liam76: Whoopty Rape Angel: you are confusing discrimination based on race with racism... I could suggest some books if you are truly interested.

I guess the dictionary is confused by that as well.

some people go further in their educations than simply picking up a dictionary. see my previous post for some authors to look into.

rewind2846: Okay... then if Rev Wright is as "ineffective" as you say he is, then why do those like you even pay attention? What difference does he make to you?

I mean, if someone just stands around and talks a bunch of shiat, so what? If that same person prevents me from getting a job, an apartment, a loan... then that person needs to be dealt with.
In all fairness, he doesn't really keep me awake at night as I claw at my eyes crying to the heavens "OH WHY DOES REVREND WRIGHT TORMENT ME THUS!?!?!?!"

NewsFlash Quote 2008-03-27 12:35:38 PM
(witntv.com) NAACP Says "Low Pants Bill" Is Discriminatory

Sooooooo.... only colored people sag their pants?

/That's certainly going to help advancement; and by the way...NAACP Wiki (new window) Maybe time for a name change?
//The NAACP will never be satisfied because if "colored" people have advanced beyond advocacy, their organization ceases to be relevant.


OOOO you're so smart. you know what NAACP stands for.

The word colored is used because it is an organization for ALL people of color.

/America Ferrera (Ugly Betty) just won a NAACP image award
//As well as Jimmy Smits

Burn98: I disagree. The playing field is slanted. You just can not leave that fact out of your analysis.

One team gets to advance the ball downhill while the other team has to advance the ball uphill. The uphill team deserves some kind of break to make up for the slant

So we give them an extra down that they can use but the other team cannot.

Now the downhill team screams that the uphill team has an unfair advantage, ignoring the advantage they have had all along.

You can argue that it is a stupid way to try to even things out and I would agree with you. But it is an attempt to make things more fair.

Therefore it is not racist.

Sorry but we aren;t teams.

If whitey incfome goes up 20% it doesn't mean I make more money.

I am all about helping economically depressed areas, the fed spending more money on failing inner city schools, fixing bad neighborhoods etc, but the standard for which schools or people to help shoulcn;t be based on skin color.

liam76: Whoopty Rape Angel: you are confusing discrimination based on race with racism... I could suggest some books if you are truly interested.

I guess the dictionary is confused by that as well.

Well, to help you undertand let's take "Liam"

Origin: Germanic
Meaning: Will, desire and helmet, protection

Origin: Hebrew
Meaning: My people

One name, two meanings (at least)

Whoopty Rape Angel: Surool: "Rev. WRight is no racist. In order to be a racist you have to be a member of the dominant racial group. It's about power."

You sad little person: From the American Heritage Dictionary...
Rac-ism
n.
1) The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2) Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Note the lack of qualifiers about dominance and power. You know that racism is what humans of all colors have in common, right?

my PhD in Sociology says otherwise. If all you have to refute my position is the dictionary then I guess we're done here.

Ooooo a PHD in Sociology! That and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee. Seriously though, does your sociological definition take into account the protected classes? Right now African Americans are considered a protected class and will dominate any discussion involving race. They are free to call whites crackers, honkeys, and anything else and resort to physical violence when called names. Wouldn't this put them as the dominant race in this case? How exactly do you define the dominant race? Do you just mean economically dominant? Do you mean population percentage dominant? Or do you mean ability to act on racial tendency dominant?

I am shocked that the South Park Wheel of Fortune pic hasn't been posted yet. Will that one get you a time out now or something?

UnkleKrakker: Thunderpipes: drunkennewfiemidget: Dancin_In_Anson: drunkennewfiemidget: Because deciding on your safety based on the colour of skin of the person walking behind you is idiotic if there's no other indication as to their intentions.

So this would apply to anyone that makes that connection?

Yes.

And what if crime statistics clearly show you are more in danger of a black guy with pants around his knees, than of a white guy in a suit and tie? It is not racism to use common sense.

common sense should tell you that if you judge people simply by the color of their skin, you're wrong.
Serial killer tend to be white males, and Dahmer was a snappy dresser.

Serial killers also tend not to just randomly do violence in public. Black thugs have no problem busting a cap in somone because they want too.

I wish there was just one time when I've spoken to a non-idiot wearing sagging pants. I really do, but they're all suffering from what must be (at best) minor brain damage. I try to have sympathy for them, but they just act like morons all the time. *sigh*

Just yesterday a neighbor was out trying out his bicycle in the parking lot and his pants kept getting caught on the FRONT of his seat, pulling them down so he was riding with his farking tighty-whity ass sticking out behind him. None of us wanted to see that.

UnkleKrakker:

Perhaps you should pick up a book occasionally. There is a very strong definition in Sociology that racism is only able to be carried out by the dominant group

This is the lame excuse and semantics that black people play to justify their own BIGOTRY.

bigotry and racism are not different. It's all about intolerance and stereotyping people who don't look like you, or sound like you or maybe of a different gender or sexual orientation.

All of that considered. Blacks are among the most bigoted race of people on this planet.

period

Everyone's a racist to a cerain point, we're just afraid to say it because it's politically incorrect and would be social suicide.

Read Freakonomics by Steven Levitt. Numbers don't lie, people do. (And swimming pools kill 100 times as many kids as guns do in the home).

(Excuse me - PEOPLE with guns).

spacechicken170am: Whoopty Rape Angel: Surool: "Rev. WRight is no racist. In order to be a racist you have to be a member of the dominant racial group. It's about power."

You sad little person: From the American Heritage Dictionary...
Rac-ism
n.
1) The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2) Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Note the lack of qualifiers about dominance and power. You know that racism is what humans of all colors have in common, right?

my PhD in Sociology says otherwise. If all you have to refute my position is the dictionary then I guess we're done here.

Ooooo a PHD in Sociology! That and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee. Seriously though, does your sociological definition take into account the protected classes? Right now African Americans are considered a protected class and will dominate any discussion involving race. They are free to call whites crackers, honkeys, and anything else and resort to physical violence when called names. Wouldn't this put them as the dominant race in this case? How exactly do you define the dominant race? Do you just mean economically dominant? Do you mean population percentage dominant? Or do you mean ability to act on racial tendency dominant?

Hey I worked hard for my doctorate and have a nice job as a result, don't give me that bullshiat you anti-intellectual goon.



1) physical violence is always illegal, you're creating a red herring
2) I mean economically and politically dominant (you know, "power")
3) equating honkey with racial slurs aimed at black people ignores U.S. history in its entirety.

Read a book.

I have no idea what you mean by "act on racial tendency" Who's making up words now?

BlippityBleep: I wish there was just one time when I've spoken to a non-idiot wearing sagging pants. I really do, but they're all suffering from what must be (at best) minor brain damage. I try to have sympathy for them, but they just act like morons all the time. *sigh*

In my undergrad I knew some Engineering students who dressed like that. On the one hand, they were still goof-offs.... but who wasn't? And besides, they graduated, so they couldn't have been that dense.

Dancin_In_Anson: Whoopty Rape Angel: some people go further in their educations than simply picking up a dictionary. see my previous post for some authors to look into.

Just depends on what the definition of "is" is, eh?

b-b-b-but Clinton?

get new material, Freeper.

Pxtl: BlippityBleep: I wish there was just one time when I've spoken to a non-idiot wearing sagging pants. I really do, but they're all suffering from what must be (at best) minor brain damage. I try to have sympathy for them, but they just act like morons all the time. *sigh*

In my undergrad I knew some Engineering students who dressed like that. On the one hand, they were still goof-offs.... but who wasn't? And besides, they graduated, so they couldn't have been that dense.

Well, they've obviously done a heckuva job designing bridges as we've seen recently.

danlpoon: Answer: We like them.

Not to chicken-and-egg this topic but you like them because your Mom bought them for you. This trend started in the Seventies while you were still playing with your EZ Bake Oven sans light bulb.

I was there, Bucko.
=================================

No, actually in the 70s when I was playing with my Lite-Brite my father was wearing his ball-hugging bell bottoms. But, I'm sure you know what black people were doing, better than I.

wow. too many posts for me to read.

Just want to say while most of us think it looks retarded it doesn't mean it is retarded. There are many retarded styles that should be banned.

a few:
big sunglasses
skinny jeans
rolled pants

If you see people wearing baggy jeans or big ass sunglasses it doesn't mean they are retarded. It's the style and you just have to look at it as such.

Probably helps that I use to play basketball with a group that all had baggy jeans.

All of that considered. Blacks are among the most bigoted race of people on this planet.

They had top-notch training.

I'm confused. In order for the bill to be discriminatory, doesn't it have to single out a group? This bill says no low pants for anyone.

/Not yours.
//Don't want to see your nasty ass hanging out anyway.

Whoopty Rape Angel: some people go further in their educations than simply picking up a dictionary. see my previous post for some authors to look into.

You never responed to my earlier questions.

What would you call a mexican who wouldn't serve black people in his restaurant? He is acting on racist tendencies, how is he not a racist? What is the point of changing the meaning of the word from its older more widely accepted meaning?

What word would you use to describe a mexican ideology that encouraged treating blacks as inferior? I can't think of a better word than racist, but since that goes against the accepted meaning in the sociology world, why don't you provide me with the correct verbage.


/i have trouble accepting that the definition you present is the only one used by people who study sociology, but i will take it in this conversation as it isn;t my are of study.

No, actually in the 70s when I was playing with my Lite-Brite my father was wearing his ball-hugging bell bottoms. But, I'm sure you know what black people were doing, better than I.

Oh. Your black? I didn't pick up on that after the ten trillion times you said it. Sorry.

Plus if you want people to believe your black don't post memories of your father.

Everybody's prejudiced to an extent. The only question is how big is that extent and how honest you are about it.

I used to be so anti-racist and anti-prejudice when i was in high school in a small town (with no black people).

Then I moved to the city and embraced my prejudices. Though I wouldn't call myself a racist my any means but I do have prejudices, mostly those that have been backed up by personal experiences.

As far as this ban goes, if you want to dress like a douche, you're more than welcome to. It's not going to keep anyone from being in a gang or anything. If anything it makes the gang members more visible. I kinda like it that way.

xanadian: That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waste

lol. Girls dont poop.

DANPLOON

All of that considered. Blacks are among the most bigoted race of people on this planet.

They had top-notch training.

That's right. Their own reatives and neighbors helped capture them and turned them over for trinkets. Sounds like a good old-fashioned turf-war training program to me.

Whoopty Rape Angel: Surool: "Rev. WRight is no racist. In order to be a racist you have to be a member of the dominant racial group. It's about power."

You sad little person: From the American Heritage Dictionary...
Rac-ism
n.
1) The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2) Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Note the lack of qualifiers about dominance and power. You know that racism is what humans of all colors have in common, right?

my PhD in Sociology says otherwise. If all you have to refute my position is the dictionary then I guess we're done here.

I'm sure your PHD gifted you with the knowledge that when there is dominance and power by an ethnic group, the effect of racism os oppression. Sure the dominant group oppress the other groups, but that doesn't mean the other groups aren't racist as well.

You might want to get a partial refund on that degree. Linguistic definitions are put together over centuries of time by countless scholars.

UnkleKrakker:

Burn98: There is no such thing as a sociologically accepted definition of racism that is different than the one in the dictionary.

Perhaps you should pick up a book occasionally.

You accuse me of ignorance even while you display your own.

There is a very strong definition in Sociology that racism is only able to be carried out by the dominant group.

There has been a few articles and books written that advocate this point view. They have been rejected by the majority of sociologists. Some have made some valid points about what factors are necessary to be successful as a racist. But there is simply no strong belief that minorities cannot be racist. This argument is generally used to excuse bad behavior by minorities.

This would be called 'the big picture', so racism really can only be praticed by those in power.

So what happens when a bigger black man beats up a smaller white? The black man has the power then does he not? I agree that in the "Big Picture" minorities suffer more. But there is nothing that prevent minorities from practicing racism. Everyone has some power. All blacks need to do is spit in the white man's food, and they are racist.

Also you can be racist without practicing racism. You can hate on the basis of race even if you do nothing about it.

I didn't say the dictionary definition was wrong, I simply said there was another, accepted definition. That happens in the world outside sometimes, people redefine things and don't get everyone's permission.

You would have a point if your definition really was accepted. I just is not. And you can use an "special" definition you want.

I can redefine the word "crime" so that nothing I do is ever criminal. But I doubt I could convince the police not to arrest me.

coordman: I'm confused. In order for the bill to be discriminatory, doesn't it have to single out a group? This bill says no low pants for anyone.

/Not yours.
//Don't want to see your nasty ass hanging out anyway

Well, technically a law can be discriminatory in its application, even if its wording is race neutral. For instance, all the laws which require a test to vote...at the time, the recently freed black community was significantly less likely to be able to pass a test to vote than the average white person. The result was that, in effect, the laws hurt blacks significantly more in their effect...even though the law mentioned race no where.

Don't really buy it here, but one could make the argument.

danlpoon: Plus if you want people to believe your you're black don't post memories of your father.

hahaha

Am I going to hell for laughing at this?

FarkleMatter Can they outlaw fanny packs next?
FZ6: How about adding "popped collars"
90supraT I don't like ties therefor ties = banned

I'll add a couple points and then clear the way for everyone to call me a racist...

1. If they tried to enact laws against fashion statements made by the dregs of the white community, the white community would probably support them. The white community doesn't like fashion statements made by a small subculture that makes everyone else look stupid (that includes mullets, acid wash jeans with holes in the knees, tank tops, and anything that says "lumberjack" if you're not holding an axe).

2. As this is a state assembly issue (in the article) and not a specific school issue, this would impact the whole state. If they were to enact a statewide dress code / uniform for schools, you'd raise the ire of the impoverished as it's hard enough to afford baggy pants, let alone clean uniforms. Uniforms would likely overrule hand-me-downs.

If that wasn't abrasive, how about this...

3. Shortly after the episode with Bernhard Goetz, NYC saw a pretty significant decline in violent crimes. Many attributed it to his vigilante-ism, but that's not the case. They'd recently installed a new police chief who had some unorthodox methods. He stepped up enforcement of minor crimes in order to create a culture that would discourage violent crimes. NYPD completely cracked down on three seemingly insignificant areas...subway toll jumpers, graffiti and squeegies at red lights.

To simplify, potential criminals saw that the police weren't playing games and weren't going to let anyone get away with anything (even the insignificant stuff) so they thought twice about doing the major stuff. Believe it or not (I'm expecting not), but it did have a profound effect on violent crime in NYC.

Now, I doubt the Florida state legislature has this kind of forethought...I mean, they are elected officials from Florida FFS...but supporting such a sumptuary law (esp one with no criminal consequences) might not be such a bad idea.

Some fun reading on the subject: Link (new window)

I don't know what's more pathetic:

Arguing over the internet

or

Lame attempts at flirting over the internet with attention-whores

UnkleKrakker: liam76: Whoopty Rape Angel: you are confusing discrimination based on race with racism... I could suggest some books if you are truly interested.

I guess the dictionary is confused by that as well.

Well, to help you undertand let's take "Liam"

Origin: Germanic
Meaning: Will, desire and helmet, protection

Origin: Hebrew
Meaning: My people

One name, two meanings (at least)

Fine a word can have two meanings. In the more common and popular meaning of racist judging people on their race is racist. Adhering to an ideology that says you must swear alliegance to a leader of a particular color is racist.

That's right. Their own relatives and neighbors helped capture them and turned them over for trinkets. Sounds like a good old-fashioned turf-war training program to me.

To you, I'm sure it does.

seal614: I don't know what's more pathetic:

Arguing over the internet

or

Lame attempts at flirting over the internet with attention-whores

I think you are totally wrong!

How you doin?

xenocide
Christ, the ignorance in this thread is staggering... I had very baggy pants growing up. Want to know why? I was poor and would wear hand-me-downs, just like a lot of my other black friends. I have no idea where this whole theory of imitating "prison culture" came from, but it makes the people who push it look shockingly out of touch.

Yeah the ignorance of this thread is staggering...and you are helping it. The baggy pants, that is one thing but that is not what these guys are wearing, they are wearing normal (and baggy) pants and they are just loose in the waits and they hang lower on the waist.

danlpoon: No, actually in the 70s when I was playing with my Lite-Brite my father was wearing his ball-hugging bell bottoms. But, I'm sure you know what black people were doing, better than I.

Oh. Your black? I didn't pick up on that after the ten trillion times you said it. Sorry.

Plus if you want people to believe your black don't post memories of your father.
=====================================


Translation: I'm wrong and I gots nothing.

/still waiting for your source on the origin of baggy pants.
//what's the bibliography number for the crack of your ass?

UnkleKrakker: Perhaps you should pick up a book occasionally. There is a very strong definition in Sociology that OPPRESSION BASED ON racism is only able to be carried out by the dominant group. This would be called 'the big picture', so racism really can only be praticed by those in power.

FIFY

atate_esq: Well, technically a law can be discriminatory in its application, even if its wording is race neutral. For instance, all the laws which require a test to vote...at the time, the recently freed black community was significantly less likely to be able to pass a test to vote than the average white person. The result was that, in effect, the laws hurt blacks significantly more in their effect...even though the law mentioned race no where.

Don't really buy it here, but one could make the argument.

Ok, I guess what I meant was 'I don't understand how it's racially discriminitory'.

If it discriminates against anyone, it's people with poor fashion sense, plumbers, and John Goodman.

You're actually trying to compare big sunglasses to pants sagging below the ass?

One is a fashion statement, the other is inappropriate and offensive.

THIS

/offended by big sunglasses

seal614
I don't know what's more pathetic:

Arguing over the internet

or

Lame attempts at flirting over the internet with attention-whores

Lame attempts at flirting over the internet with attention-whores

still waiting for your source on the origin of baggy pants.

I made it up. Doy. Especially for you.

Coordman If it discriminates against anyone, it's people with poor fashion sense, plumbers, and John Goodman.

Oh wait, I hope he's not dead. That might have been too soon.

Uh, isn't the article about being at school, where they can say no hats, no eating, no swearing, etc. They certainly wouldn't let you walk around in just your underwear or a bra, so why is a different form of regulated dress such a bad thing? They ban t-shirts with naughty stuff on them, does that mean they are racist against douchey white guys? I think a few more rules at school could be a good thing. And whoever made that argument at the top that this would make blacks drop out at a faster rate, your retarded.