Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:Is that what your parents taught you?
I AM nice to those who are nice to me.
"Be a prick unless people are nice to you."
"Be a prick unless people are nice to you."
Funny Story
"Be a prick unless people are nice to you."
Originally posted by Celeste:or face-spitting if your hubbie was there.
Originally posted by mankie:well, if he had made contact, what he would have got was an ass-kicking!
I think you mean ass-ylum.
*edit* redundant post I know….sorry Rhett, just saw your post after I made mine.
No, I'm only a prick to those who aren't nice to me (or my wife). If he had been a gentleman, I wouldn't "act like a prick" toward him. As if calling him a Mexican is actually all that insulting. Every time I've been in Europe, people have assumed I was either British or Canadian. Now THAT'S an insult.
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:Is that what your parents taught you?
I AM nice to those who are nice to me.
"Be a prick unless people are nice to you."
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:You're saying the same thing:
I'm only a prick to those who aren't nice to me
Unless people are nice to you, you're a prick.
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:That's because you're ugly and have no fashion sense.
Every time I've been in Europe, people have assumed I was either British or Canadian.
Let me put it this way:
If someone acts like an asshole toward me, my wife, my family, or my friends, I am going to be a prick toward them.
If someone does not act like an asshole toward the aforementioned people, I typically won't be a prick toward them.
Except for some wacko turn the other cheek Christians, I think most normal everyday people would have the same philosophy.
If someone acts like an asshole toward me, my wife, my family, or my friends, I am going to be a prick toward them.
If someone does not act like an asshole toward the aforementioned people, I typically won't be a prick toward them.
Except for some wacko turn the other cheek Christians, I think most normal everyday people would have the same philosophy.
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:You're saying the same thing:
I'm only a prick to those who aren't nice to me
Unless people are nice to you, you're a prick.
I'll have to get myself a pair of Black Reeboks and a Yankees cap for the next European trip.
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:That's because you're ugly and have no fashion sense.
Every time I've been in Europe, people have assumed I was either British or Canadian.
rhett and ggw arguing
someone break out the catnip!
this could go on for a while.
someone break out the catnip!
this could go on for a while.
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:good idea, Americans always get the best muggings when they sport the Yankees cap overseas!
I'll have to get myself a pair of Black Reeboks and a Yankees cap for the next European trip.
Europe has muggers ? I didn't realize they even let black people into Europe. :p
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:good idea, Americans always get the best muggings when they sport the Yankees cap overseas!
I'll have to get myself a pair of Black Reeboks and a Yankees cap for the next European trip.
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:apparently they let rednecks in too.
Europe has muggers ? I didn't realize they even let black people into Europe. :p
at least on vacation, right?
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:Fashion is not beige shorts/pants those god-awful boating shoes, a runny catchy shirt and a baseball cap worn the wrong way round. Well not in the civilized world anyway.
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:That's because you're ugly and have no fashion sense.
Every time I've been in Europe, people have assumed I was either British or Canadian.
I won't argue the ugly comment, you would know better than I an ugly man from a cute one. But doodles are way behind Europe when it comes to fashion sense.
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:Apparently, black people aren't nice to you (or your wife).
Europe has muggers ? I didn't realize they even let black people into Europe. :p
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
[QB] No, I'm only a prick to those who aren't nice to me (or my wife). If he had been a gentleman, I wouldn't "act like a prick" toward him. As if calling him a Mexican is actually all that insulting. Every time I've been in Europe, people have assumed I was either British or Canadian. Now THAT'S an insult.
To the Brits and Canadians, absolutely!
Or to Jesse Jackson
Letâ??s suppose I am a lowbrow. I am vulgar and have uncultivated tastes. I am boorish, rude, ill-mannered, coarse, rough, crude and ignorant. In addition, I stereotype everyone I meet. I have even managed to stereotype myself. Uh oh. No one is supposed to ever stereotype anyone, according to the current politically correct movement. Stereotyping people is bad because we might accidentally typecast an innocent person in an undesirable mold. However, the problem as I see it, lies with this politically correct approach, not the stereotyping itself. Stereotyping is appropriate some of the time, but deliberately avoiding stereotyping can get you into trouble. Equally vehemently, I am claiming that stereotyping can also cause problems. Most importantly, on occasion, reacting to an unknown subject by stereotyping the person will provide an added level of safety. This chapterâ??s Area of Enlightenment clarifies why there are times and certain conditions when stereotyping a person is far safer than adhering to the politically correct caveat. The use of appropriate stereotyping can protect us physically and socially. Here is an illuminating example. The Reverend Jesse Jackson was walking alone at night in Washington DC.1He heard footsteps behind him and was afraid he was about to be muggedâ??which is a common occurrence in Washington, especially at night, and especially when you are alone on a street. The Reverend turned around and saw a white man. Immediately he felt relief that he was not going to be assaulted. Then he felt shame because he had just stereotyped kindred black men. He understood during that split second of observation, that he 1Duke, Lynn, â??Confronting Violence: African American Conferees Look Inward,â? Washington Post, January 8, 1994. ©2001 C. Norman Winningstad - Page 7.1
——————————————————————————–
Page 2
Area of Enlightenment - Book1Ch7web1 â?? The Joy Of Stereotyping, Chapter 7 had assumed the worst of his own race; he assumed he would be mugged if the man was black, but that he would be safe if the man was white. Reverend Jackson felt shame because he was not thinking in the recommended politically-correct approach. The truth is, he could just as easily been mugged by a white man (after all, there are white muggers). If he had seen a black man, he most likely would have been safe (after all, most black men are not muggers). So, why did Jesse Jackson, a very intelligent gentleman, make the assumption he was safe if the person following him was white, and that he might be mugged if the person had been black? The answer will not please the politically-correct person. Because stereotypes are based upon sound statistics, the serious harm is in not paying heed to stereotypes when danger is present, and in paying attention to stereotypes when no danger is involved. In the former case, we risk physical, emotional, and financial harm. In the latter case, the downside is, at best, embarrassment for having committed a social gaff, at worst, you could be swindled. It is an unfortunate fact that there are a higher percentage of black muggers among the black population than there are white muggers among the white population.2While the absolute number of black muggers and white muggers is perhaps about the same, you are more likely to be mugged if you see a black person, than you are if you see a white person while walking down a street in any inner city late at night. So, the Reverend Jesse Jackson was simply and wisely reacting to his odds. Anyone walking the streets of Washington, D.C. has a higher probability of being mugged late at night than while walking those same streets during daytime. They also have a higher probability of being mugged in Washington, D.C.â??any time of day or nightâ??than in almost any other city in the United States. The Reverend was perhaps naïve in his belief that he was safe when followed by a white manâ??he was simply safer. Since there are far more law-abiding black people than there are black muggers, the chances are good he would have been safe in either case; however, with bodily harm a strong chance if he were mugged, it was wise of the Reverend to be on guard. For the Reverend Jackson, it was better to err by stereotyping. If he was in a safe social setting and had time to chat with the person, he could have afforded the luxury of ascribing to the politically correct approach of waiting to find out, over time, if this new acquaintance fit the stereotype being projected.
Letâ??s suppose I am a lowbrow. I am vulgar and have uncultivated tastes. I am boorish, rude, ill-mannered, coarse, rough, crude and ignorant. In addition, I stereotype everyone I meet. I have even managed to stereotype myself. Uh oh. No one is supposed to ever stereotype anyone, according to the current politically correct movement. Stereotyping people is bad because we might accidentally typecast an innocent person in an undesirable mold. However, the problem as I see it, lies with this politically correct approach, not the stereotyping itself. Stereotyping is appropriate some of the time, but deliberately avoiding stereotyping can get you into trouble. Equally vehemently, I am claiming that stereotyping can also cause problems. Most importantly, on occasion, reacting to an unknown subject by stereotyping the person will provide an added level of safety. This chapterâ??s Area of Enlightenment clarifies why there are times and certain conditions when stereotyping a person is far safer than adhering to the politically correct caveat. The use of appropriate stereotyping can protect us physically and socially. Here is an illuminating example. The Reverend Jesse Jackson was walking alone at night in Washington DC.1He heard footsteps behind him and was afraid he was about to be muggedâ??which is a common occurrence in Washington, especially at night, and especially when you are alone on a street. The Reverend turned around and saw a white man. Immediately he felt relief that he was not going to be assaulted. Then he felt shame because he had just stereotyped kindred black men. He understood during that split second of observation, that he 1Duke, Lynn, â??Confronting Violence: African American Conferees Look Inward,â? Washington Post, January 8, 1994. ©2001 C. Norman Winningstad - Page 7.1
——————————————————————————–
Page 2
Area of Enlightenment - Book1Ch7web1 â?? The Joy Of Stereotyping, Chapter 7 had assumed the worst of his own race; he assumed he would be mugged if the man was black, but that he would be safe if the man was white. Reverend Jackson felt shame because he was not thinking in the recommended politically-correct approach. The truth is, he could just as easily been mugged by a white man (after all, there are white muggers). If he had seen a black man, he most likely would have been safe (after all, most black men are not muggers). So, why did Jesse Jackson, a very intelligent gentleman, make the assumption he was safe if the person following him was white, and that he might be mugged if the person had been black? The answer will not please the politically-correct person. Because stereotypes are based upon sound statistics, the serious harm is in not paying heed to stereotypes when danger is present, and in paying attention to stereotypes when no danger is involved. In the former case, we risk physical, emotional, and financial harm. In the latter case, the downside is, at best, embarrassment for having committed a social gaff, at worst, you could be swindled. It is an unfortunate fact that there are a higher percentage of black muggers among the black population than there are white muggers among the white population.2While the absolute number of black muggers and white muggers is perhaps about the same, you are more likely to be mugged if you see a black person, than you are if you see a white person while walking down a street in any inner city late at night. So, the Reverend Jesse Jackson was simply and wisely reacting to his odds. Anyone walking the streets of Washington, D.C. has a higher probability of being mugged late at night than while walking those same streets during daytime. They also have a higher probability of being mugged in Washington, D.C.â??any time of day or nightâ??than in almost any other city in the United States. The Reverend was perhaps naïve in his belief that he was safe when followed by a white manâ??he was simply safer. Since there are far more law-abiding black people than there are black muggers, the chances are good he would have been safe in either case; however, with bodily harm a strong chance if he were mugged, it was wise of the Reverend to be on guard. For the Reverend Jackson, it was better to err by stereotyping. If he was in a safe social setting and had time to chat with the person, he could have afforded the luxury of ascribing to the politically correct approach of waiting to find out, over time, if this new acquaintance fit the stereotype being projected.
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:Apparently, black people aren't nice to you (or your wife).
Europe has muggers ? I didn't realize they even let black people into Europe. :p
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/cambridgeshire/3478693.stm
On the subject of stereotyping, I had to laugh at this. Even the people themselves can't decide if it's an insult or not…..markie?
On the subject of stereotyping, I had to laugh at this. Even the people themselves can't decide if it's an insult or not…..markie?
Originally posted by mankie::D :D :D :D
To the Brits and Canadians, absolutely!
So, you've been mugged by every black person you've met?
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
Or to Jesse Jackson
Letâ??s suppose I am a lowbrow. I am vulgar and have uncultivated tastes. I am boorish, rude, ill-mannered, coarse, rough, crude and ignorant. In addition, I stereotype everyone I meet. I have even managed to stereotype myself. Uh oh. No one is supposed to ever stereotype anyone, according to the current politically correct movement. Stereotyping people is bad because we might accidentally typecast an innocent person in an undesirable mold. However, the problem as I see it, lies with this politically correct approach, not the stereotyping itself. Stereotyping is appropriate some of the time, but deliberately avoiding stereotyping can get you into trouble. Equally vehemently, I am claiming that stereotyping can also cause problems. Most importantly, on occasion, reacting to an unknown subject by stereotyping the person will provide an added level of safety. This chapterâ??s Area of Enlightenment clarifies why there are times and certain conditions when stereotyping a person is far safer than adhering to the politically correct caveat. The use of appropriate stereotyping can protect us physically and socially. Here is an illuminating example. The Reverend Jesse Jackson was walking alone at night in Washington DC.1He heard footsteps behind him and was afraid he was about to be muggedâ??which is a common occurrence in Washington, especially at night, and especially when you are alone on a street. The Reverend turned around and saw a white man. Immediately he felt relief that he was not going to be assaulted. Then he felt shame because he had just stereotyped kindred black men. He understood during that split second of observation, that he 1Duke, Lynn, â??Confronting Violence: African American Conferees Look Inward,â? Washington Post, January 8, 1994. ©2001 C. Norman Winningstad - Page 7.1
——————————————————————————–
Page 2
Area of Enlightenment - Book1Ch7web1 â?? The Joy Of Stereotyping, Chapter 7 had assumed the worst of his own race; he assumed he would be mugged if the man was black, but that he would be safe if the man was white. Reverend Jackson felt shame because he was not thinking in the recommended politically-correct approach. The truth is, he could just as easily been mugged by a white man (after all, there are white muggers). If he had seen a black man, he most likely would have been safe (after all, most black men are not muggers). So, why did Jesse Jackson, a very intelligent gentleman, make the assumption he was safe if the person following him was white, and that he might be mugged if the person had been black? The answer will not please the politically-correct person. Because stereotypes are based upon sound statistics, the serious harm is in not paying heed to stereotypes when danger is present, and in paying attention to stereotypes when no danger is involved. In the former case, we risk physical, emotional, and financial harm. In the latter case, the downside is, at best, embarrassment for having committed a social gaff, at worst, you could be swindled. It is an unfortunate fact that there are a higher percentage of black muggers among the black population than there are white muggers among the white population.2While the absolute number of black muggers and white muggers is perhaps about the same, you are more likely to be mugged if you see a black person, than you are if you see a white person while walking down a street in any inner city late at night. So, the Reverend Jesse Jackson was simply and wisely reacting to his odds. Anyone walking the streets of Washington, D.C. has a higher probability of being mugged late at night than while walking those same streets during daytime. They also have a higher probability of being mugged in Washington, D.C.â??any time of day or nightâ??than in almost any other city in the United States. The Reverend was perhaps naïve in his belief that he was safe when followed by a white manâ??he was simply safer. Since there are far more law-abiding black people than there are black muggers, the chances are good he would have been safe in either case; however, with bodily harm a strong chance if he were mugged, it was wise of the Reverend to be on guard. For the Reverend Jackson, it was better to err by stereotyping. If he was in a safe social setting and had time to chat with the person, he could have afforded the luxury of ascribing to the politically correct approach of waiting to find out, over time, if this new acquaintance fit the stereotype being projected.
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:Apparently, black people aren't nice to you (or your wife).
Europe has muggers ? I didn't realize they even let black people into Europe. :p
now this thread is starting to get funny
and while Jesse Jackson had all this mindless banter running through his head
the white guy, who turned out to be Canadian, took his wallet and ran down F St. never to be seen again :)
luckily, black people are poor so Jackson didnt have any money in his wallet!
the white guy, who turned out to be Canadian, took his wallet and ran down F St. never to be seen again :)
luckily, black people are poor so Jackson didnt have any money in his wallet!