The most tolerant and long-suffering people in the world?

[Kirkrapine]

"Privileged status"? You, my friend have been drinking too much of the spiked kool-aid, at the DNC party.

You can't seriously doubt white males had privileged status in the 1950s -- or, for that matter, now, to somewhat lesser degree.

I worked hard for everything I call mine. I also worked hard for some of the things the whiners, calling me privileged, call theirs too.

That doesn't mean you're not privileged.

 

[AllAmericanMale]

You can't seriously doubt white males had privileged status in the 1950s -- or, for that matter, now, to somewhat lesser degree.

It's not the 1950's anymore, so I fail to see your point as to how that generation's perceived privilege has any bearing on my generation and our hard work, or lack thereof, that creates our own opportunity . Those men, that you're claiming were privileged, also fought for my freedom, came home, bought a house and a Chevy and lived the good life trying to forget what they saw. Most men today will never know what that's like.

That doesn't mean you're not privileged.

You know absolutely nothing about me, but feel free to tell me exactly why I'm privileged.

 

[Boxlicker101]

You can't seriously doubt white males had privileged status in the 1950s -- or, for that matter, now, to somewhat lesser degree.

I am a white male who was raised in the 1950's and I can doubt it all day. My family was not privileged. My father, a high school dropout and combat veteran, worked on a factory assembly line, next to men of all races. My younger brother went to work in the same factory after he finished high school. My mother worked at a series of low-paying jobs, and we lived in rented property and bought used cars. We got by and supported ourselves, as did most persons back then.

That doesn't mean you're not privileged.

So, what do you call privileged? I'm not saying we were worse off than most people; we were just not any better off.

 

[Kirkrapine]

So, what do you call privileged? I'm not saying we were worse off than most people; we were just not any better off.

You don't have to fear getting pulled over for no reason, and, when you do encounter the police, you don't have to fear getting shot.

 

[dan_c00000]

I am a white male who was raised in the 1950's and I can doubt it all day.

And you've never interacted with a black person. We know you're a racist box, you don't have to keep reminding us.

At least I know who was president in 1972.

Really? Because I don't think you did. You didn't mention it at 4am in your first post. It wasn't until noon that you looked up who was president in 1972.

I took out your bullshit about my link because you clearly didn't read it.

 

[AllAmericanMale]

You don't have to fear getting pulled over for no reason, and, when you do encounter the police, you don't have to fear getting shot.

I get sick and tired of the same bullshit excuse I hear from the same group of people. I'm a Caucasian male that used to own a ghetto hooptyride. I was profiled. I was pulled over for no reason. It was annoying. I was pulled out of my car and given field sobriety tests with absolutely no cause, because the officer knew he was wrong and had no reason to stop me. It made me late for class and work sometimes, but I was not fired, I did not fail the class, the absences were excused and because I was not a pissed off bitter prick I WAS NOT SHOT!

If you're stopped, signal that you're pulling off the road. Turn your dome light on, keep your hands on the wheel and be polite!

Does it suck to be pulled over? Yes. Are a lot of Cops dicks on a power trip because they were picked on too much in highschool and decided they didn't want to try the college thing and possibly deal with more of the same? Yes. But, at the end of the day, if you're polite and don't give them a reason, they're going to let you off with a warning because you're boring and they'll go look for a confrontation elsewhere. I'd rather there be a cop around, harassing me, when I don't need one then not have one around when I do.

 

[Boxlicker101]

You don't have to fear getting pulled over for no reason, and, when you do encounter the police, you don't have to fear getting shot.

I have been arrested for no good reason and I have been pulled over for the most trivial of reasons. I don't fear getting shot by the cops because I don't hassle them. There are risks of my getting shot or otherwise being assaulted in some parts of Oakland or other cities, so I avoid those places.

 

[Boxlicker101]

And you've never interacted with a black person. We know you're a racist box, you don't have to keep reminding us.



Really? Because I don't think you did. You didn't mention it at 4am in your first post. It wasn't until noon that you looked up who was president in 1972.

I took out your bullshit about my link because you clearly didn't read it.

Of course I have interacted with black people, when I was in high school, in the Air Force, and after, when I was working. Such interaction was normal, and I was not concerned with it.

My first post in this thread was to another author, because I considered that to be more important than the bickering that usually goes on. The OP is very long and is rife with errors, so I responded after sleeping. And, like most people, I do know and did know Nixon was POTUS in 1972.

 

[dan_c00000]

Of course I'm a racist.

I fixed your post.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101 View Post
Of course I'm not a racist.

That's too bad because, if you were, I would love to have you fuck me in the ass, bareback, and then suck you off

No way! I'm particular about where I put my cock.

 

[lovecraft68]

Cleveland Browns fans?

 

[CandiCame]

I am a white male who was raised in the 1950's and I can doubt it all day. My family was not privileged. My father, a high school dropout and combat veteran, worked on a factory assembly line, next to men of all races. My younger brother went to work in the same factory after he finished high school. My mother worked at a series of low-paying jobs, and we lived in rented property and bought used cars. We got by and supported ourselves, as did most persons back then.



So, what do you call privileged? I'm not saying we were worse off than most people; we were just not any better off.

You answered your own question. That's literally what privilege is- you weren't better off or worse than other people. You didn't have to deal with racism or sexism at an institutionalized level, because you had the privilege- you could go your whole life and ignore it if you wanted to. You could even convince yourself that it didn't exist if you wanted to. Other people, just like you, have to deal with that- people who are no better or worse than you have additional bullshit heaped on them that you had the privilege to not have to deal with.

If you want a good example- look at your parents! They lived in the 1950s, got married and had two kids- because of white privilege. Now, imagine of one of them had been black. Interracial marriage wasn't decriminalized until 1962. They would have been denied their marriage license- would not have had the PRIVILEGE of a marriage. No tax cuts, no putting your mom on your dad's insurance, no rights as his next-of-kin if he'd been killed on the job- they would have lost all those privileges. Just because one of them wasn't white.

The fact that you never had to think about that and how it would have affected you- how it DID affect other families- comes from your position of privilege.

 

[Boxlicker101]

You answered your own question. That's literally what privilege is- you weren't better off or worse than other people. You didn't have to deal with racism or sexism at an institutionalized level, because you had the privilege- you could go your whole life and ignore it if you wanted to. You could even convince yourself that it didn't exist if you wanted to. Other people, just like you, have to deal with that- people who are no better or worse than you have additional bullshit heaped on them that you had the privilege to not have to deal with.

If you want a good example- look at your parents! They lived in the 1950s, got married and had two kids- because of white privilege. Now, imagine of one of them had been black. Interracial marriage wasn't decriminalized until 1962. They would have been denied their marriage license- would not have had the PRIVILEGE of a marriage. No tax cuts, no putting your mom on your dad's insurance, no rights as his next-of-kin if he'd been killed on the job- they would have lost all those privileges. Just because one of them wasn't white.

The fact that you never had to think about that and how it would have affected you- how it DID affect other families- comes from your position of privilege.

First, my parents were married in 1936 and had three offspring, all sons.

Second, the abomination known as the anti-miscegenation laws applied to both parties in a marriage. There was no "white privilege." If a white man married a black woman, as in the case of the Loving family, they would both go to prison. If a black man married a white woman, they would both go to prison. The same misbegotten law applied to everybody involved in such a marriage. How can you call that "privilege?"

Third, my dad had medical insurance through either his union or employer; I'm unsure which. My mother was included and so were my brothers and I. I also don't know how this would have been in the case of an interracial marriage, but I am quite sure the restrictions would have applied equally to the white wife of a black man and the black wife of a white man. There would have been no racial privilege.

ETA: Out of curiosity, I looked up anti miscegenation laws in WI, where I was raised. There were never any such laws there.

 

[dan_c00000]

If a white man married .

They also didn't lynch white boys for looking at black women.

Also, in the Loving case, they were never actually put in jail but had their sentence suspended provided they move out of the state of Virginia.

Another stellar job by the racist history buff.

 

[Boxlicker101]

They also didn't lynch white boys for looking at black women.

Also, in the Loving case, they were never actually put in jail but had their sentence suspended provided they move out of the state of Virginia.

Another stellar job by the racist history buff.

I'm well aware of the evil deeds perpetrated by Democrats in the South, from the Revolutionary War until the 1970's, when white Republicans compelled them to stop. The Emmet Till case was one example, but there were thousands more. Whether the Lovings were jailed or forced to leave Virginia is neither here nor there. The point is, the law and the punishment applied to both of them, and there was no white privilege involved in the enforcement of the stupid law.

 

[CandiCame]

First, my parents were married in 1936 and had three offspring, all sons.

Second, the abomination known as the anti-miscegenation laws applied to both parties in a marriage. There was no "white privilege." If a white man married a black woman, as in the case of the Loving family, they would both go to prison. If a black man married a white woman, they would both go to prison. The same misbegotten law applied to everybody involved in such a marriage. How can you call that "privilege?"

Third, my dad had medical insurance through either his union or employer; I'm unsure which. My mother was included and so were my brothers and I. I also don't know how this would have been in the case of an interracial marriage, but I am quite sure the restrictions would have applied equally to the white wife of a black man and the black wife of a white man. There would have been no racial privilege.

ETA: Out of curiosity, I looked up anti miscegenation laws in WI, where I was raised. There were never any such laws there.

God, it must be nice to be this sheltered. It must be nice to be this privileged.

 

[CandiCame]

I'm well aware of the evil deeds perpetrated by Democrats in the South, from the Revolutionary War until the 1970's, when white Republicans compelled them to stop. The Emmet Till case was one example, but there were thousands more. Whether the Lovings were jailed or forced to leave Virginia is neither here nor there. The point is, the law and the punishment applied to both of them, and there was no white privilege involved in the enforcement of the stupid law.

Again, it's not about your political party. It's literally about the fact that you don't have to deal with things like institutionalized racism or sexism. That's what privilege is.

 

[Boxlicker101]

God, it must be nice to be this sheltered. It must be nice to be this privileged.

What sheltered and what privileged? As a boy and as a man, I was governed by the same laws and the same custom as all males where I was. And women always had easier lives and more available jobs than I. In 1960, when I left the Air Force, I sought a white collar job, but most such jobs were only available to women.

Had I not volunteered for the armed forces, I probably would have been drafted, which is something that never would have happened to a woman. Generally speaking, back then at least, women were the privileged class. That's a good example of institutionalized sexism.

 

[dan_c00000]

from the Revolutionary War

There were no Democrats during that time, racist. The modern Democratic party goes back to Andrew Jackson in 1828, racist.

You're shitty at history box. Might I suggest you stop posting and go back to your Klan meeting?

 

[Jesus_Ateo]

In Ann Coulter’s book; Scandal; she claims that “conservatives are the most tolerant (and long-suffering) people in the world".

I’m not joking. She really said this.

It’s on page 204, if you want to look it up.

So, let’s examine that statement. What sort of horrible suffering have Ann Coulter’s people been suffering? What sort of horrible tortures have the liberals forced the tolerant (and long-suffering) right-wingers of America to endure?

Ann Coulter (as per usual) didn’t bother to back up her claim with any sort of evidence, so it falls to people like me to do the research and attempt to locate examples of American right-wingers suffering at the hands of America’s liberals.

This was not easy research to do. The right-wingers in America were never rounded up and forced into decades of slavery like the African Americans. They were also never forced off their land, rounded up and forced onto tiny, inhospitable reservations like the American Indians. There were no obvious signs of America’s right-wing people being forced into decades of quiet suffering, so I had to look for much more subtle signs of suffering and silent misery.

My research begins in 1920, when the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution granted American women the right to vote. America’s right-wingers tend to be notable misogynists and Ann Coulter herself has said that it is a “personal fantasy” of hers that women will lose the right to vote and finally be silenced. This means that Ann Coulter’s right-wing brethren have now been forced to endure ninety-eight painful years of women being allowed to vote.

My next example of tolerant and long-suffering right-wingers becoming a victim of liberal aggression is in 1941, when liberal president Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8802, which prohibited racial discrimination in the national defense industry. It was the first federal action, (although not the last) to promote equal opportunity and prohibit employment discrimination in the United States.

This executive order; signed by a left-wing president means that those tolerant and long-suffering right-wingers in America’s defense industry have been forced to spend the last seventy-seven years treating African-Americans, Persian-Americans, Arab-Americans, American Indians and other dark-skinned Americans as actual human beings, with actual legal rights!

The suffering continues in 1948, when President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981, which expanded on Executive Order 8802 by establishing equality of treatment and opportunity in the military for people of all races, religions, or national origins.

This executive order desegregated the military and has forced white-Americans to serve side-by-side with dark-skinned Americans since 1948. That’s seventy years of racists and white-supremacists silently suffering as they’ve been forced to share barracks, mess halls and the cramped interior of tanks with people of the “wrong” skin color.

Then; in 1954; there was another outrage that the long-suffering right-wingers in America were forced to endure. This was the year that the United States Supreme Court made their famous ruling in Brown vs the Board of Education of Topeka, in which the Supreme Court ruled unanimously against America’s racists and said that racial segregation of children in public schools was unconstitutional.

This led to the desegregation of America’s schools, and for the past sixty-four years racists have had to deal with the agonizing trauma of knowing that when they send their little white sons and daughters to school that they will be forced to associate with children with the wrong color of skin.

Sixty-four years! Are you starting to understand what Ann Coulter means by “long-suffering”?

The Supreme Court dealt another blow to the right-wingers of America in 1962 when they made their ruling in the case of Engel v Vitale. In this Supreme Court case, the court ruled that beginning the day at a public school by forcing the school children to pray violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which says in part, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

Until this ruling came out, school teachers and school administrators in public schools had the power to force little Jewish children, little atheist children, little Hindu children and all the kids in school to publicly recite Christian prayers.

However, because of this ruling, for the past fifty-six years, right-wing Christians in America’s schools have been powerless to force their religious doctrine on Jews, atheists, agnostics, Sikhs and other non-Christians. That’s fifty-six years that they couldn’t shove their religious dogma down the throats of heretics and non-believers. Can you imagine how much suffering that must have caused them?

Not long after that, (in 1964) President Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act. This new law (passed despite the vehement objections of Ann Coulter’s people) ended segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

This infuriated the right-wingers (especially the right-wingers in the South), and they have now been forced to endure FIFTY-FOUR YEARS of concealing their racism and having to treat African-Americans (and other minorities) as if they were REAL PEOPLE (with the same rights as the white man) whenever they were in public!

In 1965, Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, which banned the use of literacy tests and authorized the U.S. attorney general to investigate the use of poll taxes in state and local elections. Racists in Southern States had used sleazy tricks like literacy tests and poll taxes to keep the vast majority of African-Americans from voting in states like Alabama, Louisiana, North Carolina and Mississippi. Then, in 1965, they were suddenly told that they couldn’t pull stunts like that anymore, and they had to give dark-skinned people the same voting rights as pale-skinned people.

Ann Coulter’s people didn’t want dark-skinned people voting in local, state or federal elections, however, despite their vigorous efforts at obstruction, millions of African-Americans have been defying Ann Coulter’s people and voting in election after election for approximately fifty-three years now.

Then, in 1972, Title IX (as part of the Education Amendments of 1972), was signed into law by Lyndon Baines Johnson. Title IX banned any and all schools receiving Federal financial assistance from excluding females from any of their education programs or activities. This meant that schools across America had to stop discriminating against girls and treat them like actual human beings.

So, for the past forty-six years, right-wingers have been forced to allow girls to participate in baseball, basketball, soccer, volleyball and other activities that previously were the exclusive domain of those who had testicles.

Ann Coulter’s people are basically misogynists, so they automatically believe that males are better at everything than females. Why do you think they have a history of paying women less than men for the same work?

However, despite the objections of right-wingers, girls have been told that they can participate in anything boys can participate in in America’s public schools.

So, these are the sorts of things that left-wingers in America have forced right-wingers in America to endure.

Because of the liberals, Ann Coulter’s people have been forced to endure decades of misery as women voted in national elections, dark-skinned people voted in national elections, little white children went to school with little black children and teachers have been unable to force Christian dogma on little Jewish children, little Muslim children and little atheist children.

So, what’s your opinion?

Have liberals been cruel for forcing them to endure all of these things? Is Ann Coulter correct when she says that the right-wingers in America are the most tolerant and long-suffering people in the world?

And now they're all butt-hurt about the idea that schools might teach their students about the Tulsa Massacre of 1921 or other milestone events in American History.

Apparently, Republicans are a bunch of whiny bitches who somehow feel threatened if our educational system makes any meaningful attempt to teach the facts of the nation’s long struggle with race.

 

[YDB95]

Apparently, Republicans are a bunch of whiny bitches who somehow feel threatened if our educational system makes any meaningful attempt to teach the facts of the nation’s long struggle with race.

Al Franken said it best: they love America like a toddler loves his mommy. She can do no wrong, and anyone who says otherwise is a monster.

 

[glamorilla]

And now they're all butt-hurt about the idea that schools might teach their students about the Tulsa Massacre of 1921 or other milestone events in American History.

Apparently, Republicans are a bunch of whiny bitches who somehow feel threatened if our educational system makes any meaningful attempt to teach the facts of the nation’s long struggle with race.

They are not teaching students about the Tulsa Massacre of 1921 or other milestone events.

They are blaming students about the Tulsa Massacre of 1921 and other milestone events.

There is a difference.

 

[YDB95]

They are not teaching students about the Tulsa Massacre of 1921 or other milestone events.

They are blaming students about the Tulsa Massacre of 1921 and other milestone events.

There is a difference.

Surely you can provide an example, then. (Note that just saying someone somewhere said it is not an example...)

 

[Ireadforpleasure]

The childish Republican temper tantrums over critical race theory is nothing more than a puerile attempt to rally the party’s overwhelmingly White base by denying documented history and uncomfortable truths.

This manufactured controversy has nothing to do with actual critical race theory, which, frankly, is the dry and arcane stuff of graduate school seminars. It is all about alarming White voters into believing that they are somehow threatened if our educational system makes any meaningful attempt to teach the facts of the nation’s long struggle with race.

The Republican state legislators screaming and whining and pounding the table as they demand the authority to decide how history can and cannot be taught in schools — and right-wing assholes such as Ted Cruz who warn that children are being taught “every White person is a racist” — know exactly what they’re doing. They're seeking to stir up a panic (like Nixon did with his Southern Strategy) in hopes of driving up GOP turnout in next year’s midterm elections.

It’s a cynical ploy. But a party willing to pretend — even now — that Donald Trump might somehow have won an election he lost by MILLIONS OF VOTES clearly embraces cynicism as its core identity.

 

[glamorilla]

https://youtu.be/0cpD3jpVPeA