All Whites are racist, Men sexist, and Straights homophobes.

[vince]

I don't disagree. It would be my ideal as well, but then I happen to like the human interest side of someone succeeding in the face of any form of adversity.

But this wasn't the point of this thread.

If I said something that you felt to be homophobic and in having a go at me for it, you used a derogatory term for a breeder , would that make you the person who was demonstrably prejudiced based on orientation? Is it then right for me to become the victim of discrimination?

But that is not the way it went down.

NJ made some statements that others questioned the validity of. She than used a derogatory term for a white guy. It wasn't the guys challenging her POV who used the insults. She did. As she often did, she quickly took the discussion to the level of overt personal insults. She did it frequently based on age, race, nationality, orientation and obviously those posts were reported often enough that the history showed a pattern of harrassment and or disruption.

To your point about white str8 men claiming victimhood and reverse discrimination when wrongly accused of being racist, I don't agree completely. There are posters on this board who play that game, no doubt. But "in real life", it's happened to me, for no other reason my skin colour. Someone here said that it's not possible for a black person to be a racist. Ha. Take your non-racist white butt for a drive down Avenue D in Ft Pierce Fl and tell me you don't feel the hatred.

I just think that while your premise is interesting, it makes this issue more complicated than it needs to be.

True racism and it's cousins bigotry and xenophobia are hatred fueled by a fear which comes directly out of ignorance and suffering.

NJ is not a racist, but she does have issues with people disagreeing with her and she is not above using epithets to dominant a discussion. Unfortunately for her, not everyone would roll over.

 

[Drifterwood]

So now we know what sort of person you are, and if when born out of your own frustration, you let slip such a derogatory comment, would you expect us to forget everything else we know about you and ban you for for being a hater?

You might hear any Scots, Irish or Welsh person spitting "fucking English arsehole".

 

[Drifterwood]

NJ is not a racist, but she does have issues with people disagreeing with her and she is not above using epithets to dominant a discussion. Unfortunately for her, not everyone would roll over.

Slightly Off Topic, but it was the allegation of her being a racist that really prickled me.

This thread is about that process of argumentation. I have to go, but I will eget back to that.

PS - I have been in plenty of places around the world and felt/experienced racism. You would be surprised, or perhaps not.

 

[helgaleena]

So now we know what sort of person you are, and if when born out of your own frustration, you let slip such a derogatory comment, would you expect us to forget everything else we know about you and ban you for for being a hater?

You might hear any Scots, Irish or Welsh person spitting "fucking English arsehole".

They mustn't say it on LPSG or else moddywoddies will reprimand. :tongue:

 

[Gillette]

GAY CANADIAN MAN WINS BOXING GOLD

I suppose if such an article appears and I were a gay Canadian man and I wished to flagwave even if the medallist had said it isn't about being gay, it isn't about being a man and it isn't about being Canadian, but I wanted to, then I would be a sexist racist heterophobe?

Let's try to keep this parallel. The article is entitled Shani Davis Wins!, not Black Man Wins!

This is the logic of what you have been saying for several days now.

No, I have not been saying that her creation of that thread makes her a racist. I said using a race based insult was hypocritical when you've expressed your opposition to racism, as is shoving racial differences to the forefront when you are opposed to racial division. However, you do seem to be saying that Lemon and Pauligan's questioning the way she did it makes them racist or qualifies as them race baiting her. Oh, no, forgive me, I note below that you've singled out Lemon as the sole antagonist, though he was neither the only one to comment nor the only one included in her pluralized slur. Pauligan's criticism was far more pointed yet he gets a free pass from the accusation of race baiting. Why might that be?

He seemed to be fair game when his race was "alleged".

If you think that I am sexist and you call me a pig, does that make you sexist? No, you use a word that is meant as an insult. But pig is sexist because it is only aimed at men. This is the argument that you are using to condemn her as racist. Shall we trawl the Women's Issue Forum and look for every incidence where a woman has used a gender specific slur against a man?

Gosh, thanks for the lesson, I never knew how insults worked before. If I call you a pig simply because you're a man and questioned my thoughts as a woman, then that would be a gender biased (sexist) slur. You'd have to do a shitload of oinking before I considered making such an accusation.

This habit of labeling people is in itself a tactic. If you can taint someone by calling them "X" you can just dismiss them instead of having to deal with their points. Kind of like your misdirection in saying I'm condemning her as a racist when what I've been arguing the last few days is that her use of "Cracker" was, in fact, as a racist slur and that her use of it given her loudly voiced objections to racism was hypocritical.

It is not a double standard.

I don't know Lemon's interaction history with NJ - but why go piss on her parade? Why? It is very important and mitigates a pissy reaction.

Here is where you single out Lemon for censure when you speak about cause. You are conveniently glossing over the fact that she maligned three people with her slur. Here for your consideration are the two you omit.

I'm proud of him because he is an american.

Is this seriously what you consider pissing on her parade? A "drive by shitting" as you call it below? A "cracking of the whip" as you said before?Can you in all honesty say that this post merited a racial slur in response?

-He can't echo his pride in the win as a black man, he's not black.
-How can he mention Shani's race in relation to the win without getting jumped for suggesting skin tone should be a barrier to success? He can't.
-He can't very well start a separate thread celebrating the win without making reference to race because the very difference would make it segregationist, no?

What a clever noose that thread was. No white, American or otherwise, could post in that thread without (justifiably, you seem to be saying) being called a Cracker, preserving the priviledge of safe posting a celebration of the win for blacks only.

If I'm not mistaken, speed skating, involves skating on ice and ice rinks are often made indoors, so I can't see how being from Texas would change that. More disturbing, you cheapen his win by bringing in skin color it's the same as when Jimmy The Greek who made a distasteful bigoted remark about black men and swimming. Let's look at this as an American wiinning and stop dragging skin color in.

YAY! SHANI DAVIS, AMERICAN WINS THE GOLD! TEAM AMERICA WINS AGAIN!

This one would have been a deep well to plumb to make your point but you don't touch it. It is clearly the most confrontational. Again, I'm compelled to ask why Pauligan is exempt from what should be a list of three examples.

She tarred three people with the same feather. Please don't bother positing a new twist on your counter-victimhood theory until you have answered precisely how each post by each of the three individual people she insulted justified the response she gave. Not just a pissy response, that pissy response.

 

[Gillette]

So now we know what sort of person you are, and if when born out of your own frustration, you let slip such a derogatory comment, would you expect us to forget everything else we know about you and ban you for for being a hater?

You're making the ban out to be the result of a single comment. It wasn't.

I can't believe I type so slowly that so many others posted!

 

[vince]

So now we know what sort of person you are, and if when born out of your own frustration, you let slip such a derogatory comment, would you expect us to forget everything else we know about you and ban you for for being a hater?

You might hear any Scots, Irish or Welsh person spitting "fucking English arsehole".

They might not be the only ones... :biggrin:

If letting those types of derogatory comments slip was chronic on my part, then I would not be surprised if I was banned. It happened once already. The juvenile epithet was "shut up asswipe" in large red letters, which evidently violated the ToS.

 

[Drifterwood]

So what we have, though this wasn't the point of this thread, is the question of by whose standards we are to judge. My old friend Vince has learnt to bite his tongue, my new friend Hilaire operates to the highest level of ethical rationalism, but many of us can not, perhaps will not, operate to these very high standards.

You will say that NJ had been warned, even banned, for her inability to hold her tongue, and I will say that the true Leopard can not hide her spots. So the lesson is, if you are a feisty individual and even if your cause is just, you will eventually fall foul of the standards currently imposed on this site.

 

[mitchymo]

I'd be curious to hear how you place her flinging a racial epithet at others under the heading of positive self affirmation.

I believe her thread was posted in that sentiment reiterating an original article. As to her intent and her use of the word it is provocative if taken as such and not at all if you regard the word as inoffensive.

Knowing Principessa it was'nt racism in purest terms, maybe not racist at all. It cannot be ascertained without her input and could have meant this or that however you believe personally.

Out of interest look at the definitions and then look at the ones with most thumbs down. Urban Dictionary: cracker

 

[Incocknito]

I see biased secondary evidence. I see little objective primary evidence.

I can't form a view without first seeing the evidence. Saw some quotes in Gillette's post which suggest that Pp was being slightly racist / derogatory.

From Drifterwood all I see is bias. So at this stage I am inclined to side with Gillette (ie the banning was justified) but really I don't care. She'll be back and the time away may even do her good.

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

So what we have, though this wasn't the point of this thread, is the question of by whose standards we are to judge. My old friend Vince has learnt to bite his tongue, my new friend Hilaire operates to the highest level of ethical rationalism, but many of us can not, perhaps will not, operate to these very high standards.

You will say that NJ had been warned, even banned, for her inability to hold her tongue, and I will say that the true Leopard can not hide her spots. So the lesson is, if you are a feisty individual and even if your cause is just, you will eventually fall foul of the standards currently imposed on this site.

There are lots of members who are pretty forthright and unabashed about stating their opinions on things (I'd like to think I might be one of them) who do not feel the need to resort to outright name calling or the use of racial epithets.

I don't think this is some radical crackdown on freedom of speech around here it's just establishing boundaries. If those boundaries include a strong line on racist language I'm OK with that.

 

[naughty]

Oh I see oops. Apologies for the misfire :redface:

Erm yes of course it is reasonable for you to claim the insult and to feel aggrieved at being called a Breeder by me no matter what the circumstances.

I cannot campaign and work in my own life towards equality and at the same time expect special treatment when I discriminate against others.

Being gay does not give me a right to be bigoted just because some people are bigoted and discriminate against gay people. Equality isn't about taking revenge for the ills done to me or other gay people down the ages, and Homosexuals are as responsible for their behaviour and attitudes (equally so in fact) as anyone else is. This is crucial in trying to understand the issue of equality.

The point is that ultimately who we sleep with, what colour our skins our, what genitals we have etc. are all immaterial, and we should treat one another as equal regardless of these factors.

The fact that gay people have been viciously persecuted for as long as anyone can remember does not give me the right to become a persecutor or a bigot if my contention is that no one should have the right to persecute me for my sexuality. If we are equal (and I believe we are) then the knife cuts both ways in terms of being responsible for how we behave and the attitudes we evince towards one another.

That is great to hear. I will remember that next time the topic of Christians comes up again...

 

[Drifterwood]

From Drifterwood all I see is bias.[/QUOT

Against what?

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

That is great to hear. I will remember that next time the topic of Christians comes up again...

Oh puleaaaaze, quit harping on that string, it's sounding a little bizarre now. On other forums it would also be considered "griefing" or in plan terms harrassment. I don't follow you from thread to thread bringing up the topic of your religious beliefs, so why do you have to do it to me? I get it, you don't like the strength of my opinions about Christianity, the message is received loud and clear.

Now do you think you might find another stick to beat me with? That one is tired, and rarely apropo, especially in this case.

 

[Drifterwood]

I don't think this is some radical crackdown on freedom of speech around here it's just establishing boundaries. If those boundaries include a strong line on racist language I'm OK with that.

When you decide the boundaries, you are the man, it's your law. Are you the man? :biggrin1:

Keanu?

 

[naughty]

Oh puleaaaaze, quit harping on that string, it's sounding a little bizarre now. On other forums it would also be considered "griefing" or in plan terms harrassment. I don't follow you from thread to thread bringing up the topic of your religious beliefs, so why do you have to do it to me? I get it, you don't like the strength of my opinions about Christianity, the message is received loud and clear.

Now do you think you might find another stick to beat me with? That one is tired, and rarely apropo, especially in this case.

No beating required.

 

[Flashy]

As my friends know, I am a wife-beating, gay-bashing member of the KKK. In my spare time I also like to hate Jews, bash America and I do a fairly good line in Snobby British Imperialist.

I am justified because you want to cut my jewels off, sneer at my dress sense, laugh at my attempts to dance, snigger at my dental challenges and you killed the only real friend I ever had.

Perhaps my humour is misplaced to introduce the serious nature of this thread. Perhaps though we all need to lighten up a bit as well. I am a white, middle aged (now 40), straight male brought up in the western christian culture, and if I was so minded I could look at everything nasty in the world and believe what some people are seeming to say and accept that it is all my fault.

The counter revolution to everyone else's rights but my own, is for me to find my own victimhood. That woman is sexist, that black man racist, that gay a heterophobe etc etc. This is bullshit. No doubt some do push the pendulum too far, they can not allow the revolution to stop, because without it they have no purpose. Thanks Robespierre (bloody frenchie).

I appreciate that some will be sick of us discussing NJ, but I believe we see a victim (oh god) of the counter revolution of victimhood. And I wonder if the perpertrator's victimhood is the new weapon of control against which she was venting. Shit, you used to just be allowed to control me, now you control me by being the victim of my positive affirmation.

Do you see what I am saying?

are you saying that you are no longer a Liverpool supporter? :tongue::biggrin1:

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

When you decide the boundaries, you are the man, it's your law. Are you the man? :biggrin1:

Keanu?

:biggrin1:

 

[prepstudinsc]

Hilaire, get off the cross, Jesus needs it.

Oh puleaaaaze, quit harping on that string, it's sounding a little bizarre now. On other forums it would also be considered "griefing" or in plan terms harrassment. I don't follow you from thread to thread bringing up the topic of your religious beliefs, so why do you have to do it to me? I get it, you don't like the strength of my opinions about Christianity, the message is received loud and clear.

Now do you think you might find another stick to beat me with? That one is tired, and rarely apropo, especially in this case.

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

Hilaire, get off the cross, Jesus needs it.

I was going to actually address this point but I suspect you're just baiting me so I'll not bother.

Just think a bit about what your posting eh?