Empowering the "Victim" classes. Double standards?

[Goofball]

"Others have been just plain common sense, like making wheelchair access mandatory in buildings, or forcing employers to hold womens' jobs while they are on maternity leave."
That is not empowering any one or giving anyone special treatment. That is acknowledging that there is a difference in sexes and that each has special needs - something that a lot say is sexist. People think it is wrong to differentiate or discriminate, when it is totally necesarry. (I considered not using the word 'discriminate' because of the bad rep the media has given it, but when you think of it, there is nothing wrong with discrimination. When you pick out eggs at the supermarket and choose one carton over the other because of the quality, you are discriminating. When you walk into a room and try to find someone of the opposite sex to talk to, and pass one over for one better built or looking, you are discriminating. etc etc Discrimination doesn't have to be giving one person a job over another because of their skin colour...just wanted to clear that up...)

Now let's talk common sense vs. PC BS.

PC BS: Blacks were slaves for a few hundred years so now all blacks get special treatment over whites.

Sounds fair right? Now let's try throwing a little common sense in and see what happens.

First of all, I don't buy into the fact that all blacks get special treatment over whites. Second, you are missing the point. Measures we are taking (such as affirmative action, which I admit is a very imperfect policy) now are not meant as "payback" for past offenses against blacks. They are meant to offer more equal opportunity in an environment that still discriminates against minorities.

You can argue that that is not what the measures are actually achieving, but that was their intent.

Common Sense:
FACT: 99% of slave traders were black and well before whites bought slaves from them they had been enslaving other blacks. That is, blacks held more black slaves than whites, and for longer than whites. Also, blacks starved, tortured, mutilated, and even ate their slaves - in the south where slaves were a valuable commodity, they were treated extremely well for the most part. (Which isn't to say there wasn't a lot of abuse - there was. That is where the "for the most part" comes in...)

They were not treated "extremely well." You need a serious dose of reality. The simple fact that they were considered to be property precludes the use of the phrase "extremely well" when describing how slaves were treated in America.

FACT: A white slave trade was going on at the same time and there were more white slaves in America than black slaves. Also, the black slaves were treated fairly well for slaves, while the white slaves were worked to death and put into brothels.

Ok, Common sense threw out its facts, now let's see it argument.

You're going to have to provide some sources that don't come from white sepremist websites before I can buy any of that.

Common Sense's argument: It is ridiculous to give people special treatment for wrongs done to their ancestors. I am part Irish and the Irish got treated a lot worse than the blacks - should I be raised on a pedastal? Anyone can did up some horrendous wrong done to their ancestors for a long amount of time, and we could go on forever with everyone sucking up to everyone. What matters is the NOW! It is too late to right past wrongs, and giving things to modern people completely undeserving of them isn't going to help those who suffered and died. What we can do now is make sure that every on IS (not was as that is to late) treated equally! Giving special treatment to a certain race or sex will only cause racial and sexual discourse. We will only complicate the situation more and more if we don't stop with the PC BS and use a little common sense. What ever did happen to that golden vision odf equality? "I have a dream!"

1) The Irish Americans were in no way treated worse than the slaves.

2) You're still missing the point. Current measures aimed at equalization are not meant as punishments for whites or gifts for blacks because of the past. They are meant as levellers for the present.

I don't know about you, but it seemed to me that Common sense whooped the pants of PC BS!

Sure it did.

If, by "common sense" you mean "a bunch of stuff you just made up."

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Sure it did.

If, by "common sense" you mean "a bunch of stuff you just made up."

I think he's taking "indentured servants" as slaves.

[Scurvy]

It is ridiculous to give people special treatment for wrongs done to their ancestors. I am part Irish and the Irish got treated a lot worse than the blacks -

not true...

We will only complicate the situation more and more if we don't stop with the PC BS and use a little common sense.

this makes more sense, the very PC media coverage etc has to be stopped...common sense tells me some counter-discrimination is needed until equality is achieved....

black slaves were treated fairly well for slaves

so actually very very badly, just like all slaves are treated very very badly....

PC BS: Blacks were slaves for a few hundred years so now all blacks get special treatment over whites.

this isnt PC or BS, infact its completely incorrect, not all blacks get special treatment, and its because of the descrimination they suffer now, not from the past that the measures are in place... it might be that the past slavery put them in the position they are now, but thats not the reason for the treatment's existance...

[AntiochusIII]

Like I said, this thread makes me happy.

It's nice to know we of the not-so-white skin are now viewed as oppressors and evilz freedom-robbers. I like being oppressive and I hate freedom. Freedom makes me sick.

With my oppressive part expressed, my victimized part congratulates all these people here who find it in themselves the newfound joy of self-victimization; they didn't know what they missed. Playing victim is so very much fun, as the people in question no doubt agrees.

[Lemur]

Sigh. Let's slog through this one. I see DA has stayed "on message."

I will agree that there's nobody more dangerous than a person who is convinced that he/she is a victim. For someone with that mentality, there is no morality, no restraint, since the victimhood justifies all. Dangerous stuff.

That said, I hear a lot more we-are-the-victims coming from white Republicans than I do from anyone else.

Consider: Black Americans demand equality and cry racism at every opportunity, but yet we have "Black Entertainment Television", "Black Power", the "United Negro College Fund", the "National Association for the Advancement of Colored People", and "Equal Opportunity".

BET is privately funded. Are you opposed to people spending their money however they wish? Likewise, the UNCF is supported by individual and corporate donations. You have a particular beef with them? It's not your tax dollars at work, after all. NAACP is a shadow of its former self, and I don't see that they're any sort of major player on the national stage. So let's get to the real meat of your offendedness:

Equal opportunity. Are you objecting to the EEOC? To private usage? Aren't "activist judges" striking down racial quotas at universities all over the nation? What exactly are you fulminating against? We'll scroll on through your screed, looking for more detail.

Didn't Martin Luther King Jr. envision an equal society where black Americans were an equal race, not a favored race?

Didn't Martin Luther King Jr. seek to erase divisions between us? So why do we see the self-selected "Black Leadership" creating divisions?

The answer to the former paragraph is yes. The answer to the latter paragraph is, why would you act surprised? Any person who finds a lever for power will use it to maintain power. It's up to the "followers" to figure out that the leader is full of B.S., using divisions and hatred to push an unrelated agenda.

I believe that the existence of a "victim class" is essential to Democrat strategy in the United States. The Democrat agenda requires the existence of an underclass for the government to support, so should black Americans achieve the dream of MLKjr, the Democrats would be severely impacted.

That's both a broad and detailed assertion, with little to back it up. Are you suggesting that if no group of people felt victimized, there would be no Democratic party? Do you have anything factual to back that up? Are you asserting that the Democrats created, encouraged and/or maintain the "victim class"?

Consider the relationship between Black leadership, Hollywood, and the Democrat elite:

Balck America today is portrayed as "tough", "strong", and "athletic". Hollywood perpetuates this myth with (a) movies and (b) music. The promotion of these mediums of entertaiment for blacks in the United States are a celebration of anti-social behavior and success through aggressive behavior (be that behavior legal or not).

That's strange—I thought the black guy always died in the action film. Especially if he was best buddies with the white guy. And doesn't the black guy usually get killed in horror films? Or are you conflating rap videos with all of Hollywood?

Black youth in American culture views its opportunities for success as limited to athleticism, rap music, or gang violence. When black youth attempts to escape these boundaries and attain an education, they are broken down by their peer as a betrayal of the race. In other words, blacks who pursue a route other than that glorified by hollywood become ostricized as "trying to be white".

There's a real problem within black culture, but you're not doing anything useful by taking these broad swipes. And I don't get the impression that healing inner-city black culture is really a burning item on your "to-do" list. Fatherlessness is probably the single biggest issue, and I don't see it popping up anywhere in your post.

The "Black leadership" contributes to this by reinforcing the notion that blacks in America are oppressed and treated as inferiors. The truth is that "black leadership" would become irrelevant if blacks were allowed to realize their potential in this country.

See my earlier response to the shorter version of this trope.

The argument that minorities require special representation is false. The argument that minorities are discriminated against based on skin color is also false. After all, where is the "Asian Leadership"? Asians as a minority in this country were forced into terrible servitude in the 1800s. They were virtually trapped by low pay and racial discrimination. But they had no MLKjr, and today Asians are renowned in the United states for their productivity and talent.

The biggest obstacle facing inner-city black Americans has to do with family structure. Hundreds of years of deliberate destruction of family bonds has a retarding effect on a group. That, more than anything, explains why black Americans have not prospered as quickly as Irish, Asian or Hispanic immigrants. I also seriously doubt that there's anything the government or white boys like you and me can do about it. It will heal, I have no doubt, but in its own time.

The success of Black Americans are discouraged unless that success came at some cost to the white majority. Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Thomas Clarence: All were hugely successfully but each receieved the scorn of the "balck leadership" and the Democratic Party. Not because they were Republicans, but because they were Black Americans who succeeded on their own without taking something away from the white majority.

You know, if you had it in you to discuss this issue without making it into yet another Liberals Are The Source of All Badness in the World thread, I think we could get somewhere interesting. As it stands, well, you and Dinesh D'Souza have a lot to talk about.

The fact is that the Democratic Party requires a "victim class" and the liberal royalty uses its media influence and political spin to artificially and permanently perpetuate one.

You've made this supposition countless times across dozens of threads. Back it up with some real data, or go sit in the Monomaniacal Theory part of the bus.

[yesdachi]

Nicely written first post DA.

I think it has been mentioned here before but Michigan ditched affirmative action this past election (despite some protest the courts found in favor of the peoples vote and support the elimination of AA). I think the sooner we eliminate all the programs that are in place to segregate us the better.

It was gimmicky but the BlackWhite show last year on FX was interesting in the way they explored the “thru their eyes” perspective of the 2 races. There were no genuine revelations but just seeing the differences was fun.

Politically, I think the Dems play to the blacks and once elected don’t do anything to make good on their campaign promises. I think the prominent black leaders are as racist and close minded as any KKK member and perpetuate discord in order to maintain their popularity. It is easier to rally the masses by telling them that their troubles are because of “society”, i.e. Whitey, rather than their own poor choices.

I really don’t think there are as many “racists” as the talking heads would like you to think, IMO more people are just prejudice against certain kinds of people. I definitely have a prejudice against “urban gangsta” people regardless of their race. Thinking about it, I have a prejudice against lots of kinds of people (shudders at the thought of clowns, old people, priests, cyclists, etc.).

I don’t see any quick fix for the racial tensions that exists other than time and common sense. Look how much different blacks (and women) are treated today vs. 25 yrs ago vs. 50 years ago vs. 100 yrs ago. The world, encouraged by the west, has come a long way in a relatively short time. In our “microwave” world of immediate gratification it is frustrating to encounter something that we can’t just make better by flipping a switch or taking a pill, but equality is something that will only become better with time, IMO it gets better with each generation, and generations are not created with the flip of a switch.

I personally find it annoying to encounter a black person (it happened more often when I was in college) that acts like they are owed something by whitey. Hello, Michigan is in the north and filled with people descended from the people that fought to free the slaves. If all the white people wanted to keep slavery it surely would still be in place but there were white people that opposed it and risked their lives to free slaves, heck the town I grew up in was one of the most active stops along the underground railroad. But that’s ok; we don’t need a black leader to propose a “thank whitey” day, But a little less ignorance about the history of the blacks transition from slave to freedom would be nice.

[Cowhead418]

I'm sorry if you think my argument reeks of sexism and racism. I don't see it that way. I see the whole process now as a series of growing pains. Minorities now have a sense of newfound power that they never had before. It's only natural that they try to flex that muscle a bit and test the limits of it. And when those limits are reached, that's what will naturally cause the pendulum to swing back in the other direction, as I believe we can see happening right now.

It's not a question of justice or revenge.

And it's certainly not a question of whites being slaves. I didn't say that, and that can not possibly even be inferred from my statement.

Minorities have been oppressed for thousands of years. Finally, over the past few decades, the powered classes have realized that this should be corrected and have made attempts to rectify the situation. Some of the measures have been imperfect (and even divisive), such as affirmative action. Others have been just plain common sense, like making wheelchair access mandatory in buildings, or forcing employers to hold womens' jobs while they are on maternity leave.

But the key point is that these measures were not designed to punish anybody for past injustices. They were only meant to level the playing field.

And I have to laugh at you trying to compare your current "paying" to what blacks have gone through for the last few hundred years in North America.

It's like holding a birthday candle beside a oil well fire.

I'm not comparing my current situation to the past. Where did I say that? I wasn't aware that the minorities today were alive thousands of years ago. How do they get the sense of this "newfound power" when they weren't alive while they were being denied it - so the thousands of years argument doesn't fly with me. I'm not acting like whites are victims, I'm just sick of racism and sexism being used as excuses for failures. People today are a hell of a lot less willing to take responsibilities for their actions, and I'm sick of their BS. I'm also sick to death of the argument that "we deserve the backlash" (maybe that isn't what you're saying but I've heard it plenty of times) Deserve it why? I wasn't aware that I was a slaveholder and denying women the right to vote. I'm not in any way even saying that whites have it bad, and I don't have much problem with the arrangements today, I'm just tired of the people that make me try to feel guilty for what I didn't do. Look at the Duke rape case for a prime example. Before any of the evidence came out, people were already condeming the "evil rich white boys" to decades in prison. Even after it was obvious they're innocent, I still heard plenty of people say they "should be punished anyway and those white boys deserve it after the way they treated blacks in the past." It's just one of my pet peeves./endrant

[Strike For The South]

Yes.

Well thats an old and dated worry. They could move to Texas Alabama Mississippi or any southern state and face no pursecution.

[Cowhead418]

I think it's evident a lot of whites see themselves as victims

I've noticed a common theme here. Caravel, SFTS, and myself have all commented on the guilt shaming tactics that have been employed on us, and we are all in our teens. I don't know what school was like for you years ago, but you'd be surprised at some of the stuff I hear from my fellow students and teachers in school today. I agree with Caravel that all this is doing is driving a wedge between the two races, and is definately worsening the already sensitive racial relations.

[Goofball]

I'm sorry if you think my argument reeks of sexism and racism. I don't see it that way. I see the whole process now as a series of growing pains. Minorities now have a sense of newfound power that they never had before. It's only natural that they try to flex that muscle a bit and test the limits of it. And when those limits are reached, that's what will naturally cause the pendulum to swing back in the other direction, as I believe we can see happening right now.

It's not a question of justice or revenge.

And it's certainly not a question of whites being slaves. I didn't say that, and that can not possibly even be inferred from my statement.

Minorities have been oppressed for thousands of years. Finally, over the past few decades, the powered classes have realized that this should be corrected and have made attempts to rectify the situation. Some of the measures have been imperfect (and even divisive), such as affirmative action. Others have been just plain common sense, like making wheelchair access mandatory in buildings, or forcing employers to hold womens' jobs while they are on maternity leave.

But the key point is that these measures were not designed to punish anybody for past injustices. They were only meant to level the playing field.

And I have to laugh at you trying to compare your current "paying" to what blacks have gone through for the last few hundred years in North America.

It's like holding a birthday candle beside a oil well fire.

I'm not comparing my current situation to the past. Where did I say that?

You're right. I reread your post and you didn't make a direct comparison.

You asked why you should have to "pay" today for what happened to blacks in the past, drawing a parallel or connection between the two experiences. My point was that any possible swing of the pendalum against whites has still caused nowhere near the pain and suffering that North American blacks have been going through for the past few hundred years, and can't be compared.

I wasn't aware that the minorities today were alive thousands of years ago. How do they get the sense of this "newfound power" when they weren't alive while they were being denied it - so the thousands of years argument doesn't fly with me.

I could make the argument that minorities are still experiencing oppression today, but I have a feeling that you would dismiss that out of hand, so how about a little middle ground we can agree on.

Would you agree with me that blacks were still being oppressed in North America as recently as the 1960's?

If yes, would you further agree that some of those blacks who were alive in the 1960's are still alive today?

There. You've answered your own question.

I'm not acting like whites are victims, I'm just sick of racism and sexism being used as excuses for failures.

Your original post would indicate that you are acting like a victim. You ranted about having to pay for past injustices that had nothing to do with you.

A person who is blamed and punished for something they didn't do can very rightly be called a victim.

So, which way do you want it? Are you a victim or not?

People today are a hell of a lot less willing to take responsibilities for their actions, and I'm sick of their BS.

I agree, it makes me sick too. Like the guy (there's one in every office) that gets one beer into him then starts with "I'm not a racist, but two black guys walk into a bar...."

The joke always turns out to be extremely racist, but he thinks its funny and takes no responsibility for the effects of his role in perpetuating negative racial stereotypes.

I'm also sick to death of the argument that "we deserve the backlash" (maybe that isn't what you're saying but I've heard it plenty of times) Deserve it why? I wasn't aware that I was a slaveholder and denying women the right to vote.

I've read the thread through again and find no instances of anybody making that argument. I have tried to stay away from the use of this word as much as possible lately in the Backroom, but you are making such blatant use of the tactic (and I don't even think you realize that you are doing it) that I feel I have to say it:

Strawman.

Yuck.

There, I've said it.

I feel a bit dirty now.

I hope you're happy.

I'm not in any way even saying that whites have it bad, and I don't have much problem with the arrangements today, I'm just tired of the people that make me try to feel guilty for what I didn't do. It's just one of my pet peeves./endrant

Fair comment. As I've said before, trying to help minorities should not be about punishing whites. And that means it should not be about guilt. Any action undertaken only out of a sense of guilt is tainted right from the get-go.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I've noticed a common theme here. Caravel, SFTS, and myself have all commented on the guilt shaming tactics that have been employed on us, and we are all in our teens. I don't know what school was like for you years ago, but you'd be surprised at some of the stuff I hear from my fellow students and teachers in school today. I agree with Caravel that all this is doing is driving a wedge between the two races, and is definately worsening the already sensitive racial relations.

I'm 20

How diverse is your school?

[Cowhead418]

You're right. I reread your post and you didn't make a direct comparison.

You asked why you should have to "pay" today for what happened to blacks in the past, drawing a parallel or connection between the two experiences. My point was that any possible swing of the pendalum against whites has still caused nowhere near the pain and suffering that North American blacks have been going through for the past few hundred years, and can't be compared.

Fair enough. I agree 100% with you here.

I could make the argument that minorities are still experiencing oppression today, but I have a feeling that you would dismiss that out of hand, so how about a little middle ground we can agree on.

Would you agree with me that blacks were still being oppressed in North America as recently as the 1960's?

If yes, would you further agree that some of those blacks who were alive in the 1960's are still alive today?

There. You've answered your own question.

No, I wouldn't dismiss it. I agree with you that blacks do have it worse today. My problem is with the people who have played the racism card on minor issues, to get sympathy, or to justify their wrongdoings. Also, I do agree that blacks living in the 1960s were treated unfairly and that many of them live today. My point was about them feeling their newfound power after thousands of years.

Your original post would indicate that you are acting like a victim. You ranted about having to pay for past injustices that had nothing to do with you.

A person who is blamed and punished for something they didn't do can very rightly be called a victim.

So, which way do you want it? Are you a victim or not?

I apologize for blowing my top in my first post. I completely overreacted. I don't actually believe I'm being 'punished' for anything, I just have problems with people who believe I should be punished. I'm not saying that you are one of those people, I'm just saying that I've encountered many of them.

I agree, it makes me sick too. Like the guy (there's one in every office) that gets one beer into him then starts with "I'm not a racist, but two black guys walk into a bar...."

The joke always turns out to be extremely racist, but he thinks its funny and takes no responsibility for the effects of his role in perpetuating negative racial stereotypes.

I agree. The whole "gangster" stereotype is still doing lots of damage to Black America today.

I've read the thread through again and find no instances of anybody making that argument. I have tried to stay away from the use of this word as much as possible lately in the Backroom, but you are making such blatant use of the tactic (and I don't even think you realize that you are doing it) that I feel I have to say it:

Strawman.

Yuck.

There, I've said it.

I feel a bit dirty now.

I hope you're happy.

I'm sorry again, I did not direct that comment at you. Once again, I'm saying that I've encountered several people who have made that argument (not here).

Fair comment. As I've said before, trying to help minorities should not be about punishing whites. And that means it should not be about guilt. Any action undertaken only out of a sense of guilt is tainted right from the get-go.

I agree.

[Goofball]

Fair enough. I agree 100% with you here.

No, I wouldn't dismiss it. I agree with you that blacks do have it worse today. My problem is with the people who have played the racism card on minor issues, to get sympathy, or to justify their wrongdoings. Also, I do agree that blacks living in the 1960s were treated unfairly and that many of them live today. My point was about them feeling their newfound power after thousands of years.

I apologize for blowing my top in my first post. I completely overreacted. I don't actually believe I'm being 'punished' for anything, I just have problems with people who believe I should be punished. I'm not saying that you are one of those people, I'm just saying that I've encountered many of them.

I agree. The whole "gangster" stereotype is still doing lots of damage to Black America today.

I'm sorry again, I did not direct that comment at you. Once again, I'm saying that I've encountered several people who have made that argument (not here).

I agree.

Darn.

You made a post that I find to be very reasonable and well considered.

I guess there's no point in arguing with you any further.

Now, what the hell am I supposed to do for the rest of the afternoon?

I might actually have to do some work.

[Cowhead418]

I'm 20

How diverse is your school?

I know I'm about to lose all my credibility here, but I guess I have to come clean now. When I saw this topic, I agreed with it in terms of gender issues, and not really race issues. But when I saw everyone making it into racial issue, I thought I wouldn't be able to be taken seriously with my point of view unless I jumped on board. In reality, I believe racism is still a big problem (not so much politically, but socially). I still have the same problems with people who use the race card in the ways I explained earlier, but I still mostly don't have issues with the methods used to "correct the balance." If you want to know, my school is mostly Asian, and white, and only about 5% black. The shaming tactics I refer to are not really directed at whites, but at men. In my English and US History classes, I can't tell you how many times I've been told by my feminist teachers and classmates that I "owe" women something for what happened in the past. Some of the double standards they promote and the things they say are appalling, and their sense of entitlement is sickening. Note: I'm not trying to start a "who has it worse" debate (I loathe those kinds of discussions), but count me as one of those who is tired of the bitching from feminazis, especially about the mythological "Patriarchy."

Alright, I've got my coat and I'm out the door. I know I've probably confused everyone with my sudden change in position, so I apologize. I'll go back to being a stupid, ignorant teenager now.

[Strike For The South]

White, non-Hispanic 67%
Hispanic 23%
Asian/Pacific Islander 6%
Black 4%
American Indian/Alaskan Native <1%

[Marshal Murat]

My point was about them feeling their newfound power after thousands of years.

Well, thousands of years is kinda long, especially since the use of slaves as plantation workers has only been around since probably 1500's or so. Slavery isn't just a black issue. Gauls, Germans, Brits, Angles, Franks, Saxons, Moors and more have been slaves. Its just that it was so long ago, I can't sue anyone in Rome for enslaving my Gallic great-infinite grandfather, since he was forced to work on Caesar's latifundia.

I have to say that the Irish were exploited, either pay to get out of the draft, or forced into the army, and while hard labor is never the same as risking your life for the country that didn't give you the choice, I understand.

The Chinese were also terribly exploited, forced to work on the railroads, and then when they worked for less than average wage they were hated and despised. They threatened the local economies and it wasn't cool to be a 'China man' in San Francisco. Have you heard about their civil rights activities?
I think that African-Americans have exploited some white regret for slavery. They started out like many of the yeomanry after the American Civil War. Poor, without a job. The African-Americans could work for a lower wage, and that threatened the yeomanry and their jobs. The pre-exisiting racial problems were exploded.

Just for example, Barrack Obama. A white mother, black Kenyan father. He lived with both parents, and has been fostered in a culture that promotes success. How has he done? Pretty darn good, Senator if I am correct.
It's the atmosphere that you live in, the social influences and pressures that are exerted on you. Barrack Obama started with a Kenyan father and has a darker skin tone, but was fostered to be successful. He is. The Kenyan father in Chicago with his white wife is going to be looked upon in a different way. The social stereotypes, pressures, and ideas about who you are affects who you become. How you are raised is what you become.


I have to say the feminist have the best of both worlds. They can vote, own property, and still be able to pull 'ladies first'.

[Del Arroyo]

There are a couple of points I would like to interject here. First of all, "minorities", as in minority populations of the United States of America, have not been oppressed for thousands of years. The US has only existed as an independent republic for a little over two hundred years.

If you are attempting to extend this statement backwards in time, arguing that the genetic or political predecessors of "the oppressors" have been oppressing the genetic or political predecessors of "the oppressed", then you are patently and quite totally mistaken. If you look at human history as a whole, or even fairly recent human history, what you see is a whole bunch of people oppressing a whole bunch of other people, without very much discrimination on the basis of religion, race or creed.

Or, to put it in more accurate, neutral terms, you see all sorts of vibrant personal interaction, with a great variety of power relationships between the parties involved.

As far as gender issues are concern, men have historically been affected by society-imposed gender roles just as much as have women. Men were expected to be physically brave and strong, and serve the family by hunting, building, and exploring, things which most men enjoyed. Women were expected to be nurturing and loyal, serving the family by making homes, creating families, and caring for small children-- things which most women enjoyed.

..

The real story here is that economic change always outpaces social change, thus creating imbalances. Whenever there is an imbalance there will be pressure to correct it, and history has shown us that usually this pressure wins out in the end. Economic change marches on, rinse and repeat.

[Watchman]

Men were expected to be physically brave and strong, and serve the family by hunting, building, and exploring, things which most men enjoyed. Women were expected to be nurturing and loyal, serving the family by making homes, creating families, and caring for small children-- things which most women enjoyed.

...and did either actually have much choice in the matter ? Social pressures can be pretty overwhelming in tight-knit communities...
Nevermind now the curious longstanding idea that women were inherently incapable of doing anything else, which sentiment still
interestingly enough keeps popping up in one form or another every now and then. It just tends to be covered by the tiniest fig leaves of technical jargon.

[Del Arroyo]

...and did either actually have much choice in the matter ? Social pressures can be pretty overwhelming in tight-knit communities...
Nevermind now the curious longstanding idea that women were inherently incapable of doing anything else, which sentiment still
interestingly enough keeps popping up in one form or another every now and then. It just tends to be covered by the tiniest fig leaves of technical jargon.

All service involves sacrifice.

[Watchman]

You lost me there.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

You lost me there.

A penny saved is a penny earned

[Major Robert Dump]

I was wondereing if anyone, anyone please, can point out examples of credible blacks treating Condolezza Rice and Colin Powell as Uncle toms due just to the fact that they are blacks working for whitey. Note my words credible and due just to the fact.

Don't get me wrong, I may very well be the most racially insensitive person on the planet. But this is just another gay liberals-got-pwnt thread.

The degredation of black culture has just as much to do with washington-style politics, conservatives and the blacks themselves as it does liberalism. nice try though.

[BDC]

My ancestors were oppressed for nearly a thousand years by Norman overlords.

Now I'm ruled over by a couple of Scots.

*shrug*

[Tribesman]

I can't tell you how many times I've been told by my feminist teachers and classmates that I "owe" women something for what happened in the past.

Well you could offer to give them a portion .
They generally feel very happy and content after they have recieved a good one .

[InsaneApache]

Well thats an old and dated worry. They could move to Texas Alabama Mississippi or any southern state and face no pursecution.

That's not what she says.

[Vuk]

First of all, I don't buy into the fact that all blacks get special treatment over whites. Second, you are missing the point. Measures we are taking (such as affirmative action, which I admit is a very imperfect policy) now are not meant as "payback" for past offenses against blacks. They are meant to offer more equal opportunity in an environment that still discriminates against minorities.

No, giving equal opportunities is giving equal opportunities - giving special treatment or elevated status isn't. And don't tell me that women and minorities don't get both. I've lived long enough to see that. I think it is horrible that they shouldn't get equal opportunities, but I think it is equally horrible to see them getting special treatment. If you say it is horrible that one sect of society or culture got special treament, but not that it is horrible that another sect got equal treatment, you are saying that one is better than the other, and that is the essence of the negativity given to the word: discrimination. Saying women are better than men is JUST as sexist as saying men are better than women. Saying blacks are better than whites is JUST as racist as saying whites are better than blacks. You guys are being just as sexist and racist as the guys we just worked so hard to get rid of!!

You can argue that that is not what the measures are actually achieving, but that was their intent.

I beg to differ.

They were not treated "extremely well." You need a serious dose of reality. The simple fact that they were considered to be property precludes the use of the phrase "extremely well" when describing how slaves were treated in America.

You really need to read posts before responding to them. I said COMPARED to other slaves.

You're going to have to provide some sources that don't come from white sepremist websites before I can buy any of that.

Once again, we have a reading related problem. Before you respond to a post like this, may I suggest you read up on the subject.

P.S. I am afraid I don't know of any white supremist sites, perhaps I'll check one out after I check your GBBS website out...

1) The Irish Americans were in no way treated worse than the slaves.

2) You're still missing the point. Current measures aimed at equalization are not meant as punishments for whites or gifts for blacks because of the past. They are meant as levellers for the present.

MAN! You have to read more!! The Irish Americans were not given jobs and nearly all initial settlers died! They were persecuted, starved, beaten, put in brothels, etc.
The few boys who did get jobs got jobs in factories operating poor machinery, that should never have been put into use, or became chimney sweeper. Meanwhile rich WHITE women would sit in their parlors with their warm fire thinking of how to free the poor black slaves...while a little white boy was on the roof suffocating from their fires that they refused to extinguish while the chimney was swept.
Most whites considered the Irish worse than animals and thought nothing of their pain, misery, or lives. They thought less of the Irish than dirt under their feet, but at the same time deluded themselves with notions of their humanity by thinking of way to free the poor blacks.

There were sign that said things like: "Dogs, Jews, and Irish stay of grass", and "Such and such job, Irishmen need not apply."




Sure it did.

If, by "common sense" you mean "a bunch of stuff you just made up."

[/QUOTE]

I think he's taking "indentured servants" as slaves.

No, I am talking of both...

not true...

Maybe if you and GB spend more time reading and less time jumping to attack things you know nothing of you'd be worth me talking to... meant in a friendly way of course...

this makes more sense, the very PC media coverage etc has to be stopped...common sense tells me some counter-discrimination is needed until equality is achieved....

You mean discrimination. Discriminating against a sect of society because old members of that sect committed discrimination is discrimination...and completely retarded....



so actually very very badly, just like all slaves are treated very very badly....


Not as badly as most think, though there were cases. The point is, not as bad as a lot of whites. So if blacks get special treatment, shouldn't those whites?

this isnt PC or BS, infact its completely incorrect, not all blacks get special treatment, and its because of the descrimination they suffer now, not from the past that the measures are in place... it might be that the past slavery put them in the position they are now, but thats not the reason for the treatment's existance...

Wrong. People always treat blacks with kid gloves because they are afraid they will say or do something one may consider racist. Also, the government gives them special treatment. Don't tell me it isn't true, as I said above I've lived long enough to know it is.
Whites think they should feel guilty about something they didn't even do, it is quite pathetic.
Sorry I have not been on, my financial aid was dropped and I have to get a third job. I have been very busy. One of best friends (who has never done or attempted to do a days work in his life, is getting his college and living paid for by taxpayers because he is black. He is getting grades much lower than mine also.

[Marshal Murat]

You know Vaudeville? The one where the white men paint themselves black and dress in white and red suits, with the hats. Strumming on the banjo, harmonica, all that old south stuff.
That was begun by the Irish because they shared more in common with the free blacks than with the New York people.
Another mark against the Irish was because they were Papist. As far out as it sounds that John Paul II could command so many people, alot of 1890s Americans were afraid of Catholics and despised them.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I was wondereing if anyone, anyone please, can point out examples of credible blacks treating Condolezza Rice and Colin Powell as Uncle toms due just to the fact that they are blacks working for whitey. Note my words credible and due just to the fact.

There's the black Republican Senator candidate in Maryland who was pelted with oreos, presumably for being a republican.

Crazed Rabbit

[Tribesman]

MAN! You have to read more!! The Irish Americans were not given jobs and nearly all initial settlers died! They were persecuted, starved, beaten, put in brothels, etc.
The few boys who did get jobs got jobs in factories operating shitty machinery, that should never have been put into use, or became chimney sweeper. Meanwhile rich WHITE women would sit in their parlors with their warm fire thinking of how to free the poor black slaves...while a little white boy was on the roof suffocating from their fires that they refused to extinguish while the chimney was swept.
Most whites considered the Irish worse than animals and thought nothing of their pain, misery, or lives. They thought less of the Irish than dirt under their feet, but at the same time deluded themselves with notions of their humanity by thinking of way to free the poor blacks.

What a classic piece of crap , is that some sort of huge narrowback victim complex you have there ?
What about all the poor Russian French Dutch German Greek Polish Italian ........settlers eh ?

Tell you what Vuk if you want to be sooooo really concerned about existing populations attitudes to recent immigrants then try and remember this episode next time you moan about all the Latinos .

[Watchman]

No, giving equal opportunities is giving equal opportunities - giving special treatment or elevated status isn't. And don't tell me that women and minorities don't get both. I've lived long enough to see that. I think it is horrible that they shouldn't get equal opportunities, but I think it is equally horrible to see them getting special treatment. If you say it is horrible that one sect of society or culture got special treament, but not that it is horrible that another sect got equal treatment, you are saying that one is better than the other, and that is the essence of the negativity given to the word: discrimination. Saying women are better than men is JUST as sexist as saying men are better than women. Saying blacks are better than whites is JUST as racist as saying whites are better than blacks. You guys are being just as sexist and racist as the guys we just worked so hard to get rid of!!

You seem to be working hard to miss the point. Nobody ever said "women are better than men" (although one does wonder if this really isn't so every now and then...) or "blacks are better than whites", or in any case outside the loony fringe anyway. And nobody in their right minds takes those sorts seriously.

Strawmen get fed to lions in this ranch.

The basic idea behind "positive discrimination" is to first of all negate the handicap the discriminated get from the discrimination (well, duh). And fixing the damage done. One aspect is then quite bluntly taking the equality principle and force-feeding it to the recalcitrants in order to make the matter a fait accompli; this has the effect of making the previously abhorrent idea - say, married women working - an undeniable reality and kind of tends to debunk the sorts of arguments used to justify the discrimination by proving them invalid.

In short, forcing the "general public" to recognize the equality and live with it, so over time they will come to regard it as the natural state of affairs. Then we can start talking about dumping the positively discriminating legislation; but as long as the negative discrimination hangs around - and believe you me it does - this is not an option, because removing the legislation will just allow it to become dominant again.

And you wouldn't believe the difficulties our state church has getting some of the hardliners to believe female clergy is just as good as male... in spite of the former having been around for over two decades now.

It's also pretty painfully obvious US Blacks still had to fight for full civil rights and equality before law (which AFAIK still hasn't been realized by the by; darker skin apparently tends to net you heavier sentences than for example "whites" get for same crimes...) as late as the Sixties. And what's with that repugnant taboo about Black men and White women again...?

Of course there always will be some unscrupulous people who exploit "positive discrimination" legislation to their own advantage; in the field of politics this is known as "political enterpreneurship" and populism. But them's the breaks when dealing with people.