Ta da again!
Racism unique to only Iowa within the college ranks?
- Thread starter hawkinarkansas
- Start date
- Status
Bigtenchamp
Well-Known Member
So you agree with more explanation that it was racist?
Let me answer for you.. because I already know what you are going to say.
You don't
So get the out of here with the "Ta da" bullshit lol
I know Hawkgold's post history so I know he would assume something was racist right away and close down any other possibility. If what he said is true that she is a good girl who comes from a really good family, then that's definitely more damning towards racism. But that is still nowhere near enough info to assume its without a doubt racism. In still stuck on the part where he knows that's the only jaywalking ticket issued in the history of a town. That's either some serious investigation or compete BS to start a story.
Do you agree that questions need to be asked before assuming an act is racist?
I'm not sure what you are asking, but if you are asking if I need more proof that it was indeed racist motivated, then yes I absolutely do.
I'm not saying it was or wasn't. He said he knows the family, knows the girl. Does he know the police officer? Does he have issues with the police either personally or in general? He has heard the families side it would appear, has he talked to the officer and heard his side?
If not then is he not forming an opinion/ judgement based in bias? Is that fair? Is that not claiming biased/racism based on an opinion that is uninformed and rooted in bias?
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
Or, they could walk through a neighborhood dominated by poverty and all white with the results you expect.
Bigtenchamp
Well-Known Member
Like when black people couldn't walk through any white neighborhoods for a majority of history? Even today it still happens sometimes.
But I'm forgetting racism is a myth
A broke black man would fair better in said neighborhood than a wealthy well dressed Porsche driving, white man would. That's the difference.
I wasn't even there. Why you blaming me for the past? How can you live in the now and move forward when you are stuck in the past?
I could expand on your thought process and ask do you blame your wife or husband for what your ex did? Do you sit around and think all the time about how that first love broke your heart and let it rule over your life today?
Bigtenchamp
Well-Known Member
anyways this thread is aa waste of
That's what you got out of that? lol
Blaming you for the past no.. blaming you for the present? maybe the more you open your mouth.
But this thread is a waste of time anyway... off I go.
That's what you got out of that? lol
Blaming you for the past no.. blaming you for the present? maybe the more you open your mouth.
But this thread is a waste of time anyway... off I go.
Do you think I think racism is a myth? I feel like I've been pretty vocal that it exists as a 2 way street and steps need to be taken to bring us closer together. Not to drive us further apart.
Well do not Native Americans have a big complaint about the past too? What about Scotland and Ireland don't they have a complaint about the past too? What about Israel, they probably have the biggest complaint of anyone in modern history.
Or are we ignoring all that and everyone else because it doesn't fit your agenda?
RobHowe
Administrator
Fryowa
Administrator
What about child abuse?
What about human trafficking?
What about genocide in Africa?
What about radical Muslim oppression of women?
What about millions of other problems in the world?
See where the logical flaw is? Where do you stop?
Do you say F everything if we can't fix them all at the same time? Because you can't. There will literally always be what abouts. And because there will always be what abouts, saying "what about" is an excuse and distraction from a problem that's front and center. A bad excuse.
Because it doesn't fit your agenda. You think your problem should be front and center. You can't put yourself in their situation and understand their plight. Yet you are going to talk in a condescending way, call other people names? Yet ask others to see your opinion and plight. Not call you names? If that isn't biased I don't know what is.
For days I have been trying to explain that everyone has a bitch. I have been trying to explain that you can't have a conversation if the other person never gets to talk. You can't ask someone else to understand your bitch if you can't understand theirs. you can't make an unbiased educated decision without all the facts from both sides. Because that is not fair. That is unjust. That is selfish. That is biased.
You can't ask that your plight takes front and center and that your opinion carries more weight. Otherwise you are a tyrant. You are discriminating against everyone else and their plight by thinking that yours should be front and center or more important.
If you want I can take out the what about and replace it with can't you see and understand.
I didn't realize we were still in chapter 1.
For days I have been trying to explain that everyone has a bitch. I have been trying to explain that you can't have a conversation if the other person never gets to talk. You can't ask someone else to understand your bitch if you can't understand theirs. you can't make an unbiased educated decision without all the facts from both sides. Because that is not fair. That is unjust. That is selfish. That is biased.
You can't ask that your plight takes front and center and that your opinion carries more weight. Otherwise you are a tyrant. You are discriminating against everyone else and their plight by thinking that yours should be front and center or more important.
If you want I can take out the what about and replace it with can't you see and understand.
I didn't realize we were still in chapter 1.
Last edited:
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
You know this site is about Iowa Sports. The others don't relate, though we have discussed child abuse some including the barnstormers and some of us recognizing Iowa's abuses through the lenses of our own past. You could make a case that abortion has decreased the pool of athletes and fans which create less $$$$ for Iowa sports. Black's are aborted at a higher rate than white, so maybe that is why there aren't enough here (last comment sarcasm to your sarcasm).
Fryowa
Administrator
At the expense of minimizing (intentionally or not) another group's problems.
You're essentially saying, "There's a whole lot of problems in the world, so why are we making such a big huge deal out of this one?"
People have tried to explain it to you with logic and reason, and some of them have even been polite, but at the end of the day some people are just too fuckin dense to pick up on things.
It's ok. I'm an idiot too so don't feel bad.
Whataboutism is a way to try to get people to understand there is not some unique problem between white and black people in an attempt to de-escalate the growing divide that is clearly happening over the last few years. You say it's a way to deflect a problem at hand. I say its away to try to put out a fire other people have started and are adding gasoline to to create a bigger divide.
Fry you and I see a lot of things in similar ways. The way you make points leads me to believe we kinda use the same logic on stuff, so you seem like a good person to ask. Do you think this movement created by the left is bringing blacks and whites closer together or driving a bigger wedge between them?
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
PC and 4th
Both of you are expressing a lot of frustration about how racism is defined and what appears to be constantly moving goal posts. I'd like to think your attempts at open discussion are genuine efforts at growth, but I guess time will tell.
I'm no expert on the subject, but my take is that some people grasp onto situations where the accusation of racism probably wasn't appropriate to the point where they blind themselves to the reality that is racism as a whole. They then use those examples as the "whataboutisms" to which Rob is referring.
Yes, occasionally minorities will scream racism when the situation probably doesn't warrant it, or they'll play the "race card" out of frustration or convenience, or they'll blame racism on just about everything negative in their lives, etc., etc. We've all seen it, and it's both sad and frustrating at the same time, especially when you consider that those situations ultimately are counter-productive to the cause.
Case in point: O.J. Simpson. Coming off the emotional turmoil surrounding the Rodney King situation, his legal team effectively used his race as a way to get an acquittal. Johnny Cochran even had his residence renovated to make him look more "black" to the jury. The strategy obviously was extremely effective. Most African-Americans deep down knew he was guilty, but applauded his acquittal as a blow to what they deemed an historically unjust judicial system.
The point is that it's okay to see these inconsistencies and call them out, as long as you don't use them to blind yourself to the truth about racism, or try to hide behind them as a covert way to cover up true racist attitudes.
Both of you are expressing a lot of frustration about how racism is defined and what appears to be constantly moving goal posts. I'd like to think your attempts at open discussion are genuine efforts at growth, but I guess time will tell.
I'm no expert on the subject, but my take is that some people grasp onto situations where the accusation of racism probably wasn't appropriate to the point where they blind themselves to the reality that is racism as a whole. They then use those examples as the "whataboutisms" to which Rob is referring.
Yes, occasionally minorities will scream racism when the situation probably doesn't warrant it, or they'll play the "race card" out of frustration or convenience, or they'll blame racism on just about everything negative in their lives, etc., etc. We've all seen it, and it's both sad and frustrating at the same time, especially when you consider that those situations ultimately are counter-productive to the cause.
Case in point: O.J. Simpson. Coming off the emotional turmoil surrounding the Rodney King situation, his legal team effectively used his race as a way to get an acquittal. Johnny Cochran even had his residence renovated to make him look more "black" to the jury. The strategy obviously was extremely effective. Most African-Americans deep down knew he was guilty, but applauded his acquittal as a blow to what they deemed an historically unjust judicial system.
The point is that it's okay to see these inconsistencies and call them out, as long as you don't use them to blind yourself to the truth about racism, or try to hide behind them as a covert way to cover up true racist attitudes.
You assume that I don't see the problem. I'm saying everyone has problems.
To me this may as well be an argument about religion, with many facets and many good points. I'm not making it black and white, others are trying to do that. I'm coloring with all the crayons.
Because when you do, you get a much more detailed picture.
If I can not justify one bitch, I can not justify any. If I can't see validity in one side I cannot see it in the other. Otherwise there would be no debate, there would be no argument. You really can't argue that water is wet. There is no validity at all to the other side of that argument. You must be able to see all sides. I think you will find that when you can it becomes more simplified and not more complex. You will find that people, all people are more alike than different.
If it's true in the micro, it's true in the macro and vise versa. Anything else is unfair and unjust.
Do you understand the importance of that?
It means that what is inside you, you project outward. You are the micro, the world is the macro. Be honest and just with yourself and you will be honest and just with the world. Be objective with yourself and you will be objective with the world. It's not easy, because as I said, the human brain is designed to go to great lengths to not admit that it is wrong.
Last edited:
- Status
