Powered by Bravenet Bravenet Blog

Subscribe to Journal

Tag Board

mas huda: jos banget lah
The Ultimate Herpes Protocol Review: The Ultimate Herpes Protocol Review
What Men Secretly Want Review: What Men Secretly Want Review
The Venus Factor Review: The Venus Factor Review
iklan lucu indonesia: iklan lucu indonesia, bikin ngkakak. Iklan Smartfren Terbaru Versi Live Smart Best Friend
saç ekimi: sac ekimi, sac ekim merkezi, sac ekimi fiyat, sac ekim istanbul
Grosir jilbab: grosir jilbab indonesia
iklan lucu luar negeri: Iklan Kondom Yunani Lucu Tapi Gak Pantas Dilihat
ituBola.com JUDI BOLA, AGEN BOLA, AGEN JUDI BOLA : http://meredicta.blogspot.com/2014/04/itubolacom-judi-bola-agen-bola-agen.html
Obat aborsi: andre.ical@yahoo.com
Obat aborsi: http://obataborsi.pw/
Seks İçin 333 Neden!: Zevk almak ve ya neslimizi sürdürmek için seks yapıyoruz doğru mu?Ama düşünün hiç karşınızdakini ödüllendirmek ya da kutlamak veyahutta sadece merhametten belki biraz da şehvet bağımlılığından sevişiyor olabilir miyiz? Yıllardır erkeklerin fiziksel olarak, kadınlarınsa duygusal sebeplerden ötürü seviştiğini söyler dururlar. Oysaki bu tabu artık yıkıldı ve yapılan araştırmalar son derece farklı sebeplerden dolayı insanların seviştiklerini ortaya çıkardı.
android murah asus: info android murah dari asus
Genel Gündem: Doğru ve tarafsız haber sitesi. Son Dakika haberleri
Grosir jilbab: grosir jilbab indonesia
Sanal Pos Cozumleri: Talepleriniz doğrultusunda Cari Hesap bakiyleriniz de dahil olmak üzere güvenli ve pratik şekilde vakit kaybetmeden tahsilat yapabilir hatta ödemeleri taksitlendirebilirsiniz.
ALAT BANTU SEX: Kami Menyediakan Alat Bantu Sex, Obat Kuat, Obat Perangsang, Obat Peninggi Badan, Pelangsing Badan, Penggemuk Badan, Pembesar Penis, Pembesar Payudara, Obat Kuat, Perangsang Wanita, Alat Bantu Sex Pria
Grosir jilbab: grosir jilbab indonesia
sewa mobil surabaya: rental mobil surabaya, lokasi dekat bandara
rental mobil surabaya: rental mobil surabaya, lokasi dekat bandara
ESCORT BAYAN: ESCORT BAYAN, BAYAN ESCORT, SİTESİ BUYRUN BEYLER, ESCORT GİRLS
ESCORT BAYAN: ESCORT BAYAN, BAYAN ESCORT, SİTESİ BUYRUN BEYLER, ESCORT GİRLS
fat-block: fdss
pasang iklan gratis tanpa register: pasang iklan gratis tanpa register
Hasir tek cit: Tel kalınlıkları 2,mm ile 8 mm arasında göz aralıkları da 20 mm den 150mm ye kadar olan gerek sıcak daldırma galvanizli, gerekse siyah tavlı telden ilam edilen hasır tel üretimimizle askeri alanlar, makine imalatı, tavukçuluk gibi çok değişik sektörlerdeki taleplere cevap vermekteyiz
agen sbobet: http://agen365.info
Afatogel.com Bandar Terbesar Situs Togel Online Terpercaya: Afatogel.com Bandar Terbesar Situs Togel Online Terpercaya
Eyangtogel.com Togel Singapura | Togel China | Togel Sydney | Togel Cambodia: Eyangtogel.com Togel Singapura | Togel China | Togel Sydney | Togel Cambodia
oyunlar: oyunla , oyun
Alfamart official partner merchandise FIFA piala dunia Brazil 2014: http://tempatjualbelionline.bl.ee/2014/03/alfamart-official-partner-merchandise-fifa-piala-dunia-brazil-2014
sewa mobil: nice information
hediyelik esya: siteniz harika. cok güzek olmus. bayıldım. tesekkürler
tips bisnis: nice info
alat bantu seks: alat bantu seks
memperbesar penis: memperbesar penis
penambah gairah: penambah gairah
Tas Etnik Mordiva: Tas Etnik Mordiva

Please type in the four characters shown in the black box.

Monday, December 24th 2012

3:42 PM

Two Knuckleheads For The Price Of One: In Response To Chuck Ross & Vox Day

"Ok so, bring up Black/Brown violence in the wake of the Newtown Massacre is something of a red herring because the people who typically commit this type of mass murder are not NAMs. Its usually a disgruntled, middle/upper class, young, white male. No doubt Black/Hispanic gun violence is an issue however when talking about Newton its off-topic and out of place. 

Its also disingenuous of the ALT-Right to bring up NAM gun violence because, lets be frank, they really don't give a shit about NAMs duking it out and the 'collateral damage' that results because its not happening to them, in their suburbans. Why is it that the Newtown shootings has these people deflecting gun violence in a white suburb onto people that are a world away? All evidence suggest, if a suburbanite, white or otherwise, is going to be a victim of gun violence it will be most likely at the hands of another middle/upper class suburbanite, usually an white guy in his 20s with 'mental illness' (aka the new catchall phrase for people who's paranoia and hate has consumed them to the point of murder). These people aren't doing themselves any favors by laying blame at the feet of NAMs. These massacres are not the result of dope slanging gone wrong or gang warfare, its a result of a culture that teaches white suburbanites to fear all that is foreign to them to the point they ignore the very real dangers living among them. With this mentality the body count will only continue to rise

I also find it pretty funny how Alt-righter have been successful at avoiding any extracurricular contact with NAMs (via white flight, private/white-washed public schools for their kids, highly controlled social circles) yet when something/someone in the in-group fucks up in Whitetopia they blame it on NAMs who are nowhere to be found. 

Amazing!"

-O-Files reader Y, Dec 22, 2012

"It has been interesting to witness the reponse of white nationalist-types to Obsidian’s argument. They’ve argued that we should still be focused mostly on black crime because although white men are 70 pct of mass shooters, white people are 70 percent of the population so it’s proportional. Black men, however, commit violence out of proportion with their numbers because they are inferior and inherently violent so that is where we need to focus our attention.

Of course the obvious rejoinder is that if black men are as inherently violent as they say, and white people have a far lower predisposition for violence, surely black men should be commiting mass shootings out of proportion to our numbers as well—but this is not happening. In fact, it is white men who are overperforming, if you will, when it comes to mass shootings. It’s not as if black criminals don’t have access to assault weapons, yet black involvement in crimes of mass death is much lower than their involvement in other kinds of crime. I would really be interested to see what people have to say about this."

- O-Files reader Dragnet, Dec 23, 2012

In the days since my last post covering the Sandy Hook massacre, it seems that my writings have gotten the attention of two of the more vociferous voices on the White Alt-Right: Chuck Ross, whom you all know, and a newcomer of sorts to the O-Files, one Vox Day. I look forward to chin-checking them both.

Let's begin, shall we?

Chuck goes first:

"Trollsidian has been coming at me behind the scenes for a while now.  I won’t bore you with the details, I’ll just say that we’ve spoken on the phone at his request and he’s complimented me some and then criticized me some."

O: This is true, though grossly incomplete. I could be a real SOB and release the actual emails as to what was actually said and by whom and put the whole thing on blast, but instead I'll leave that to my private exchanges with Mr. Ross himself. Suffice it to say however, that what you're seeing from him is NOT what you actually get. 

Chuckie continues:

"He’s really gone on tilt since I started harping on the mainstream black opinion on Robert Griffin III.  If the black community really does think that RG3 is some sort of Uncle Tom then how in the hell does the black community, in the main, expect to attain a Middle Class American existence?  If “acting white” – or “being successful” – is something to frown upon, then how will they make it?  Basically, they won’t, and when they don’t they’ll just double down on the claim that institutional racism prevented them from being successful or uneducated or poor or criminal."

O: Hmm. OK, lemme get this straight - here we have a guy who's posted about RG3 no less than a half a dozen times, and I'm the one who's "gone on tilt"? To date I've only had one post on RG3, and that was really in response to this knucklehead's blatherings on the issue. Moreover, Chuck's simpleton argument is downright dumb, since I not only roundly debunked it, but Chuck has refused to respond eversince:

"I cannot speak for Mr. Parker, but Champ made very clear in his post that he was and remains an ardent Obama supporter - a Man who was literally, RAISED BY WHITE PEOPLE. Nor is he by any means alone, if Black voting totals in the past two presidential elections is anything to go by. Clearly, Black people, in toto, disagree with you; If indeed your "simple argument" held water, Barack Obama would NOT have become the 44th POTUS. 

As I've noted above, I am the product of solidly working/middle class roots. My parents were married for 30 years, until the day my father died. I come from three generations of US Marines. Ms. Brown Sugah's parents were/are also solidy middle class, and her father served in Vietnam. Both our closest Black friends came from families a heck of a lot closer to the one you praised raised RG3, and more to the point, she attended "White" schools, all the way through grad school, while I was speaking "White" from kindergarten age - yet, neither one of us was ever derided for it, nor had our "Blackness" questioned. I think this is because of other factors that I may write about in due course. 

In any event, Obama clearly debunks your "simpleton" argument. I also note, with a degree of satisfaction I might add, that you have failed to address my above points per my email. Please feel free to actually do so - with at least some evidence this time(?) - at your leisure."

Please feel free to respond anytime you like Chump, er, Chuck...

Not to be outdone, Chuck goes on:

"The Troll had a problem with my linking to a post by Vox Day about the racial breakdown of murder in America.  The discussion after Newtown has moved quickly.  It went from discussing mass shootings to gun violence in general.  Critics claim that the U.S. is an inherently violent country.  But when you control for race, the nation seems more on par with the sainted nations of Western Europe.  Minnesota isn’t much different than Sweden.  American crime rates can’t be compared, straight up.  The facts confronted Obsidian so he lashed out at me, in email.  I told him to take it up with Vox Day and it appears that he might have.  Vox Day has responded on his blog and basically thumped The Troll."

O: Hardly, as we'll see in a moment; but to get back to Chuck - and by extension the whole of the White Alt-Right - isn't it fascinating that they utterly refuse to address the very real problem of White Males Shooting Up The Place? Why now all the concern trolling over Black gun crime? Why now all the concern over, say, abortion? Why now the sudden need to launch into these psuedo-logical discourses about "who's committing the real crime"? Of course anyone who even has a modicum of commonsense can see that this is all squid ink - the White Alt-Right Manosphere simply refuses to place the blame of White Male Violence squarely where it belongs - on said White Males themselves. 

Chuck staggers on:

"Oh wow, that means that over the past 30 years whites committed 73.3% of mass murders.  And in 1980 whites made up almost 80% of the U.S. population.  Today they make up about 72%.  Sooooo…white mass murderers fit their demographic representation.  This is quite unlike black murderers who are greatly overrepresented compared to their population representation.  The general numbers are that blacks are only 13% of the U.S. population but commit over half of the murders and violent crimes in the nation.  And a far larger number of crimes to boot."

O: So what? None of those Blacks shot up a White school last week, murdered dozens of White kids and half a dozen of White Women. None of those Blacks were responsible for the mass murders at that movie theater in Aurora. None of those Blacks were responsible for what went down at that Sikh temple. And none of those Blacks were responsible for what went down out in Oregon. This "proportional" argument is just downright disingenuous, fullstop, and the White Alt-Righters know it - which is why NONE of them have deigned to question the marketing strategies of outfits like Bushmaster - you know, the weapons company that has as its tagline, "Consider your Man Card Reissued"? Yea, that one. 

Which brings me to Mr. Purple Prose himself, one Vox Day, who says that my recent calling him out was quite the bold move; based on what I see from him in response, he's got moves that even I would have trouble keeping up with. Didn't know a White boy could shimmy like that.

His response consists largely of squid ink, hyperbole, personal insult and rhetorical finger-snapping that would make a flaming gay guy blush, but Mr. VD seems to have experienced a rare moment of clarity when he said the following:

"There are real problems to discuss with regards to why young white men commit acts of mass murder.  But they are completely unrelated to the arguments that the pro-gun control forces have presented, and to which I have responded."

O: I couldn't agree more, Vox! So, riddle me this one, Voxman:

WHY AREN'T YOU DISCUSSING THOSE "REAL PROBLEMS" AS TO WHY YOUNG WHITE MEN COMMIT ACTS OF MASS MURDER? I mean, why are you spending so much precious time debunking ostensibly dubious arguments pro-gun control supporters and the like are proferring, if you know there are "real problems to discuss" as to why "young white men commit acts of mass murder"? I mean, you're a pretty prolific guy, right? We should see you tackling the, I don't know, reasons why Bushmaster has to market its products in a way that clearly exploits the evolved sexual psychology of said White males - right? 

Right? 

I went and did a quick Google using Vox Day's handle and the terms "young white men mass murder", and the results were...paltry, at best. In fact, just for shits and giggles, I entered the search terms "Vox Day Bushmaster", and again got...nothing. 

The conclusion is clear - White Alt-Righters like Vox Day not only have zero problem with the way Bushmaster markets its products, it really doesn't have that much of a problem with White Men Snapping Out either - if anything, as Dave Futrelle of the blog Manboobz makes clear, guys like Vox Day take the view that said White Guys Flipping Out is seen as a legitimate act of resistance (and isn't it just a weebit fascinating that the only guy who happens to be asking these questions about the marketing practices of armorers like Bushmaster, also just so happens to be the Black guy - not the self-proclaimed saviors of White Western Civ? Hmm?). Don't believe me? Take a look at the comments section of VD's post responding to me, and see for yourself the attempts on the part of his readers to actually debate the merits of the depraved actions of one Anders Breivik. 

That both Chuck and Vox Day can spend all their time talking about how bad Black folk really are, in the wake of one of the worst mass shooting sprees in American history - where the victims and perp, were White, really tells you all you need to know about what the Alt-Right Manosphere, is truly all about. 

Shameful shit, folks. Shameful.

*No firearms were used in the double chin-checking of Knuckleheads in this post

Now adjourn your asses...

The Obsidian

18 comment(s).

Posted by dragnet:

"He’s really gone on tilt since I started harping on the mainstream black opinion on Robert Griffin III. If the black community really does think that RG3 is some sort of Uncle Tom then how in the hell does the black community, in the main, expect to attain a Middle Class American existence?"

With this bit I have officially lost all respect for Chuck. How he can assert that Parker's riff on RG3 is "mainstream black opinion" is just beyond me. I don't know ANY black people who don't think RG3 is really black or authentically black or whatever. The guy is just full of it.

"White Alt-Righters like Vox Day not only have zero problem with the way Bushmaster markets its products, it really doesn't have that much of a problem with White Men Snapping Out either - if anything, as Dave Futrelle of the blog Manboobz makes clear, guys like Vox Day take the view that said White Guys Flipping Out is seen as a legitimate act of resistance."

I think that's the only reasonable conclusion you can come to at this point. And it's deplorable.

And the "proportionality" argument is a red herring for reasons I've said before. I'll restate: if white people are less inherently disposed to crime & violence, then white men should be perpetrators of mass shootings at far lower rates (~70 pct) than they are now---but this is not the case. If alt-righters did actually take on the question (they won't) they'd probably suggest a slew of socioeconomic and cultural factors that were driving it, not any sort of hereditary/racial/genetic drivers. Funny how all that is needed to explain white crimes of mass death, but only race (and not any other factors) is needed to explain black street crime.
Monday, December 24th 2012 @ 4:34 PM

Posted by Blacthor:

Good eve O.I read your blog constantly a really appreciate your viewpoint.
The coping skills of white males have always been suspect.It's like certain stress factors always put these skills on display.The outburst of this group will always be quickly focused on something /someone else. In the movie "Falling Down" the characters response was deemed appropriate buy looking at the ticket sales.this same behavior is seen in my opinion in the Tea party.But to really take that response apart and really look at it would do to much psychological damage.They will gladly let the discussion stay on gun control issues. they will deflect to look at crime in the inner cities. In the latter case that is Their reasoning for having guns. The discussion is not about saving Jamal.So as they deflect more and more
mass murder incidents happen in their communities.
I recall when the discussions on trying teenagers as adults were taking place. At that time the were thinking of Black teenagers,shifting the focus even then. The Alt- Right still has it's "deep frame " from which to work from. ;)
Monday, December 24th 2012 @ 7:14 PM

Posted by Handle:

Imagine what the reaction would be if it had been a suicide-attack by an Islamist terrorist that had killed exactly the same children. Who would be doing the political exploitation - and what overreactions would you see being proposed? "Did Obama keep the country and our children safe? Is he tough enough on the terrorists?"

At any rate, whatever the nature of these events, everybody's got their list of things they'd be willing and unwilling to have the government do if it would have prevented "this tragedy". TSA, Patriot Act, banning firearms, censoring entertainment, expansion of involuntary psychiatric committal criteria, etc.

But our lists don't line up - at all - and so it's constant cold civil war. Few people really care about the causes of and remedies for mass-shootings - they're all worried about the other side leveraging the rare incident to accomplish what they've always wanted to do anyway, "don't let a crisis go to waste," and so on. So people feel the need to change the subject, shift frames - and quick! - because it's the political implications that they're really worried about.
Monday, December 24th 2012 @ 8:16 PM

Posted by Lara:

If most black people don't agree with Rob Parker's comments then they should say so. There are plenty of black writers who could do this. If black people don't always agree, then don't always agree publicly.
Wednesday, December 26th 2012 @ 8:15 AM

Posted by MaMu1977:

@Lara

Really? *Really*!?

I could go on for a few paragraphs, and add multiple links, but I'll keep this nice and short: most African-Americans don't care about RG3. We have our own issues to worry about, whether a good (but overrated, to be frank) black quarterback is "black enough" isn't on our radar.
Wednesday, December 26th 2012 @ 2:28 PM

Posted by dragnet:

"If most black people don't agree with Rob Parker's comments then they should say so. There are plenty of black writers who could do this. If black people don't always agree, then don't always agree publicly."

Lara this is sheer lunacy. How exactly are “most black people” going to make it clear they disagree with Rob Parker? “Most black people” don’t have blogs or newspaper writing gigs or TV shows from which to voice their opinions. “Plenty of black writers” don’t speak for black people (no one does). They speak for themselves.
And why on earth should we have to voice disagreement with Rob Parker? Why on earth are we held accountable for shit some black guy says on television? No one holds all white people responsible for what a random white man says on television—why are we held to a different standard? Black people don’t need to agree or disagree publicly or anything—our only obligation is to get on with our lives as best as we can, same as anyone else. We’re not accountable for shit other random black people say on TV and it’s not our responsibility to speak up against other random black people so some white people can feel better.
Lara, what on earth is wrong with you? Why are you such a cretin? I’ve seen you voice (fairly) intelligent and nuanced opinions on blogs before—but when discussing black people, it’s like you’ve dropped 50 IQ points and had the empathy part of your brain blasted out with shotgun before firebombing it. I can only hope that you are smart enough to be deeply ashamed of yourself in your quiet moments. The good news is that you don’t have to be like this for good. All you have to do is begin to see black people as human in the same way that white people are. You’ve got your whole life ahead you, honey, and if you start now, change is possible.
Wednesday, December 26th 2012 @ 2:39 PM

Posted by Chuck Ross:

Dragnet,

Point is that Obsidian and yourself have come at me and my post which was about something that Rob Parker (and Champ from VSB) said about RG3. Why step to me? Take it to those guys who *directly stated* that their opinions were shared by many within the black community. Why would either of you go to the distiller when you could go directly to the source?

And you guys like to pretend that there isn't a strong current of anti "acting white" sentiment among black people, yet it keeps popping up. Furthermore, you refuse to investigate the overall impact that such thinking has on the aggregate outcomes of blacks.
Wednesday, December 26th 2012 @ 3:02 PM

Posted by Obsidian:

@Chuck:
"Point is that Obsidian and yourself have come at me and my post which was about something that Rob Parker (and Champ from VSB) said about RG3. Why step to me? Take it to those guys who *directly stated* that their opinions were shared by many within the black community. Why would either of you go to the distiller when you could go directly to the source?"

O: Because you were the one who spilled six gallons of virtual ink on this issue - as I've pointed out above, you've posted about the subject of RG3 no less than SIX TIMES - why so many crocodile tears over this "issue", Chuck? What is it to you either way? Why do you care so much? What, you gonna do the Peace Corps thing now, or what?

Secondly, you're so lazy you didn't take the time out to read the more than 600(!) comments left up on Champ's post at VSB because if you did you would have found out there there are far and away more Black folk who think along the lines of myself, MaMu and Dragnet than Parker or even, to some extent, Champ when it comes to RG3. I lost count to the number of those commenters who clearly said that they had no problem with RG3 whatsoever, and that included his choice of who he wants to spend his intimate time with. Put that with the fact that, as I've pointed out for the umpteenth time above, if indeed Black folk writ large had such an issue with Black folk "acting White", how then do you explain the overwhelming Black support for Barack Obama - twice(!) - a Black Man who was literally raised by White people?

You gonna respond to that or what?

"And you guys like to pretend that there isn't a strong current of anti "acting white" sentiment among black people, yet it keeps popping up."

O: Where? What studies, surverys or polls can you point any of us to, that proves your point? What, Parker and Champ is supposed to do the trick? Are you serious? Have you been drinking or getting high or something?
Wednesday, December 26th 2012 @ 4:16 PM

Posted by Obsidian:

"Furthermore, you refuse to investigate the overall impact that such thinking has on the aggregate outcomes of blacks."

O: Dragnet, MaMu (who is career military btw), myself, Champ, all hail from high working class/middle class Black families. Moreover, VSB is a blog that caters almost exclusively to the Buppie set. It is a fact that the Black middle class makes up the majority of the Black American population in the USA. You don't have a statistical leg to stand on here, and you know it, but you keep talking whacked shit outta the side of your neck - and then you wonder why I spend a bit of my time showing just how ridiculously silly you really are...

SMH...

O.
Wednesday, December 26th 2012 @ 4:19 PM

Posted by dragnet:

Was just about to type a response to Chuck, but I stand by what Obs said.

I'll only add that there are plenty black writers and their commentariat who take the anti-Parker position of this debate. Start with Ta-Nehisi Coates and then get your ass on Google and do some research:

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/12/espns-laughable-arbitration-of-rg3s-blackness-is-predictable/266264/#

"And you guys like to pretend that there isn't a strong current of anti "acting white" sentiment among black people, yet it keeps popping up."

No, it doesn't. Some random guy spouting shit on TV only counts as "popping up" if the same thing is said when random white people talk shit on TV. RG3's (or anyone else's) blackness is not in any way, shape, form or fashion a subject of serious debate or a serious cultural meme
among black people.

Both you and Lara need to get a grip.
Wednesday, December 26th 2012 @ 4:42 PM

Posted by Chuck Ross:

Fellas are in denial. More than whites and Asians, blacks and Hispanics punish their peers for "acting white" - being bookish and studious and what-not. Here's some research from a black Harvard prof, Roland Fryer.

You had Parker and Champ and then Jalen Rose who all spoke about how blacks punish blacks for not acting black enough. Barack Obama said as much back in '04. Bill Cosby has spoken on it.

Either way, Rob Parker had the bigger platform. I addressed his points at their face value. You guys criticized me even though I was responding to a sentiment expressed by a national sportswriter. Again, if you disagree with my reliance on Parker's anecdota, then why did Obsidian not write a post criticizing Rob Parker's perspective?

http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/fryer/files/aw_ednext.pdf
Thursday, December 27th 2012 @ 3:41 AM

Posted by Lara:

If I don't see black people as human then why would I waste my time commenting on a black man's blog? You know that's a false statement. You are a talented tenth black man. White Americans have deferred to people like you on race issues for some time now. You aren't accustomed to having that authority questioned.
Thursday, December 27th 2012 @ 8:27 AM

Posted by dragnet:

"If I don't see black people as human then why would I waste my time commenting on a black man's blog?"

I didn't say you didn't see black people as human---I implied that you didn't see black people as human in the same way that you see white people as human.

Big, big difference--and I stand by that statement.

And white Americans have NEVER deferred to black people on race issues. There was NEVER a time in American history where white people weren't the preeminent or prominent voices on race. There was NEVER time when white people deferred to me or thought that my opinions had more weight than theirs. White people have more than held their own on these matters--that's a fact.

Part of the problem of dialoging with alt-rights is really the same difficultly at the core of any kind of political conservatism: the longing for and/or reference to a time that never really existed in the way that those looking back believe that it did.

I'm also not a fan of "talented tenth" phrase--but really it's something that can be applied to any demographic, I suppose.
Thursday, December 27th 2012 @ 1:12 PM

Posted by Obsidian:

@Chuck:
"Fellas are in denial."

O: Yes, you Great White Hopes aka Alt-Righters most certainly are...

"More than whites and Asians, blacks and Hispanics punish their peers for "acting white" - being bookish and studious and what-not. Here's some research from a black Harvard prof, Roland Fryer."

O: As it happens, I'm very familiar with Fryer's researches, so I can intelligently discuss it. Among the points Fryer makes, is the idea that (1), Black Males are more "punished" for "acting White" than Black Females; and (2), this "punishment" is more likely to occur if the "punished" are seen as "defecting" to White America. In other words: if a Black kid is seen as a "flight risk" in terms of taking his talents outside of the Black community. Now, I think that this is a quite a novel notion on Fryer's part, as it raises a heck of a lot of very interesting and provocative questions. It would also explain why I, for example, was never "vilified" for "acting White" - because I chose to attend all or majority Black schools. Pure anecdote I know, but my persona experience seems to tally well with what Fryer proposes here.

In any rate, again we have to ask - why this line of discussion, and why now Chuck? It's all seen as diversionary tactics to keep from discussing in an honest way, a serious problem of national proportions.

"You had Parker and Champ and then Jalen Rose who all spoke about how blacks punish blacks for not acting black enough. Barack Obama said as much back in '04. Bill Cosby has spoken on it."

O: Yet Obama has been supported overwhelmingly by Blacks twice. Cosby got damn near a standing ovation when he made his now infamous remarks back in 04. And as I've pointed out to you several times now, Champ's RG3 post garnered more than 600 comments, the overwhemlming majority of them either tacitly supportive of RG3, or neutral; I defy you to find me just 100 comments there that derided RG3 for "acting White". I'll wait...
Thursday, December 27th 2012 @ 3:04 PM

Posted by Obsidian:

"Either way, Rob Parker had the bigger platform. I addressed his points at their face value."

O: Why? Simply having a bigger megaphone doesn't then mean that one is any better prepared to discuss a matter as anyone else. Why didn't you do some actual research in terms of polls and the like if you really want to know what Black folk think about anything? And again: why all the handwringing now?

"You guys criticized me even though I was responding to a sentiment expressed by a national sportswriter."

O: No, we're criticising you because you've been like a pitbull whose lockjawed on an issue and hasn't let go, nor has explained why it is so much personal importance to him. To date, you have yet to explain.

"Again, if you disagree with my reliance on Parker's anecdota, then why did Obsidian not write a post criticizing Rob Parker's perspective?"

O: But you didn't just rely on Parker's perspective; you also brought in the perspective of Jamie Foxx - remember? Clearly, you're angling for something here, something that doesn't even have anything to do with the current discussion on the national stage, no matter how much you or your fellow Great White Hopes try to twist it into. The discussion is why so many White Guys are Going Postal and shooting up the place with high-powered, high-capacity assault weapons, Chuck? That you refuse to discuss this, says a heck of a lot more about the degree of denial you and your White Alt-Righers are in, than anything you think it says about me and mine...

O.
Thursday, December 27th 2012 @ 3:05 PM

Posted by Obsidian:

"I'm surprised (not really) by what you've done here. You crossed up the discussion of RG3 and gun violence. I didn't do that, remember? These were two different discussions and you've brought them together in an overall critique of me and now that I've responded to the different beefs you have with me you're accusing me of bringing up RG3 when it doesn't matter."

O: Hmm. Well, per your blog, the majority of your posts on RG3 occured after the Newtown massacre, and to date, you don't have anywhere near as many posts on the latter issue, despite the fact that it's been a topic of intense discussion nationally. In contrast, I have easily half a dozen posts devoted to some aspect of the Newtown shootings. Hmm.

"Re Roland Fryer: so you're accepting the point that blacks are accused of acting white if they step to far outside the black community without paying dues back to the community."

O: I accept that Fryer has an interesting and novel theory that deserves closer attention and study.

"This reinforces my original point. This is still a barrier to exit/entry for blacks. How can blacks fully integrate and earn money and build social and economic capital if these barriers exist?"

O: Most Blacks are middle class and have been for quite some time now, Chuck - your excoriation of Champ is interesting in this regard since, again for the umpteenth time, VSB is a venue that caters almost exclusively to middle class Blacks. Hence your crocodile tear-laden handwringing is just a bit florid here.

"That's how Jamie Foxx fits in. He seemingly wants to take part in movies created by whites in Hollywood just as the general argument among activists and academics and progressives is that blacks are being unfairly prevented from entering the mainstream status quo. But, again, they are shooting themselves in the foot by not playing by the rules of the establishment."
Thursday, December 27th 2012 @ 5:03 PM

Posted by Obsidian:

O: Hmm, that's a very interesting reading of Foxx's interview in Vibe magazine. Are you sure you've actually read it? From what I read, I got the point Foxx was making - that there was a price to be paid, a toll that it takes on one to exist in a White world. DuBois discusses this a century ago in his Souls of Black Folk - perhaps you've heard of it? At any event, you should go to see Django Unchained, because Tarantino's vision regarding the movie is most interesting. Here's a bit of background info on it:

"As for why the topic is important to me: you've followed my blog. You should notice that I like to investigate various angles to different topics. You've yet to tell me why what I choose to write about at my blog bothers you so much."

O: It doesn't "bother" me as much as it intrigues me - here you are, a defacto White Nationalist type, who spends a great deal of time discussing what Black folk do or don't think, etc. I'm just wondering why it's of such great importance to you, especially given the fact that you seem to have some pretty firm opinions and beliefs about Black people in any event (remember: I'm not going to be able to change your fundamental belief system - right?).

"At any rate, my blog covers diverse topics whereas your blog only seems to cover me. What's up with that?"

O: Clearly you don't read my blog anywhere near as much as I read yours. If you did, you wouldn't say such silly things. I'll go on record right now that you have far and away more posts about Jezebel and Feministing - blogs that, by your own admission, you've been banned from, than I have posts about or mentioning you.

Shall we test out the theory?

O.
Thursday, December 27th 2012 @ 5:04 PM

Posted by Harga Samsung Galaxy S4:

Oke Sayank, Cip Oke
Sunday, April 21st 2013 @ 1:45 AM

Post New Comment

No Smilies More Smilies »
Please type the letters you see