Topic: bitsontherocks (Read 12017 times)

HeavyJay · « **Reply #25 on:** February 18, 2009, 12:39:27 PM »

Quote from: 12AX7 on February 18, 2009, 12:29:05 PM

Hey sheriff; ya got the wrong Jay. It was the Heavy Jay that started the racial talk. I'm R-E-G-U-L-A-R Jay.

You're just picking on me because I'm a Fat-American, you anti-lardite scum.

xolik · « **Reply #26 on:** February 18, 2009, 02:26:30 PM »

Mom: That's the most adorable little colored girl playing outside.
Steve: "Colored"? You're saying "colored people" in 1988? You know better, Ma.
Mom: Then why the "National Association for Colored People? I don't think Negroes mind at all.
Steve: Don't say "Negroes," Ma! You can't say "Negroes"!
Mom: Can I say "United Negro College Fund"?
Steve: You are baiting me, Ma!
Dad: That's it. We're leaving.
Mom: Stay put, Reginald. "Mister Socially Sensitive"isn't finished shaming his parents into enlightenment.
Steve: Everybody just calm down. Let's agree to use the the New-Age term "People of Color."
Mom: People of Color.
Steve: People of Color.
Mom: Colored people.
Steve: NO!!
Dad: We're leaving.

Novice · « **Reply #27 on:** February 18, 2009, 03:36:30 PM »

I cling to Native American because it gets me extra scholarship bucks.

Min · « **Reply #28 on:** February 18, 2009, 05:02:21 PM »

Don't you mean...

Mother: That is the most adorable little coloured girl playing outside, eh?
Steven: "Coloured"? You're saying "coloured people" in 1988? You know better, Mother.
Mother: Then why the "National Association for Coloured People, eh? I don't think Negroes mind at all.
Steven: Don't say "Negroes," Mother! You can't say "Negroes"!
Mother: Can I say "United Negro University Fund", eh?
Steven: You are baiting me, Mother!
Father: That's it. We're going to the other igloo.
Mother: Stay put, Reginald. "Mister Socially Sensitive" isn't finished shaming his parents into enlightenment. Besides, the other igloo is having repairs done, eh?
Steven: Everybody just calm down. Let's agree to use the the New-Age term "People of Colour."
Mother: People of Colour, eh?
Steven: People of Colour.
Mother: Coloured people, eh?
Steve: NO!!
Father: Hitch up the dog sled, we're leaving.

HeavyJay · « **Reply #29 on:** February 18, 2009, 05:29:15 PM »

I was gonna write another one out, but I'm too lazy. Just assume I made a lot of jokes about Molson, moose and maple syrup.

ivan · « **Reply #30 on:** February 18, 2009, 06:12:06 PM »

Quote from: 12AX7 on February 18, 2009, 12:29:05 PM

You're the one who brought it into some sort of debate by singling me out of this entire thread and attacking me

I was not attacking you. I said "stop being difficult" in response to this:

Quote from: 12AX7 on February 17, 2009, 10:13:23 PM

What if they've never been to Africa? You can't be from somewhere you've never been.

and pointed out, with great aplomb and an undercurrent of good humour, that, since you don't have to be from Ireland to call yourself Irish-American, why hold African-Americans to that standard?

(The words "stop being difficult" imply, as you would realize if you would just count 10 before posting, that I essentially agree with you in general that certain labels are contrived and meaningless, but that I think there are larger issues to be concerned about.)

Anyway, identifying people as negroid (a set of characteristics like skin color and... well, really just skin color after all) and acknowledging that negroid people originated in a particular geographic area does not contradict my contention that the concept of "race" is bogus. Having red hair and freckles is also a localized genetic characteristic, but no one is clamoring to define "Irish" as a race.

The reason why I say the concept of "race" should be trashed is because it is an artificial categorization used to group people by superficial and insignificant characteristics. I would not mind such a categorizing if it made sense, if it were useful, like if for instance we separated humans into the Moron Race, the Asshole Race, The Cool Race, The Interesting Race and the Funny Race. And of course the Brilliant and Devilishly Handsom Race -- don't want to leave myself disenfranchised.

ivan · « **Reply #31 on:** February 18, 2009, 06:33:23 PM »

Quote from: 12AX7 on February 18, 2009, 10:48:51 AM

As a race? You've heard them use that as their race?
Stop being simplistic.

Ok, this just sunk in.

"African-American" is not a race. I don't know anyone who uses that term to designate a race. If you do, you should disregard them.

12AX7 · « **Reply #32 on:** February 18, 2009, 06:43:37 PM »

Quote from: ivan on February 18, 2009, 06:33:23 PM

Ok, this just sunk in.

"African-American" is not a race. I don't know anyone who uses that term to designate a race. If you do, you should disregard them.

Um, a lot of African-Americans designate that as their race. Disregard? No; I'll just let them call themselves whatever they want. However, when I am called on the carpet for using the proper scientific term (although; agreed- "race" is much more ambiguous than ever in history), or any other non-derogatory term (black, 'a brother', or 'shorty' or 'sister'); I tend to get angry.
Think 'backlash'.

xolik · « **Reply #33 on:** February 18, 2009, 07:24:28 PM »

When can we go back to mocking the pretentious hipster?

pbsaurus · « **Reply #34 on:** February 18, 2009, 07:25:40 PM »

We have a Race Street here in San Jose. How's that for enlightenment?

ivan · « **Reply #35 on:** February 18, 2009, 07:51:05 PM »

Quote from: 12AX7 on February 18, 2009, 06:43:37 PM

Um, a lot of African-Americans designate that as their race.

The US Census uses the term "Black or African American". But you know why that is. We stopped using "Colored" and "Negro" because those terms acquired a racist tone. The same might be happening to "Black", which was originally a defiant, proud and righteous term, and hopefully will stay that way. So "African American" is pretty safe, and in the context of the US Census, halfway legitimate in a roundabout way: if you are Black, but not an American, you would not check that box; nor would you if you are a White African. Of course, if you were an American descended from Afrikaners (which would likely mean you are White), then you could, actually, check the "Black or African American" box, and totally bollox up the census. And I would hope you would, to further undermine the whole idea of tallying American people, and the people of the world, by skin color.

The amount of variation of the human form is wonderful. We go from tall to short, fish-belly white to pitch black, scrawny to fat, round-eye to slit-eye, little-nose to big-nose, worm-lip to fat-lip, ugly to gorgeous. When you see one of those rainbow coalition tableaus, with individuals representing all the various interesting extremes, what you get is an impression that individual humans belong to distinct racial groups. But that is simply not true. As the addage goes, walk from Paris, France to Beijing, China, and then on down to Abuja, Nigeria and look only at the indigenous populations of every inhabited area you pass through. You will not see abrupt jumps from northern-european-looking to semitic-looking to asian-looking to indian-looking to negroid-looking. What you will see are gradual changes in appearance, gradual enough that to a walking person, the people in each area would look pretty much the same as those in an area before. There is, in truth, greater genetic distinction between some Europeans than there are between some Europeans and some Africans.

"Race" is a myth, and should be abandoned as a way of categorizing people.

ivan · « **Reply #36 on:** February 18, 2009, 08:32:02 PM »

Another good essay.

As noted, the closer you look at the concept of "race", the less it holds water. It is, simply, bogus, and has been from the start.

On another side note, before we get back to mocking the pretentious hipster (which would require me to actually go back and read the fist page of this thread), on the subject of racial cross-breeding: Some people note, often with a tinge of dismay, that humans will all soon be brown. That's possibly true, although it would take a really, really long time.

But the tinge of dismay is based on the idea that we would be losing our inherent racial identities. In fact, the opposite is true: the worldwide variations in appearance that we enjoy today are a result of divergence from a common stock originating in northern Africa.

Originally, we were all brown.

12AX7 · « **Reply #37 on:** February 18, 2009, 08:42:40 PM »

Quote from: ivan on February 18, 2009, 07:51:05 PM

The US Census uses the term "Black or African American". But you know why that is. We stopped using "Colored" and "Negro" because those terms acquired a racist tone. The same might be happening to "Black", which was originally a defiant, proud and righteous term, and hopefully will stay that way.

This in and of itself is indicative that current "racist tones" may be more 'projection' than previous generations. Why is it that it seems whatever *that very dark skinned group in North America* chooses to call itself somehow magically becomes a new "racist" term? Why is this not true using "Hispanic" or "Asian" or "Native American (even "Indian"), or "Jewish" or "Arabic"? The slavery angle is pretty weak in that regard; as each and every "race" has been enslaved at some time or another; and many have been targets of attempted genocide. The idea that someone NOT 'of color' describing people 'of color' is inherently somehow bigoted regardless of what terminology is used seems to be exclusive to *that group of very dark-skinned North Americans*; indicating to me that it is more of an internal strife than an actual case of present-day racism.

Quote from: ivan on February 18, 2009, 07:51:05 PM

Of course, if you were an American descended from Afrikaners (which would likely mean you are White), then you could, actually, check the "Black or African American" box, and totally bollox up the census.

HA! Capital idea. Except that those tallies do some good as well, by defining needs and concerns for different, specific groups of people.

Quote from: ivan on February 18, 2009, 07:51:05 PM

The amount of variation of the human form is wonderful.

Agreed.

Wunderkind · « **Reply #38 on:** February 18, 2009, 08:48:07 PM »

I love it when a music elitist's intro-thread turns into a serious discussion.

I believe race should no longer be used as an item on your driver's lisence or other forms. I think they should assign a number from 1 to 10 with 1 being the palest skin tone and 10 being the darkest and we'll determine each other's shade from there.

No. I'm being serious. The fact of the matter is we are all still brown. Light brown, tan, medium brown, beige, chocolate... all shades of brown. There is no black or white.

Personally, I think I'm a 2.

As for where I'm from, so long as the government is still paying hush money, I'll be checking the Native American Indian box.

12AX7 · « **Reply #39 on:** February 18, 2009, 08:48:34 PM »

Quote from: ivan on February 18, 2009, 08:32:02 PM

on the subject of racial cross-breeding: Some people note, often with a tinge of dismay, that humans will all soon be brown.

tinge of dismay is based on the idea that we would be losing our inherent racial identities.

I've heard this before, and to be honest; anyone perpetuating such nonsense is either
A.) So retarded (uh-oh. Here we go on "retarded"... :-p ) that they can't understand that biological diversity only produces biological DIVERSITY or;

B.) there's your racist bigot right there.

Vespertine · « **Reply #40 on:** February 18, 2009, 09:50:12 PM »

Quote from: 12AX7 on February 18, 2009, 06:43:37 PM

<snip>
However, when I am called on the carpet for using the proper scientific term (although; agreed- "race" is much more ambiguous than ever in history), or any other non-derogatory term (black, 'a brother', or 'shorty' or 'sister')...
<snip>

Actually, 12, there doesn't appear to be any agreed upon "proper scientific term" for black people, or any other people for that matter...

"The concept of race is a social and cultural construction. . . . Race simply cannot be tested or proven scientifically,'' according to the policy statement issued by the American Anthropological Association. "It is clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. The concept of `race' has no validity . . . in the human species.''

"For example, while race may have some biological basis, its significance is mainly derived from social arrangements. Thus, race should be viewed within public health surveillance as a sociological phenomenon. Race and ethnicity are not risk factors -- they are markers used to better understand risk factors. "

"Directive 15 was not developed to define the concepts of race or ethnicity. Instead, Directive 15 and the agencies of the Executive Branch whose data collection it regulates (e.g., CDC and BC) explicitly note the absence of scientific considerations in the designation of categories of race and ethnicity: "These classifications should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature..."
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00021729.htm

HeavyJay · « **Reply #41 on:** February 18, 2009, 10:11:15 PM »

Quote from: Vespertine on February 18, 2009, 09:50:12 PM

Actually, 12, there doesn't appear to be any agreed upon "proper scientific term" for black people, or any other people for that matter...

"The concept of race is a social and cultural construction. . . . Race simply cannot be tested or proven scientifically,'' according to the policy statement issued by the American Anthropological Association. "It is clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. The concept of `race' has no validity . . . in the human species.''

"For example, while race may have some biological basis, its significance is mainly derived from social arrangements. Thus, race should be viewed within public health surveillance as a sociological phenomenon. Race and ethnicity are not risk factors -- they are markers used to better understand risk factors. "

"Directive 15 was not developed to define the concepts of race or ethnicity. Instead, Directive 15 and the agencies of the Executive Branch whose data collection it regulates (e.g., CDC and BC) explicitly note the absence of scientific considerations in the designation of categories of race and ethnicity: "These classifications should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature..."
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00021729.htm

Girls ought not to read. It gives them ideas.

Next I'll bet you'll want to drive, work outside of the home and vote.

12AX7 · « **Reply #42 on:** February 19, 2009, 10:27:41 AM »

Quote from: Vespertine on February 18, 2009, 09:50:12 PM

Actually, 12, there doesn't appear to be any agreed upon "proper scientific term" for black people, or any other people for that matter...

Is that a fact now.

Min · « **Reply #43 on:** February 19, 2009, 03:51:46 PM »

Quote from: bananaskittles on February 18, 2009, 05:59:22 PM

I love maple syrup, and my mistake Detta. You clearly know more aboot what goes on up north. Brb Moose hunting.

You can go ahead and edit it to reflect a mob family from NY to make fun of where I'm from.

HeavyJay · « **Reply #44 on:** February 19, 2009, 03:53:37 PM »

Quote from: Detta on February 19, 2009, 03:51:46 PM

You can go ahead and edit it to reflect a mob family from NY to make fun of where I'm from.

Is there still a big mob presence in NYC? I grew up in northern NJ...The Sopranos is surprisingly accurate as to how prevalent it is there.

Min · « **Reply #45 on:** February 19, 2009, 04:44:45 PM »

Nah, it's easy. Just replace all my eh's with y'knowudI'msayin? And then at the end, instead of saying "we're leaving", it would be "I'm gonna have you wacked. You know that?"

Jay, of the heavy variety...I have no idea. Sure, most people on Long Island look like the characters on the Sopranos, but they can't all be in the mob, can they?

HeavyJay · « **Reply #46 on:** February 19, 2009, 05:13:48 PM »

Quote from: Detta on February 19, 2009, 04:44:45 PM

Jay, of the heavy variety...I have no idea. Sure, most people on Long Island look like the characters on the Sopranos, but they can't all be in the mob, can they?

When I moved to central Jersey, the town I lived in had a few retirement communities full of old, Jewish LI transplants. Please, please tell me you don't have that accent. I'll cry.

pbsaurus · « **Reply #47 on:** February 19, 2009, 07:05:05 PM »

Lung Eyelund accent?

pbsaurus · « **Reply #48 on:** February 19, 2009, 07:06:01 PM »

For the record I love Detta's accent.

Min · « **Reply #49 on:** February 19, 2009, 10:07:09 PM »

Better go buy some Kleenex cause I have a pretty thick accent still.

News:

Recent Forum Posts

Shout Box

Author Topic: bitsontherocks (Read 12017 times)

12AX7

12AX7

12AX7

12AX7