Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member Seitse
    Doug Stanhope
    26 Jun '14 19:37
    Seriously.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-28018302

    I support African Americans in their struggle to overcome their historical plight, but the U.S. traumas, values and unwritten rules should remain there. They're not an exportable product.
  2. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    26 Jun '14 20:01
    Originally posted by Seitse
    Seriously.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-28018302

    I support African Americans in their struggle to overcome their historical plight, but the U.S. traumas, values and unwritten rules should remain there. They're not an exportable product.
    There's a village on the South Coast of England somewhere that made the news a couple of years ago when the media found out about a traditional thing where every year on one day they all black their faces and have a sort of street party. The one black family who live there said they could put up with hiding indoors for one day a year, given it was the perfect place to live for the other 364 days - and no one was racist the rest of the time. The population were condemned for being racist of course, but I wonder if it was to do with race. In the 1723 there was an Act of Parliament, called the Waltham Black Act which made blacking your face a hanging offence as evidence of poaching. I suspect it could be a folk memory of this (if everyone does it then they can't hang everyone and so you can poach that day). Of course the PC merchants were too busy condemning to think of non-racist explanations. If PC is a matter of treating people with respect it's a good thing, but when it becomes a way of moralizing at people who don't quite get it right then it's not.
  3. Standard member Seitse
    Doug Stanhope
    26 Jun '14 20:11
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    If PC is a matter of treating people with respect it's a good thing, but when it becomes a way of moralizing at people who don't quite get it right then it's not.
    I agree with you.

    However, who decides (and does it freely and uninfluenced) what is respectful and what not?

    An example: some Americans of Latin American ancestry (the term I consider appropriate for the so called "Latinos" or "Hispanics") are starting to do some noise for mariachi costumes, i.e. sombrero, fake mustache, poncho, etc.

    Out of the U.S., though, and by that I mean the millions south of the Río Grande, it is something quirky albeit funny. Nothing shocking. So, should they be told that it is a must to be offended? What is the role of Americans of Latin American ancestry, through social media and the like, to scream and shout if, let's say, in London there is a parade of English sporting sombreros and mustaches?
  4. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    26 Jun '14 20:39
    Originally posted by Seitse
    I agree with you.

    However, who decides (and does it freely and uninfluenced) what is respectful and what not?

    An example: some Americans of Latin American ancestry (the term I consider appropriate for the so called "Latinos" or "Hispanics") are starting to do some noise for mariachi costumes, i.e. sombrero, fake mustache, poncho, etc.

    O ...[text shortened]... nd shout if, let's say, in London there is a parade of English sporting sombreros and mustaches?
    However, who decides (and does it freely and uninfluenced) what is respectful and what not?
    The black family who were local would have that right, but weren't complaining, although didn't feel comfortable about joining in either. Most of the people getting wound up about it were (white) politicians and media types.
    ... if, let's say, in London there is a parade of English sporting sombreros and mustaches?
    That would be quite strange behaviour.
  5. 26 Jun '14 23:42 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by DeepThought to Seitse
    However, who decides (and does it freely and uninfluenced) what is respectful and what not?
    The black family who were local would have that right, but weren't complaining, although didn't feel comfortable about joining in either. Most of the people getting wound up about it were (white) politicians and media types.
    ... if, ...[text shortened]... arade of English sporting sombreros and mustaches?
    That would be quite strange behaviour.
    "The black family who were local would have that right, but weren't complaining."
    --DeepThought

    Were they not complaining because they were sincerely not bothered or
    at least not offended or because they were worried about retaliation?
    And even if they were not worried about overt retaliation, might they be
    worried about the social consequences of expressing an unpopular view?

    Speaking from experience, I know how hard it can be for someone in a
    small minority (sometimes a minority of one) to stand up and criticize what
    the overwhelming majority is doing. And such reluctance to speak out may
    take place even when people are not in a small minority. I have heard men
    make sexist comments (e.g. rape jokes) to a group including many women,
    yet the women were too intimidated to express any objection at those times.

    In real life, there have been many occasions when someone (usually a more
    powerful man) has made comments or gestures that have made me feel
    quite uncomfortable or offended. Yet I usually have not made an explicit
    objection at those times. When I later have attempted to explain why I
    felt uncomfortable and why I would appreciate it if he changed his conduct,
    I often have not been taken seriously and I have to decide whether I should
    accept the costs of disengaging from further contact with that person.
  6. Standard member Seitse
    Doug Stanhope
    27 Jun '14 00:11
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    "The black family who were local would have that right, but weren't complaining."
    --DeepThought

    Were they not complaining because they were sincerely not bothered or
    at least not offended or because they were worried about retaliation?
    And even if they were not worried about overt retaliation, might they be
    worried about the social consequences of ...[text shortened]... decide whether I should
    accept the costs of disengaging from further contact with that person.
    Shut up, woman.

  7. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    27 Jun '14 00:18
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    "The black family who were local would have that right, but weren't complaining."
    --DeepThought

    Were they not complaining because they were sincerely not bothered or
    at least not offended or because they were worried about retaliation?
    And even if they were not worried about overt retaliation, might they be
    worried about the social consequences of ...[text shortened]... decide whether I should
    accept the costs of disengaging from further contact with that person.
    The media asked them, they had a first class opportunity. The general atmosphere in the village was fine, it was just that one day. What I wondered about was the assumption that the representation was of black people. It would help if I could remember the name of the village, I tried to find the story, but couldn't think of specific enough search terms that returned anything relevant.
  8. 27 Jun '14 02:37
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    The media asked them, they had a first class opportunity. The general atmosphere in the village was fine, it was just that one day. What I wondered about was the assumption that the representation was of black people. It would help if I could remember the name of the village, I tried to find the story, but couldn't think of specific enough search terms that returned anything relevant.
    "The media asked them, they had a first class opportunity."
    --DeepThought

    Wouldn't they have to live around the other people, whom they might
    have criticized to the media, during the other 364 days of the year?
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    27 Jun '14 02:44 / 6 edits
    Originally posted by Seitse
    I agree with you.

    However, who decides (and does it freely and uninfluenced) what is respectful and what not?

    An example: some Americans of Latin American ancestry (the term I consider appropriate for the so called "Latinos" or "Hispanics") are starting to do some noise for mariachi costumes, i.e. sombrero, fake mustache, poncho, etc.

    O ...[text shortened]... nd shout if, let's say, in London there is a parade of English sporting sombreros and mustaches?
    Just because you're not Hispanic doesn't mean that actual Hispanics can't use the term.

    By the way, sombreros are Mexican. Why would an Argentinian Hispano or Brazilian Latino care about sombreros? Not everyone with Latin American ancestry is a Mexican...if anybody should know this, it's you.

    NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION
    Segment from History of the World Part 1

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZegQYgygdw
    http://otherside.junik.lv/pages/inquisition.html

    The Inquisition (Let's begin)
    The Inquisition (Look out sin)
    We have a mission to convert the Jews (Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew)
    We're gonna teach them wrong from right.
    We're gonna help them see the light
    and make an offer that they can't refuse. (That those Jews just can't refuse)
    Confess, don't be boring.
    Say yes, don't be dull.
    A fact you're ignoring:
    It's better to lose your skull cap than your skull (or your govalt!)
    The Inquisition (what a show)
    The Inquistion (here we go)
    We know you're wishin' that we'd go away.
    But the Inquisition's here and it's here to stay!

    "I was sitting in a temple. I was minding my own business.
    I was listening to a lovely Hebrew mass.
    Then these Papus persons plungered and they throw me in a dungeon and they shove a red hot poker up my a*.
    Is that considerate? Is that polite?
    And not a tube of Preperation H in sight!"