So apparently Jadeveon Clowney Wore an Inmate Costume to the Texans' Halloween Party

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...-ethnic-group/

http://cdn.financialsamurai.com/wp-c...me-by-race.jpg

https://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs/...g&action=click

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2012/...-gap-3.top.gif


Seems more or less the consensus at this moment in America that black people are poor(er than other races), but clearly wasn't my point and wasn't saying/implying that's how it should be, not in the slightest. I'm genuinely interested in what that type of graph would look like and I figured someone else may have a good source to find that answer.

A liberal might tend to see the definition of racism as something axiomatic. It often seems pointless to argue with someone who chooses different axioms.

My second favorite thing about conservatives is that they always insist on pretending that they got called racist because of some sort of nebulous "disagreement" rather than that disagreement being specifically about whether something is racist.

It's baked in. Black features are ugly, black people have lower intelligence, black people are inherently criminals etc etc. Yuval Harari explained it very clearly (and starkly) when put within the context of the entire sweep of human history.

Jk we're all pink haired non gendered regressive left SJW commies for taking offense to the racist thing the racist guy said. Something about idioms.

Says the guy who's avatar is from a movie that thinks racist, sexist and homophobic jokes are a great thing

That seems like a superficial comment that fails to engage the substance of his post.

There is no substance to his post. He reaffirmed what I said "See the issue the liberal way or you are a racist."

Your point of view seems to be that there is no real racism unless it is "obvious", just disagreements. Am I misunderstanding your position?

Oh SNAP! You got him there! Good one boyeee!

looooooool

Read the thread..I have not stated an opinion supporting the players being upset or the owner making his prison comment. I only posted when someone said 50 million people should not have voting rights. I simply said with liberals there is no middle ground. Someone said if you see this different than me you are a liar, stupid or racist. That's insane.

I think his point is that SJWS don't win every argument about race by claiming countervailing viewpoints are all racist. They think you do, but this conclusion simply causes SjJWS ti be ignored and politically marginalized.

The better part was how the entire post was projection. No middle ground for liberals? The entire Obama presidency was defined by compromise! HRC ran her whole campaign on appealing to never Trump conservative voters, of which there existed a handful! Compromise is the predominate feature of liberal politicians.

By racists. Who think they are not racists because they don't feel like bad people when they do racist ****. But they accept that racism is bad. Therefore THEIR racism isn't racism, because they don't feel bad, so they're not racists, so the LIBRULS are wrong.

There you go.

I was hoping there would be an actual discussion of the ongoing issues rather than the lefties normal bs. I love this protest movement. I love that fans are voting with their pocketbooks and leaving games(not pence's theatrics). I love the owners kneeling with the players after the twitter war. I hope the owners vote to disallow it and some of the players do it anyways. Games get forfeited, lawsuits filed. I think the owners and players have risked very little so far and want to see how they react to the financial pressures. Only Kapernick has really paid the price for his exercise of political speech. I think the other owners have the right to not pick him up bc of his price and baggage he brings to a new team ( but i also think Kap was a one "hit" season wonder). I am actually more embarassed by what my team does after the national anthem, man the Browns are awful

The no discussion guy is back, with nothing but hurt feelings that he did not get his way. If it were only racists you used this tactic with, SJWs would rule the world. But when you do it to every countervailing viewpoint, 90% of the country stop listening wont support your agendas.

jj, when you use the term "SJW," what do you mean by it? You only use it in a disparaging fashion, what exactly are you disparaging? What are the bad parts of "social justice?"

People who get labeled as SJWs sometimes see people who label people as SJWs as people who often don't argue in good faith. I have found this to sometimes be true.

Usually it means the speaker is a dick...

buddy, you're going to bat for the side that is mad about being called racist instead of the side that feels like they're being discriminated against by racists.

While we're on this might as well bring up actual issues. This will certainly only further my deep long standing racist views with many on this board but I've pretty much lost interest in the NFL at this point in the season, and that's mostly down to the Giants being awful.

1) Kaepernick is not good enough to warrant the headache. Is he better than like Matt Moore or someone probably, but owners absolutely have the right to not want to deal with the backlash they will get from portions of their fan base. You have the right to speak up, you have the right to kneel for the anthem, but then your boss has the right to act accordingly (cue the inmates running the asylum idiom)

2) Here's one of my biggest issues with the whole kneeling thing. The causes the players are kneeling for are absolutely just and worthy of protest. Kneeling for the anthem is completely within their rights but it's also within the rights of people get properly pissed off. But they are kneeling for social injustices when they are ignoring all the social injustice going on in their own league, but their own colleagues.

Joe Mixon literally upper-cutted a woman on camera and I haven't heard a bunch of players speak out against him playing.

The NFLPA has carried on appeal after appeal going up the supreme court, so Ezekiel Elliot can continue to play football, after a very strong domestic violence claim was made against him. Like you can beat the **** out of women and we will not only ignore that but actually protect you and fight for you so you can keep playing football.

Ben Roethlisberger fondled some girls and had strong rape allegations made against him with very little said by his colleagues. He too, still continues to play football

Greg Hardy also beat the **** out of some women and then had some arrogant and egregious things to say when coming back and being signed and once again accepted by all of his colleagues with little to no one speaking up or protesting.

Ray Lewis is literally a free man because of a social injustice and there he was kneeling on the Ravens sideline with the team after the Trump comments.

There's no congruency. It is a do what I say not what I do situation. I love that NFL players have chosen to take a stand even if I don't like the way they've gone about, but I can't take it seriously when they are completely unwilling to speak out against their own social injustices, or present any concrete plan for what they want done about it. I would hope that's what the meeting was about. But the leagues ratings are clearly plummeting (due to many reasons) and there is increasing division between the NFL Players and owners and between the NFL and it's fans. /racist

Like, if we all accept that no one can interpret the intentions behind words with absolute precision, why wouldn't we still side with people who are ostensibly being discriminated against?

Seems like one thing is way worse than the other.

Never forget how much racists despise wealthy black people having a voice (while, obviously, poor black people have zero voice at all in America)

hahaha says the guy banned on multiple accounts for racism

What makes you think that I am judging you based solely on your posts in this thread?

Sometimes, there is no middle ground. Where is the middle ground between "that's racist" and "that's not racist"? If something is only kind of racist, that's still racist.

If something is racist (and let us stipulate that it actually is racist) and you claim it is not racist, you are either racist, you know it is racist and are lying for whatever reason, or you are too dumb or ignorant to know it is racist. I'm having a hard time coming up with another explanation for why someone would deny that a racist thing is racist.