Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: qman] * 1
    #25925109 -

qman said:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Whites get treated better than blacks, on average.  What would YOU like to call that, if not "white privilege"?


https://www.thisisinsider.com/benefits-of-being-attractive-science-2018-12

It's an endless road to go down and really not worthy of discussion.


I don't dispute the benefits of being attractive from your article.  On the other hand XUL (and possibly yourself?) are disputing the benefits of being white.  That's the difference.

If you want to start a thread about the benefits of being attractive, I'll take your side and argue against anyone who claims there are no benefits (unless of course, they come up with scientific proof that being attractive doesn't matter).


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: XUL] * 1
    #25925117 -

XUL said:
It is a contradiction.

In one paragraph you call skin color pseudoscience. In the other paragraph you say that using skin color can be appropriate.

Let me guess, you are the arbiter of when it is appropriate to use skin color?


XUL.  In one paragraph he argued that "the racist skin-colour system is arbitrary pseudoscience that should be left behind in the past.

However, because of the fact that there still are racists in the world, there are times when "acknowledgement of skin colour is contextually appropriate".

Get it now?


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: XUL]
    #25925118 -

XUL said:
It is a contradiction.

In one paragraph you call skin color pseudoscience. In the other paragraph you say that using skin color can be appropriate.

Let me guess, you are the arbiter of when it is appropriate to use skin color?



That's the thing about leftists.

They bend their principles to fit the narrative, backtracking all over themselves.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25925119 -

Two can play this game



Whites are objectively the real people of color :biggrin:


--------------------
:thumbup: :thumbdown:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: XUL] * 2
    #25925148 -

The specific language was "the racist skin-colour system is arbitrary pseudoscience", and was in reference to the system of classification dividing humans into black/brown/red/yellow/white that was displayed in the OP. That system of skin-colour is pseudoscience.

On the other hand, skin tone is a physical human quality in the same way as eye colour, hair colour, height and weight are. We can describe any of these qualities without necessitating the existence of a caste-system based on these qualitie. 

For example, when I give friends tattoos, the tone of their skin is relevant to how different ink colours will appear, and acknowledging this is contextually appropriate. But, for the record, I would never consider any human skin to be a yellow skin tone unless they had jaundice. The association of yellow with Asian skin tone is strictly a by-product of the aforementioned racist skin-colour system.

Another instance of contextually appropriate use of skin-colour is, as I have explained further above, when discussing, describing, and critiquing the race-based caste-systems that presently exist.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25925163 -

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
qman said:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Whites get treated better than blacks, on average.  What would YOU like to call that, if not "white privilege"?


https://www.thisisinsider.com/benefits-of-being-attractive-science-2018-12

It's an endless road to go down and really not worthy of discussion.


I don't dispute the benefits of being attractive from your article.  On the other hand XUL (and possibly yourself?) are disputing the benefits of being white.  That's the difference.

If you want to start a thread about the benefits of being attractive, I'll take your side and argue against anyone who claims there are no benefits (unless of course, they come up with scientific proof that being attractive doesn't matter).


My point, there's potentially an endless list of "privileges" that may exist contingent upon the environment.

There's age, religion, gender, sexuality, citizenship status, economic status, health status and so many other factors that alter people's perception of an individual dependent on the environment.

To make generalizations on one type of potential "privilege" while simultaneously ignoring many other key factors that also play key roles is disingenuous. It's too complicated of a topic to constantly jump to just one type of "privilege" and make massive generalizations based on that assumption being universal in nature.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: qman]
    #25925171 -

[
qman said:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
qman said:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Whites get treated better than blacks, on average.  What would YOU like to call that, if not "white privilege"?


https://www.thisisinsider.com/benefits-of-being-attractive-science-2018-12

It's an endless road to go down and really not worthy of discussion.


I don't dispute the benefits of being attractive from your article.  On the other hand XUL (and possibly yourself?) are disputing the benefits of being white.  That's the difference.

If you want to start a thread about the benefits of being attractive, I'll take your side and argue against anyone who claims there are no benefits (unless of course, they come up with scientific proof that being attractive doesn't matter).


My point, there's potentially an endless list of "privileges" that may exist contingent upon the environment.

There's age, religion, gender, sexuality, citizenship status, economic status, health status and so many other factors that alter people's perception of an individual dependent on the environment.

To make generalizations on one type of potential "privilege" while simultaneously ignoring many other key factors that also play key roles is disingenuous. It's too complicated of a topic to constantly jump to just one type of "privilege" and make massive generalizations based on that assumption being universal in nature.


This.

Well said.

These are multifactorial issues.

Which brings me back to the racist tone of "white privilege."

Or "Yellow privilege."


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Edited by XUL (04/09/19 02:39 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25925186 -

You are flopping around like a fish grabbing at straws.

What you are saying in your, "in this situation, or that situation scenario" is that you see yourself as the moral arbiter of when mentioning skin color is okay.

I refute your position and disavow the term "white privilege" as a racist term that defines an entire swath of people by skin color.

The Dems have started an Anti-white movement. I hope you don't get swept up in that trash as it looks like you already have.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Edited by XUL (04/09/19 02:45 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: XUL] * 3
    #25925238 -

You still can’t imagine an alternative political ideology beyond the democrats’? Lmao.

Shiva, the anarchist leftist, disagreeing with me on issues? He must have been swept up and brainwashed by the Democratic Party.

:feelsbadman:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #25925240 -

True.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #25925243 -

There are but two teams: 1) Me, and 2) Everyone else.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: XUL] * 1
    #25925251 -

XUL, just answer the questions man, its not hard, they aren't complicated questions, can answer with yes or no if you want to. Just simple questions.

And are you implying that either of these are OK?

Do you support white Christians persecuting Muslims?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: Holybullshit]
    #25925256 -

You accused me of using right wing propaganda outlets for reference, but my reference was Wikipedia.

I'm still waiting for you to explain that one to me.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: XUL] * 2
    #25925261 -

XUL said:
What you are saying in your, "in this situation, or that situation scenario" is that you see yourself as the moral arbiter of when mentioning skin color is okay.


There's no moral ambiguity here. We can describe any physical quality without necessitating the existence of a caste-system based on those qualities; but yellow skin-tone is not a physical quality of any human, Asian or otherwise (unless they have jaundice), and as such the use of such language only exists within the structure of the aforementioned racist caste-system.

From the perspective of a tatooist, instead of seeing skin tones divided into five distinct colour groups I see a spectrum running from dark to light. I'm still acknowledging skin-tone, but I'm not turning this observation of one quality into a race-based caste-system. Do you see the difference now?

If you would prefer a hard rule: any statements, beliefs, or practices (based on skin-tone) that are claimed to be both scientific and factual, but are incompatible with the scientific method, should be considered pseudoscience and left in the past.

Do you agree or disagree with this rule?

Using this rule, we can see how your use of yellow would be considered pseudoscience, whereas my awareness of skin-tone while tattooing isn't. No moral ambiguity at all.



XUL said:
I refute your position and disavow the term "white privilege" as a racist term that defines an entire swath of people by skin color.


Once again, "refute" and "disavow" are not magic words. You can't just say it and then it's so; you need to provide an actual argument or else it's the intellectual equivalent of closing your eyes, plugging your ears, and going "nah nah nah nah nah".



XUL said:
The Dems have started an Anti-white movement. I hope you don't get swept up in that trash as it looks like you already have.


I don't live in the USA and couldn't give less of a shit for your Republican/Democrat sideshow, but clearly you've been swept up in that trash.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25925266 -

My Korean roommates would have begged to differ.

I never heard of yellow skin until them.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Edited by XUL (04/09/19 03:31 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: XUL] * 1
    #25925272 -

XUL said:
My Korean roommates would beg to differ.

I never heard of yellow skin until them.


That's because everyone, but you apparently, knows that it is a slur and not appropriate to say.

XUL said:
Before I answer your questions, I have to address your accusation of Wikipedia being right wing.

Where do I get my news?

The OP lists Wikipedia.

Is Wikipedia right wing?


Then why don't you know that people on the left have been condemning the genocide in Myanmar for a while now?

And what does me explaining Wikipedia have to do with you dodging the question? Seriously, answer them, you want me to say Wikipedia isn't right wing for you to answer the questions? For one, anybody can add stuff to Wikipedia...it's not a news source, it doesn't offer analysis, it's an encyclopedia, when talking about Myanmar its narrative is written from a neutral, objective, point of view it neither condemns nor supports nor does it even mention others feeling on the subject....but OK its not right wing...now answer the questions.

For the third time,

Are you implying that either of these are OK?

And, do you support white Christians persecuting Muslims?

Edited by Holybullshit (04/10/19 01:43 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25925276 -

Lastly, those aren't magic words.

They are indicators that I will only agree to disagree with you.


Anyways, the poll favors both scenarios.

80% think that racism/bigotry has nothing to do with opposing Muslims/islam.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: qman]
    #25925282 -

qman said:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I don't dispute the benefits of being attractive from your article.  On the other hand XUL (and possibly yourself?) are disputing the benefits of being white.  That's the difference.

If you want to start a thread about the benefits of being attractive, I'll take your side and argue against anyone who claims there are no benefits (unless of course, they come up with scientific proof that being attractive doesn't matter).


My point, there's potentially an endless list of "privileges" that may exist contingent upon the environment.

There's age, religion, gender, sexuality, citizenship status, economic status, health status and so many other factors that alter people's perception of an individual dependent on the environment.


Agreed.  All of these are valid privileges, but XUL denies the existence of white privilege for some reason.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: XUL] * 1
    #25925284 -

Why won't your answer?

Are you implying that either of these are OK?

And, do you support white Christians persecuting Muslims?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Yellow Supremacy in Burma [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25925288 -

Actually, I said it was multifactorial, which means the word 'white' should be removed from the term.

How about just "privilege?"

Or is skin color a requirement?


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Should Relief be Provided in Burma Against Gov't Wishes?
( 1 2 all )		 Madtowntripper 2,422 39 05/16/08 02:41 AM
by MushmanTheManic
* Don't import things made from Burma, it's the law. sir tripsalot 690 3 03/23/04 03:26 PM
by DoctorJ
* Saddam's nuclear arsenal? A scattering of yellow powder wingnutx 449 0 10/04/03 11:47 PM
by wingnutx
* The US Government and the 60s counterculture
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 it stars saddam 10,038 148 01/04/09 07:51 AM
by it stars saddam
* The Democrats did 911
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Luddite 5,154 83 12/30/08 11:55 AM
by Phred
* Persecuting the sick and disabled
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )		 Alex213 8,957 178 02/06/06 08:24 PM
by MisterMyco
* CEOs now make 431 times more than workers
( 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )		 carbonhoots 8,908 207 01/29/06 06:21 PM
by Falcon91Wolvrn03
* Korea launched the missile
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 Cubie 4,573 113 04/13/09 01:38 PM
by Falcon91Wolvrn03

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
3,277 topic views. 1 members, 399 guests and 13 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.036 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.