Besides, don't be hating The Roots or Jay-Z. Dey owns choo!
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon/smile.gif)
Moderators: Freakzilla, ᴶᵛᵀᴬ, Omphalos
no questionA Thing of Eternity wrote:I'm not slagging the intelligent stuff, or the originals like Public Enemy. It's the retarded stuff that's nothing but slang and talking about how great and violent the artist is and that his women are whores. That definitly contributes to negative perceptions of black americans.
SwordMaster wrote:no questionA Thing of Eternity wrote:I'm not slagging the intelligent stuff, or the originals like Public Enemy. It's the retarded stuff that's nothing but slang and talking about how great and violent the artist is and that his women are whores. That definitly contributes to negative perceptions of black americans.
Im always having difficulty to figure out the girls vs. guys. Something about girls who are less then consevative makes me all interested. I read a blog by a girl who calls her self "slut machine" I love her wacky tales of random stranger sex and what not.Mr. Teg wrote:Down boy!SwordMaster wrote:Is Schu a girl?
Resheath your sword, sword master!
No its just funny cause they called you slut that is more of a girls name, but if your a man slut then I get it. So man slut how many a lady have you rolled around with? Are we talking 10? 20? 50?Schu wrote:Isn't "picky slut" kinda an oxymoron?
Yeah, I'm a guy. I'd suggest if you want to find girls with a liberal attitude towards sex, join a choir, if possible a university choir. You'll get the conservative types, the shy types and all that, but it seems that the world over, a lot of choir girls are rather fun
Thanks for filling me in, you can flirt with me if you want, Im good with it, my friend is still trying to convince me to "give it a try:Schu wrote:Hmmm... broken hearts? Only one or two misguided guys. Not that I have anything against them, but my standards for guys are very high, and they didn't make the cut.
I mainly flirt because, yes, there are a couple of in-jokes sorta ish. In fact, I think they started back on dunenovels.
I absolutely agree. I hate camp accents and mannerisms and have no idea why that would turn anyone on. But it's just another of the many things that irritate me. I usually figure that people that adopt camp mannerisms like that are probably making too big a show of their sexuality deliberately, and are posturing just a little. Some people seem to just grow up with them though, so who knows.Ampoliros wrote:my bigotry admission is absofuckinglutly hating the 'gay accent' and haughty attitude/culture that is adopted by some homosexuals. That should be criminal.
I don't agree with that. How can a group be held responsible for the actions of its ancestors? And if they're not being held responsible for the actions of their ancestors, then they have no responsibility to make up for the mistakes of those ancestors.SwordMaster wrote:You make some good points although I have difficulty co-signing to this, I am one who feels that to some extent, we do have to make up for the mistakes of our ancesters... how we do that is another matter all together!?!Freakzilla wrote:I think the problem in the US (especially the South) is that for the most part, white people are not racist, yet black people, who have never been slaves, have been born in this country with MORE RIGHTS than white people, keep rubbing out noses in what happened 400 years ago.
Freeman is right. If they stopped playing the race card at every possible turn, it might go a long way towards healing.
But therein lies another problem. Black people don't seem to want to be equal. I think they like it the way it is. They get special treatment, why would they want that to stop? They WANT to be different. If they didn't, they wouldn't call themselves "african-americans", but just Americans. Why give up thier trump card?
I'm proud of my heritage (to the disdain of black people) but I don't call myself european-american.
Now, if I found myself in Africa, I would do my best to fit in, but that doesn't mean I have to forget my heritage.
Even if Freak's ancestors were rich enough to own slaves, that doesn't mean Freak bears any responsibility for what happened in the past.SandRider wrote:I'll take issue with your "none of my ancestors were slave-holders" comment, Freak.
If your family is from the South, prior to The War, and not immigrants from after,
the chances of slave-holding is extremely high. Southern slavery did not just take
place in huge numbers on big Tara-like plantations. (There were actually very few
large plantations under one control as is currently believed or depicted in movies)
Most cotton production was done on small to medium family farms, brothers and
uncles and cousins working adjacent lands and often pooling their small slave force.
The true face of slavery in the South was not one big Master with hundreds of slaves,
but hundreds of ordinary citizens with one to three slaves each.
I take issue with your statement because I hear it all the time.
"I don't owe them nothin' - my people were too poor to own slaves".
Unless you can prove to me thru genealogical research that this is true, the numbers
are against that statement. People have forgotten or were not taught just how rich
and prosperous the South in general was before the War. We didn't turn into poor
white bare-footed trash until after the War.
Absolutely not. There should be no such thing as racial shame, and people who feel they should be ashamed because they happen to have the same skin colour as centuries-dead slave owners are prolonging division, not helping to bring at end to racial tension.A Thing of Eternity wrote:I'd have to say that it's kind of a moot point IMO, unless FZ ever owned his own slave then I don't think he has to feel personally guilty about slavery, other than maybe a broad sense of racial (by race I mean human here) guilt/shame, such as feeling a bit guilt to belong to the same race that did that kind of garbage. (Just like one might feel somewhat guilty/shamed for all kinds of shitty things humans have done in the past).SandRider wrote:I'll take issue with your "none of my ancestors were slave-holders" comment, Freak.
If your family is from the South, prior to The War, and not immigrants from after,
the chances of slave-holding is extremely high. Southern slavery did not just take
place in huge numbers on big Tara-like plantations. (There were actually very few
large plantations under one control as is currently believed or depicted in movies)
Most cotton production was done on small to medium family farms, brothers and
uncles and cousins working adjacent lands and often pooling their small slave force.
The true face of slavery in the South was not one big Master with hundreds of slaves,
but hundreds of ordinary citizens with one to three slaves each.
I take issue with your statement because I hear it all the time.
"I don't owe them nothin' - my people were too poor to own slaves".
Unless you can prove to me thru genealogical research that this is true, the numbers
are against that statement. People have forgotten or were not taught just how rich
and prosperous the South in general was before the War. We didn't turn into poor
white bare-footed trash until after the War.