The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I saw this article (http://qz.com/395207/if-asian-americans-saw-white-americans-the-way-white-americans-see-black-americans/) earlier today.  It expounds on some tweets (https://twitter.com/anildash/status/593589614092357633) from Anil Dash, an Asian American startup CEO:

If Asian Americans talked about white Americans the way whites talk about black folks, they'd bring back the Exclusion Act.

We could point at how white Americans compare to Asian Americans in violence, in education, in income. We could call your kids thugs.

I am glad that white Americans don't have to endure the daily dehumanization that black people do; nobody should have to.

But when I hear a white man on TV talk about "where are the dads?" or "why are they so violent?" Fix your shit, my white friends. Fix it.

Every criticism that gets leveled at Black families is indistinguishable from the same traits in White families, from where we sit.

From outside, the thing that stands out is black kids are taught how to live in white society. White kids are taught to avoid black people.

Thing is, I have very sincere empathy for white people reckoning with no longer being the cultural default. You were raised on a myth.

White people raised without economic privilege are sold from birth on the idea that systematic racism can help them. And it's a lie.

And this is where most Asian American communities fall in line. We're complicit in, and reinforce, anti-blackness. It won't save us, either.

But imagine if every time a white person underwent a tragedy, you heard Asians mentioning white on white crime & white dropouts. Inhuman.

---

I think this person eloquently captured the shortsightedness of these attacks on "black culture" as the cause of the problems blacks experience in American society.  The idea that "white culture" is responsible for the difference in, say, dropout rates between whites and Asians, or divorce rates between whites and Asians... this theory would never be entertained for even a nanosecond by the mainstream media.  Yet "black culture" is frequently cited as the cause for every statistical shortcoming of the black population in America.

Not institutionalized racial profiling.
Not the dismantling of decent working class jobs.
Not enormous socioeconomic barriers made larger by slashed public school funding.
Not ballooning fines (used to supplant revenue lost to tax cuts) for minor citations that spiral into an unending vortex of debt.
No, it's rap music, sagging pants, mouthing off, and laziness.  That's why black people are having so many problems in this country.

I'm not sure what white people she listens to. I don't hear any white people I know talking about black culture. Mostly, I just hear them saying it is stupid to burn down your own neighborhoods... which it in fact is.

I am sure the point.  I have never called all blacks thugs.  But I do call the thugs who are rioting or who run drugs or who commit burglary thugs. 

If she (or any other Asian American) wants to use a derogatory term for a white unmarried welfare women on welfare who has five kids with five different fathers, I got no problem with that.  If she wants to use derogatory term for a white father of 5 with 5 different moms who doesn't pay child support, I got no problem with that.  If she want to call a white who burglarizes a liqueur store a derogatory term, I got no problem with that.

I don't know anyone who calls all blacks thugs.  But there certainly are black thugs. 

Anil Dash is male.


Posted to this board over the last week:






So then, the next time an unarmed white person is beaten or shot to death by cops, we can start talking about how police are rightfully scared of whites because whites commit much more crime than Asians, and ask what we can do to reduce the problem of single white welfare mothers and fatherless white kids, right?  When will the vast majority of law-abiding white citizens come out strong against the problem of white rioting (http://mic.com/articles/105198/9-photos-of-white-people-rioting-put-the-ferguson-demonstrations-in-perspective) in America?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B0UHfLACMAE0wrC.jpg:large)

(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/popcorn_yes.gif)

I am done with this conversation.  By taking my quotes out of context shows you have no interest in having a conversation

  The Baltimore riots are no more defendable than Tim McViegh or The Boston marathon bombing.  Are there legitimate gripes with BPD? Yes.  But there are also legitimate gripes with the IRS and our policy towrds Chetnya.

The rioters are thugs, anyone who defnds the riots is a thug too. I see no difference between those who defend the riots and Mirre Kuznetsov.

Then let's talk about context.

In a thread about whites blaming black problems on black culture, your first response is to bring up:

- unmarried women on welfare
- women who have multiple kids with different fathers
- fathers who don't pay child support

Tell me, what do any of those things have to do with the Baltimore riots over police brutality?

BLACK CULTURE

That's what this guy does. He takes quotes out of context or attributes things to you that you never said. He's got "smartest guy in the room" syndrome when all he really is is a cookie cutter liberal spewing out the latest far left talking points and raising straw man arguments. He really is not worth having a discussion with other than if you are in the mood to be amused by his apparent lack of active listening skills and hyperactive spin mode. Sometimes it is quite laughable, other times it is quite sad.

He's here to argue you to death, not to have an honest and productive discussion with you. Remember that the next time you feel the desire to respond to one of his posts.

I've been saying this close to 10 years. And, while I sometimes agree with his over-arching points, the one constant truth is that Spider-Dan lives for the filibuster.

That sounds like a pathological issue.

People typically express their viewpoints because they want to persuade others to see things their way or at the very least have people accept or understand their point of view as valid and viable. You don't have to agree with me, but at least understand the way I see things. We can respectfully disagree at the very least.

Putting words in people's mouths, flat out lying about what they are saying, using bizarre, exaggerative and ridiculous arguments and talking in circles until everyone else gets bored and you're the last one left is not an effective way to do that. All you're doing is alienating yourself and your viewpoints. If the goal is to accomplish that, then the above approach is a very effective way of doing it. But what is the point of doing that other than some sort of pathological need to be right?

So we're running with the "that's out of context" argument, then?  OK, fine.

When I think someone has taken my quotes out of context, I don't just say "that's out of context!" and leave it at that; I actually explain the context behind my (otherwise incriminating) quote.  To just say "you're taking my statement out of context" and then fail to explain the context is really just a lazy substitute for "stop badgering me with things I said before that are inconvenient now!"  And the claim that I "attribute things to people they never said" rings mighty hollow in a thread full of complaints about direct quotes.

Now, as to the finer points of internet discussion: if you think I make posts on politics or religion in the hopes of convincing the people who have the opposite position, you're pretty naive.  For example, I don't actually believe that I am magically going to convince conservatives that we should increase taxes and public spending, or Christian fundamentalists that same sex marriage is OK.  I mean, if I do convince one here or there, great!  An unexpected bonus.  But my posts aren't really for them; they're for everyone else.

So honestly, if you're the kind of person that opened this thread and thought it would be a stinging counterpoint to mention that black people are the ones burning down their own neighborhoods or if white women are on welfare with 5 kids they also deserve the same criticism, I'm probably not trying to convince you.  And if you sincerely believe that your argument is Super Reasonable and would convince a Reasonable Person on the opposite side of the aisle... yeah, you're naive.

That being said, I'm perfectly happy to respectfully disagree.  And I'm not running around forcing anyone to click Reply on a thread, nor am I forcing them to type statements that may prove inconvenient later.

I am not debating if it is appropriate or not to riot.  If you feel rioting is appropriate you are thug, it is that black and white.

This is even over the top for normal Dan. Typically he just tries to bait by adding meaning to what he knows people are saying. It seems like this time he is directly trying to make crap up in order to have something to play the victim

Hoodie, why are you focusing entirely on the usage of the word "thug"?  It was mentioned exactly once in the 10 tweets cited.  Furthermore, you said, "I have never called all blacks thugs."  When was it stated or implied that (some?) whites are calling all blacks thugs?  Anyone who would call "all blacks" thugs is an overt racist and is outside the scope of this discussion.

You seem to be making a general point against rioters, yet you felt it relevant to mention welfare mothers and deadbeat dads.  Since the apparent objection of the day is context, what do those two things have to do with one another?

And finally: white people riot all (http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/10/west-virginia-baylor-fans-riot-tear-gas) the time (http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-new-hampshire-pumpkin-riots-20141019-story.html).  When they do it, the media never questions the deficiencies of White Culture.  No... it's just young people "being rowdy."

Spider-Dan, while I understand your points and even agree to an extent, I'll say this as a white guy: the reason why, in my opinion, why we refer to a black culture and not white culture is because we see blacks as a more unified (for lack of a better word) group of people, what with FUBU (for us by us), black power (spoken freely by anyone at any point in time, such as P Diddy stating black power at an all star game https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCpBtngVdSo), the projects, ghetto, etc... While I'm more or less agreeing with what you said, there really is nothing that lumps white culture together (other than some joking around things like we love mayonnaise, or we can't jump high, etc..).

It's the statistical truth. And I guess for you, the truth hurts. It seems to me that if people with your skewed viewpoint focused on the issues of the black community instead of thinking that everyone is out to get you, maybe you might see progress in these areas. However, when you have clowns, thugs, and idiots rioting against white people every week or two, do you honestly expect people not to call out the hypocrisy? Such silly games people like you play. This whole thread is a great example.

"BLACK LIVES MATTER". No, how about "ALL LIVES MATTER". But then again, I guess that doesn't fit with the agenda at hand for people like you.

Have a great day :)

mod edit: fixed broken quoteblock

I'd say that the reason why you don't often see "white culture" mentioned by name is because whites are the majority; referring to "white culture" would almost be like referring to "American culture."  So I somewhat agree with your point.

To me, the problem is more that "black culture" is frequently used as an explanation for why black people have problems... but when white people have problems, no such explanation is offered.  And if some people are going to cite crime statistics as justification for police brutality, then by the same token, whites should also be facing the same kind of racial profiling relative to Asians.

Again for emphasis:
(http://chainsawsuit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/20141204-patreon.png)

Again for emphasis:
(http://i.imgur.com/NYUHSKJ.jpg?1)

(http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/61937952.jpg)

Those of you that continue the discussion after this rebuttal are certifiable masochists.

Rich, if you need any help locating the Back button on your browser, let me know.  The technology exists to leave a thread you don't care for without clicking on Reply.

thug: a violent person, especially a criminal.

riot: a violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd

The word "thug" was used to describe Occupy Wall Street protestors, including one of the leaders of the movement, Danny Cline, who happens to be *gasp* white.

http://reason.com/blog/2011/10/08/danny-cline-occupy-wall-street

The Occupy Wall Street protestors were not black prosteters, in fact many if not most of them were white.

All you have to do is search on Google for Occupy Wall Street thugs and you will get a slew of articles referring to the protestors as thugs.

WTO protestors have also been referred to as thugs. I do not believe they are of any particular race.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2003/09/004521.php

So the use of the word was never an issue when it was being used against these organizations but now it is used to describe mostly black looters (you know, people who are committing illegal acts, i.e. thugs) and now it is an issue.

As for the use of the word riot, here is a New York Daily News article referring to fans rioting after the SF Giants won the World Series.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/san-francisco-giants-fans-riot-world-series-win-gallery-1.1992930

NYDN is pretty right leaning, isn't it?

Here are some more articles using the word "riot" to describe the celebration.

http://rt.com/usa/200987-san-francisco-world-series-riots/

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2014/10/sf_giants_fans_celebration_turns_to_rioting_after_world_series.html

I'm sure if we continued digging at these words that are supposedly racist code, we would find them used in instances that are not related to African Americans.

So please, put this guy to bed.

(http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/files/2014/01/StrawMan2.jpg)

Oh, my comment was based on personal experience.  ;D

Welcome back to this discussion, Rich!  I guess you have not yet decided to take your ball and go home, even though you have (twice!) opined on how much of a waste of time you feel this thread is.

I'm not sure why you and Hoodie have decided to dedicate multiple paragraphs to a single-line mention (out of 10 tweets) of the word thug, nor can I determine where in this thread the term "thug" was claimed to be racist.  But congratulations on thoroughly rebutting an argument not being made here.

And I'd think that it would be clear that after posting links to four different examples of white people rioting (including news articles specifically using that word), I'm not claiming that "riot" is a racist term.  However, looking through your links (as well as the earlier examples I posted), I can find no mention of white welfare mothers or white deadbeat dads, nor do I see anyone calling for the vast majority of law-abiding whites to stand up (you know, as a race) and denounce these rioters.  Statistics about white-on-white crime also seem to be absent from said articles.  It must be nice to have some dumb people riot without it being an indictment on your culture as a whole.

That picture of a strawman was the perfect conclusion to your post, though.

This is your problem in a nutshell. I never said the thread was a waste of time. I said responding to you is a waste of time, because you do exactly what you did here. Either you're not too quick on the uptake and points fly right over your head or you purposefully enjoy twisting what other people are saying. There is zero interest on your part in having a discussion, you just want to talk down to everyone else and not bother listening to other points of view.

If Asian-Americans saw whites the way whites see blacks...there would be a bunch of white dudes dating fat Asian chicks.

And here is your problem in a nutshell: you protest vigorously that you never said this thread was a waste of time (a thread I created, it bears mentioning), and that you only said responding to me is a waste of time.  Yet every single post you have made to this thread is either a) a direct response to me, b) a response to the subject matter I posted in the OP, or c) complaining about me that has nothing to do with the subject matter.  And so even though you continually insist that no one should bother responding to me, you just keep doing it.  But to you, this detail is apparently unimportant.

Again, no one is forcing you to read this thread or reply to it.  If you think it's a waste of time to reply to me, then... don't?  But if you are going to take the time to reply, it would be nice if you spent less time complaining about me being mean and more time addressing the topic at hand.  Because so far, you haven't been addressing any of the real points:

- that there's a vast gulf between how black rioters are treated and how white rioters are treated, even when the white rioters are "destroying their own communities" over total nonsense like the outcome of a football game
- that welfare mothers, deadbeat dads, and other elements of "black culture" are frequently cited in mainstream media as a cause of the problems blacks face, but almost never cited as a cause of the same problems when whites face them
- that black people are expected, as a race, to specifically take responsibility for condemning lawbreakers, while whites are never asked to do the same

But rather than counter those points, you're citing dictionary definitions of the word "thug" and insisting that white people are also capable of rioting (as if anyone was arguing to the contrary) while posting unintentionally ironic pictures of strawmen.

It would be easier to accept your complaints about process as valid if you weren't making astoundingly poor attempts to address the subject.  Instead, it just looks like you're whining about me personally as a smokescreen because you don't have an actual counterargument to the points I'm making.  (see: "you're taking me out of context!")

They don't say fat anymore. I'm not sure why, but "thick" is the new fat for some reason, hahahaha