Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say you were arrogant by refusing to be a bystander. In fact, I simply agreed to a general statement you made.

I don't know the laws where you are, in fact I just saw that you were Canadian, but I do know that there are hate crime laws where you certainly can charge someone with a hate crime over hate speech. Have you reported this to the school? If you haven't exhausted all your options, then you are being a bystander.

And show me any case in the last decade either in Canada or the US where a racist got away scot-free with a racist act. What does what might have happened a century ago do with today? Attitudes, social mores and laws have changed greatly in the last century. If you want proof look at the President of the US!!! So please don't justify your actions or diatribes with historical events that have no bearing on today. It has already been shown that your opinions on historical events is way off base.

---

Obviously racists never away with anything in the court. The jury's compassion would not let the racist win. But unless it is made obvious to a jury, racists get away with everything. You're asking me to get some kid younger than me charged with "hate speech". It just wouldn't work. There's a difference between not exhausting all of my options and excluding the inefficient ones. Last time I checked, Rosa Parks did not "report" anyone.

My opinion on historical events is not way off base. If we use a concept our middle school history teacher taught us, "whoever wins the battle, writes the history". It is my opinion the info you sound like you got from an American textbook was made up to justify slavery. "Oh, the black people sold themselves to us". For god's sakes if the Americans wanted stuff to buy, the Africans could've made whatever they wanted in Africa. Instead, the Americans thought "oh how convenient it would be to have Africans doing free labor back home".

If you have a heart sir, you will kindly stop buying into everything you read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hamworld05

If a guy I know mouths the n word should I beat him up?

---

Hamworld: back to your original post... let's break this down.

Someone saying a word does not make them a racist. Obviously this young man used it in a derogatory manner, but that only makes him unkind and perhaps ignorant. Could he also be racist? Sure, but merely calling you a name does not make him so.

Your beating him up over calling you a name would be unlawful and only serve to lower yourself. I am sure that would not be your intent, but that would be the result. This kid may just be trying to get a rise out of you or look big in front of his friends; don't take the bait.

When someone thinks less of someone else, the best response is to prove them otherwise. You mention Rosa Parks... learn from her example.

The mentioning of slavery serves no purpose as you were not a slave, your parents were not slaves, your grandparents were not slaves. To fall back on what happened in history as an excuse for present behaviour only serves to hold you back in your own mind. It is truly unfortunate that many black artists do just this in their music. They only serve to keep the people feeling oppressed and defensive. It is fashionable, it is what sells, and they are contributing to the problem of keeping people in such a mindset for the sake of making money.

You are your own person, you choose the direction your life goes. Do not fall into the trap of allowing past events, those which you nor anyone you know were a part of, to influence your decisions or expectations of today.

Do a bit more research into the history of slavery, that which was in full force well before there even was an America. Then move passed it, ignore those few individuals who may try to get a rise out of you with their words.

Show them by the example you set, the life you lead, the way you conduct yourself that you are the bigger man who will do great and wonderful things in his life not in spite of the colour of your skin, but because of your character and what's in your heart. This kid is but a blip in your life... move passed it.

If anyone cares enough to read past posts (and I'm certainly getting bored) it is obvious that OP's writing style has changed. Odd, indeed.

Two people, perhaps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoulaLC

Hamworld: back to your original post......let's break this down.

Someone saying a word does not make them a racist. Obviously this young man used it in a derogatory manner, but that only makes him unkind and perhaps ignorant. Could he also be racist? Sure, but merely calling you a name does not make him so.

---

This is called being "two-faced". Acting like someone that isn't racist and then being racist. It still makes him a racist. Give me someone that says racist things about anyone of color and is actually not a racist and I`ll show you a person in denial.

If I shout a homophobic slur at someone, I`m a homophobic.

[QUOTE=DoulaLC;2805469 This kid is but a blip in your life......move passed it.[/QUOTE]

I will, just as soon as I get a chance to kick his butt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hamworld05

Obviously racists never away with anything in the court. The jury's compassion would not let the racist win. But unless it is made obvious to a jury, racists get away with everything. You're asking me to get some kid younger than me charged with "hate speech". It just wouldn't work. There's a difference between not exhausting all of my options and excluding the inefficient ones. Last time I checked, Rosa Parks did not "report" anyone.

My opinion on historical events is not way off base. If we use a concept our middle school history teacher taught us, "whoever wins the battle, writes the history". It is my opinion the info you sound like you got from an American textbook was made up to justify slavery. "Oh, the black people sold themselves to us". For god's sakes if the Americans wanted stuff to buy, the Africans could've made whatever they wanted in Africa. Instead, the Americans thought "oh how convenient it would be to have Africans doing free labor back home".

If you have a heart sir, you will kindly stop buying into everything you read.

---

Boy are you going to be in trouble with unless you eliminate the attitude before you mature.

First, I don't need a heart what I need is a brain. You know nothing about me so don't make assumptions about what I'm buying into. Your middle school teacher was right about history being written by the winners, but that doesn't mean you can discount that history without proof. And that's what you are doing. Simply because you don't want to believe historical fact, you make up your own version that is not supported by fact. You have to understand that opinion is worthless unless its supported by facts.

What I explained about history is not only from American Textbooks. I minored in History in college and my research is thorough. Slavery existed long before the Americas were populated. Enslaving conquered peoples goes back to the dawn of recorded history. This is not a justification for it, because I abhor the institution, but one needs to view it in its historical context. It is fact, from more than American historical records, that African tribes enslaved people from other tribes. It is fact that often these slaves where sold to white slavers. It does not paint the slave trade in a better light to note that fact. And what do you think Africans in the 18th century could have made? The African economy was in no way geared to producing what was needed. Nor was it "free" labor. While it was cheaper to use slaves, they were not free.

As to citing Rosa Parks, I find your use of her example ludicrous. Rosa Parks stood for NON-VIOLENT protest. And yes, she did not report anyone, because IN HER TIME there was no one to report to. And, if you think use of violence to be "efficient", you are further gone then I think you to be.

Oh and this is the first time you mention the user of the word was younger than you. Someone else asked if you had made any attempt to educate him as to how wrong it was to use that word?

Sorry, my friend, but you are wrong on so many levels. But I can see that you are close minded and will not listen to facts. You have formed your opinions because they suit you, not because they are based on fact. And that means there is no further point in trying to educate you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

Boy are you going to be in trouble with unless you eliminate the attitude before you mature.

First, I don't need a heart what I need is a brain. You know nothing about me so don't make assumptions about what I'm buying into. Your middle school teacher was right about history being written by the winners, but that doesn't mean you can discount that history without proof. And that's what you are doing. Simply because you don't want to believe historical fact, you make up your own version that is not supported by fact. You have to understand that opinion is worthless unless its supported by facts.

What I explained about history is not only from American Textbooks. I minored in History in college and my research is thorough. Slavery existed long before the Americas were populated. Enslaving conquered peoples goes back to the dawn of recorded history. This is not a justification for it, because I abhor the institution, but one needs to view it in its historical context. It is fact, from more than American historical records, that African tribes enslaved people from other tribes. It is fact that often these slaves where sold to white slavers. It does not paint the slave trade in a better light to note that fact. And what do you think Africans in the 18th century could have made? The African economy was in no way geared to producing what was needed. Nor was it "free" labor. While it was cheaper to use slaves, they were not free.

As to citing Rosa Parks, I find your use of her example ludicrous. Rosa Parks stood for NON-VIOLENT protest. And yes, she did not report anyone, because IN HER TIME there was no one to report to. And, if you think use of violence to be "efficient", you are further gone then I think you to be.

Oh and this is the first time you mention the user of the word was younger than you. Someone else asked if you had made any attempt to educate him as to how wrong it was to use that word?

Sorry, my friend, but you are wrong on so many levels. But I can see that you are close minded and will not listen to facts. You have formed your opinions because they suit you, not because they are based on fact. And that means there is no further point in trying to educate you.

---

This is 2011. People understand how bad it is to use the n-word.

The african tribes didn't see slaves the way people from the New World did. Some of them treated them as "just people that worked for them". Had they known how cruel the New World would be to slaves they wouldn't have "sold" slaves just to be able to feed themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hamworld05

This is 2011. People understand how bad it is to use the n-word.

---

How do you know what he understands? You seem to only want to believe what you want, not to find out the truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hamworld05

The african tribes didn't see slaves the way people from the New World did. Some of them treated them as "just people that worked for them". Had they known how cruel the New World would be to slaves they wouldn't have "sold" slaves just to be able to feed themselves.

---

And so did many slave owners in the New World. Yes, many slaves were treated with cruelty, but many were also treated as valuable assets. In my opinion slavery, as a institution, is cruel to begin with. But that is an opinion made from the context of the 21st century.

So you admit that African tribes did sell their slaves to traders! Do you really believe they cared what was going to happen to them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hamworld05

This is called being "two-faced". Acting like someone that isn't racist and then being racist. It still makes him a racist. Give me someone that says racist things about anyone of color and is actually not a racist and I`ll show you a person in denial.

If I shout a homophobic slur at someone, I`m a homophobic.

---

No, if you shout a homophobic slur at someone it means you are insensitive, ignorant, and, in the opinion of many, a jerk. Many people who do such acts are ignorant, and it is a result of their upbringing or the association they have with other people.

Being a racist means you are depriving someone of something due to the colour of their skin. It is the belief that you are inherently better than someone due to skin colour.
Why don't you ask him why he called you that. Have you spoken to him about it? If he had called you something else, would you be as up in arms over it?

You are responding in an immature manner. That is not an affront to you, it is due to your age and stage of development, and it is not uncommon. Hence why teen boys are more likely to get into fights over issues that could easily be ignored. It is a big deal to you because you allow it to be a big deal. Then, to top it off, the history of slavery gets brought up as some sort of justification. Slavery has nothing to do with you. Time to take the chip off your shoulder.

With that sort of mentality, I could use the abuse and oppression of women over the centuries, much of which still continues today, as an excuse for poor judgement and anti-social behaviour. Poor me, men are out to get me because I am female. If I am called a name should I beat them up? Those types of people aren't worth your time or energy. Certainly not worth you getting in serious trouble over.

Whether this kid is a racist is beside the point. You simply can not go around beating people up that call you names or make you upset. If you decide to do so, you must also then be willing to deal with any potential consequences. The most damaging will be that you will have served to perpetuate a stereotype.

From time to time you are going to have ignorant individuals and people who are going to try to wind you up. Learn how to deal with it in a more productive manner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoulaLC

It is a big deal to you because you allow it to be a big deal.

---

I had to comment on that specific point because it is so true. People call other people names for a reaction. To get a rise out of them, to make them angry. By showing them it bothers you, it feeds their purpose. You are playing right into his hands if you show how it bothers you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hamworld05

This is called being "two-faced". Acting like someone that isn't racist and then being racist. It still makes him a racist. Give me someone that says racist things about anyone of color and is actually not a racist and I`ll show you a person in denial.

If I shout a homophobic slur at someone, I`m a homophobic.

---

What about your statement about Germans? I find that offensive. Should I beat you up since I am German? Luckily I'm too mature, have too many morals, and I'm not a bully.

You're not really here for advice, are you? You want someone to tell you to be a bully. That's not going to happen, so where do we go from here?

In the end, you'll do whatever you want. You got advice, and it was very good advice. Instead of accepting it and moving on, you want to fight about the past, and you don't even fight fair. You reinvent history to suite your prejudices, and your feelings.

Really, why is this thread not closed? The OP doesn't want answers, he wants to fight. We're giving him that fight. It's way past time to close.

Closed