Discussion:
Uncle Ben's considering new 'visual identity' for products amid Aunt Jemima rebranding
Add Reply
Johnny
2020-06-17 20:44:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
By Alexandra Deabler
Published 3 hours ago

Uncle Ben’s rice may be getting a new logo after Quaker Foods announced
it would be changing the name and image on its Aunt Jemima brand in a
bid to “make progress toward racial equality.”

Mars Inc., which owns Uncle Ben’s, told Fox News on Wednesday that it
was looking into updating the rice brand’s image.

“As a global brand, we know we have a responsibility to take a stand in
helping to put an end to racial bias and injustices,” a spokesperson
for Mars, Inc., said in an emailed statement to Fox News.

https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/uncle-bens-rice-logo-changing-aunt-jemima-rebranding

What next, Quaker Oatmeal and Grits?
El Castor
2020-06-18 06:05:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Johnny
By Alexandra Deabler
Published 3 hours ago
Uncle Ben’s rice may be getting a new logo after Quaker Foods announced
it would be changing the name and image on its Aunt Jemima brand in a
bid to “make progress toward racial equality.”
Mars Inc., which owns Uncle Ben’s, told Fox News on Wednesday that it
was looking into updating the rice brand’s image.
“As a global brand, we know we have a responsibility to take a stand in
helping to put an end to racial bias and injustices,” a spokesperson
for Mars, Inc., said in an emailed statement to Fox News.
https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/uncle-bens-rice-logo-changing-aunt-jemima-rebranding
What next, Quaker Oatmeal and Grits?
For those who haven't tried it, Uncl Ben's has several different rices
and rice flavors in mcrowaveable packages. Very credible steaming hot
plain Brown Rice, enough for at least two, in 90 seconds. No more
simmering for 45 minutes! Hurray!
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-18 15:43:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 6/17/2020 11:05 PM, El Castor wrote:

{snip}
Post by El Castor
For those who haven't tried it, Uncl Ben's has several different rices
and rice flavors in mcrowaveable packages. Very credible steaming hot
plain Brown Rice, enough for at least two, in 90 seconds. No more
simmering for 45 minutes! Hurray!
I like those microwaveable cups. But, a rice cooker is nice too. It
takes only about 5 minutes (perhaps 6 or 7 for brown rice).
El Castor
2020-06-18 16:34:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 08:43:45 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by El Castor
For those who haven't tried it, Uncl Ben's has several different rices
and rice flavors in mcrowaveable packages. Very credible steaming hot
plain Brown Rice, enough for at least two, in 90 seconds. No more
simmering for 45 minutes! Hurray!
I like those microwaveable cups. But, a rice cooker is nice too. It
takes only about 5 minutes (perhaps 6 or 7 for brown rice).
This isn't a cup, more like an envelope. Tear off a corner to allow
steam to escape. 90 seconds in a microwave - done. For health reasons
my preference has always been for brown rice, and this couldn't be
better or easier.
https://www.unclebens.com/rice-products/ready-rice/whole-grain-brown
b***@gmail.com
2020-06-18 16:46:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I like fried rice done in a wok. Cook the white rice first and cool it and then fry in the wok along with a scrambled egg, peas, carrots, green onions, shrimp and Napa cabbage. 7
El Castor
2020-06-18 19:09:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
I like fried rice done in a wok. Cook the white rice first and cool it and then fry in the wok along with a scrambled egg, peas, carrots, green onions, shrimp and Napa cabbage. 7
Sounds good. Several years ago my A1c (blood sugar) got up into the
pre-diabetic range. Since then I cut back on the sugar & sweets and
everything is whole grain, rice included. A1c back to normal. (-8
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-19 01:20:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Johnny
By Alexandra Deabler
Published 3 hours ago
Uncle Ben’s rice may be getting a new logo after Quaker Foods announced
it would be changing the name and image on its Aunt Jemima brand in a
bid to “make progress toward racial equality.”
Mars Inc., which owns Uncle Ben’s, told Fox News on Wednesday that it
was looking into updating the rice brand’s image.
“As a global brand, we know we have a responsibility to take a stand in
helping to put an end to racial bias and injustices,” a spokesperson
for Mars, Inc., said in an emailed statement to Fox News.
https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/uncle-bens-rice-logo-changing-aunt-jemima-rebranding
What next, Quaker Oatmeal and Grits?
It seems there are some seeking to undermine contributions made by
African-Americans and native Americans. If they want to do it they
will probably live to regret it and blame white people.
People should be proud of their heritage. I found nothing offensive
by the Land O Lakes native woman that was removed. It is sad. They
should be proud.
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman? I like those brands.
What about Tony Roma? is he next? Why should anyone associate good
barbque with a black guy? Duh. They are being fools, trying to erase their heritage.

You know after Scotland fell under the British crown, bagpipes, kilts,
and even the language were outlawed. I am so glad scottish people are
proud of their heritage as am I.
Johnny
2020-06-19 12:41:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 18:20:44 -0700 (PDT)
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Johnny
By Alexandra Deabler
Published 3 hours ago
Uncle Ben’s rice may be getting a new logo after Quaker Foods
announced it would be changing the name and image on its Aunt
Jemima brand in a bid to “make progress toward racial equality.”
Mars Inc., which owns Uncle Ben’s, told Fox News on Wednesday that
it was looking into updating the rice brand’s image.
“As a global brand, we know we have a responsibility to take a
stand in helping to put an end to racial bias and injustices,” a
spokesperson for Mars, Inc., said in an emailed statement to Fox
News.
https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/uncle-bens-rice-logo-changing-aunt-jemima-rebranding
What next, Quaker Oatmeal and Grits?
It seems there are some seeking to undermine contributions made by
African-Americans and native Americans. If they want to do it they
will probably live to regret it and blame white people.
People should be proud of their heritage. I found nothing offensive
by the Land O Lakes native woman that was removed. It is sad. They
should be proud.
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman? I like those brands.
What about Tony Roma? is he next? Why should anyone associate good
barbque with a black guy? Duh. They are being fools, trying to erase their heritage.
You know after Scotland fell under the British crown, bagpipes,
kilts, and even the language were outlawed. I am so glad scottish
people are proud of their heritage as am I.
I agree.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-19 15:06:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 6/18/2020 6:20 PM, ***@my-deja.com wrote:

{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
El Castor
2020-06-19 17:13:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
Loading Image...

Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
Johnny
2020-06-19 17:37:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 10:13:01 -0700
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
They look fine to me. The only problem the liberals have is they are
black.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-19 22:19:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?

As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
El Castor
2020-06-20 05:42:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:19:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?
As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
Oh? That's very helpful. What is there about their images that gives
them away to your keen eye?
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-20 17:28:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:19:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?
As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
Oh? That's very helpful. What is there about their images that gives
them away to your keen eye?
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/

The modern makeover to a maid does not justify keeping the brand.

Uncle Ben:
https://purpleclover.littlethings.com/lifestyle/6214-real-or-fake/item/uncle_ben-3/

Uncle Tom:
http://www.loyalbooks.com/book/uncle-toms-cabin-by-harriet-beecher-stowe

They are both distinguished, kindly Uncles.
El Castor
2020-06-20 17:40:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 10:28:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:19:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?
As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
Oh? That's very helpful. What is there about their images that gives
them away to your keen eye?
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
The modern makeover to a maid does not justify keeping the brand.
https://purpleclover.littlethings.com/lifestyle/6214-real-or-fake/item/uncle_ben-3/
http://www.loyalbooks.com/book/uncle-toms-cabin-by-harriet-beecher-stowe
They are both distinguished, kindly Uncles.
Oh. Kindly Uncles. Pretty awful I suppose. Would Brother or Sister
have worked for you?

BTW -- I see that statues of Ulysses S Grant and Francis Scott Key
were just torn down by the minions of the Left. Does that seem
appropriate to you?
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-20 18:22:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 10:28:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:19:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?
As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
Oh? That's very helpful. What is there about their images that gives
them away to your keen eye?
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
The modern makeover to a maid does not justify keeping the brand.
https://purpleclover.littlethings.com/lifestyle/6214-real-or-fake/item/uncle_ben-3/
http://www.loyalbooks.com/book/uncle-toms-cabin-by-harriet-beecher-stowe
They are both distinguished, kindly Uncles.
Oh. Kindly Uncles. Pretty awful I suppose. Would Brother or Sister
have worked for you?
Maybe. Are you that ignorant of Uncle Tom?
Post by El Castor
BTW -- I see that statues of Ulysses S Grant and Francis Scott Key
were just torn down by the minions of the Left. Does that seem
appropriate to you?
No.
El Castor
2020-06-20 19:11:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 11:22:01 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 10:28:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:19:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?
As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
Oh? That's very helpful. What is there about their images that gives
them away to your keen eye?
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
The modern makeover to a maid does not justify keeping the brand.
https://purpleclover.littlethings.com/lifestyle/6214-real-or-fake/item/uncle_ben-3/
http://www.loyalbooks.com/book/uncle-toms-cabin-by-harriet-beecher-stowe
They are both distinguished, kindly Uncles.
Oh. Kindly Uncles. Pretty awful I suppose. Would Brother or Sister
have worked for you?
Maybe. Are you that ignorant of Uncle Tom?
Ancient history, over and done with. If we go back far enough, every
person on the planet has a slave or slave owner in their ancestry. As
we speak there are more than 9 million slaves in Africa. India, China,
Pakistan, they all have millions of literal slaves, and that just
scratches the surface. Do those idiots tearing down Jefferson's statue
or demanding that Sir Francis Drake Blvd be renamed Tupac Shakur, know
or care about India or Africa?

Those same idiots don't hesitate to tear down statues of Thomas
Jefferson, but ...
"In 1806, Jefferson denounced the international slave trade and called
for a law to make it a crime. He told Congress in his 1806 annual
message, such a law was needed to "withdraw the citizens of the United
States from all further participation in those violations of human
rights ... which the morality, the reputation, and the best interests
of our country have long been eager to proscribe." Congress complied
and on March 2, 1807, Jefferson signed the Act Prohibiting Importation
of Slaves into law; it took effect 1 January 1808 and made it a
federal crime to import or export slaves from abroad."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_slavery

Those Lefties who are so anxious to tear down statues and spit on the
graves of the Founding Fathers are really intent on tearing down our
social and political system and replacing it with their Marxist
paradise.
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
BTW -- I see that statues of Ulysses S Grant and Francis Scott Key
were just torn down by the minions of the Left. Does that seem
appropriate to you?
No.
Gary
2020-06-20 21:12:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 11:22:01 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 10:28:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:19:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?
As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
Oh? That's very helpful. What is there about their images that gives
them away to your keen eye?
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
The modern makeover to a maid does not justify keeping the brand.
https://purpleclover.littlethings.com/lifestyle/6214-real-or-fake/item/uncle_ben-3/
http://www.loyalbooks.com/book/uncle-toms-cabin-by-harriet-beecher-stowe
They are both distinguished, kindly Uncles.
Oh. Kindly Uncles. Pretty awful I suppose. Would Brother or Sister
have worked for you?
Maybe. Are you that ignorant of Uncle Tom?
In 2009, I gave some thought to referring to Obama as "Uncle Barry"
-- but it seemed to give him a little more respect than he deserved.
"Boy" suited him better.
Johnny
2020-06-20 17:42:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 10:28:23 -0700
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:19:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with
good food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt
and Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?
As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
Oh? That's very helpful. What is there about their images that gives
them away to your keen eye?
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
The modern makeover to a maid does not justify keeping the brand.
That's amazing, you can tell she's a maid by that picture?
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
https://purpleclover.littlethings.com/lifestyle/6214-real-or-fake/item/uncle_ben-3/
http://www.loyalbooks.com/book/uncle-toms-cabin-by-harriet-beecher-stowe
They are both distinguished, kindly Uncles.
You need to see a psychiatrist.

Would you be satisfied it they just called it Ben's rice? I doubt it.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-20 18:24:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 10:28:23 -0700
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:19:23 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with
good food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt
and Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
How about we ask black people since they are beholder who counts?
As for me, they are Mammy and Uncle Tom stereotypes.
Oh? That's very helpful. What is there about their images that gives
them away to your keen eye?
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
The modern makeover to a maid does not justify keeping the brand.
That's amazing, you can tell she's a maid by that picture?
It's explained in my link.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-21 01:50:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:06:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
Take a look ...
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/6252130_061720-cc-shutterstock-aunt-jemima-uncle-bens-img.jpg?w=1600
Gross Caricatures? Negative Stereotypes? They both look like fine
people to me. Perhaps the problem is in the eye of the beholder?
+1 Beav
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-21 01:53:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-21 03:07:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
El Castor
2020-06-21 05:23:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 20:07:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
Sadlly, lots of White people waste their time tearing down the history
that belongs to all of us, looting stores, blocking streets, attacking
police, and fretting over rice labels when they should be thinking of
ways to help their fellow Black citizens find jobs and restore the
Black family that their foolish misguided policies destroyed.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-21 14:14:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
What I see today is seemingly intelligent people becoming stupid.
Excusing criminal actions because of the way someone feels.
What they don't understand is that no amount of "social engineering"
is going to change the way people feel. This will never end.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-21 15:40:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
What I see today is seemingly intelligent people becoming stupid.
Excusing criminal actions because of the way someone feels.
What they don't understand is that no amount of "social engineering"
is going to change the way people feel. This will never end.
Gary
2020-06-21 15:59:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 08:40:01 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
Not at all. They simply let us know we were talking the house help,
and not to Mother or Father or any of their brothers or sisters.
Then ... if we needed some help from the cotton field -- we called for
"Hey, Rastus!"

I met a lot of Rastuses when visiting my grandparent's Alabama farm.
El Castor
2020-06-21 16:28:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gary
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 08:40:01 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
Not at all. They simply let us know we were talking the house help,
and not to Mother or Father or any of their brothers or sisters.
Then ... if we needed some help from the cotton field -- we called for
"Hey, Rastus!"
I met a lot of Rastuses when visiting my grandparent's Alabama farm.
I met (for the first time) a lot of southerners in the navy. One
particularly nice guy intended to return to Alabama and get into the
chicken business. As he described it, a series of long chicken barns
with a small house at the end of each. The house would be for a Black
family that would tend to the barn. No idea if he ever achieved his
dream, but I hope he did.
El Castor
2020-06-21 16:15:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 08:40:01 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
What I see today is seemingly intelligent people becoming stupid.
Excusing criminal actions because of the way someone feels.
What they don't understand is that no amount of "social engineering"
is going to change the way people feel. This will never end.
A portrayal of benevolent kindly people in a world in which racial
hatred is being encouraged.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-21 23:50:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters. That is what is happening. And people are going along with it.
I guess any portrayal of a white southern man of a 150 is
to be stretched to be the evil massa.
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
What I see today is seemingly intelligent people becoming stupid.
Excusing criminal actions because of the way someone feels.
What they don't understand is that no amount of "social engineering"
is going to change the way people feel. This will never end.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-22 00:14:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.

https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
El Castor
2020-06-22 06:38:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any other
meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire to stir
up racial animosity. What, else is the purpose of the Left's identity
politics if not to exploit and encourage racial division in a time
when we should be uniting as Americans. Be careful, the Left's work to
exploit race plays right into Trump's hands. He will use the same
tactics to unite White's, and others, against you identity mongers.

A Harvard Asian on the subject of identity politics ...
"Identity politics makes people feel better about themselves at the
expense of productive discourse. A person’s lived experience should
never be invalidated. But no identity makes the beliefs that someone
derives from their lived experience automatically more correct. This
is not just a logical fallacy that should be avoided on principle. In
practice, it is actually a hindrance to persuading others. In a time
of such polarization, identity politics makes us close ranks with the
like-minded when we need to reach out."
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/1/24/gao-identity-politics/

"Protesters marking Juneteenth on Friday in Golden Gate Park toppled
and defaced several statues, including one of Union Gen. Ulysses S.
Grant, KPIX reports."
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article243696912.html

Others defaced and destroyed included Father Junipero Serra, Francis
Scott Key, and Miguel de Cervantes, the author of Don Quixote. By all
means keep moaning about Uncle Ben, tearing down statues, and
demanding that the police be defunded. You aren't winning many
friends, but you are energizing a lot of enemies.
islander
2020-06-22 14:12:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any other
meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire to stir
up racial animosity. What, else is the purpose of the Left's identity
politics if not to exploit and encourage racial division in a time
when we should be uniting as Americans. Be careful, the Left's work to
exploit race plays right into Trump's hands. He will use the same
tactics to unite White's, and others, against you identity mongers.
A Harvard Asian on the subject of identity politics ...
"Identity politics makes people feel better about themselves at the
expense of productive discourse. A person’s lived experience should
never be invalidated. But no identity makes the beliefs that someone
derives from their lived experience automatically more correct. This
is not just a logical fallacy that should be avoided on principle. In
practice, it is actually a hindrance to persuading others. In a time
of such polarization, identity politics makes us close ranks with the
like-minded when we need to reach out."
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/1/24/gao-identity-politics/
"Protesters marking Juneteenth on Friday in Golden Gate Park toppled
and defaced several statues, including one of Union Gen. Ulysses S.
Grant, KPIX reports."
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article243696912.html
Others defaced and destroyed included Father Junipero Serra, Francis
Scott Key, and Miguel de Cervantes, the author of Don Quixote. By all
means keep moaning about Uncle Ben, tearing down statues, and
demanding that the police be defunded. You aren't winning many
friends, but you are energizing a lot of enemies.
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
El Castor
2020-06-22 15:50:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any other
meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire to stir
up racial animosity. What, else is the purpose of the Left's identity
politics if not to exploit and encourage racial division in a time
when we should be uniting as Americans. Be careful, the Left's work to
exploit race plays right into Trump's hands. He will use the same
tactics to unite White's, and others, against you identity mongers.
A Harvard Asian on the subject of identity politics ...
"Identity politics makes people feel better about themselves at the
expense of productive discourse. A person’s lived experience should
never be invalidated. But no identity makes the beliefs that someone
derives from their lived experience automatically more correct. This
is not just a logical fallacy that should be avoided on principle. In
practice, it is actually a hindrance to persuading others. In a time
of such polarization, identity politics makes us close ranks with the
like-minded when we need to reach out."
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/1/24/gao-identity-politics/
"Protesters marking Juneteenth on Friday in Golden Gate Park toppled
and defaced several statues, including one of Union Gen. Ulysses S.
Grant, KPIX reports."
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article243696912.html
Others defaced and destroyed included Father Junipero Serra, Francis
Scott Key, and Miguel de Cervantes, the author of Don Quixote. By all
means keep moaning about Uncle Ben, tearing down statues, and
demanding that the police be defunded. You aren't winning many
friends, but you are energizing a lot of enemies.
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Sorry you don't get it.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-22 16:47:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
{snip}
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Sorry you don't get it.
What doesn't he get? That black people are offended by Aunt Jemima and
Uncle Ben? Or that the opinions of black people shouldn't be the ones
that count the most?
El Castor
2020-06-22 18:02:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 09:47:13 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Sorry you don't get it.
What doesn't he get? That black people are offended by Aunt Jemima and
Uncle Ben? Or that the opinions of black people shouldn't be the ones
that count the most?
Sitting down at breakfast with a friendly smiling Black face. Nice way
to start the day. You are the racist, using race to divide us and
promote your political agenda. BTW, how does Biden feel about this? He
seems to have gone into hiding. I don't blame him.

Oh well, time for another riot, tear down a couple of statues, and
maybe a little looting on the side. A liberals work is never done.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-22 18:05:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 09:47:13 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Sorry you don't get it.
What doesn't he get? That black people are offended by Aunt Jemima and
Uncle Ben? Or that the opinions of black people shouldn't be the ones
that count the most?
Sitting down at breakfast with a friendly smiling Black face.
We know *you* think they are just friendly smiling black faces. But,
that doesn't answer my questions about how black people feel.
El Castor
2020-06-22 19:03:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:05:29 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 09:47:13 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Sorry you don't get it.
What doesn't he get? That black people are offended by Aunt Jemima and
Uncle Ben? Or that the opinions of black people shouldn't be the ones
that count the most?
Sitting down at breakfast with a friendly smiling Black face.
We know *you* think they are just friendly smiling black faces. But,
that doesn't answer my questions about how black people feel.
Race in America isn't about a smiling black face on a box, and to
pretend that it is, is beyond foolish. How do ALL people, White and
Black, feel about Black neighborhoods where bars on the windows are a
required adornment, a Black murder rate triple the Black presence in
the population, a Black illegitimacy of 72%, and a Black hero who held
a gun to a pregnant woman's stomach while his friends ransacked her
home. Those are the issues we all should be discussing, but a smiling
face on a box is apparently a much more useful diversion, at least it
is for some people.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-22 21:59:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:05:29 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 09:47:13 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Sorry you don't get it.
What doesn't he get? That black people are offended by Aunt Jemima and
Uncle Ben? Or that the opinions of black people shouldn't be the ones
that count the most?
Sitting down at breakfast with a friendly smiling Black face.
We know *you* think they are just friendly smiling black faces. But,
that doesn't answer my questions about how black people feel.
Race in America isn't about a smiling black face on a box, and to
pretend that it is, is beyond foolish.
Once again, you won't answer my questions.
Post by El Castor
How do ALL people, White and
Black, feel about Black neighborhoods where bars on the windows are a
required adornment, a Black murder rate triple the Black presence in
the population, a Black illegitimacy of 72%, and a Black hero who held
a gun to a pregnant woman's stomach while his friends ransacked her
home. Those are the issues we all should be discussing, but a smiling
face on a box is apparently a much more useful diversion, at least it
is for some people.
El Castor
2020-06-23 07:27:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 14:59:10 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:05:29 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 09:47:13 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Sorry you don't get it.
What doesn't he get? That black people are offended by Aunt Jemima and
Uncle Ben? Or that the opinions of black people shouldn't be the ones
that count the most?
Sitting down at breakfast with a friendly smiling Black face.
We know *you* think they are just friendly smiling black faces. But,
that doesn't answer my questions about how black people feel.
Race in America isn't about a smiling black face on a box, and to
pretend that it is, is beyond foolish.
Once again, you won't answer my questions.
I don't know how Black people feel, but I doubt it is a big deal.
George Floyd "had landed five years behind bars in 2009 for an assault
and robbery two years earlier, and before that, had been convicted of
charges ranging from theft with a firearm to drugs"
https://nypost.com/2020/06/02/george-floyd-had-violent-criminal-history-minneapolis-union-chief/
Was he driven to a life of crime by a picture on a box or pouch of
rice? I feel safe in believing that he was not. There are much more
important influences on American Blacks -- 85 median IQ, single parent
fatherless childhood, and jobs taken by a flood of millions of
Hispanic illegal immigrants, probably being a bit more important than
a picture on a box.
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
How do ALL people, White and
Black, feel about Black neighborhoods where bars on the windows are a
required adornment, a Black murder rate triple the Black presence in
the population, a Black illegitimacy of 72%, and a Black hero who held
a gun to a pregnant woman's stomach while his friends ransacked her
home. Those are the issues we all should be discussing, but a smiling
face on a box is apparently a much more useful diversion, at least it
is for some people.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-23 01:53:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any other
meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire to stir
up racial animosity. What, else is the purpose of the Left's identity
politics if not to exploit and encourage racial division in a time
when we should be uniting as Americans. Be careful, the Left's work to
exploit race plays right into Trump's hands. He will use the same
tactics to unite White's, and others, against you identity mongers.
A Harvard Asian on the subject of identity politics ...
"Identity politics makes people feel better about themselves at the
expense of productive discourse. A person’s lived experience should
never be invalidated. But no identity makes the beliefs that someone
derives from their lived experience automatically more correct. This
is not just a logical fallacy that should be avoided on principle. In
practice, it is actually a hindrance to persuading others. In a time
of such polarization, identity politics makes us close ranks with the
like-minded when we need to reach out."
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/1/24/gao-identity-politics/
"Protesters marking Juneteenth on Friday in Golden Gate Park toppled
and defaced several statues, including one of Union Gen. Ulysses S.
Grant, KPIX reports."
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article243696912.html
Others defaced and destroyed included Father Junipero Serra, Francis
Scott Key, and Miguel de Cervantes, the author of Don Quixote. By all
means keep moaning about Uncle Ben, tearing down statues, and
demanding that the police be defunded. You aren't winning many
friends, but you are energizing a lot of enemies.
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-23 02:31:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-25 01:34:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 02:57:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
El Castor
2020-06-25 06:13:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:57:17 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
If they speak to the offender, and explain why they are offended, that
would be perfectly appropriate and quite fair. If they break his
window, beat him to a pulp, and pour paint on him, would you consider
that fair?

Is the looting and vandalism you have experienced fair or appropriate?
Here is a 6/1 map showing looting in the Bay Area. I'm sure that by
now it would be even more outrageous.
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/06/01/map-looting-at-bay-area-stores/?shared=email&msg=fail

This afternoon I was researching a gun purchase on the Internet. If an
"offended" Black person kicks in my front door and storms into the
house, would I be within my rights to shoot him and his fellow
invaders, or should I just negotiate the identity those items which he
would like to steal?

BTW -- In your case, you probably should put your TV set, wife's
jewelry, spare cash, and prescription pain killers on the front porch
with a "Please Steal Me" sign, but if you intend to defend your home
you might want to consider a .38 with hollow point ammunition rather
than a 9mm. The 9mm ammunition would be more likely to pass through a
wall or door and kill a neighbor. (-8
islander
2020-06-25 16:01:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:57:17 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
If they speak to the offender, and explain why they are offended, that
would be perfectly appropriate and quite fair. If they break his
window, beat him to a pulp, and pour paint on him, would you consider
that fair?
Is the looting and vandalism you have experienced fair or appropriate?
Here is a 6/1 map showing looting in the Bay Area. I'm sure that by
now it would be even more outrageous.
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/06/01/map-looting-at-bay-area-stores/?shared=email&msg=fail
This afternoon I was researching a gun purchase on the Internet. If an
"offended" Black person kicks in my front door and storms into the
house, would I be within my rights to shoot him and his fellow
invaders, or should I just negotiate the identity those items which he
would like to steal?
BTW -- In your case, you probably should put your TV set, wife's
jewelry, spare cash, and prescription pain killers on the front porch
with a "Please Steal Me" sign, but if you intend to defend your home
you might want to consider a .38 with hollow point ammunition rather
than a 9mm. The 9mm ammunition would be more likely to pass through a
wall or door and kill a neighbor. (-8
Seriously, are you considering purchasing a handgun to protect your
home? Practically speaking, you would be better off buying a 12ga
shotgun and it doesn't require a permit. Safer for you and your
neighbors. Also less likely to be taken from you and used on you or
others. Frankly, if you are seriously considering purchase of a gun, I
find that worrisome!
El Castor
2020-06-25 17:17:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:57:17 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
If they speak to the offender, and explain why they are offended, that
would be perfectly appropriate and quite fair. If they break his
window, beat him to a pulp, and pour paint on him, would you consider
that fair?
Is the looting and vandalism you have experienced fair or appropriate?
Here is a 6/1 map showing looting in the Bay Area. I'm sure that by
now it would be even more outrageous.
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/06/01/map-looting-at-bay-area-stores/?shared=email&msg=fail
This afternoon I was researching a gun purchase on the Internet. If an
"offended" Black person kicks in my front door and storms into the
house, would I be within my rights to shoot him and his fellow
invaders, or should I just negotiate the identity those items which he
would like to steal?
BTW -- In your case, you probably should put your TV set, wife's
jewelry, spare cash, and prescription pain killers on the front porch
with a "Please Steal Me" sign, but if you intend to defend your home
you might want to consider a .38 with hollow point ammunition rather
than a 9mm. The 9mm ammunition would be more likely to pass through a
wall or door and kill a neighbor. (-8
Seriously, are you considering purchasing a handgun to protect your
home? Practically speaking, you would be better off buying a 12ga
shotgun and it doesn't require a permit. Safer for you and your
neighbors. Also less likely to be taken from you and used on you or
others. Frankly, if you are seriously considering purchase of a gun, I
find that worrisome!
I inherited a shotgun (very nice semi-auto Browning) and 2 hand guns.
Gave them away. I even dropped off the ammo with the local police
department. Having grown up in Oakland I have always been dedicated to
living in a place where a gun was not needed. Now, who knows? I'm sure
you remember Union Square. Trashed. Marin has its own Project. So far
we have been spared, but time will tell.
islander
2020-06-26 14:09:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:57:17 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
If they speak to the offender, and explain why they are offended, that
would be perfectly appropriate and quite fair. If they break his
window, beat him to a pulp, and pour paint on him, would you consider
that fair?
Is the looting and vandalism you have experienced fair or appropriate?
Here is a 6/1 map showing looting in the Bay Area. I'm sure that by
now it would be even more outrageous.
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/06/01/map-looting-at-bay-area-stores/?shared=email&msg=fail
This afternoon I was researching a gun purchase on the Internet. If an
"offended" Black person kicks in my front door and storms into the
house, would I be within my rights to shoot him and his fellow
invaders, or should I just negotiate the identity those items which he
would like to steal?
BTW -- In your case, you probably should put your TV set, wife's
jewelry, spare cash, and prescription pain killers on the front porch
with a "Please Steal Me" sign, but if you intend to defend your home
you might want to consider a .38 with hollow point ammunition rather
than a 9mm. The 9mm ammunition would be more likely to pass through a
wall or door and kill a neighbor. (-8
Seriously, are you considering purchasing a handgun to protect your
home? Practically speaking, you would be better off buying a 12ga
shotgun and it doesn't require a permit. Safer for you and your
neighbors. Also less likely to be taken from you and used on you or
others. Frankly, if you are seriously considering purchase of a gun, I
find that worrisome!
I inherited a shotgun (very nice semi-auto Browning) and 2 hand guns.
Gave them away. I even dropped off the ammo with the local police
department. Having grown up in Oakland I have always been dedicated to
living in a place where a gun was not needed. Now, who knows? I'm sure
you remember Union Square. Trashed. Marin has its own Project. So far
we have been spared, but time will tell.
Browning made a very nice semi-auto. I had occasion to use one as a
teenager and it appealed to my then teenage mind. There is actually not
a strong reason to own a semi-auto, shotgun or otherwise. I inherited a
Winchester 12ga pump action and the sound of the action is a pretty
strong deterrent without firing a shot. I haven't fired it in 50 years.
El Castor
2020-06-26 16:24:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:57:17 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
If they speak to the offender, and explain why they are offended, that
would be perfectly appropriate and quite fair. If they break his
window, beat him to a pulp, and pour paint on him, would you consider
that fair?
Is the looting and vandalism you have experienced fair or appropriate?
Here is a 6/1 map showing looting in the Bay Area. I'm sure that by
now it would be even more outrageous.
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/06/01/map-looting-at-bay-area-stores/?shared=email&msg=fail
This afternoon I was researching a gun purchase on the Internet. If an
"offended" Black person kicks in my front door and storms into the
house, would I be within my rights to shoot him and his fellow
invaders, or should I just negotiate the identity those items which he
would like to steal?
BTW -- In your case, you probably should put your TV set, wife's
jewelry, spare cash, and prescription pain killers on the front porch
with a "Please Steal Me" sign, but if you intend to defend your home
you might want to consider a .38 with hollow point ammunition rather
than a 9mm. The 9mm ammunition would be more likely to pass through a
wall or door and kill a neighbor. (-8
Seriously, are you considering purchasing a handgun to protect your
home? Practically speaking, you would be better off buying a 12ga
shotgun and it doesn't require a permit. Safer for you and your
neighbors. Also less likely to be taken from you and used on you or
others. Frankly, if you are seriously considering purchase of a gun, I
find that worrisome!
I inherited a shotgun (very nice semi-auto Browning) and 2 hand guns.
Gave them away. I even dropped off the ammo with the local police
department. Having grown up in Oakland I have always been dedicated to
living in a place where a gun was not needed. Now, who knows? I'm sure
you remember Union Square. Trashed. Marin has its own Project. So far
we have been spared, but time will tell.
Browning made a very nice semi-auto. I had occasion to use one as a
teenager and it appealed to my then teenage mind. There is actually not
a strong reason to own a semi-auto, shotgun or otherwise. I inherited a
Winchester 12ga pump action and the sound of the action is a pretty
strong deterrent without firing a shot. I haven't fired it in 50 years.
My problem with shotguns has been the size. Stevens makes an
inexpensive pump -- the model 320 with a short barrel, 38.25" overall.
It's clearly designed for home defense. I don't want to own a gun, but
if I have to, that will probably be it. So far the rioting and looting
has been confined to shopping districts. Listening to the radio this
morning, it sounds like Portland is in a bad way. I hope it doesn't
spread to residential areas.
Johnny
2020-06-26 16:42:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:24:41 -0700
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:57:17 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to
you. You are not the person who is being discriminated
against. If you engage in discrimination against a person,
whether or not that discrimination is harmful depends on
what that person believes you intended. Simple civility
would urge you to not engage in a form of overt
discrimination when the subject believes that they are
harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be
responsible for how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and
there is no justification for doing what you are doing, you
are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black
person is offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out
on the person in blackface, it isn't fair?
If they speak to the offender, and explain why they are
offended, that would be perfectly appropriate and quite fair. If
they break his window, beat him to a pulp, and pour paint on
him, would you consider that fair?
Is the looting and vandalism you have experienced fair or
appropriate? Here is a 6/1 map showing looting in the Bay Area.
I'm sure that by now it would be even more outrageous.
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/06/01/map-looting-at-bay-area-stores/?shared=email&msg=fail
This afternoon I was researching a gun purchase on the Internet.
If an "offended" Black person kicks in my front door and storms
into the house, would I be within my rights to shoot him and his
fellow invaders, or should I just negotiate the identity those
items which he would like to steal?
BTW -- In your case, you probably should put your TV set, wife's
jewelry, spare cash, and prescription pain killers on the front
porch with a "Please Steal Me" sign, but if you intend to defend
your home you might want to consider a .38 with hollow point
ammunition rather than a 9mm. The 9mm ammunition would be more
likely to pass through a wall or door and kill a neighbor. (-8
Seriously, are you considering purchasing a handgun to protect
your home? Practically speaking, you would be better off buying
a 12ga shotgun and it doesn't require a permit. Safer for you
and your neighbors. Also less likely to be taken from you and
used on you or others. Frankly, if you are seriously considering
purchase of a gun, I find that worrisome!
I inherited a shotgun (very nice semi-auto Browning) and 2 hand
guns. Gave them away. I even dropped off the ammo with the local
police department. Having grown up in Oakland I have always been
dedicated to living in a place where a gun was not needed. Now,
who knows? I'm sure you remember Union Square. Trashed. Marin has
its own Project. So far we have been spared, but time will tell.
Browning made a very nice semi-auto. I had occasion to use one as a
teenager and it appealed to my then teenage mind. There is actually
not a strong reason to own a semi-auto, shotgun or otherwise. I
inherited a Winchester 12ga pump action and the sound of the action
is a pretty strong deterrent without firing a shot. I haven't fired
it in 50 years.
My problem with shotguns has been the size. Stevens makes an
inexpensive pump -- the model 320 with a short barrel, 38.25" overall.
It's clearly designed for home defense. I don't want to own a gun, but
if I have to, that will probably be it. So far the rioting and looting
has been confined to shopping districts. Listening to the radio this
morning, it sounds like Portland is in a bad way. I hope it doesn't
spread to residential areas.
It's better to have it and not need it.

I have a Winchester like islander's, and he's right, just pumping a
shell into the chamber is very good deterrent.

I had a friend that was a cop. Him and his buddy were on a prowler
call, and were walking between houses at night. Willie said he was in
front, and his partner was behind him, when he heard the sound of a
shell being pumped into the firing chamber, he didn't know if it was
his partner or someone else. He said it scared the crap out him, and
when he found out it was his partner, he said he wanted to shoot him.
b***@gmail.com
2020-06-26 15:31:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
My only experience with a shotgun was when I was about 16 and went quail hunting with a friend and his father's gun. I fired at one bird and winged it and it went crashing to the ground. But it wasn't dead and continued running on the ground. So I chased it and got within 5 feet and fired another shot and totally distroyed the poor thing. I felt guilty and never went bird hunting again.
islander
2020-06-26 19:05:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
My only experience with a shotgun was when I was about 16 and went quail hunting with a friend and his father's gun. I fired at one bird and winged it and it went crashing to the ground. But it wasn't dead and continued running on the ground. So I chased it and got within 5 feet and fired another shot and totally distroyed the poor thing. I felt guilty and never went bird hunting again.
Bird hunting is a gentleman's sport and I don't mean that in a
complementary way. Dick Cheney liked bird hunting. Says something
about the man, IMV.
Gary
2020-06-26 19:09:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
My only experience with a shotgun was when I was about 16 and went quail hunting with a friend and his father's gun. I fired at one bird and winged it and it went crashing to the ground. But it wasn't dead and continued running on the ground. So I chased it and got within 5 feet and fired another shot and totally distroyed the poor thing. I felt guilty and never went bird hunting again.
I had a similar experience when I was about 12. My grandfather gave
me his old single-shot 22 rifle. He lived in the country -- and one
day I had looked all over the nearby woods for a squirrel to shoot.
No luck. I was only a few feet from Grandpa's back door -- when a
song bird lit on a branch not more than 30 feet from me. I threw the
rifle up, fired and hit him. I never will forget watching him
flutter to the ground -- lying there and dying. I never killed
another bird.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 16:09:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:57:17 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
If they speak to the offender, and explain why they are offended, that
would be perfectly appropriate and quite fair. If they break his
window, beat him to a pulp, and pour paint on him, would you consider
that fair?
"Take it out" includes only legal actions such as admonishments and
boycotts.
El Castor
2020-06-25 17:23:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 09:09:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:57:17 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
If they speak to the offender, and explain why they are offended, that
would be perfectly appropriate and quite fair. If they break his
window, beat him to a pulp, and pour paint on him, would you consider
that fair?
"Take it out" includes only legal actions such as admonishments and
boycotts.
That's your version of "take it out". These days the less civilized
among us might have something else in mind.
b***@gmail.com
2020-06-25 09:17:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
If a white person enters a public shower room occupied by all blacks and the white person delibertly rushes to get out as fast as possible and is subjected to rude comments, of not doing a good job in the shower, is that fair or just a bunch of blacks ganging up on white guy with his clothes off? But you probably have never done that?
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 16:09:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
If a white person enters a public shower room occupied by all blacks
and the white person delibertly rushes to get out as fast as possible
and is subjected to rude comments, of not doing a good job in the
shower, is that fair or just a bunch of blacks ganging up on white
guy with his clothes off? But you probably have never done that?
Comments such as "Why are leaving? Are you afraid to be in a shower with
black people?" are fair.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-25 16:52:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by b***@gmail.com
If a white person enters a public shower room occupied by all blacks
and the white person delibertly rushes to get out as fast as possible
and is subjected to rude comments, of not doing a good job in the
shower, is that fair or just a bunch of blacks ganging up on white
guy with his clothes off? But you probably have never done that?
Comments such as "Why are leaving? Are you afraid to be in a shower with
black people?" are fair.
So you would then have to agree that the same could be said if it
was a black guy entered a public shower and rushed, and the white
guys asked "Why are leaving? Are you afraid to be in a shower with
white people?"
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 17:21:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by b***@gmail.com
If a white person enters a public shower room occupied by all blacks
and the white person delibertly rushes to get out as fast as possible
and is subjected to rude comments, of not doing a good job in the
shower, is that fair or just a bunch of blacks ganging up on white
guy with his clothes off? But you probably have never done that?
Comments such as "Why are leaving? Are you afraid to be in a shower with
black people?" are fair.
So you would then have to agree that the same could be said if it
was a black guy entered a public shower and rushed, and the white
guys asked "Why are leaving? Are you afraid to be in a shower with
white people?"
Yes.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-25 12:01:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair. What is not considered is intent and how it is
taken. Communication is one of the hardest things people do.
Shy people are many times thought of as being conceited or "stuck up"
by others because they are not social. It isn't fair to accuse
them as such because others "took it that way".

I would not want to hurt anyone's feelings and if they explained to
me why they are offended then I would reconsider my actions.
But it isn't fair to indict someone that did not know they were
offending someone. And the person offended should also be held
accountable to not be unreasonable and use it as an excuse to find a
socially acceptable way to direct accusations and hostile actions
toward an innocent person. I know this is happening.
Johnny
2020-06-25 12:57:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 05:01:46 -0700 (PDT)
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you.
You are not the person who is being discriminated against.
If you engage in discrimination against a person, whether or
not that discrimination is harmful depends on what that person
believes you intended. Simple civility would urge you to not
engage in a form of overt discrimination when the subject
believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible
for how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there
is no justification for doing what you are doing, you are
responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person
is offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the
person in blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair. What is not considered is intent and how it is
taken. Communication is one of the hardest things people do.
Shy people are many times thought of as being conceited or "stuck up"
by others because they are not social. It isn't fair to accuse
them as such because others "took it that way".
I would not want to hurt anyone's feelings and if they explained to
me why they are offended then I would reconsider my actions.
But it isn't fair to indict someone that did not know they were
offending someone. And the person offended should also be held
accountable to not be unreasonable and use it as an excuse to find a
socially acceptable way to direct accusations and hostile actions
toward an innocent person. I know this is happening.
Yes it's happening, but liberals ignore the facts. People are being
attacked just because they are white, while the person doing the
attacking doesn't know if the person they hurt was a racist or a
liberal that supported their cause.

It seems white people have inherited the sin of racism from their
ancestors.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-25 16:00:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Johnny
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 05:01:46 -0700 (PDT)
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you.
You are not the person who is being discriminated against.
If you engage in discrimination against a person, whether or
not that discrimination is harmful depends on what that person
believes you intended. Simple civility would urge you to not
engage in a form of overt discrimination when the subject
believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible
for how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there
is no justification for doing what you are doing, you are
responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person
is offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the
person in blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair. What is not considered is intent and how it is
taken. Communication is one of the hardest things people do.
Shy people are many times thought of as being conceited or "stuck up"
by others because they are not social. It isn't fair to accuse
them as such because others "took it that way".
I would not want to hurt anyone's feelings and if they explained to
me why they are offended then I would reconsider my actions.
But it isn't fair to indict someone that did not know they were
offending someone. And the person offended should also be held
accountable to not be unreasonable and use it as an excuse to find a
socially acceptable way to direct accusations and hostile actions
toward an innocent person. I know this is happening.
Yes it's happening, but liberals ignore the facts. People are being
attacked just because they are white, while the person doing the
attacking doesn't know if the person they hurt was a racist or a
liberal that supported their cause.
It seems white people have inherited the sin of racism from their
ancestors.
I saw a video about a week ago in a large city. It was at night
and these people in a 3rd floor apartment were looking down at the
protesters and cheering them on. Then the protesters started hurling
rocks at the apartment window breaking them. The apartment people
kept shouting "we are on your side", but the rocks kept coming.
There was something funny about it, and I thought some people just
want chaos.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 16:08:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-25 16:55:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?

Only in the minds of those "getting stupid".
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 17:22:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-25 23:47:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 23:52:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-26 01:05:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
So you didn't know either until the official "state" reason was released.
Like the rest of us.
Too bad Al Jolson didn't understand how offensive he was being.
I guess Warner Bros. like Disney needs to purge his work, I am sure
you agree.
But I say that was all a hundred years ago. A guy that puts on white
face today is not the same context as back then.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-26 02:27:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
So you didn't know either until the official "state" reason was released.
Like the rest of us.
There is no "official state reason." There are those who are aware of
history and those that are ignorant. And much worse, there are those who
willfully remain ignorant.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Too bad Al Jolson didn't understand how offensive he was being.
I guess Warner Bros. like Disney needs to purge his work, I am sure
you agree.
Song of the South was known to be offensive when it as made.
El Castor
2020-06-26 06:06:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 19:27:29 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
So you didn't know either until the official "state" reason was released.
Like the rest of us.
There is no "official state reason." There are those who are aware of
history and those that are ignorant. And much worse, there are those who
willfully remain ignorant.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Too bad Al Jolson didn't understand how offensive he was being.
I guess Warner Bros. like Disney needs to purge his work, I am sure
you agree.
Song of the South was known to be offensive when it as made.
It is one thing to ignore history, but much more frightening, to
ignore the reality of the here and now -- 74% illegitimacy, 1/3rd of
murders, 85 median IQ, etc. On the murder score that 1/3rd is probably
50%+ when the unknown race number is factored in. BTW, Islander was
correct, for home defense a shotgun is the best choice.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-26 13:33:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
So you didn't know either until the official "state" reason was released.
Like the rest of us.
There is no "official state reason." There are those who are aware of
history and those that are ignorant. And much worse, there are those who
willfully remain ignorant.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Too bad Al Jolson didn't understand how offensive he was being.
I guess Warner Bros. like Disney needs to purge his work, I am sure
you agree.
Song of the South was known to be offensive when it as made.
But Al Jolson didn't? I wonder why he was so ignorant?
A guy putting on black face today at Halloween is not anything like some
1920s minstrel show.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-26 15:13:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
So you didn't know either until the official "state" reason was released.
Like the rest of us.
There is no "official state reason." There are those who are aware of
history and those that are ignorant. And much worse, there are those who
willfully remain ignorant.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Too bad Al Jolson didn't understand how offensive he was being.
I guess Warner Bros. like Disney needs to purge his work, I am sure
you agree.
Song of the South was known to be offensive when it as made.
But Al Jolson didn't? I wonder why he was so ignorant?
Jolson came before Song of the South.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
A guy putting on black face today at Halloween is not anything like some
1920s minstrel show.
Ugh.
El Castor
2020-06-26 16:29:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 08:13:56 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
So you didn't know either until the official "state" reason was released.
Like the rest of us.
There is no "official state reason." There are those who are aware of
history and those that are ignorant. And much worse, there are those who
willfully remain ignorant.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Too bad Al Jolson didn't understand how offensive he was being.
I guess Warner Bros. like Disney needs to purge his work, I am sure
you agree.
Song of the South was known to be offensive when it as made.
But Al Jolson didn't? I wonder why he was so ignorant?
Jolson came before Song of the South.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
A guy putting on black face today at Halloween is not anything like some
1920s minstrel show.
Ugh.
This thing is not about Al Jolson or Uncle Ben. It's a Marxist
inspired insurrection, revolution, or whatever you want to call it.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-26 19:03:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 08:13:56 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
So you didn't know either until the official "state" reason was released.
Like the rest of us.
There is no "official state reason." There are those who are aware of
history and those that are ignorant. And much worse, there are those who
willfully remain ignorant.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Too bad Al Jolson didn't understand how offensive he was being.
I guess Warner Bros. like Disney needs to purge his work, I am sure
you agree.
Song of the South was known to be offensive when it as made.
But Al Jolson didn't? I wonder why he was so ignorant?
Jolson came before Song of the South.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
A guy putting on black face today at Halloween is not anything like some
1920s minstrel show.
Ugh.
This thing is not about Al Jolson or Uncle Ben. It's a Marxist
inspired insurrection, revolution, or whatever you want to call it.
What mushrooms do you eat?
El Castor
2020-06-26 20:34:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:03:02 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 08:13:56 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
That the accuser can never be wrong in how they perceive?
That they can use it as an excuse to get attention and support
while admonishing someone that has done nothing wrong?
It's amazing you think that it is OK for a white person to go in
blackface because they don't think it is offensive.
.
Why? I can think of a lot more offensive costumes. What is so
offensive about a white guy putting black makeup on his face to
imitate a black guy? or visa versa.
https://www.history.com/news/blackface-history-racism-origins
So you didn't know either until the official "state" reason was released.
Like the rest of us.
There is no "official state reason." There are those who are aware of
history and those that are ignorant. And much worse, there are those who
willfully remain ignorant.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Too bad Al Jolson didn't understand how offensive he was being.
I guess Warner Bros. like Disney needs to purge his work, I am sure
you agree.
Song of the South was known to be offensive when it as made.
But Al Jolson didn't? I wonder why he was so ignorant?
Jolson came before Song of the South.
Post by m***@my-deja.com
A guy putting on black face today at Halloween is not anything like some
1920s minstrel show.
Ugh.
This thing is not about Al Jolson or Uncle Ben. It's a Marxist
inspired insurrection, revolution, or whatever you want to call it.
What mushrooms do you eat?
Portobello. I suggest always cooking them.

Today's news from Portland ...
"North Portland Descends Into 'War Zone' as Antifa Tries to Set up
Another 'Autonomous Zone'"
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/06/26/north-portland-descends-into-war-zone-as-antifa-tries-to-set-up-another-autonomous-zone-n579334
Please note the White faces. ANTIFA is a predominantly White
organization, far more concerned with Marxist politics than Uncle Ben.
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jun/3/antifa-planned-anti-government-insurgency-george-f/
El Castor
2020-06-25 17:31:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 09:08:43 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
"During their rioting Democrat Senator Tim Carpenter stopped by and
took a video of the destruction.
The mob turned on him. They punched him, beat him in the head, neck
and ribs.
They socked him in the left eye and gave him a concussion."
https://thespectator.info/2020/06/24/violent-mob-attacks-democrat-state-senator-for-taking-picture-of-their-vandalism/
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 17:41:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 09:08:43 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black
person is offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out
on the person in blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
"During their rioting Democrat Senator Tim Carpenter stopped by and
took a video of the destruction. The mob turned on him. They punched
him, beat him in the head, neck and ribs. They socked him in the left
eye and gave him a concussion."
https://thespectator.info/2020/06/24/violent-mob-attacks-democrat-state-senator-for-taking-picture-of-their-vandalism/
Red herring alert.
Johnny
2020-06-25 17:42:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 10:31:29 -0700
Post by El Castor
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 09:08:43 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person
is offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the
person in blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
"During their rioting Democrat Senator Tim Carpenter stopped by and
took a video of the destruction.
The mob turned on him. They punched him, beat him in the head, neck
and ribs.
They socked him in the left eye and gave him a concussion."
https://thespectator.info/2020/06/24/violent-mob-attacks-democrat-state-senator-for-taking-picture-of-their-vandalism/
It wouldn't have happened if he was black.
El Castor
2020-06-25 18:27:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Johnny
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 10:31:29 -0700
Post by El Castor
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 09:08:43 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person
is offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the
person in blackface, it isn't fair?
No, it isn't fair.
Amazing!
"During their rioting Democrat Senator Tim Carpenter stopped by and
took a video of the destruction.
The mob turned on him. They punched him, beat him in the head, neck
and ribs.
They socked him in the left eye and gave him a concussion."
https://thespectator.info/2020/06/24/violent-mob-attacks-democrat-state-senator-for-taking-picture-of-their-vandalism/
It wouldn't have happened if he was black.
My point -- and being a liberal Democrat did him no good. White was
all that mattered.
m***@my-deja.com
2020-06-25 16:05:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by islander
It doesn't make any difference what a stereotype means to you. You are
not the person who is being discriminated against. If you engage in
discrimination against a person, whether or not that discrimination is
harmful depends on what that person believes you intended. Simple
civility would urge you to not engage in a form of overt discrimination
when the subject believes that they are harmed. What is the point?
Where does it end? You can't expect someone to be responsible for
how another person feels.
If you are doing something that makes them feel bad, and there is no
justification for doing what you are doing, you are responsible.
If I am being myself, with no ill will toward anyone else,
and someone doesn't like it, then that is their problem.
Some of this can be attributed to discontent. Being unhappy
for whatever reason can cause someone to take it out on
another person or group. That is not fair.
If someone goes in blackface without ill will, and a black person is
offended, it's their problem? And if they take it out on the person in
blackface, it isn't fair?
What about the case of Bubba Wallace, the NASCAR driver. It was
found that the "noose" is actually a pull handle for the garage door
and had been there long before Bubba started using it.
But if a person had been identified as putting that pull handle there,
I think we both know it would be unfair to accuse that person as
committing a racist act.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-25 16:17:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 6/25/2020 9:05 AM, ***@my-deja.com wrote:

{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
What about the case of Bubba Wallace, the NASCAR driver. It was
found that the "noose" is actually a pull handle for the garage door
and had been there long before Bubba started using it.
But if a person had been identified as putting that pull handle there,
I think we both know it would be unfair to accuse that person as
committing a racist act.
Of course it would be unfair if the handle was placed before Wallace was
assigned that garage because there can be no racist message. The same
defense doesn't work for Aunt Jemima or blackface.
Johnny
2020-06-25 16:29:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 09:17:36 -0700
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
What about the case of Bubba Wallace, the NASCAR driver. It was
found that the "noose" is actually a pull handle for the garage door
and had been there long before Bubba started using it.
But if a person had been identified as putting that pull handle
there, I think we both know it would be unfair to accuse that
person as committing a racist act.
Of course it would be unfair if the handle was placed before Wallace
was assigned that garage because there can be no racist message. The
same defense doesn't work for Aunt Jemima or blackface.
The FBI sent 15 men to investigate that pull rope.

Take a look at knots illustrated, you will see that many of them
resemble a noose.

If some dumb white boy made that pull rope for the door while Wallace
was there, he would be facing a hate crime, for being stupid.
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-22 14:35:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any other
meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire to stir
up racial animosity.
The mammy and Uncle Tom are just gentle, kindly, caring people? This is
jaw-dropping ignorance.
Johnny
2020-06-22 15:13:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:35:41 -0700
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
On Saturday, June 20, 2020 at 11:07:30 PM UTC-4, Josh
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
On Friday, June 19, 2020 at 11:06:29 AM UTC-4, Josh
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong
with good food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the
Aunt and Uncle are gross caricatures of negative
stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative
stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any
other meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire
to stir up racial animosity.
The mammy and Uncle Tom are just gentle, kindly, caring people? This
is jaw-dropping ignorance.
Why can't you look at this from a different point of view.

Uncle Ben's and Aunt Jemima products came long after slavery ended.
Why can't these people just represent good cooks?

What do you think about renaming cities?
Josh Rosenbluth
2020-06-22 15:42:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Johnny
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:35:41 -0700
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
On Saturday, June 20, 2020 at 11:07:30 PM UTC-4, Josh
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
On Friday, June 19, 2020 at 11:06:29 AM UTC-4, Josh
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong
with good food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the
Aunt and Uncle are gross caricatures of negative
stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative
stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any
other meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire
to stir up racial animosity.
The mammy and Uncle Tom are just gentle, kindly, caring people? This
is jaw-dropping ignorance.
Why can't you look at this from a different point of view.
Uncle Ben's and Aunt Jemima products came long after slavery ended.
Why can't these people just represent good cooks?
They were introduced during Jim Crow.
Post by Johnny
What do you think about renaming cities?
I think we should honor people for the good they did even though they
may have also done bad. For example, we honor Washington for winning the
Revolutionary War and stepping away from the Presidency. And, we honor
him even though he was slave holder.

In contrast, we should not honor people for doing bad. We should not
honor Robert E. Lee for his service to the Confederacy because that
service was in the name of bad cause.
El Castor
2020-06-22 15:55:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 08:42:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Johnny
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:35:41 -0700
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
On Saturday, June 20, 2020 at 11:07:30 PM UTC-4, Josh
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
On Friday, June 19, 2020 at 11:06:29 AM UTC-4, Josh
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong
with good food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the
Aunt and Uncle are gross caricatures of negative
stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative
stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any
other meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire
to stir up racial animosity.
The mammy and Uncle Tom are just gentle, kindly, caring people? This
is jaw-dropping ignorance.
Why can't you look at this from a different point of view.
Uncle Ben's and Aunt Jemima products came long after slavery ended.
Why can't these people just represent good cooks?
They were introduced during Jim Crow.
Post by Johnny
What do you think about renaming cities?
I think we should honor people for the good they did even though they
may have also done bad. For example, we honor Washington for winning the
Revolutionary War and stepping away from the Presidency. And, we honor
him even though he was slave holder.
In contrast, we should not honor people for doing bad. We should not
honor Robert E. Lee for his service to the Confederacy because that
service was in the name of bad cause.
Lame justification for your race baiting that is driving us apart, not
bringing us together. Russia and China must be dancing in the street.
Gary
2020-06-22 16:11:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 08:42:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Johnny
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:35:41 -0700
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any
other meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire
to stir up racial animosity.
The mammy and Uncle Tom are just gentle, kindly, caring people? This
is jaw-dropping ignorance.
Why can't you look at this from a different point of view.
Uncle Ben's and Aunt Jemima products came long after slavery ended.
Why can't these people just represent good cooks?
They were introduced during Jim Crow.
Post by Johnny
What do you think about renaming cities?
I think we should honor people for the good they did even though they
may have also done bad. For example, we honor Washington for winning the
Revolutionary War and stepping away from the Presidency. And, we honor
him even though he was slave holder.
In contrast, we should not honor people for doing bad. We should not
honor Robert E. Lee for his service to the Confederacy because that
service was in the name of bad cause.
Some folks think Lee did good. Who decides whether a cause is good
or bad ? I am not a fan of Lee or the Confederacy. The Confederacy
was founded (owned?) by a small group of very rich planters. I doubt
that many (any?) of their sons served in the army. One of my
ancestors was killed. Another spent about three years in a Yankee POW
camp. And my wealthiest ancestor -- lost his assets, farm and money.

BTW, my wealthiest ancestor owned 20 slaves. Back then, the average
price (value) of a slave was about $500. So he lost $10,000. (about
$169,000 in today's money).

I love that genealogy search :-)
El Castor
2020-06-22 18:32:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 08:42:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Johnny
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:35:41 -0700
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any
other meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire
to stir up racial animosity.
The mammy and Uncle Tom are just gentle, kindly, caring people? This
is jaw-dropping ignorance.
Why can't you look at this from a different point of view.
Uncle Ben's and Aunt Jemima products came long after slavery ended.
Why can't these people just represent good cooks?
They were introduced during Jim Crow.
Post by Johnny
What do you think about renaming cities?
I think we should honor people for the good they did even though they
may have also done bad. For example, we honor Washington for winning the
Revolutionary War and stepping away from the Presidency. And, we honor
him even though he was slave holder.
In contrast, we should not honor people for doing bad. We should not
honor Robert E. Lee for his service to the Confederacy because that
service was in the name of bad cause.
Some folks think Lee did good. Who decides whether a cause is good
or bad ? I am not a fan of Lee or the Confederacy. The Confederacy
was founded (owned?) by a small group of very rich planters. I doubt
that many (any?) of their sons served in the army. One of my
ancestors was killed. Another spent about three years in a Yankee POW
camp. And my wealthiest ancestor -- lost his assets, farm and money.
BTW, my wealthiest ancestor owned 20 slaves. Back then, the average
price (value) of a slave was about $500. So he lost $10,000. (about
$169,000 in today's money).
I love that genealogy search :-)
No slave owners in my ancestry, but everyone could probably find one
if they went back far enough. Those Romans and their Sabines. Tsk,
tsk. I did have an ancestor that spent the war guarding a bridge in
Tennessee. My favorite Joan Baez song is The Night They Drove Old
Dixie Down. I'm sure one or two in this group could find something
racist in it if they tried, and they do seem to love trying. I guess
Joan will have to be banned.

El Castor
2020-06-22 15:52:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:35:41 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:14:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
{snip}
Post by m***@my-deja.com
And Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's. Is there something wrong with good
food being represented by a black man and woman?
Are people really this ignorant that they don't realize the Aunt and
Uncle are gross caricatures of negative stereotypes?
I don't see it as negative.
Fine make them white and dress them in cooks outfits of a
hundred years ago. I won't think it any better or worse.
Sadly, lots of white people are really this ignorant.
I guess it depends on how people define "negative stereotype".
You don't think the mammy and Uncle Tom are negative stereotypes?
So someone is stretching Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to other
characters.
No, that is not a stretch.
https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
https://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/tom/
Gentle, kindly, caring people. That's what they mean to me. Any other
meaning you care to promote is just part of the Left's desire to stir
up racial animosity.
The mammy and Uncle Tom are just gentle, kindly, caring people? This is
jaw-dropping ignorance.
Regretably, you are the racist in this picture. Read my post, as well
as what others have to say about your identity politics.
Loading...