"Diversity or Deception" Video [Archive]

Vecha

2012-02-23, 09:11 PM

Okay look, we are all humans. White, black, asain, hispanic, burnt.... I am from Tennessee and I was raised by a man that lived to be nearly ninety years old, his grandfather owned slaves. I was raised to be racist, the word ****** or ***** was not regarded as bad in my house at all. I was seventeen when I realized this was wrong.

I was in a fire and had 100% of my body burned second degree and 80% third degree. Back, Legs, arms, hands and lower chest were fucked up and scarred.

As time went on and I started healing, I noticed people were treating me differently.. Not so much on a disabled manner, but a "different" manner. I felt this and decided to join the army to defeat this, I figured it was just them seeing me as a guy who couldn't do it, someone disabled.

I joined the army with barely the ability to run, went to basic training and AIT and because I had an amazing first sergeant, they built me from the ground up and after five months, I was scoring 412's on PT tests. I was running two miles in less than 12 minutes, I was doing 100 push ups and 100 sit ups.. and only stopping because I felt like I was showing off.

After all that and being 196 lbs of six foot four brick muscle, people still treated me different.... I couldn't figure it out but I knew I was different somehow. My body was completely normal, my mind functioned completely normal and the only difference between me and the rest of EVERYONE ... black.. white... asian.. hispanic...... was my SKIN....

I got really angry one day at some black guy and called him a ******, I threw his bunk off on top of him and beat the piss poor shit out of him. No one pulled me off, I just stopped... I seen blood..... I looked at him and said I was sorry.. and I was sorry, I was a sorry fucking human... lowest moment of my life and I felt it so hard. I told him I didn't understand why people treated me differently and he told me it was because I was different, like he was. This added more insult to mental injury and it sincerely and whole heartidly was an epiphany.

You can have blue skin, you can have red skin and you can have purple skin. Color has always been a decided factor in our alliance, be it gangs, be it race, be national flags or be it Planetside.

The fact matters, in the real fucking world, we all bleed. We ALL hurt, we ALL die and we all love. Bleeding, hurting, dying and loving is FAR enough emotion for me, I don't need hate anymore.

Those who are still racist just haven't had their eyes opened and if they had been raised differently, wouldn't be racist today.

Every soul on this planet, regardless of the color, wants love. Every soul on this planet hurts. Every soul on this planet will die. If you can love an animal, then it is the same as the ability to love a black, white, asian or hispanic person. Different they are, but still alive, and that is what really matters.

That was a very touching story, really enjoyed the read. Beautiful even.

Wish we had the ability to literally be placed into someone's shoes for a day, week, or however long it took to open someone's heart and mind.

My situation, I would say very different from yours, was when I had to move(at the age of 13) from a small town in Alabama to San Diego, California. I was the only white kid in the class, and for the first time in my life I was treated differently. Sometimes with hate, but overall with ignorance.

Vecha

2012-02-23, 09:36 PM

Vecha

2012-02-23, 10:52 PM

The thing is, people don't realize or dont WANT to realize that white people are being treated as a minority. Even on TV a black guy can say cracker and it's funny. If someone were to get on TV and say ******, there would be many law suits.

Once I became neutral in terms of race, I noticed things, things I never noticed before. BET. Black Entertainment Television. Now I understand that African American people were oppressed more so than anyone in this country for a very very long time, but this is 2012, and if someone where to make a WET; White Entertainment Television TV station, it would be called extreme racism. Some will fight and say CMT is a racist TV station yet they have black people winning awards all the time.

I am not white anymore... I am by ethnicity, but not by practical standards and I have pictures to show it. My problem is, other races are able to persecute white people without regard.

I am not using words like caucasian and very seldomly use african american because i want this thread to be vigilant and intelligent without hate.

SO DONT BE A FUCKING RACIST PRICK IF YOU REPLY... just sayin'

PS: Good post Vancha, me and you don't see eye to eye politically a lot of times, but this one we most certainly do.

This is where we disagree, and the debata begins.. Sadly I am going to bed after this post and your response.

The majority of blacks are in prison is because of their culture, not them as a color, it is how they are brought up as children and the lifestyle they are forced into.

Blacks in prison and for the most part have a complex stating "you owe us something" because of the slavery imposed on them 150 years ago. THEY are RIGHT! I do agree they should be given leniency for some of the cases, but not all and by far not the ones in prison for murder or rape, and this applies to white or hispanic people as well.

The fact of the matter is that black people are more prone to violence given their past, their current living situation and need to survive and their mentors / people they look up to in "the hood".

The reason we have so many black people in prison is in fact because they are the most notorious of all the races that can't get away with it. Me personally, I think the Italians are the most cold hearted evil creating sob's out there, they just know how to cover their tracks.

Secondly, and mostly. I do not want to work and pay taxes to feed seven babies by someone who opens their legs to anyone, if not intentionally getting pregnant to get government welfare. Yes, blacks are the majority of the people on welfare and the reason of it is pure laziness and the excuse of "im black and you know you owe me" is now faded and it will not take long before the rest of America sees this.

Hispanics gaining government aid even though they are illegally here or drawing disability because they succeeded in crossing a border is just pure shit. We fought to have this country and now it is being intruded in my opinion. Now we have spanish on every label because of it? Really?

Now comes my fight between being racist and being a nationalist. Did you know there are 22% more white homeless people in america than ANY other 'minority'?

I am too tired and too drunk to continue this post, but I will finish tomorrow... But we do see eye to eye on some things, this will be a very VERY interesting debate in the morning.

What I've read, and this was a while ago, was that whites are actually higher on the welfare receiving end, however blacks are the higher percentage as far as their race goes.

More blacks out of blacks are on welfare...where as more whites OVERALL are on welfare(not out of whites however).

I could be wrong. As it was a while ago I read this and can't back this statement up.

I'll agree that it is part of their culture. I will not say their entire culture is based on sex, drugs, and violence.(All cultures have those three issues in some way and/or at sometime though). There are many blacks who don't fit that stereotype, but enough do to make it an issue.

This reminds me when Bill Cosby tried to stand up and say that Black fathers need to raise their kids. From what I recall he received a backlash over that statement.

I agree there need to be more restrictions/regulations with welfare. Spanish/Mexico, however, is a big part of our history in the southwest though...there are enough there legally to make it make it a part of the culture. With that said...the border crossing really needs to be handled/fixed/solved.

I'm not sure I touched on everything in your post...I'm a little inebriated myself.

Do you think things will eventually get better?

Warborn

2012-02-23, 11:24 PM

I am not white anymore... I am by ethnicity, but not by practical standards and I have pictures to show it. My problem is, other races are able to persecute white people without regard.

And what does their persecution amount to? The word "cracker"? Some people being rude now and then? White people in the US and in many other first world countries hold all the cards. The wealth, the political power, it's all concentrated in the hands of white people. It's as absurd as the Christians saying they're being persecuted in the US, saying that other "races" (races by the way are a social construct and not a real thing at all so it's probably best to not use the term) persecute white people.

Accuser

2012-02-24, 08:13 AM

Holy crap, Duke...
If that isn't in a book (or a complete one) it should be.

Vecha

2012-02-24, 10:33 AM

Not only do I believe they will get better, I believe within 500 years, there will be no more "races" as everyone will get over these petty differences, world travel will be extremely inexpensive and humans of all kinds will breed.

If we don't blow our fucking selves up before then.

Hmm..not sure I have the same positive optimism as you.

I can't see "race" going away...it is the main reason, either in front of or following religion, to start any conflict.

If we human unite, we'd have to find some other way to create an outlet for our aggression.

But, I'd love a world where everyone is united as one, truly.

Warborn

2012-02-24, 01:01 PM

You say this when we have a black president? Saying 'cracker' is the same exact thing as any other racial slur, it's not being rude, it's having hate.

Hate does not fix hate.

"Races by the way are a social construct and not a real thing at all"? Really? Soooo... the chinese man doesn't exist?

You either wanted to say something and wrote it wrong or I am totally misunderstanding what you've said.

Having a black President really doesn't change anything. Did that magically uplift a lot of black people from poverty and into the middle class? Are the CEOs and congressmen and judges and so on now proportionately represented by black people? Do cops and laws no longer unfairly target black people? It doesn't help that Obama is a spineless shill, either.

As for race, if you ever take any university-level anthropology courses you'll probably get into it in more detail, but for now I will just quote the American Anthropological Association:

"In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species."

tldr: There is hardly any actual difference between what people suppose are "different races" and those differences are so mutable even within a supposed "race" that it's impossible to even define what the characteristics of a given race might be.

Elude

2012-02-24, 05:12 PM

I stopped watching when it mentioned the media being a controlled environment. I'm sorry but the internet is beyond being controlled, it's a giant pool of random information. If anything I'd say people who grew up without the internet were in a more controlled environment and were more confined to certain beliefs or ideas, people who would have a harder time in changing their way of life.

When being exposed to the mass media of the internet you are less likely to be influenced by one way of life when you are capable of seeing so much more. Your ideas change constantly from the unlimited amount of media that you are forced to see contradictions in things you strongly use to believe in.

Baneblade

2012-02-24, 05:21 PM

And what does their persecution amount to? The word "cracker"? Some people being rude now and then? White people in the US and in many other first world countries hold all the cards. The wealth, the political power, it's all concentrated in the hands of white people. It's as absurd as the Christians saying they're being persecuted in the US, saying that other "races" (races by the way are a social construct and not a real thing at all so it's probably best to not use the term) persecute white people.

Were you aware that the world's richest human is a Mexican?

Warborn

2012-02-24, 09:39 PM

Yeah, I remember hearing about that after Newt Gingrich called English the "language of prosperity" while Spanish was the "language of the ghetto". It's also not at all relative to my point.

Fenrys

2012-02-24, 10:34 PM

Regarding who holds political power, that's more about class than about race.

Discrimination based on race plays a role, and so does religion, gender, fucking, culture, age, etc...

But if you do have money, don't have morals, and desire control of other people, then you qualify for political power and there's a higher than average probability that you'll float to the top.

The people who's discrimination profile is low in a particular place and time are more likely to begin life with money or find a way to 'get' some, and race is just one variable in that profile. Even if you're deep in the receiving end of discrimination, the possibility exists to become a floater, but only if you're also part of the flakiest upper crust economically.

Baneblade

2012-02-24, 11:40 PM

Yeah, I remember hearing about that after Newt Gingrich called English the "language of prosperity" while Spanish was the "language of the ghetto". It's also not at all relative to my point.

Well except that it is. 'Ethnicity' really has little to do with prosperity.

You are a product of your environment.

Warborn

2012-02-25, 04:00 AM

Well except that it is.

You totally missed my point. Duke Nukem there is an American guy. He lives in America. In America, white people possess the vast portion of the country's wealth and power. For him as a white American to act like someone calling him a cracker might ruin his day is laughable considering how amazingly lucky he is to simply be a white person in the US, as by default the odds of his life being decent if not "good" is far higher than it would be if he were born not-white, speaking in terms of statistics.

I'm not saying that the colour of someone's skin magically create money in the pockets of people.

Baneblade

2012-02-26, 12:40 AM

It isn't like that everywhere in America.

Mightymouser

2012-02-26, 01:11 AM

The poverty rates among Asian-Americans closely follows that among Whites; so it's cool to call them all ****** and ***** then, yea?

Warborn

2012-02-26, 08:03 AM

It isn't like that everywhere in America.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2010/highlights.html

Between 2009 and 2010, the poverty rate increased for non-Hispanic Whites (from 9.4 percent to 9.9 percent), for Blacks (from 25.8 percent to 27.4 percent), and for Hispanics (from 25.3 percent to 26.6 percent). For Asians, the 2010 poverty rate (12.1 percent) was not statistically different from the 2009 poverty rate.1

The poverty rates among Asian-Americans closely follows that among Whites; so it's cool to call them all ****** and ***** then, yea?

It isn't cool in any respect, but if you as a white person honestly give a shit about someone calling you a cracker then you're a big whiny baby. There is nothing more advantageous to be than a white guy in our societies. Oh no, someone called you a cracker and reminded you of a time when white people used to own non-white people. How tragic for you.

Mightymouser

2012-02-26, 02:52 PM

It isn't cool in any respect, but if you as a white person honestly give a shit about someone calling you a cracker then you're a big whiny baby. There is nothing more advantageous to be than a white guy in our societies. Oh no, someone called you a cracker and reminded you of a time when white people used to own non-white people. How tragic for you.

See, this is where you jump off the deep end; racism & discrimination shouldn't be acceptable in any form. Calling people 'cracker' (which is the silliest among many forms of discrimination) isn't discrimination because it "reminded [whites] of a time when white people used to own non-white people." It's discrimination because it stereotypes all white people into a derogatory mold, which may not (and most often is not) applicable at all. It promotes the idea that all white people are the same; just as calling an Asian a ***** lumps them all into the same racial pigeonhole.

I really don't understand why you would choose to stand against someone saying that all dissociation is bad. He is not saying that all races have faced the same history, he is simply saying that no person should be treated differently because of the color of their skin; all racism is bad. That's not a hard sentiment to get behind, and indeed I cannot fathom why anyone would stand opposed to it, but there you are....

Oh and: Yes, there is something much more advantageous than being white; it's coming from a rich family (of any color). Beyond that, it's being well educated (though perhaps your Liberal Arts degree might not be doing you any favors). Education is something that all races should have have access to in our day and age, and where there are discrepancies, efforts are made to help those in need succeed (again of all races, be it outreach programs in inner-city communities {mostly helping poor minorities}, or outreach in rural areas {mostly helping poor whites}. Those efforts should continue, but supporting (or tolerating) racism against white people, for any "reason", is divisive and stupid.

Baneblade

2012-02-26, 03:29 PM

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2010/highlights.html

You did absolutely nothing to prove my statement wrong.

Warborn

2012-02-26, 04:39 PM

You did absolutely nothing to prove my statement wrong.

Oh okay.

See, this is where you jump off the deep end; racism & discrimination shouldn't be acceptable in any form.

I said it "isn't cool". It's not acceptable, but it's so meaningless that being genuinely offended by it is laughable. Naturally the person who's saying it makes a fool out of himself in the process, but that's only partly to do with the fact that he's a racist. The other part is him using something so ineffectual as "cracker" as a means to offend a person with light skin.

Firefly

2012-02-26, 08:53 PM

How about ***** or casper? Or Elmer's glue? Or cotton? Snowflake? Lightbulb? Paper? Generic apartment wall? Undershirt? Plain white tee? Bleached? No-melotonin?

Warborn

2012-02-27, 08:45 PM

No-melotonin?

To be fair, it's melanin, and unless you're albino you've got it. It's worthwhile to remember that even "white" people are just a light shade of brown.

You cracka-ass cracka.

Warborn

2012-02-28, 01:52 AM

Unless. Not useless.

And it\\\'s not a mathematical colour. It\\\'s brown. Melanin is brown. That\\\'s the colour humans are unless they\\\'re albino. They\\\'re a shade of brown.

I have no idea why the forum is fucking with my punctuation like this.

Traak

2012-02-28, 09:19 AM

You say this when we have a black president? Saying 'cracker' is the same exact thing as any other racial slur, it's not being rude, it's having hate.

Hate does not fix hate.

"Races by the way are a social construct and not a real thing at all"? Really? Soooo... the chinese man doesn't exist?

You either wanted to say something and wrote it wrong or I am totally misunderstanding what you've said.

Chinese isn't a race, it's a nationality. It's no more racist to say "*****" than it is to say "Yank, Limey, Canuck, *****, or Frog." However, I know that the non-white races have nothing in the deck but the Race Card. It throws attention off stuff that they are lacking to focus on someone somewhere who said something that hurt their fragile little feelings. But, I understand that it's generally okay to be a racist. As long as you are any color but white. For the non-white cultures, it's cute and clever and cool and down and hip and gangsta and yo and enlightened and comedic and funny and and and.

Problem is, different races have different predilections. Not being able to say anything about it is blocking reality. Being only allowed to notice what whites do badly is stupid. You will never be able to emulate the good qualities of people you hate. You will unconsciously block yourself.

I have noticed, however, that the white race is the only race that isn't obsessed with breeding the white race out of existence. It makes me laugh a sad laugh to see the obsession the other races have with eliminating the white race by "assault breeding".

Just enjoy your life. Don't bother fantasizing about Genocide By Sperm Slinging. White people will continue to exist no matter how much you hate them, and no matter how many of their women you impregnate then abandon.

Instead of focusing on what someone else does badly, why not focus on what they are good at that you suck at. I mean stuff that produces a strong society, like working for a living, knowing who and where your kids are, and supporting each and every one of them with a father and mother who both love them. This stuff works for every race and every society.

Having become a fulfilled, positive, excellent person yourself, who has created a positive, nurturing environment for your wife and children, then perhaps you can spend your leftover time trying to find something wrong with some other race. However, before you embark on this crusade to change THEM, make sure you have secured the change of every single member of your race, nationality, or group, before bothering to look OUTSIDE of it for the faults of others, like whether they call you a cracker or not.

Matthew 7:5
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

One of the largest beams I have seen was about 20 feet long and about one by two feet in cross-section. That's quite a hunk of lumber to have in your eye. When we take care of our own problems, we can see clearly to help others deal with theirs.

Firefly

2012-02-28, 12:58 PM

It's no more racist to say "*****" than it is to say "Yank, Limey, Canuck, *****, or Frog."
I'm sorry but you are quite possibly the most ignorant, bigoted, blind, and stupid person I have ever had the fortune of never having to meet in real life. And by stupid, I wish I meant that as merely an insult rather than an indication of your total mental faculties.

Warborn

2012-02-28, 02:55 PM

I have noticed, however, that the white race is the only race that isn't obsessed with breeding the white race out of existence. It makes me laugh a sad laugh to see the obsession the other races have with eliminating the white race by "assault breeding".

This isn't a thing. Birth rates naturally dropped with the emancipation of women from being breeding animals for men, wide access to birth control and abortions, and the general upward trek of people out of poverty. There isn't some vast conspiracy to "assault breed" the "white race" out of existence. It's that minorities are disproportionately represented in lower economic brackets, and people in lower economic brackets tend to have lesser sex education, less access to birth control, and less access to abortions. All of that conspires to give their birth rate a leg-up over people who are middle class or better.

Warborn

2012-02-28, 10:23 PM

If you really believe sex education ... if you really TRULY believe the LACK of sex education is the fucking reason people are having kids.. You need to go get your testicles removed to never have children. I mean this. I really really mean this.

I said it's a reason. It conspires with the other reasons I listed to result in an increased birth rate amongst people of lower economic brackets. As for your impression sexual education has nothing to do with it:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0024658

The level of abstinence education (no provision, covered, promoted, stressed) was positively correlated with both teen pregnancy (Spearman's rho = 0.510, p = 0.001) and teen birth (rho = 0.605, p<0.001) rates (Table 4), indicating that abstinence education in the U.S. does not cause abstinence behavior. To the contrary, teens in states that prescribe more abstinence education are actually more likely to become pregnant (Figure 2).

A lack of sex education makes accidental pregnancies more likely.

The other two things that I said increase the birth rate amongst lower economic bracket people is: Less access to contraceptives, and less access to safe and affordable abortions. Both of those, I think, are fairly obvious in their ability to reduce birth rates.

If you're going to reply to this, don't be a childish spaz about it next time, alright?

Warborn

2012-02-29, 03:34 PM

It's a scientific paper from a peer reviewed journal. Sorry if that isn't quite up to the same standard as "your gut feeling". Either way, your opinion that sexual education does not affect unwanted pregnancy rates is clearly wrong. And don't worry, I'll interpret your skeptical comment regarding the actual evidence I referenced as an off-handed way to apologize for your earlier post. You know, the one where you called me an idiot a bunch of times for claiming something that was true and which I had evidence to prove it as such?

Meanwhile, you wrote a whole bunch of stuff which you didn't cite any references for. That people have more kids because they're "bored" or to game the welfare system. I'd like to see your (scientifically rigorous) sources for both of those assertions.

Firefly

2012-02-29, 03:39 PM

Hey, when I get bored, I bang chicks. It's pretty rigorous. If I provide video evidence, can we watch it on the couch together and pretend we're back in high school?

Warborn

2012-02-29, 03:48 PM

I refuse to watch any pornographic material featuring a red-headed man. It is Allah's great curse that red hair is not exclusive to women.

Firefly

2012-02-29, 03:49 PM

I refuse to watch any pornographic material featuring a red-headed man. It is Allah's great curse that red hair is not exclusive to women.
I do not have red hair - the carpet matches the drapes, if you know what I mean.

And by that I mean, hardwood floors.

Warborn

2012-02-29, 04:56 PM

Oh, you're just a freckled brunette? That's depressing.

Firefly

2012-02-29, 05:37 PM

Oh, you're just a freckled brunette? That's depressing.
Naw, sugartits. It's all bare.

Warborn

2012-02-29, 08:39 PM

I could have sworn your picture you posted over there with the kid revealed you as a horribly disfigured freckle-creature. I seem to have not looked closely enough.

This changes everything...

Vecha

2012-02-29, 09:02 PM

I think sex education can help...as far as knowing how to use a condom.

I knew plenty of friends back in high school that thought using two condoms was better than one and that the pull-out method actually worked.

This was in a high school of predominately black/latin/asian kids.

It can only help.

I wrote/research quite a bit on this topic while in college. I'm no expert by any means, but it does help slightly.

Won't solve the issue...but it sure as fuck is better than teaching abstinence as some people in politics wish to do.

Warborn

2012-02-29, 09:13 PM

The good news is that you don't need to think about it, you can rely on the studies done which have shown that sex ed unequivocally helps avoid unwanted pregnancies and STIs.

Pulling out does work okay though. The terror that is pre-cum is mostly hype aimed at encouraging condom usage, as withdrawal doesn't protect against STIs at all. It's overall less effective than condoms and obviously there's greater potential for it to not work on account of user failure, shall we say, but it's better than not pulling out by a long shot. For example, pulling out is more effective than using a diaphragm (http://www.contraceptivetechnology.com/table.html) if done perfectly every time.

Firefly

2012-02-29, 09:22 PM

I could have sworn your picture you posted over there with the kid revealed you as a horribly disfigured freckle-creature. I seem to have not looked closely enough.

This changes everything...
Oh, I have freckles. You can kiss each one on your way down. When I said "bare" I mean, no hair.

Warborn

2012-02-29, 10:17 PM

No hair at all? I don't know how I feel about that. A man should have some hair on him. Especially 'round-a-bouts the frontal pants region. If you're hairless there then we definitely can't be two heterosexual dudes who just happen to blow each other (but not in a gay way).

Firefly

2012-03-01, 07:59 AM

How about a sword fight?

Warborn

2012-03-01, 09:52 AM

http://i.imgur.com/1GXGi.gif

Firefly

2012-03-01, 10:01 AM

Oh, Black Snake Moan (how fitting a name)... you want me to chain you up? Is that what you're saying?

Fenrys

2012-03-01, 12:06 PM

Whenever I hear about somebody using the pulling out "method" my reaction is always "congratulations, have you chosen a name yet?" Over time, the odds of pregnancy rapidly approach 100%.

Vecha

2012-03-01, 12:12 PM

Pulling out does work okay though. The terror that is pre-cum is mostly hype aimed at encouraging condom usage, as withdrawal doesn't protect against STIs at all. It's overall less effective than condoms and obviously there's greater potential for it to not work on account of user failure, shall we say, but it's better than not pulling out by a long shot. For example, pulling out is more effective than using a diaphragm (http://www.contraceptivetechnology.com/table.html) if done perfectly every time.

Eh, to me 27% is enough to get people to use a condom.

>1% is better than 27%.

I've also read a few studies back in the day that stated a male can't guarantee exactly when he is "shooting" shall we say. So, precum may not be as scary, but trusting a guy to "know" when the pipe is firing away? Even if I have to "scare" my future daughters, if I have any, of precum/cum/condom-less sex, I will.

But yes, you are right, withdrawl can be better than other methods, but I see no harm in getting kids/adults to use condoms over withdrawl just for pregnancies. The STDs safety is a great plus...or the prevention of pregnancies is a great plus. Whichever.

Now...for two consenting adults in a monogamous relationship I see nothing wrong with the pull-out method, as you said, the big issue is STDs.(I'm not trying to say people shouldn't go around partying it up, sleeping around, being "promiscuous" I don't care. Just use a condom, please. Pretty please.)

On a side note,
I'm so glad I'm not a woman and don't have to worry about some asshat taking the thing off during sex. Or deal with him trying to persaude me that it "won't fit, feels better, blah blah blah"

Vecha

2012-03-01, 12:13 PM

Whenever I hear about somebody using the pulling out "method" my reaction is always "congratulations, have you chosen a name yet?" Over time, the odds of pregnancy rapidly approach 100%.

Exactly...27% are good odds if you are having sex several times a week and/or day.

I wish I had those odds at the lottery.

Warborn

2012-03-01, 02:25 PM

Eh, to me 27% is enough to get people to use a condom.

Yeah, I'm not advocating the withdrawal method by any means. Just pointing out that it is actually substantially better than not using any form of birth control method.

Oh, Black Snake Moan (how fitting a name)... you want me to chain you up? Is that what you're saying?

I want to chain you up and heal you through the power of Christ.

Also, my penis is named Christ.

Firefly

2012-03-02, 07:37 AM

SWEET JESUS!

Traak

2012-03-04, 11:20 PM

I can't see "race" going away...it is the main reason, either in front of or following religion, to start any conflict.

Really. So all the wars that have been going on in Africa since time immemorial are race-related?

How about the killing fields of Cambodia? The American Civil War? WWII? WWI? Hitler annexed Czechoslovakia because of religion or race? Poland? Russia? He attacked Russia because it was full of ****** and ****?

All the conflicts in Latin America? They are all race and religion? Catholic latinos attacking other Catholic latinos is a race and religion war?

I thought the reason people went to war was to defend themselves, pre-emptively attack others, or attack others for some benefit, such as peace, security, financial gain or territory, socio-economics. The vast majority of conflicts, from family fights up to world wars are not race and religion-related. They are started for megalomania, greed and avarice, or are started to end it.

Traak

2012-03-04, 11:27 PM

I want to chain you up and heal you through the power of Christ.

Also, my penis is named Christ.

My ignore button is named Warborn. At least this time it is.

Traak

2012-03-04, 11:33 PM

Let him go into China town and hollar ***** outloud a few times... Then we'll laugh when the triad cuts his fucking balls off.

Completely fucking moronic statements like "Calling the Chinese ****** isn't racist" are going to cause me to rage.. Very hard.

China is a country, not a race. I fail to see how you fail to see that. I never advocated using racist terms or even nationalistic ones. If you were to use a term to describe their RACE, it would largely be "Han."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Chinese

Please, don't follow the examples of the growing list of ignorees. Try to read what I said, not what someone on some forum said I said.

Especially when they launch into a shrieking diatribe because they are still fuming over the fact that I said homosexual men, about 1 percent of the population, were 53 percent of the AIDS cases, and are stalking me to attack any time they see an opportunity, real or imagined, or whatever their cause is to Act Up. I noticed the shriekfests went into high gear after that.

Firefly

2012-03-05, 12:51 AM

I thought the reason people went to war was to defend themselves, pre-emptively attack others, or attack others for some benefit, such as peace, security, financial gain or territory, socio-economics. The vast majority of conflicts, from family fights up to world wars are not race and religion-related. They are started for megalomania, greed and avarice, or are started to end it.
You're the biggest and saddest idiot I've ever seen posting on this forum.

Crusades (all twelve of them): religion
Almohad Dynasty capturing of North Africa/Moorish Spain: religion
French Wars of Religion: obviously not about stolen cookies, now was it?
Thirty Years War: religion
Chinese Taiping Rebellion: religion
WW2: religion and race
Lebanese Civil War: religion
Ethnic cleansing in Bosnia: ethnicity and religion
Ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, Congo, Sudan, Nigeria: ethnicity and religion
Second Sudanese Civil War: religion
Irish internal conflict: Protestants vs Catholics, aka religion.
Israel-Palestine conflict: ethnicity, also religion courtesy of the Milkhemet Mitzvah.
India-Sikh conflict: ethnicity and religion
Pakistan-India conflict: religion
War on Terror: started by religious fanatics in the name of holy war, aka religion.
Iraq Civil War: ethnicity (which, to them, is also religious)

These are just a few examples. Not all of them. Not even some of them. Just a small cross-section. For roughly 1900 years the charge of deicide by Christians against **** has led to hatred, violence against, and murder of **** in Europe, Asia, and America. My people have been faced with extermination and extinction since the Roman Empire. Based on our religion. If it wasn't a pogrom or a diaspora, if it wasn't being confined to a slum in a city or being driven out of an entire nation for hundreds of years, it was genocide.

You and people like you, in the name of G-d, start wars over religion and then claim that religion has nothing to do with it. Religious institutions are political institutions, and political institutions require war to thrive. "War is merely the continuation of policy by other means." -Clausewitz.

So fuck you very much and your "it's not about religion" bullshit. You are a blind, myopic little rectum projectile.

Mightymouser

2012-03-05, 04:19 PM

Traak, Not to rain on what is otherwise such a beautiful parade; but you seem to have been taught an incomplete definition for the term race.

Here it is:
race (2)
noun
1. a group of persons related by common descent or heredity.

2. a population so related.

3. Anthropology .
a. any of the traditional divisions of humankind, the commonest being the caucasian, Mongoloid, and *****, characterized by supposedly distinctive and universal physical characteristics: no longer in technical use.
b. an arbitrary classification of modern humans, sometimes, especially formerly, based on any or a combination of various physical characteristics, as skin color, facial form, or eye shape, and now frequently based on such genetic markers as blood groups.
c. a human population partially isolated reproductively from other populations, whose members share a greater degree of physical and genetic similarity with one another than with other humans.

4. a group of tribes or peoples forming an ethnic stock: the Slavic race.

5. any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc.: the Dutch race. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/race

I draw definitions 3-c and 5 specifically to your attention.

Vecha

2012-03-05, 04:33 PM

Really. So all the wars that have been going on in Africa since time immemorial are race-related?Yep.

How about the killing fields of Cambodia?Yep The American Civil War?A definite Yep. WWII?Yep. WWI?Yep. Hitler annexed Czechoslovakia because of religion or race?Seeing as it was a dipute over land/nation/etc..Yep. Poland?Yep. Russia?Yep. He attacked Russia because it was full of ****** and ****?Umm, I'll ignore your obvious facetiousness. It was about nationality and preserving his "master" nation/race

All the conflicts in Latin America?Which ones? They are all race and religion? Catholic latinos attacking other Catholic latinos is a race and religion war?You are going to need to be specific. Which country, which conflict. When?

I thought the reason people went to war was to defend themselves, pre-emptively attack others, or attack others for some benefit, such as peace, security, financial gain or territory, socio-economics. The vast majority of conflictsYou didn't show me a vast majority of anything that proves your points. Quite the contrary actually, from family fights up to world wars are not race and religion-related. They are started for megalomania, greed and avarice, or are started to end it.

Yes, to all the above. Especially since "race" does not ONLY mean color of skin.

Race/Nationality is one in the same.

Wars are waged over differences. As simple as that.

Warborn

2012-03-05, 08:35 PM

My ignore button is named Warborn. At least this time it is.

Oh no guys Traak is ignoring me what do I do?

Race means whatever you want it to mean. It's arbitrary. There aren't any definitive characteristics of people from a certain region which are shared by members of that demographic. If we'd stayed isolated from each other for longer we might have differentiated enough for there to be genuine races, but as it is we're far more similar than we are different.

Warborn

2012-03-05, 09:01 PM

It is the generally accepted belief amongst anthropologists that the human species has no "races", and that these are purely social constructs. So no, I'm not saying it. I'm just repeating what the people who study humans as a job have to say about it. If you disagree with them because you're a burn victim and someone called you a cracker once or whatever that stuff you were going on earlier was about, I'm sure the American Anthropological Association (http://www.aaanet.org/) would be delighted to hear about it. Until then:

In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species.

Firefly

2012-03-05, 09:07 PM

When people say "race" they largely mean "ethnicity". The meaning of the word has evolved and changed over time. That word, like the word "epic", has essentially lost its original meaning.

Mightymouser

2012-03-05, 09:09 PM

Warborn

2012-03-05, 09:10 PM

Thus my earlier statement about race meaning essentially whatever someone happens to want it to mean. I didn't agree with people trying to educate someone else about the definition of the term race, even if it was Traak they were attempting to educate.

That's great and all warborn; except that only discusses genetic 'races'; whereas the point is, just as your quote pointed out; there are clearly defined; socially understood, cultural races. For example; the Chinese race.

This is not how you use semi-colons, stop doing it.

Oh, and yeah, ethnic group, not race.

Firefly

2012-03-05, 09:10 PM

That's great and all warborn; except that only discusses genetic 'races'; whereas the point is, just as your quote pointed out; there are clearly defined; socially understood, cultural races. For example; the Chinese race.
That's called ethnicity by those of us with a better-than-public-school grasp of the English language.

And yes, I have a public school education, mostly.

Baneblade

2012-03-05, 09:19 PM

Are you still saying there are no races?

I think you mean we are the same species. Either that or you're colorblind.

Truth be told, the majority of racial identifiers are unrelated to skin color.

Mightymouser

2012-03-05, 09:24 PM

As posted above, the definition of ethnic group and race are very much synonymous under certain context; specifically the one we're using.

As for my use of semicolons Warborn, I type on forums as I speak in conversation, and I use punctuation to establish rhythm in the same way I do in conversation. Semicolons represent pauses longer than that of a comma; and I use them to represent such. I'm not writing a paper here, I'm expressing thought on a web forum, so I'll use my punctuation however I damned well please.

Vecha

2012-03-05, 09:48 PM

It is the generally accepted belief amongst anthropologists that the human species has no "races", and that these are purely social constructs.

I agree with you...technically...we may be all the same, but sadly the majority of people can't think that clearly.

They latch onto what makes us different.

Crator

2012-03-06, 04:56 PM

You're the biggest and saddest idiot I've ever seen posting on this forum.

Crusades (all twelve of them): religion
Almohad Dynasty capturing of North Africa/Moorish Spain: religion
French Wars of Religion: obviously not about stolen cookies, now was it?
Thirty Years War: religion
Chinese Taiping Rebellion: religion
WW2: religion and race
Lebanese Civil War: religion
Ethnic cleansing in Bosnia: ethnicity and religion
Ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, Congo, Sudan, Nigeria: ethnicity and religion
Second Sudanese Civil War: religion
Irish internal conflict: Protestants vs Catholics, aka religion.
Israel-Palestine conflict: ethnicity, also religion courtesy of the Milkhemet Mitzvah.
India-Sikh conflict: ethnicity and religion
Pakistan-India conflict: religion
War on Terror: started by religious fanatics in the name of holy war, aka religion.
Iraq Civil War: ethnicity (which, to them, is also religious)

These are just a few examples. Not all of them. Not even some of them. Just a small cross-section. For roughly 1900 years the charge of deicide by Christians against **** has led to hatred, violence against, and murder of **** in Europe, Asia, and America. My people have been faced with extermination and extinction since the Roman Empire. Based on our religion. If it wasn't a pogrom or a diaspora, if it wasn't being confined to a slum in a city or being driven out of an entire nation for hundreds of years, it was genocide.

You and people like you, in the name of G-d, start wars over religion and then claim that religion has nothing to do with it. Religious institutions are political institutions, and political institutions require war to thrive. "War is merely the continuation of policy by other means." -Clausewitz.

So fuck you very much and your "it's not about religion" bullshit. You are a blind, myopic little rectum projectile.

I find it very ironic that religious groups are behind a lot of this too. I do believe one of the ten commandants is "Thou shalt not kill". It's only the 6th commandment though so it's ok. Anything past the 5th commandment has less penalties in the afterlife...