University creates "no whites" zones

Wow, so many cowards in GD today who just can't bring themselves to address someone directly so resort to passive aggressive behaviour.

No that's not my definition, if you think it is then you're reading comprehension skills are worse then even i thought.

Yes it's easy to say because it's the truth. Like i said in a previous post...

While they maybe left with mental scars after a brutal assault the reasoning part of their brains should be capable of recognising what would understandably be an emotional reaction to seeing someone that reminds them of that attack. The reasoning part of their brain should be capable of recognising that emotional reaction and reminding them that not everyone is like whoever attacked them.

They're not the first people to be left with emotional scars and they won't be the last.


In other words, bear your scars with silence and fortitude, we aren't done with rubbing collective noses in multicultaralism, whatever the costs.
 
Wow, so many cowards in GD today who just can't bring themselves to address someone directly so resort to passive aggressive behaviour.

No that's not my definition, if you think it is then you're reading comprehension skills are worse then even i thought.

Yes it's easy to say because it's the truth. Like i said in a previous post...

While they maybe left with mental scars after a brutal assault the reasoning part of their brains should be capable of recognising what would understandably be an emotional reaction to seeing someone that reminds them of that attack. The reasoning part of their brain should be capable of recognising that emotional reaction and reminding them that not everyone is like whoever attacked them.

They're not the first people to be left with emotional scars and they won't be the last.
So the black folk in university should get a grip and realise all white people aren’t violent too and let them in their block?
 
Can someone break down the arguments in this thread? I can't be bothered reading through paragraphs of fluff.

Well for a start the title is wrong and actually no university has created any no-whites zones. Certain people in here dont like blacks because of bad things they have seen but they arent racist and blacks arent allowed in Robs house despite him having a right go in this thread about how bad it is that a university has created no go zones for whites. Even though they havent.
 
Can someone break down the arguments in this thread? I can't be bothered reading through paragraphs of fluff.
Off campus residential building that's affiliated with the university now has a rule that 'bans' white students from using the common areas if a person of color is already using it. Some forum members think this is discriminatory, some don't. Other forum members have decided racism is allowable and not actually racism, if they deem it so, should you have experienced negative behaviors by said ethnicity.
 
In other words, bear your scars with silence and fortitude, we aren't done with rubbing collective noses in multicultaralism, whatever the costs.
No, not in other words. I'm perfectly capable of putting things into words and if you're finding something I've said difficult to understand I'm more than willing to take the time to explain.

In my other words, learn to live with you emotional scars and don't let them negatively effect your life. That is assuming you're a grown ass adult and actually capable of controlling your emotions.
So the black folk in university should get a grip and realise all white people aren’t violent too and let them in their block?
Not let them in their block because one would assume new residents arrive every year, new residents that you would assume are dealing with the same 'problems'. However yes, eventually a student in residency should eventually learn to cope with the fear, discomfort, or whatever that they feel when they're around white people. When they leave university their not going to be given the privilege of being able to avoid the thing that invokes an emotional response.
Other forum members have decided racism is allowable and not actually racism if they deem it so, should you have experienced negative behaviors by said ethnicity.
No they haven't.
 
True but not learning to cope with whatever invokes an emotional response is going to negatively effect your life one way or another, avoiding certain people because of what racial group they belong to would IMO be a pretty big negative as it restricts a lot of your potential life choices.
 
Well for a start the title is wrong and actually no university has created any no-whites zones. Certain people in here dont like blacks because of bad things they have seen but they arent racist and blacks arent allowed in Robs house despite him having a right go in this thread about how bad it is that a university has created no go zones for whites. Even though they havent.
Actually, I was telling a porky. Yes my mum was attacked by two black ladies in 1992 but we don’t have a problem with blacks at all. Of course we’re intelligent enough to realise it’s only a very small minority. I was just testing the water to see what the reaction would be.
So no, contrary to what people on here may think, we are not a household full of raging KKK clan members and never will be.
 
Murphy, genuine question, do you have some sort of bipolar disorder or something affecting your short term memory?
Just you're popping off at people for not addressing you directly when you've been doing the exact same thing. On top of that you've now done a complete 180 on what myself, clandestine and c Kent were pointing out to you yesterday after you also tried to redefine words.
On top of that you're whining about people insulting/attacking you yet you did plenty of that without provocation from anyone yesterday.
 
No, not in other words. I'm perfectly capable of putting things into words and if you're finding something I've said difficult to understand I'm more than willing to take the time to explain.

In my other words, learn to live with you emotional scars and don't let them negatively effect your life. That is assuming you're a grown ass adult and actually capable of controlling your emotions.

<snip>

AFFECT you life, AFFECT! ;)
 
Murphy, genuine question, do you have some sort of bipolar disorder or something affecting your short term memory?
Just you're popping off at people for not addressing you directly when you've been doing the exact same thing. On top of that you've now done a complete 180 on what myself, clandestine and c Kent were pointing out to you yesterday after you also tried to redefine words.
On top of that you're whining about people insulting/attacking you yet you did plenty of that without provocation from anyone yesterday.
I think its quite clear he does, also amusing he's getting annoyed at people not addressing him when they've told him they aren't going to bother with him anymore. He's like an emotionally stunted woman that wont leave you alone after a break up.
 
Murphy, genuine question, do you have some sort of bipolar disorder or something affecting your short term memory?
Just you're popping off at people for not addressing you directly when you've been doing the exact same thing. On top of that you've now done a complete 180 on what myself, clandestine and c Kent were pointing out to you yesterday after you also tried to redefine words.
On top of that you're whining about people insulting/attacking you yet you did plenty of that without provocation from anyone yesterday.
Popping off? Not sure what you even mean by that but no, perhaps you'd like to point out where I've not addressed someone directly, because if you can't maybe you're the one with "some sort of bipolar disorder or something affecting your short term memory" (although it's rather reassuring that you've once again resorted to personal insults).

If you think I've done a 180 then then you're really struggling to understand basic words or you're doubling down on trying to misrepresent what someone said, how about you point out to me what leads you to believe I've done a 180 and i can explain, once again, what words mean.

Also I'm not "whining about people insulting/attacking", and you have the temerity to suggest it's I who has a problem, i simply pointed out how cowardly and weak it is for people like yourself to attack the person rather than the idea.
AFFECT you life, AFFECT! ;)
He also used their instead of they're yet has been popping off about people's use and understanding of English...
If you're both going to be grammar Nazi, especially after one of you made a mistake in your correction (it's 'your life' not 'you life') and the other has been struggeling to understand the meaning of simply words like "us", "you", "reason" then you're both obviously very desperate and know you're incapable of attacking the argument so have to resort to attacking the person.
I think its quite clear he does, also amusing he's getting annoyed at people not addressing him when they've told him they aren't going to bother with him anymore. He's like an emotionally stunted woman that wont leave you alone after a break up.
And yet those people who said they're not going bother with me any more seem incapable of actually doing that, instead they choose to behave like prepubescent teens when they say they're not going to talk to someone only to start telling their mate to tell the person they said they're not going to talk to X, Y, or Z.
 
Popping off? Not sure what you even mean by that but no, perhaps you'd like to point out where I've not addressed someone directly, because if you can't maybe you're the one with "some sort of bipolar disorder or something affecting your short term memory" (although it's rather reassuring that you've once again resorted to personal insults).

If you think I've done a 180 then then you're really struggling to understand basic words or you're doubling down on trying to misrepresent what someone said, how about you point out to me what leads you to believe I've done a 180 and i can explain, once again, what words mean.

Also I'm not "whining about people insulting/attacking", and you have the temerity to suggest it's I who has a problem, i simply pointed out how cowardly and weak it is for people like yourself to attack the person rather than the idea.


If you're both going to be grammar Nazi, especially after one of you made a mistake in your correction (it's 'your life' not 'you life') and the other has been struggeling to understand the meaning of simply words like "us", "you", "reason" then you're both obviously very desperate and know you're incapable of attacking the argument so have to resort to attacking the person.

And yet those people who said they're not going bother with me any more seem incapable of actually doing that, instead they choose to behave like prepubescent teens when they say they're not going to talk to someone only to start telling their mate to tell the person they said they're not going to talk to X, Y, or Z.


Highlighted further contradictions for you within a single post that you've made. When you have multiple people pointing you you're doing something - you need to realise you're the problem.
 
Highlighted further contradictions for you within a single post that you've made. When you have multiple people pointing you you're doing something - you need to realise you're the problem.
Blimey, i can't believe I'm having to point out such basic concepts to you. If someone is passively aggressively referring to someone in the third person there is no idea to attack, it's literally impossible to attack an argument because they're not making one, they're making snide comments with zero substance.

In such an instance saying it's cowardly and weak is not a personal insult, it's a statement of fact.

e: You're welcome to point out where the substance, the argument is in in these though...
I suppose its reasonable to expect some lunatics in California to do something like this since they are on another level of crazy "progressive" in that state, I'm not sure what Murphys excuse is though. It's fine for your team to be wrong sometimes
Nope.Murphy has declared if you've had a bad experience with someone of a particular category then its not -ist to discriminate against them.
Murphy's definition of a racist.

Person A. Has bad experiences with a few people of a particular race, doesn't like that ethnicity. Isn't a racist because you agree with their politics
Person B. Has bad experiences with a few people of a particular race, doesn't like that ethnicity. Is a racist because you don't agree with their politics.

Spoiler they are both racist.
 
Back
Top Bottom