(11-26-2021 11:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Actually, we are all colored--some color. I suppose there may be some albino somewhere who is totally white, but that would be unusual in the extreme.

For that matter, I can claim to be a person of color. I am a descendent of Nicholas Martiau, a Moorish French Huguenot. About the same as Fauxcahontas's Native American ancestry claim. Other descendants of his include George Washington, Meriwether Lewis, and Queen Elizabeth II. So Obama is not the first USA President of color and Meghan Markle is not the first person of color to be a member of the UK royal family.

And no, words don't offend me. But actions sure as heck do.

I think most of us, if we had access to genealogies going back many generations would have "some" color in their background. A lot of those people would be designated as persons of no color by the currently accepted leaders of POCs. I knew of my spanish/mexican ancestry, but DNA testing revealed my NA and Jewish roots, as well as some North African and Middle Eastern ancestry. Yet I would likely be called a "white supremacist" by Biden if I interfered in a BLM mostly peaceful riot.

I will even grant Warren her 1000th of a percent NA heritage. I guess that makes her a POC too.

We are a melting pot and have been for centuries. Trying to designate one side of the stew as this and the other side as that is an endeavor for liberals and segregationists.

I hope somebody will publish a list of words that can be used soon. Thinking for ourselves is so tiring.

According to My Friend, 'colored is okay' when used by the NAACP when referring to all people of color.

But according to My Friend, bad when referring to blacks.

And according My Friend, bad when referring to a Vice President of mixed Indian / Jamaican heritage.

I dont know how to make heads or tails of that mishmash.

(11-26-2021 11:42 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Actually, we are all colored--some color. I suppose there may be some albino somewhere who is totally white, but that would be unusual in the extreme.

For that matter, I can claim to be a person of color. I am a descendent of Nicholas Martiau, a Moorish French Huguenot. About the same as Fauxcahontas's Native American ancestry claim. Other descendants of his include George Washington, Meriwether Lewis, and Queen Elizabeth II. So Obama is not the first USA President of color and Meghan Markle is not the first person of color to be a member of the UK royal family.

And no, words don't offend me. But actions sure as heck do.

I think most of us, if we had access to genealogies going back many generations would have "some" color in their background. A lot of those people would be designated as persons of no color by the currently accepted leaders of POCs. I knew of my spanish/mexican ancestry, but DNA testing revealed my NA and Jewish roots, as well as some North African and Middle Eastern ancestry. Yet I would likely be called a "white supremacist" by Biden if I interfered in a BLM mostly peaceful riot.

I will even grant Warren her 1000th of a percent NA heritage. I guess that makes her a POC too.

We are a melting pot and have been for centuries. Trying to designate one side of the stew as this and the other side as that is an endeavor for liberals and segregationists.

I hope somebody will publish a list of words that can be used soon. Thinking for ourselves is so tiring.

According to My Friend, 'colored is okay' when used by the NAACP when referring to all people of color.

But according to My Friend, bad when referring to blacks.

And according My Friend, bad when referring to a Vice President of mixed Indian / Jamaican heritage.

I dont know how to make heads or tails of that mishmash.

Just STFU and do as they say.

(11-26-2021 11:42 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Actually, we are all colored--some color. I suppose there may be some albino somewhere who is totally white, but that would be unusual in the extreme.

For that matter, I can claim to be a person of color. I am a descendent of Nicholas Martiau, a Moorish French Huguenot. About the same as Fauxcahontas's Native American ancestry claim. Other descendants of his include George Washington, Meriwether Lewis, and Queen Elizabeth II. So Obama is not the first USA President of color and Meghan Markle is not the first person of color to be a member of the UK royal family.

And no, words don't offend me. But actions sure as heck do.

I think most of us, if we had access to genealogies going back many generations would have "some" color in their background. A lot of those people would be designated as persons of no color by the currently accepted leaders of POCs. I knewhttps://csnbbs.com/jscripts/editor_themes/default/images/television.gif of my spanish/mexican ancestry, but DNA testing revealed my NA and Jewish roots, as well as some North African and Middle Eastern ancestry. Yet I would likely be called a "white supremacist" by Biden if I interfered in a BLM mostly peaceful riot.

I will even grant Warren her 1000th of a percent NA heritage. I guess that makes her a POC too.

We are a melting pot and have been for centuries. Trying to designate one side of the stew as this and the other side as that is an endeavor for liberals and segregationists.

I hope somebody will publish a list of words that can be used soon. Thinking for ourselves is so tiring.

According to My Friend, 'colored is okay' when used by the NAACP when referring to all people of color.

But according to My Friend, bad when referring to blacks.

And according My Friend, bad when referring to a Vice President of mixed Indian / Jamaican heritage.

I dont know how to make heads or tails of that mishmash.

Bro, I thought that article explained the difference between the NAACP (founded in 1909) using that term and you using that term. I guess not.

I won't even try to understand how if a person has some Indian heritage as well as black heritage then calling them colored is OK. Not in the mood for that level of mental gymnastics on my day off.

(11-26-2021 12:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:42 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Actually, we are all colored--some color. I suppose there may be some albino somewhere who is totally white, but that would be unusual in the extreme.

For that matter, I can claim to be a person of color. I am a descendent of Nicholas Martiau, a Moorish French Huguenot. About the same as Fauxcahontas's Native American ancestry claim. Other descendants of his include George Washington, Meriwether Lewis, and Queen Elizabeth II. So Obama is not the first USA President of color and Meghan Markle is not the first person of color to be a member of the UK royal family.

And no, words don't offend me. But actions sure as heck do.

I think most of us, if we had access to genealogies going back many generations would have "some" color in their background. A lot of those people would be designated as persons of no color by the currently accepted leaders of POCs. I knew of my spanish/mexican ancestry, but DNA testing revealed my NA and Jewish roots, as well as some North African and Middle Eastern ancestry. Yet I would likely be called a "white supremacist" by Biden if I interfered in a BLM mostly peaceful riot.

I will even grant Warren her 1000th of a percent NA heritage. I guess that makes her a POC too.

We are a melting pot and have been for centuries. Trying to designate one side of the stew as this and the other side as that is an endeavor for liberals and segregationists.

I hope somebody will publish a list of words that can be used soon. Thinking for ourselves is so tiring.

According to My Friend, 'colored is okay' when used by the NAACP when referring to all people of color.

But according to My Friend, bad when referring to blacks.

And according My Friend, bad when referring to a Vice President of mixed Indian / Jamaican heritage.

I dont know how to make heads or tails of that mishmash.

Just STFU and do as they say.

Yeah, homie! Can you imagine living in a world where you can't call a black person colored?!?! NO THANK YOU!!!!

And seriously, how come rappers use the N-word all the time and WE can't! SO UNFAIR!!!!!

(11-26-2021 12:10 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Yeah, homie! Can you imagine living in a world where you can't call a black person colored?!?! NO THANK YOU!!!!

Actually living there now.

And I am not your homie. It's not OK for a white guy to call a Hispanic homie. Shame on you.

Quote:And seriously, how come rappers use the N-word all the time and WE can't! SO UNFAIR!!!!!

because it is forbidden to someone of your heritage and/or skin tone.. Simple. Some things are allowed others and not you. Been that way forever.

(11-26-2021 12:08 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:42 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Actually, we are all colored--some color. I suppose there may be some albino somewhere who is totally white, but that would be unusual in the extreme.

For that matter, I can claim to be a person of color. I am a descendent of Nicholas Martiau, a Moorish French Huguenot. About the same as Fauxcahontas's Native American ancestry claim. Other descendants of his include George Washington, Meriwether Lewis, and Queen Elizabeth II. So Obama is not the first USA President of color and Meghan Markle is not the first person of color to be a member of the UK royal family.

And no, words don't offend me. But actions sure as heck do.

I think most of us, if we had access to genealogies going back many generations would have "some" color in their background. A lot of those people would be designated as persons of no color by the currently accepted leaders of POCs. I knewhttps://csnbbs.com/jscripts/editor_themes/default/images/television.gif of my spanish/mexican ancestry, but DNA testing revealed my NA and Jewish roots, as well as some North African and Middle Eastern ancestry. Yet I would likely be called a "white supremacist" by Biden if I interfered in a BLM mostly peaceful riot.

I will even grant Warren her 1000th of a percent NA heritage. I guess that makes her a POC too.

We are a melting pot and have been for centuries. Trying to designate one side of the stew as this and the other side as that is an endeavor for liberals and segregationists.

I hope somebody will publish a list of words that can be used soon. Thinking for ourselves is so tiring.

According to My Friend, 'colored is okay' when used by the NAACP when referring to all people of color.

But according to My Friend, bad when referring to blacks.

And according My Friend, bad when referring to a Vice President of mixed Indian / Jamaican heritage.

I dont know how to make heads or tails of that mishmash.

Bro, I thought that article explained the difference between the NAACP (founded in 1909) using that term and you using that term. I guess not.

They put two reasons. One that the name was chosen in 1909. Does this mean they are prohibited from changing the name from such a terrible name? Otherwise the rationale is ‘ they chose the name when it wasn’t bad, but it has become bad, but for some godforesaken reason they won’t change the name from such a slur’. Does that sum up your ‘1909’ reason?

Quote:I won't even try to understand how if a person has some Indian heritage as well as black heritage then calling them colored is OK. Not in the mood for that level of mental gymnastics on my day off.

That goes to the second reason given in that article.

Here I’ll post it a second time.

Quote:The group has since broadened its mission to include not only African Americans, but all people of color.

That is quite the distinction, would you not say? And it seems to peg spot on the issue of dual ancestry. The quote above says ‘the term is unacceptable for use with solely African Americans, but acceptable when used in conjunction of any multitude of persons of color.

Now, to me, if colored is unacceptable with blacks, it surely should be unacceptable with Indians, or Arabs, or such. But the above attempt at justifying its continued use seems to be a sprightly Irish jig that attempts to rather stupidly and clumsily short circuit the issue. Please feel free to get triggered on the term ‘Irish jig’ given the last couple of days….

(11-26-2021 11:24 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Where we reserve the right to call women "sluts" ...

No, we call sluts "sluts."

(11-26-2021 12:08 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Bro, I thought that article explained the difference between the NAACP (founded in 1909) using that term and you using that term. I guess not.

What article?

I am reminded of the old joke about LBJ (who was a racist) saying, "Damn, I finally learned how to pronounce KNEE-grow, and they went and changed it to black."

(11-26-2021 11:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Actually, we are all colored--some color. I suppose there may be some albino somewhere who is totally white, but that would be unusual in the extreme.

reminded me of...

(11-27-2021 01:02 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2021 11:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Actually, we are all colored--some color. I suppose there may be some albino somewhere who is totally white, but that would be unusual in the extreme.

reminded me of...

Even that guy is not “white”.

But he is white enough that we know he is an evil racist.

travel ban

Remember when Trump had a travel ban that the Blue Team leaders labeled racist and the sheeple took up the chant?

Today, silence.

(11-26-2021 12:08 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  I won't even try to understand how if a person has some Indian heritage as well as black heritage then calling them colored is OK. Not in the mood for that level of mental gymnastics on my day off.

I've missed a lot of this conversation and not going to look too hard at it catching up.... but I've often been troubled by the idea that 'a person of color' seems to be okay but 'colored' is not. To me, those mean the same exact thing... just one is harder/longer to say/ can sound awkward in a sentence. 'Wear a colored shirt' (meaning not a white shirt) vs 'wear a shirt of color' if the game thing is 'rainbow' or something.

To me, its much more about whether or not you intend to denigrate someone by your use of the word. While certainly a racist would intend malice if referring to a 'non-white' as 'colored', I'm struck by how often supposedly 'woke' people hear it as offensive.... and/or saying that 'white' is superior.

To me, its a simple differentiation... a tool for describing someone to be picked out of a crowd. He's tall, short, skinny, blonde, red head, white, black or brown. These physical descriptors say nothing about the person's character, quality or intellect... and certainly nothing about their potential. Now if you asked if he were 'smart' and I responded with a comment about his skin tone, that would be something completely different.

The problem is, this has become a weapon to demonize others based on some version of mind-reading of intention.... of that someone's CHOICE to claim to be offended is somehow someone else's responsibility. I mean seriously... apparently we're supposed to have what must now be a 5 minute conversation about 'how someone prefers to be addressed' before we can ask simple questions... and then we're supposed to remember those things... for everyone. It's like trying to remember how each and every person we run across likes their burger prepared... or if they prefer a meatless or chicken option.... and again, if so... how prepared or with what condiments.

This to me is just one of those ideas where someone somewhere decides that we're going to ignore centuries of practice and of course an entire lifetime of habit and end the use of pronouns like he and she, replacing them with these new, made-up words like 'xi' and somehow, all the world's gender issues (or in this case, racial issues) are solved. And no, it's not even a start. It's a complete and utter deflection... INCREASING rather than decreasing these tensions.

If someone is generally offended by a word, I will make some effort to not use that word around them... or at all. What I'm not okay with though is where it is 'okay' to use those words, depending on MY race, gender preference or whatever. That's just the same sort of insult, just in reverse. In THIS case, the slight is absolutely intended... by definition.

(11-26-2021 12:08 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  I won't even try to understand how if a person has some Indian heritage as well as black heritage then calling them colored is OK. Not in the mood for that level of mental gymnastics on my day off.

Are you allowed to say "Indian"?

IAC, I have some NA heritage as well as Spanish. Growing up, I was usually referred to as Anglo. But now the left has decided I am a "person of color". when do MY preferences get taken into account?

BTW, Hambone, my preferences are mustard, no onions.

Russian invasion of Ukraine

I guess we will be tested soon. I think somebody needs to remind Biden that "the 80's called and they want their foreign policy back."

(11-29-2021 11:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Growing up, I was usually referred to as Anglo.

It's funny that in general contemporary usage, "Anglo-Saxon" is a subset of
"Anglo" but (usually) a disjoint set from "Saxon".
Demonyms are weird.

(12-09-2021 05:06 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 11:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Growing up, I was usually referred to as Anglo.

It's funny that in general contemporary usage, "Anglo-Saxon" is a subset of
"Anglo" but (usually) a disjoint set from "Saxon".
Demonyms are weird.

Growing up, I was usually referred to as 'gabacho'.

(12-09-2021 05:54 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-09-2021 05:06 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 11:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Growing up, I was usually referred to as Anglo.

It's funny that in general contemporary usage, "Anglo-Saxon" is a subset of
"Anglo" but (usually) a disjoint set from "Saxon".
Demonyms are weird.

Growing up, I was usually referred to as 'gabacho'.

Come to think of it, it was mostly Anglos who used "anglo". I moved away when I was 11.

Or maybe I was just around politer people.

I was listening to a comic yesterday... Patton Oswalt I think... and he made the comment that he was SUPER supportive of the racial and LGBTQ+ agendas, but that even he couldn't keep up with all of the changes.... and he noted (as I have) that 'you know who can??' EVIL people.... because they use the language to deliver their 'evil'. Now he meant 'those against the agenda', but I think it can be applied to the other side as well. For them, its also a weapon.

Biden admin released a report that used financial reporting from the four major meat processors (which are publicly held companies) to back up the claims they made about how they’re profiteering and driving up prices, and not reacting to inflation.

It’s a WH document, so it would be interesting to see a non-partisan group weigh in.

Quote: New data released in the last several weeks by four of the biggest meat-processing companies—Tyson, JBS, Marfrig, and Seaboard—show that this trend continues. (Other top processors are private companies that don’t report publicly on their profits, margins, or income.) According to these companies’ latest quarterly earnings statements, their gross profits have collectively increased by more than 120% since before the pandemic, and their net income has surged by 500%…

Their profit margins—the amount of money they are making over and above their costs—have skyrocketed since the pandemic. Gross margins are up 50% and net margins are up over 300%. If rising input costs were driving rising meat prices, those profit margins would be roughly flat, because higher prices would be offset by the higher costs.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room...t-margins/

(12-11-2021 01:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Biden admin released a report that used financial reporting from the four major meat processors (which are publicly held companies) to back up the claims they made about how they’re profiteering and driving up prices, and not reacting to inflation.

It’s a WH document, so it would be interesting to see a non-partisan group weigh in.

Quote: New data released in the last several weeks by four of the biggest meat-processing companies—Tyson, JBS, Marfrig, and Seaboard—show that this trend continues. (Other top processors are private companies that don’t report publicly on their profits, margins, or income.) According to these companies’ latest quarterly earnings statements, their gross profits have collectively increased by more than 120% since before the pandemic, and their net income has surged by 500%…

Their profit margins—the amount of money they are making over and above their costs—have skyrocketed since the pandemic. Gross margins are up 50% and net margins are up over 300%. If rising input costs were driving rising meat prices, those profit margins would be roughly flat, because higher prices would be offset by the higher costs.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room...t-margins/

JBS sure seems to be making a healthy profit.

https://api.mziq.com/mzfilemanager/v2/d/...3?origin=2