I don't understand racism or homophobia
- Thread starter CorrectHorseBattery
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,647
say dat to my face irl m8!
I posted a link to the current uk defi itions theyre on wiki.
2 the most recent ones.
3 as ive said repetedly whatever catagory you like.
You it is perfectly acceptable to answer "i dont want to do it as I'll look racist" i only posted the challenge as i wanted to see the mental gymnastics people would pull to avoid answering rhe question .
And you and angillion provided excellently.
You both have highlighted the major isssue, it's almost impossible to have a discussion about racial issues as no one wants to actually talk just side step and strawman or play semantics because they don't want to appear racist.
I find it funny in this thread its a bunch of white straight guys saying how terrible it alll is.
And one black dude and a bi guy saying, its really not.
I forget where I mention my skin tone.
what time frame for achievement are we using?
If any, the the first sling that allowed humans to evolve increadibly weak offspring with the potential for enhanced intelligence was discovered in what is now africa, though the population at the time were likely very different.
I don't actually care about using a definition for sub categorisation, I'm simply pointing out that by current evidence they don't actually group the sub divisions in any meaningful way.
I'm going for comical view on being intolerant to prejudments = Bear
Implying humans don't hunt prey = disagree
Prey being redefined as same spieces = lol
and the final act you riding in on your sophist rocket doing a bit of track changing = LOL
With some sometimes funny commentary by robocod
Last edited:
Straw bear*
Sorry Tefal, I've not got the patience to search the whole thread.
Could I ask you link to the UK census categories of self report "racial" classifications, my google fu is failing me, all I can find is ethnicity?
I'm warming to Tosno
Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist, Sophist. I can see why he can be endearing. It's like the silly kid in class, it wouldn't have been the same without him.
In discussion a sense of humor goes a long way, that doesnt make the points raised any more valid. I think OCuk has a very broad base of users which can lead to very interesting discussion. That said race is clearly controversial to some, painting peoples position as biased or inherently wrong is easy but not productive. As with my self and with my littleun I advocate the continuing value in personal critical thinking, based on evidence and not tradition.
If someone wants to claim sub division of the human species as valuable I'll read it, but what is it based on?
And with such upbringing, I will bet that your child will grow without irrational prejudices against people based on irrelevant characteristics.
I can't really say if that will be the case but rational and critical thinking seem preferentisl so let's hope so.
That said, there was a visit from santa and the tooth fairy recently, I have no idea why me and the missus play those games, I look forward to the day our paper thin deceptions are detected
I'm warming to Tosno
I hate to be immodest, as you all know, but that's what all the girls say and keeping with the topic some boys too
The warmth of tradition will melt even the coldest cultural marxist heart.
See this is where you fall down over and over.
Something does not need to be informative, valuable or of use to exist.
Dawkins does not say race doesn't exist, he says all race does is inform us of the simple traits, skin colour eye shape etc.
He nor does anyone in the scientific comunity say race does not exist.
Saying race doesnt exist is a fringe and bizzare view.
The point I was making is no one complains about church bells, even though they are heard all over the UK, yet a call from a minaret is somehow different? It's a reasonable comparison.
Personally I don't have an issue with either of them, unless perhaps I happened to live next door an one and it woke me up at silly o'clock.
I said that "race" isn't real, but close enough.
No it isn't and I've already explained why. But I'll do it again anyway.
Irrational prejudices are based on what a person believes. Whether it's true or not doesn't matter. If a person believes in tiny pixies that live in some people's ears, they can be "ist" against people they believe have tiny pixies in their ears or people they believe don't have tiny pixies in their ears or on the basis of something they believe about different types of tiny ear-dwelling pixies.
So what if it is? That has no relevance to whether it's right or not. What's considered fringe and bizarre views is a reflection of contempory social norms, not reality. For example, the idea that slavery is unacceptable has been a fringe and bizarre view in some times and places. You'd have been hard pressed to find an abolitionist in ancient Rome, for example.
But you're missing the other data, for example that the poverty/crime correlation is basically the same across a wide number of races, including White British and that wealthy non white people are no more likely to commit crime than similarly wealthy white people.
There is nothing wrong with saying that statistically black people are more likely to commit crimes, but people will quite happily pick you out if you say someone is more likely to commit a crime because they are black - due to it not having anything to do with being black, rather being in poverty.
Last edited: