(07-08-2019 04:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 11:27 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 09:26 AM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.
It will be interesting to see how they enforce the distinction at the gate. Surely not by racial profiling!
Yes, I wondered what would happen if somebody like me showed up wanting the POC discount, but did not obviously fit their stereotype of what a Hispanic person should look like.
Also, side questions: Why is "person of color" OK, but not "colored person"? Is a white person a person of no color"?
I can envision a black man saying, "You can't call me a Negro, you racist POS. Now excuse me while I fill out this application to the United Negro College Fund."
Yeah... I think a black man would be within his rights to take offense at you using the term "negro" while being OK with the United Negro College Fund.
Is it really that confusing?
Given the epic s*** sandwich that black people have been forced to eat in America over the past 200+ years, I am OK with them dictating to me what names/descriptions they are comfortable with.
i think I have just been virtue attacked. maybe thatis OK, since I am a deplorable and therefore a bad person. I must learn to speak and think purwly, as you do. Send me to a re-education camp.
Yes it is confusing, that a given word may or maynot be OK to use, depending on the grandparents of the speaker.
I have both white and Hispanic gramdparents. which words are OK for me to use? which am I not allowed to use? explain rightthinking to me, big brother.
93, I saw the world that you hate so much. you didn't. And remember, I am a POC and don't have to take this **** from you.
Please. Don't be so sensitive. I am not virtue-signalling or accusing you of being racist. I don't think it is that confusing and I have a feeling you aren't that stymied by this concept either.
(07-08-2019 04:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 11:27 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 09:26 AM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.
It will be interesting to see how they enforce the distinction at the gate. Surely not by racial profiling!
Yes, I wondered what would happen if somebody like me showed up wanting the POC discount, but did not obviously fit their stereotype of what a Hispanic person should look like.
Also, side questions: Why is "person of color" OK, but not "colored person"? Is a white person a person of no color"?
I can envision a black man saying, "You can't call me a Negro, you racist POS. Now excuse me while I fill out this application to the United Negro College Fund."
Yeah... I think a black man would be within his rights to take offense at you using the term "negro" while being OK with the United Negro College Fund.
Is it really that confusing?
Given the epic s*** sandwich that black people have been forced to eat in America over the past 200+ years, I am OK with them dictating to me what names/descriptions they are comfortable with.
i think I have just been virtue attacked. maybe thatis OK, since I am a deplorable and therefore a bad person. I must learn to speak and think purwly, as you do. Send me to a re-education camp.
Yes it is confusing, that a given word may or maynot be OK to use, depending on the grandparents of the speaker.
Seriously. Words go out of favor for one reason or another. It's not that difficult.
Quote:I have both white and Hispanic gramdparents. which words are OK for me to use? which am I not allowed to use? explain rightthinking to me, big brother.
This is hardly "right-thinking". If you're not black you shouldn't use the term "negro" when describing African-Americans. Spare me the indignation about this concept.
*edit* To be clear... I don't think that you would use the term "negro". I am responding to your point about the United Negro College Fund.
(07-08-2019 04:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 11:27 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 09:26 AM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ]It will be interesting to see how they enforce the distinction at the gate. Surely not by racial profiling!
Yes, I wondered what would happen if somebody like me showed up wanting the POC discount, but did not obviously fit their stereotype of what a Hispanic person should look like.
Also, side questions: Why is "person of color" OK, but not "colored person"? Is a white person a person of no color"?
I can envision a black man saying, "You can't call me a Negro, you racist POS. Now excuse me while I fill out this application to the United Negro College Fund."
Yeah... I think a black man would be within his rights to take offense at you using the term "negro" while being OK with the United Negro College Fund.
Is it really that confusing?
Given the epic s*** sandwich that black people have been forced to eat in America over the past 200+ years, I am OK with them dictating to me what names/descriptions they are comfortable with.
i think I have just been virtue attacked. maybe thatis OK, since I am a deplorable and therefore a bad person. I must learn to speak and think purwly, as you do. Send me to a re-education camp.
Yes it is confusing, that a given word may or maynot be OK to use, depending on the grandparents of the speaker.
I have both white and Hispanic gramdparents. which words are OK for me to use? which am I not allowed to use? explain rightthinking to me, big brother.
93, I saw the world that you hate so much. you didn't. And remember, I am a POC and don't have to take this **** from you.
Please. Don't be so sensitive. I am not virtue-signalling or accusing you of being racist. I don't think it is that confusing and I have a feeling you aren't that stymied by this concept either.
i am well aware that the sma ewords can have different meanings based on context. In this case,,the context is the race of the speaker, and the putative experiences of the listener's forebears. What I womder is why either of these should be salient. I am sure some of my hispanic amcestors were despised by many of my white ancestors. i am equally sure my Hispanic ancestors despised my Native Ameican ancestors. heck some of my Anglo ancestors may have despised my German ancestors. i cannot spend my whole life apologizing for the attitudes of my ancestors. I guess you can. maybe your ancestry is more pure than mine. but I am quite sure my gramdparents would not have gotten along. for one thing, they didn't speak the same language.
(07-08-2019 04:23 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 11:27 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, I wondered what would happen if somebody like me showed up wanting the POC discount, but did not obviously fit their stereotype of what a Hispanic person should look like.
Also, side questions: Why is "person of color" OK, but not "colored person"? Is a white person a person of no color"?
I can envision a black man saying, "You can't call me a Negro, you racist POS. Now excuse me while I fill out this application to the United Negro College Fund."
Yeah... I think a black man would be within his rights to take offense at you using the term "negro" while being OK with the United Negro College Fund.
Is it really that confusing?
Given the epic s*** sandwich that black people have been forced to eat in America over the past 200+ years, I am OK with them dictating to me what names/descriptions they are comfortable with.
i think I have just been virtue attacked. maybe thatis OK, since I am a deplorable and therefore a bad person. I must learn to speak and think purwly, as you do. Send me to a re-education camp.
Yes it is confusing, that a given word may or maynot be OK to use, depending on the grandparents of the speaker.
I have both white and Hispanic gramdparents. which words are OK for me to use? which am I not allowed to use? explain rightthinking to me, big brother.
93, I saw the world that you hate so much. you didn't. And remember, I am a POC and don't have to take this **** from you.
Please. Don't be so sensitive. I am not virtue-signalling or accusing you of being racist. I don't think it is that confusing and I have a feeling you aren't that stymied by this concept either.
i am well aware that the sma ewords can have different meanings based on context. In this case,,the context is the race of the speaker, and the putative experiences of the listener's forebears. What I womder is why either of these should be salient. I am sure some of my hispanic amcestors were despised by many of my white ancestors. i am equally sure my Hispanic ancestors despised my Native Ameican ancestors. heck some of my Anglo ancestors may have despised my German ancestors. i cannot spend my whole life apologizing for the attitudes of my ancestors. I guess you can. maybe your ancestry is more pure than mine. but I am quite sure my gramdparents would not have gotten along. for one thing, they didn't speak the same language.
You can't spend your whole life apologizing for them, but you can also live with the consequences of using certain language that, contextually, isn't appropriate.
If you don't want someone to call you a racist, don't use language that may result in someone calling you a racist. And if you happen to accidentally do that, then apologize and actually listen to why that person felt that way, and try to come to an understanding as to why they feel that way.
(07-08-2019 04:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:23 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ][quote='Rice93' pid='16184999' dateline='1562609396']
Yeah... I think a black man would be within his rights to take offense at you using the term "negro" while being OK with the United Negro College Fund.
Is it really that confusing?
Given the epic s*** sandwich that black people have been forced to eat in America over the past 200+ years, I am OK with them dictating to me what names/descriptions they are comfortable with.
i think I have just been virtue attacked. maybe thatis OK, since I am a deplorable and therefore a bad person. I must learn to speak and think purwly, as you do. Send me to a re-education camp.
Yes it is confusing, that a given word may or maynot be OK to use, depending on the grandparents of the speaker.
I have both white and Hispanic gramdparents. which words are OK for me to use? which am I not allowed to use? explain rightthinking to me, big brother.
93, I saw the world that you hate so much. you didn't. And remember, I am a POC and don't have to take this **** from you.
Please. Don't be so sensitive. I am not virtue-signalling or accusing you of being racist. I don't think it is that confusing and I have a feeling you aren't that stymied by this concept either.
i am well aware that the sma ewords can have different meanings based on context. In this case,,the context is the race of the speaker, and the putative experiences of the listener's forebears. What I womder is why either of these should be salient. I am sure some of my hispanic amcestors were despised by many of my white ancestors. i am equally sure my Hispanic ancestors despised my Native Ameican ancestors. heck some of my Anglo ancestors may have despised my German ancestors. i cannot spend my whole life apologizing for the attitudes of my ancestors. I guess you can. maybe your ancestry is more pure than mine. but I am quite sure my gramdparents would not have gotten along. for one thing, they didn't speak the same language.
Yes. I can avoid using obvious words that people find offensive. It doesn't seem like a burden and I don't feel like I am "spending my whole life apologizing for my ancestors".
(07-08-2019 04:01 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 03:49 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:11 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:02 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2019 03:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]You leave off the information gathering function of the census. Funny that.
As you leave off the question about this being kind of a basic piece of information. Funny that.
Care to answer if you feel or dont feel that citizenship isnt a basic piece of information? Third time asked might be the charm.
I mean, they have already asked:
Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?
What is the highest degree or level of school this each person has completed?
Does any person have an issue with learning, remembering, or concentrating?
What kind of work was this person doing?
What time did this person usually leave home to go to work last week?
Wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, or tips from all jobs?
What were the real estate taxes on this property last year?
And, here is some real funny ones from 2000 itself:
What state or country was this person from?
Is this person a citizen of the United States?
If the person was not born in the United States, when did he come to live in the United States?
Not only do they ask these questions, there is a requirement at law to answer them.
So given the issue with the informational aspect of the census, the fact that I have been asked literally almost everything else about the household, that they have *already* deemed it appropriate to ask about the citizenship, *and* that they require that answering their questions is required by law, perhaps that background might be able to help you answer that question you seemingly so studiously avoid.
So, unambiguously for all of us here:
"Seems to be kind of one of those 'basic questions', does it not?" Especially since everything else in the friggin universe is asked, *and* an answer is required by law.
Please help clear this up for us.
Quick response as just getting back from holiday weekend.
These questions that you reference are not found on today's census. It seems that you are referencing questions that might by found on the American Community Survey (not the census). As I understand it, today's census is pretty limited.
This is from the Population Reference Bureau website:
"Census Bureau research strongly suggests that “adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census would lead to lower self-response rates in households potentially containing noncitizens, resulting in higher fieldwork costs and a lower-quality population count.” [3] Estimates indicate that the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census may put almost one in 10 U.S. households—more than 14 percent of the population, and nearly 45 million people—at greater risk of being missed in the Census. [4] Undercount risk is particularly high among young children (under age 5) because nearly one in five of them lives in a household with at least one noncitizen. [5]"
https://www.prb.org/why-are-they-asking-...questions/
The 10 questions asked in the 2010 census:
How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?
Were there any additional people staying here April 1, 2010 that you did not include in Question 1?
Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?
What is your telephone number?
Please provide information for each person living here. Start with a person here who owns or rents this house, apartment, or mobile home. If the owner or renter lives somewhere else, start with any adult living here. This will be Person 1. What is Person 1's name?
What is Person 1's sex?
What is Person 1's age and Date of Birth?
Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
What is Person 1's race?
Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?
https://www.census.gov/history/www/throu.../2010.html
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512...s-question
Read the whole article. Citizenship was asked before.
Huh - weird response to me posting what the 2010 questions were on the census, after 93 posted about the American Community Survey, which is now, where the more detailed questions are asked.
I never refuted that a citizenship question has been asked, historically. As you can see in the NPR article, a citizenship question was last asked of every household (e.g. the short-form, 2010 style census I referenced) in 1950. It's been included in the long-form questionnaire (which has gone away, but is basically the American Community Survey) that is not sent to every citizen, and is conducted yearly (not every 10 years).
And it has been asked up until 2000. Albeit not to every household. That means, what, to you re: to the fact of whether it has been asked or not?
(07-08-2019 04:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:01 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 03:49 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:11 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:02 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]Quick response as just getting back from holiday weekend.
These questions that you reference are not found on today's census. It seems that you are referencing questions that might by found on the American Community Survey (not the census). As I understand it, today's census is pretty limited.
This is from the Population Reference Bureau website:
"Census Bureau research strongly suggests that “adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census would lead to lower self-response rates in households potentially containing noncitizens, resulting in higher fieldwork costs and a lower-quality population count.” [3] Estimates indicate that the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census may put almost one in 10 U.S. households—more than 14 percent of the population, and nearly 45 million people—at greater risk of being missed in the Census. [4] Undercount risk is particularly high among young children (under age 5) because nearly one in five of them lives in a household with at least one noncitizen. [5]"
https://www.prb.org/why-are-they-asking-...questions/
The 10 questions asked in the 2010 census:
How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?
Were there any additional people staying here April 1, 2010 that you did not include in Question 1?
Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?
What is your telephone number?
Please provide information for each person living here. Start with a person here who owns or rents this house, apartment, or mobile home. If the owner or renter lives somewhere else, start with any adult living here. This will be Person 1. What is Person 1's name?
What is Person 1's sex?
What is Person 1's age and Date of Birth?
Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
What is Person 1's race?
Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?
https://www.census.gov/history/www/throu.../2010.html
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512...s-question
Read the whole article. Citizenship was asked before.
Huh - weird response to me posting what the 2010 questions were on the census, after 93 posted about the American Community Survey, which is now, where the more detailed questions are asked.
I never refuted that a citizenship question has been asked, historically. As you can see in the NPR article, a citizenship question was last asked of every household (e.g. the short-form, 2010 style census I referenced) in 1950. It's been included in the long-form questionnaire (which has gone away, but is basically the American Community Survey) that is not sent to every citizen, and is conducted yearly (not every 10 years).
And it has been asked up until 2000. Albeit not to every household. That means, what, to you re: to the fact of whether it has been asked or not?
I would say to leave the citizenship question off of the census (goes out to everybody and important to get accurate count of population). I don't see why it would be an issue off the top of my head to leave the question on the American Community Survey.
(07-08-2019 04:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 11:27 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 09:26 AM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ]It will be interesting to see how they enforce the distinction at the gate. Surely not by racial profiling!
Yes, I wondered what would happen if somebody like me showed up wanting the POC discount, but did not obviously fit their stereotype of what a Hispanic person should look like.
Also, side questions: Why is "person of color" OK, but not "colored person"? Is a white person a person of no color"?
I can envision a black man saying, "You can't call me a Negro, you racist POS. Now excuse me while I fill out this application to the United Negro College Fund."
Yeah... I think a black man would be within his rights to take offense at you using the term "negro" while being OK with the United Negro College Fund.
Is it really that confusing?
Given the epic s*** sandwich that black people have been forced to eat in America over the past 200+ years, I am OK with them dictating to me what names/descriptions they are comfortable with.
i think I have just been virtue attacked. maybe thatis OK, since I am a deplorable and therefore a bad person. I must learn to speak and think purwly, as you do. Send me to a re-education camp.
Yes it is confusing, that a given word may or maynot be OK to use, depending on the grandparents of the speaker.
I have both white and Hispanic gramdparents. which words are OK for me to use? which am I not allowed to use? explain rightthinking to me, big brother.
93, I saw the world that you hate so much. you didn't. And remember, I am a POC and don't have to take this **** from you.
Please. Don't be so sensitive. I am not virtue-signalling or accusing you of being racist. I don't think it is that confusing and I have a feeling you aren't that stymied by this concept either.
What are the acceptable terms du jour, then?
And when will *those* acceptable terms become 'bad' words?
With all respect the metamorphosis of *what * is acceptable to call *anyone* is mind boggling in its rate of change.
And the funny thing is that whatever the 'acceptable' word or phrase is now I will bet you dollars to donuts that in a decade it will grow to be unacceptable. In my lifetime that score on that count is now 2 for 2 with this particular classification --10 for 10 with a whole slew of others considered.
(07-08-2019 04:51 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:01 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 03:49 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 01:11 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]The 10 questions asked in the 2010 census:
How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?
Were there any additional people staying here April 1, 2010 that you did not include in Question 1?
Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?
What is your telephone number?
Please provide information for each person living here. Start with a person here who owns or rents this house, apartment, or mobile home. If the owner or renter lives somewhere else, start with any adult living here. This will be Person 1. What is Person 1's name?
What is Person 1's sex?
What is Person 1's age and Date of Birth?
Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
What is Person 1's race?
Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?
https://www.census.gov/history/www/throu.../2010.html
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512...s-question
Read the whole article. Citizenship was asked before.
Huh - weird response to me posting what the 2010 questions were on the census, after 93 posted about the American Community Survey, which is now, where the more detailed questions are asked.
I never refuted that a citizenship question has been asked, historically. As you can see in the NPR article, a citizenship question was last asked of every household (e.g. the short-form, 2010 style census I referenced) in 1950. It's been included in the long-form questionnaire (which has gone away, but is basically the American Community Survey) that is not sent to every citizen, and is conducted yearly (not every 10 years).
And it has been asked up until 2000. Albeit not to every household. That means, what, to you re: to the fact of whether it has been asked or not?
Quote:I never refuted that a citizenship question has been asked, historically.
So your response is just for general enjoyment with no point. Got it.
(07-08-2019 04:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:51 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:01 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 03:49 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512...s-question
Read the whole article. Citizenship was asked before.
Huh - weird response to me posting what the 2010 questions were on the census, after 93 posted about the American Community Survey, which is now, where the more detailed questions are asked.
I never refuted that a citizenship question has been asked, historically. As you can see in the NPR article, a citizenship question was last asked of every household (e.g. the short-form, 2010 style census I referenced) in 1950. It's been included in the long-form questionnaire (which has gone away, but is basically the American Community Survey) that is not sent to every citizen, and is conducted yearly (not every 10 years).
And it has been asked up until 2000. Albeit not to every household. That means, what, to you re: to the fact of whether it has been asked or not?
Quote:I never refuted that a citizenship question has been asked, historically.
So your response is just for general enjoyment with no point. Got it.
It was to inform people of what are the 10 questions that are included on the census that everyone receives. I didn't know what they were, and since you were posting specific questions from the general census process, I thought it would be informative.
Read and discuss:
What Should A Black Law Professor Do When A White Student Wears A MAGA Hat In Class?
To me the entire cornerstone to his article (and progressivism in general) was this:
Quote:MAGA is an undeniable symbol of white supremacy
I will assume that 'black' is still a good word, since the author uses it to describe a racial characteristic. I had heard from many in the last few years that that word is a 'bad' word now. I am so confused.
(07-08-2019 05:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Read and discuss:
What Should A Black Law Professor Do When A White Student Wears A MAGA Hat In Class?
To me the entire cornerstone to his article (and progressivism in general) was this: Quote:MAGA is an undeniable symbol of white supremacy
He has a few other doozies as well:
- "I was unsure whether the student was directing a hateful message toward me or if he merely lacked decorum and was oblivious to how his hat might be interpreted by his black law professor.
I presumed it was the former."
- "...authority defiantly undermined by an insensitive student." Authority was undermined how?
- "In an effort to assuage the perceived tension..." Perceived by whom?
In most law school classes, a person who is that prone to and reliant upon logical leaps is chewed up and spit out pretty quickly. It's hard to imagine such a person becoming a professor.
(07-08-2019 07:11 PM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 05:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Read and discuss:
What Should A Black Law Professor Do When A White Student Wears A MAGA Hat In Class?
To me the entire cornerstone to his article (and progressivism in general) was this: Quote:MAGA is an undeniable symbol of white supremacy
He has a few other doozies as well:
- "I was unsure whether the student was directing a hateful message toward me or if he merely lacked decorum and was oblivious to how his hat might be interpreted by his black law professor. I presumed it was the former."
- "...authority defiantly undermined by an insensitive student." Authority was undermined how?
- "In an effort to assuage the perceived tension..." Perceived by whom?
In most law school classes, a person who is that prone to and reliant upon logical leaps is chewed up and spit out pretty quickly. It's hard to imagine such a person becoming a professor.
If wearing a MAGA hat is "undeniable [act] of white supremacy" in a simple symbolic sense, one doesnt have to think long about what that person 'undeniably' would think of *anyone* who dared vote for the person that the symbol acts as a campaign for.
Yep, the sharp, cutting edge of free thinking, openness of thought, and ideals of inclusion in full battle display here.
(07-08-2019 04:51 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:44 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:33 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 04:23 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Please. Don't be so sensitive. I am not virtue-signalling or accusing you of being racist. I don't think it is that confusing and I have a feeling you aren't that stymied by this concept either.
i am well aware that the sma ewords can have different meanings based on context. In this case,,the context is the race of the speaker, and the putative experiences of the listener's forebears. What I womder is why either of these should be salient. I am sure some of my hispanic amcestors were despised by many of my white ancestors. i am equally sure my Hispanic ancestors despised my Native Ameican ancestors. heck some of my Anglo ancestors may have despised my German ancestors. i cannot spend my whole life apologizing for the attitudes of my ancestors. I guess you can. maybe your ancestry is more pure than mine. but I am quite sure my gramdparents would not have gotten along. for one thing, they didn't speak the same language.
Yes. I can avoid using obvious words that people find offensive. It doesn't seem like a burden and I don't feel like I am "spending my whole life apologizing for my ancestors".
Amd back to square one.
I don't follow.
You cannot follow if you are leading.
(07-08-2019 04:44 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ][quote='Rice93' pid='16185294' dateline='1562621589']
[quote='RiceLad15' pid='16185289' dateline='1562621338']
[quote='OptimisticOwl' pid='16185276' dateline='1562620985']
I am sure some of my hispanic amcestors were despised by many of my white ancestors. i am equally sure my Hispanic ancestors despised my Native Ameican ancestors. heck some of my Anglo ancestors may have despised my German ancestors.
Late in her life, my dear mother became very interested in genealogy, and she documented a specific case in our family tree of exactly what you're saying. During the Revolutionary War:
- One of my maternal ancestors was a Loyalist officer in the British army.
- One of my paternal ancestors (who is my namesake) served in the Second Continental Congress.
Since they were both in the southern colonies, they may well have known each other socially before the war started, and may have come close to crossing paths during the war. If my maternal ancestor had somehow apprehended my paternal ancestor, he would have had him hanged.
On another note, a Rice professor and I discovered that my namesake ancestor and his were bitter political rivals in the decades following the Revolutionary War. After digging a little more into their history, we were somewhat surprised (and perhaps a little disappointed) that the two of them never fought a duel.
(07-08-2019 07:52 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 07:11 PM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2019 05:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Read and discuss:
What Should A Black Law Professor Do When A White Student Wears A MAGA Hat In Class?
To me the entire cornerstone to his article (and progressivism in general) was this: Quote:MAGA is an undeniable symbol of white supremacy
He has a few other doozies as well:
- "I was unsure whether the student was directing a hateful message toward me or if he merely lacked decorum and was oblivious to how his hat might be interpreted by his black law professor. I presumed it was the former."
- "...authority defiantly undermined by an insensitive student." Authority was undermined how?
- "In an effort to assuage the perceived tension..." Perceived by whom?
In most law school classes, a person who is that prone to and reliant upon logical leaps is chewed up and spit out pretty quickly. It's hard to imagine such a person becoming a professor.
If wearing a MAGA hat is "undeniable [act] of white supremacy" in a simple symbolic sense, one doesnt have to think long about what that person 'undeniably' would think of *anyone* who dared vote for the person that the symbol acts as a campaign for.
Yep, the sharp, cutting edge of free thinking, openness of thought, and ideals of inclusion in full battle display here.
One may also wonder:
- How would this professor grade a student whose exam essay relied on terms like "undeniable"?
- In his own student days, what would he have thought of a faculty member who demanded greater respect for faculty "authority"?
Quote:MAGA is an undeniable symbol of white supremacy
Somebody needs to tell this to the black, Asian, and Hispanic men and women I play poker with on a regular basis. There is one guy who often wears a TRUMP 2020 hat or a MAGA hat and none of them seem to mind, or even notice.