoning racism.

Frankly, I love eating pork. But if you change the word "pork" to "babies," it means something very different. That doesn't mean the first statement is wrong. Context matters.

White fragility is also about ignoring context because it's painful to admit to. We can argue about whether it's a word, but man, so much of whatever you want to call it is on display

No it doesn't, racism is racism, and all should be condemned equally. And it IS Contextually and unequivocally racism.

Beamer wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 20:45:

Razumen wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 15:33:

Beamer wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 14:18:
No, it accurately describes a condition in which white people get infinitely more offended by something being called racist than by something being racist. Unless it's nominally racist against themselves.

Sounds like you just like excusing racism.

And you'll note my comment wasn't towards something being called racist, but towards a blatantly racist comment. So yeah, just another made up term for edgelord racists to try and hide behind.

If white fragility isn't a thing, how else do we describe how fragile you're being over whiteness here?

I mean, you see how your inability to have a conversation over this being racist without calling everyone else racist is fragility, no?

What else should people that defend racist statements be called? Hmm, seems simple to me. Unlike you, I don't condone racism of any kind. Has nothing to do with "whiteness".

SURE I'm the fragile one here, yet NBD can't even own up to HIS own words, and has to hide behind a made up term and several other posters who have nothing better to do than dogpile someone in defense of a racist statement. What a joke y'all are.

The very fact you have to use that term explicity proves the prejudice in that statement.

Love watching the resident alt left racists come in, sling racist slurs and literally invent entirely new quotes from the other posters they're arguing with so they can "win".

"reversing" entirely abandons context. So, to Quiboid's point, if someone thinks you can just reverse something, they're basically condoning racism.

Frankly, I love eating pork. But if you change the word "pork" to "babies," it means something very different. That doesn't mean the first statement is wrong. Context matters.

White fragility is also about ignoring context because it's painful to admit to. We can argue about whether it's a word, but man, so much of whatever you want to call it is on display

I know what you originally got upset about, I'm just abridging it because it's not worth the bother. It's not like a long winded explanation is going to help you.

that wouldn't fly if the cards were reversed

And this is exactly why you just don't get it.

Razumen wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 15:33:

Beamer wrote on Sep 5, 2021, 14:18:
No, it accurately describes a condition in which white people get infinitely more offended by something being called racist than by something being racist. Unless it's nominally racist against themselves.

Sounds like you just like excusing racism.

And you'll note my comment wasn't towards something being called racist, but towards a blatantly racist comment. So yeah, just another made up term for edgelord racists to try and hide behind.

If white fragility isn't a thing, how else do we describe how fragile you're being over whiteness here?

I mean, you see how your inability to have a conversation over this being racist without calling everyone else racist is fragility, no?