kfed2020 Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 In your quest to claim legitimacy, you assume too much. Nobody gives a flying @#$% if a white man gets arrested. There is no NAAWP to rouse the colorless rabble. Nobody cries "Race! Race! Race!" when bad things happen to white folks. (Or Asian folks, for that matter, since they seem to do well on standardized tests.) It's all a bunch of hypocritical bullshit. "Equality means more for me!" Boo-hoo? "Hyperbole and histrionics." Apparently, for you, claiming victimhood is only okay when a white person uses it as a counter-claim against a person of color. People wouldn't react the same way to a white person getting arrested because it'd seem (to many people) far less likely that the person were getting arrested because they were white. That's the key difference. Again: consult history. On the other hand, given the abundance of 4th amendment issues in this particular case, if this had happened to a (relatively famous, elderly) white person, many people most certainly would have raised similar questions about the officer's conduct. If you want sympathy for white people, look no further than the news. You're much more likely to see reports on missing white children (mostly female), or white women who've been murdered by their husbands (be they OJ, Scott Peterson, whomever else...) than you are of similar situations involving people of color. White victims are everywhere; where's your protest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnesotan Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Boo-hoo? "Hyperbole and histrionics." Apparently, for you, claiming victimhood is only okay when a white person uses it as a counter-claim against a person of color. Now you're just making stuff up. Argue honestly. Nobody would need to make a counter-claim if there was no claim in the first place. Unfortunately the claims never stop. And this is what annoys me. Well,that and the fact that people like you will say anything to make the claims true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent shakespeare Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Now you're just making stuff up. Argue honestly. Nobody would need to make a counter-claim if there was no claim in the first place. Unfortunately the claims never stop. And this is what annoys me. Well,that and the fact that people like you will say anything to make the claims true. looks like a case of, "do as I say, not as I do." if you re-read your own posts, you'll see you are far more guilty of what you accuse others than anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnesotan Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 looks like a case of, "do as I say, not as I do." That's the justification for racist policies in our government, anyway. Affirmative Action is racism to cure racism. Smart! As for your other claims, you have no proof for any of it. It's just a bunch of conjecture based on outdated race theory. I think it's time to find a new blind faith to preach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow#5 Posted August 13, 2009 Author Share Posted August 13, 2009 Take heart. There are many white males being appreciated at this very moment. Granted, not all of them, just the good ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfed2020 Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 I think it's time to find a new blind faith to preach. I think you've already got that covered... And, no -- no reasonable person ever said AA was a cure for racism, and in fact, AA is most often (and most effectively) used to establish social class diversity, nowadays, as financial status is a more tangible indication of social resources than is race. You're fighting a scarecrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow#5 Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 That's the justification for racist policies in our government, anyway. Affirmative Action is racism to cure racism. Smart! In fact, that is not the justification. The justification is that minorities in disproportionate number don't have access to good schools, therefore, grades and test scores are used as only one indication of future success, (namely, grades indicate academic success in the past). The people who are given YOUR spots at other graduate schools have some quality that seems to indicate to the admin board that they will succeed in the future, perhaps it was this type of quality that your application lacked. Don't worry, school will start soon and you can go back to making fun of your undergraduate students' papers, as you frequently discuss on this board, and you won't have to spend as much time correcting everyone's spelling on these boards, even while you continue to post arguments that make no sense simply to hijack conversations in which you are not really interested. By the way, I overtly appreciated 3 white males today by openly complimenting them, but none of those white males were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnesotan Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 The people who are given YOUR spots at other graduate schools have some quality that seems to indicate to the admin board that they will succeed in the future, perhaps it was this type of quality that your application lacked. 1) This is another personal attack, and your final warning. If you cannot allow for other opinions on these forums (and I have every right to post my opinions here, just like everyone else), then we'll see if a "time out" will curb your attitude problems. 2) I had a very successful round of applications when I got into my PhD program. Moreover, my results and my personal life are none of your business. Please don't comment on them. 3) The only quality that these hypothetical "diversity admissions" could possess, based on the information you've provided, is darker colored skin. I don't see how you can argue that this should qualify or disqualify anyone for anything. 4) The point of all of this is that you are perpetuating racism by defining and privileging people based on the color of their skin. I don't care who gets what -- divvying up material goods based on phenotype is absurd and needs to end. (You have detached lobes so clearly you can't do this job!) 5) Your arguments about "historical wrongs" are nothing more than excuses to either 1) get revenge, or 2) get free stuff. That, or you've been brainwashed by your professors who are too high to realize the 60s are over and the civil rights movement won already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow#5 Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 First of all, you are conflating many people's opinions about race and your racial attitudes and ascribing them to me. 5) Your arguments about "historical wrongs" are nothing more than excuses to either 1) get revenge, or 2) get free stuff. That, or you've been brainwashed by your professors who are too high to realize the 60s are over and the civil rights movement won already. I think I've mentioned already that I'm not a minority and working to pay for my degree, for which I have no funding, though, it was clear to me long ago, you are not reading these posts, merely ranting. 4) The point of all of this is that you are perpetuating racism by defining and privileging people based on the color of their skin. I don't care who gets what -- divvying up material goods based on phenotype is absurd and needs to end. (You have detached lobes so clearly you can't do this job!) That's nice. I have a different opinion of what affirmative action is hoping to accomplish, which you'd know if you read my posts. I suppose the only person entitled to have a different opinion is you. 3) The only quality that these hypothetical "diversity admissions" could possess, based on the information you've provided, is darker colored skin. I don't see how you can argue that this should qualify or disqualify anyone for anything. I am speculating based on your comments on this board, that you are probably not the most awesomely supportive person to work with at the university, which I am led to believe by posts such as this one: Re: Ok, so I'm here, Now what? by Minnesotan irvinchiva10 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnesotan Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Sorry, but creating new threads just to harass me, and continuing to make this a personal dispute leaves me no option but to give you the time out I promised. I'm not sure what playing video games has to do with being a supportive teacher and colleague, but little you have said in this thread is backed by reason -- it's pure opinion. I maintain that you have a right to that opinion, but you do not have a right to wage a personal war against me on this website. I cannot follow you around, locking or deleting threads that you create for no other purpose than to jerk me around. It's a waste of my time, and it harms this website. *Edit: I'm locking this thread entirely, since it seems to be a nexus for racial animosity. Since reason seems to go out the window when discussing these topics, I don't think any good will come of keeping this thread alive. irvinchiva10 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts