Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 May '18 12:361 edit
    How is it we can have "cracker" threads here but when I created another thread referring to "Whitey" and "Darkey" it was taken down so as not to offend blacks?

    Is this just further proof of the fascist hypocrisy we see everyday on the internet and media?
  2. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14639
    11 May '18 12:471 edit
    Originally posted by @whodey
    How is it we can have "cracker" threads here but when I created another thread referring to "Whitey" and "Darkey" it was taken down so as not to offend blacks?

    Is this just further proof of the fascist hypocrisy we see everyday on the internet and media?
    Did you report the posts in question?
  3. Standard membersh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    New York
    Joined
    26 Dec '07
    Moves
    17585
    11 May '18 13:19
    Originally posted by @whodey
    How is it we can have "cracker" threads here but when I created another thread referring to "Whitey" and "Darkey" it was taken down so as not to offend blacks?

    Is this just further proof of the fascist hypocrisy we see everyday on the internet and media?
    If this thread, in which you refer to "Whitey" and "Darkey" is not taken down, does that blow up your thesis?
  4. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 May '18 13:28
    Originally posted by @great-king-rat
    Did you report the posts in question?
    No, because I'm not a fascist cry baby like Marauder.

    I prefer to know what people are thinking rather than censoring them.
  5. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 May '18 13:281 edit
    Originally posted by @sh76
    If this thread, in which you refer to "Whitey" and "Darkey" is not taken down, does that blow up your thesis?
    It would, but it was removed.
  6. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    11 May '18 13:40
    Originally posted by @whodey
    How is it we can have "cracker" threads here but when I created another thread referring to "Whitey" and "Darkey" it was taken down so as not to offend blacks?

    Is this just further proof of the fascist hypocrisy we see everyday on the internet and media?
    It seems the thread in question was a discussion of whether the term "cracker" is racially or ethically objectionable; there is no question that "darky", a word you seem obsessed with using here, is. Therefore you are violating the RHP Terms of Service which state under Section 6 Member Conduct:

    You agree to not use the Service to:

    Post, email or otherwise make available any Content that is ............................... racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;

    There are plenty of other sites on the net where you are free to post racial slurs; why don't you use one of those?

    Glad to help explain.

    And I've alerted the OP.
  7. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 May '18 13:49
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    It seems the thread in question was a discussion of whether the term "cracker" is racially or ethically objectionable; there is no question that "darky", a word you seem obsessed with using here, is. Therefore you are violating the RHP Terms of Service which state under Section 6 Member Conduct:

    You agree to not use the Service to:

    Post, email or ...[text shortened]... cial slurs; why don't you use one of those?

    Glad to help explain.

    And I've alerted the OP.
    I used both Whitey and Darky.

    It is interesting that your only objection is to the term Darky.

    I was merely mocking the Left's objection to dark or white skin, in other words, I was mocking racists like yourself who have no problem with threads about "crackers"
  8. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 May '18 13:56
    What I find most amusing is when the color of ones skin no longer is applicable to the Left.

    This only happens when you see a black Conservative, or someone with brown skin like Zimmerman. These people are the lowest of the low for those on the Left and are attacked with such venom it is almost unspeakable, yet, they never get charged with racism for it. In fact, on these boards and in the media Zimmerman is often portrayed as "white".
  9. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    11 May '18 13:59
    Originally posted by @whodey
    What I find most amusing is when the color of ones skin no longer is applicable to the Left.

    This only happens when you see a black Conservative, or someone with brown skin like Zimmerman. These people are the lowest of the low for those on the Left and are attacked with such venom it is almost unspeakable, yet, they never get charged with racism for it. In fact, on these boards and in the media Zimmerman is often portrayed as "white".
    Zimmerman was "white" and identified himself as such.

    The rest of the post is aimless ranting and raving.
  10. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    11 May '18 14:01
    Originally posted by @whodey
    I used both Whitey and Darky.

    It is interesting that your only objection is to the term Darky.

    I was merely mocking the Left's objection to dark or white skin, in other words, I was mocking racists like yourself who have no problem with threads about "crackers"
    You only use "whitey" as a cover; you have no intention to offend whites or use racial slurs against them. But you do seem very intent on using the racial slur mentioned despite the fact that you acknowledge this site has found the use of the term improper on these boards.
  11. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 May '18 14:031 edit
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    Zimmerman was "white" and identified himself as such.

    The rest of the post is aimless ranting and raving.
    This is how insane people like you are.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/looking-in-the-cultural-mirror/201308/what-race-is-george-zimmerman

    Discussions of race in the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case have focused on issues of prejudice and stereotypes, but have generally ignored Americans’ confusion about the concept of race itself. While my recent e-book and paperback, The Myth of Race(link is external), discusses various aspects of the race concept in depth—including the biology of human variation, cultural differences in conceptions of race, the race-IQ debate, and the treatment of race in the census, I will limit myself here to pointing out some of the paradoxes and confusions about race implicit in the current debate.
    George Zimmerman has been described as white, a white Hispanic, mixed race, and perhaps by other racial terms.

    Americans assume that race is a biological entity, and use the folk term “blood” (meaning ancestry) to describe it. Since Zimmerman has some African ancestry on his Peruvian mother’s side, he would probably meet Louisiana’s former criterion, that anyone with 1/32 black blood is black. So one possible race for Zimmerman is black.

    Most Americans would say that discrimination against Hispanics is racial discrimination, implying that Hispanics or Latinos are a race. However, the 2010 census says that Hispanics can be of any race. Hence, we have the hierarchical paradox that Hispanics are a race that can be any race. In any event, another possible race for Zimmerman is Hispanic.

    The census says that people can only be of one race, so the U. S. government treats the mixed race category as a contradiction in terms.

    In fact, there has been a generational shift in American culture—people in their 80s would say that someone with any black ancestry is black, and teenagers would say that someone with white and black parents is mixed. Many Americans still believe that a white woman can give birth to a black person (e.g., President Obama), but that a black woman cannot give birth to a white person. Having lived in Brazil, I can assure you that such people would unequivocally be considered white there—but in the United States, if they claimed to be white, many would still say that they are really black, but “passing for white.” So another possible race for Zimmerman is mixed race, though he could be any of several mixtures—white and Hispanic, white and black, black and Hispanic, or white, black, and Hispanic, depending on the cultural categories used by the classifier.

    Some people view Zimmerman’s killing of Trayvon Martin as a white on black crime, so for them Zimmerman’s race is white.

    Interestingly, Zimmerman has been referred to as a white Hispanic, but not as an Hispanic white. This is because, most Americans assume that Hispanics are a race, and therefore are not white—so a white Hispanic is a kind of Hispanic. However, the census says the opposite—that whites and blacks (but not Hispanics) are a race. So according to the census categories, he is an Hispanic white—which is a kind of white person.
  12. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    11 May '18 14:06
    Originally posted by @whodey
    This is how insane people like you are.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/looking-in-the-cultural-mirror/201308/what-race-is-george-zimmerman

    Discussions of race in the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case have focused on issues of prejudice and stereotypes, but have generally ignored Americans’ confusion about the concept of race itself. While m ...[text shortened]... So according to the census categories, he is an Hispanic white—which is a kind of white person.
    From your link:

    So according to the census categories, he is an Hispanic white—which is a kind of white person.

    Thanks for showing how "insane" I am.
  13. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 May '18 14:081 edit
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    From your link:

    So according to the census categories, he is an Hispanic white—which is a kind of white person.

    Thanks for showing how "insane" I am.
    So he is an Hispanic white and not a white Hispanic?

    Thanks for clearing that up goof ball.

    Incidentally, I thought you said he was only white?
  14. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    11 May '18 14:14
    Originally posted by @whodey
    So he is an Hispanic white and not a white Hispanic?

    Thanks for clearing that up goof ball.
    My real answer to that would be censored on RHP.

    Race is a social construct and Zimmerman's background was white on his father side and somewhat mixed on his mother's but he identified as "white". We don't have Louisiana's laws from 100 years ago or the Nuremberg ones (though perhaps you would prefer if we did), so saying Zimmerman was "white" as far as social categories in the US is correct.
  15. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56379
    11 May '18 14:17
    Originally posted by @whodey
    How is it we can have "cracker" threads here but when I created another thread referring to "Whitey" and "Darkey" it was taken down so as not to offend blacks?

    Is this just further proof of the fascist hypocrisy we see everyday on the internet and media?
    Perhaps it wasn't the subject. Perhaps people were just complaining about you existing.

    Anyhoo... I hardly think darkey (although I presume you mean darky) offending blacks is a reason for a post getting banned on RHP. I can't imagine many coloured folk hang around the Debates forum.

    The lot of you sound like a bloody KKK rally.
Back to Top