The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
I am a rancid shitlib on the Redskins debate, just fucking change it
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:39 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena It's stupid and we should change it if it offends any indigenous, Native American, First Nations people. There is no reason to keep it save for white cultural belligerence.
|
 |
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:04 PM Author: filthy field yeah so fuck you its staying. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775879) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:43 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Not necessarily but the networks backing down from self-censoring is a major barrier to the best possible avenue for change. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776128) |
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:40 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Lmao @ "First Nations" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775720) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:42 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena What's wrong with that? They had a robust societies and cultures in the pre-Columbian Americas. We dismantled all of them with conquest and then named the team of our political capitol the equivalent of 'Washington Niggers.' (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775728) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:43 PM Author: Hairraiser abode crotch Link to them being "first" or "nations"? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775733) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:45 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena First in time, first in right. You can't deny that we wrecked those people and turned them into a permanent underclass as a superior alternative to total eradication. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775747) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:52 PM Author: Hairraiser abode crotch They weren't first, idiot. And why should I care that they got displaced by more advanced people? This has been happening since time immemorial. Blame science for discriminating against the immune systems of isolated people (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775787) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:56 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena This is a ridiculous argument. They were first so far as we know through prehistory. And in any event, it's beside the fact. We have a terrible history with these people and 'Redskins' in rightfully offensive to many people who live with the legacy of brutality and oppression that we willfully imposed on their culture and ancestors. Any humane and open-minded person can recognize this. Human slavery also occurred from 'time immemorial' and yet we reject that practice as backwards. It's foolish to argue that history advocates for thoughtless and needless actions. Society was built by generations of men who rejected this notion.
The indigenous cultures of this continent that existed when we arrived could have annihilated multiple previous cultures. It doesn't vindicate or absolve us in any fashion. The same argument is employed by insane racists who attempt to legitimize the morality American slavery by saying that slavery was a feature of many West African civilizations. If anything, if we're so much better, then we should aspire to be better in all ways rather than tacitly embrace this profoundly regressive shit. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:57 PM Author: Shimmering corner ladyboy this is not a ridiculous argument. no land and no thing belongs to anyone in this world except to the extent they can defend it for themselves. to assign fault in this order for past behavior is ridiculous. I don't disagree the name is offensive and should be changed, but it has nothing to do with duty owed for what happened generations ago. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775835) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:02 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You find no moral fault in how we treated First Nations people? Are you seriously arguing that it was simply the inevitable consequence of the advancement of civilization and the degree that our society benefitted from their loss carries no moral culpability?
If that's the case, do you think it's cool to call a football team by other racist monikers, or is 'Redskins' some kind of special category that we can create through a tortured rereading of history?
Edit: LOL at your near total rewrite and editing after I responded. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:03 PM Author: adulterous cream toaster Do you *seriously* believe that when the RED NIGGERS were first named so, that "redskin" was the equivalent to todays NIGGER? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775872) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:04 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena No, man, I don't! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775882) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:10 PM Author: Shimmering corner ladyboy to answer your question simply, yes. There is no moral culpability attached to the current inheritors of history. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775923) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:13 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Completely disowning racist actions in the present because you didn't live in the racist past is incoherent. Human slavery was wrong and we know that and we reject it, even though we have no direct culpability for the actions of previous generations. We can still recognize the moral truth of that period and reconcile our current behavior. Rejecting a racist team name is no different than rejecting slavery. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775938) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:16 PM Author: Shimmering corner ladyboy that's what i'm saying also except it is not incoherent. culpability dies with the man. a sense of culpability can continue. regardless, choices are the responsibility of the living vestige, but they are not bound by moral obligations to the past. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775952) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:18 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena None of that informs on or advances your evident position that 'Redskins' is a perfectly fine term and there is no reason to change the name. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775964) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:19 PM Author: Shimmering corner ladyboy I think it should be changed. Has nothing to do with past treatment. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775966) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:22 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I believe that many First Nations descendants would vehemently disagree with part of this statement. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775979) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:58 PM Author: Hairraiser abode crotch *leans into mic* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775839) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:04 PM Author: filthy field americans murdered them all. they took the land. same way your barbarian ancestors took rome. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775884) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 3:02 PM Author: Garnet idea he suggested "First in time, first in right."
The new eminent domain defense. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:25 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino It's ridiculous because it's an invented PC term from Canada with zero historic usage for describing anybody in America, the country we live in. American Indians is a perfectly good term, or Native Americans if you don't like that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776000) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:02 AM Author: racy cordovan boistinker guess what the indians call themselves? indians.
in both canada and the us.
first nations, natives, etc are terms used by dumb white women.
|
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:12 AM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Most Indians I meet prefer Native but I've mostly met really lib politically radicalized Indians. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779242) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:22 AM Author: racy cordovan boistinker i had a job during school that had hundreds of random indians self-identify their ethnicity to me every day. (take a guess)
out of the gate 'north american indian' was about 75%; 'indian' or some specific tribal affiliation was the rest. i never got any of the pc crap terms.
|
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:14 PM Author: floppy jet hall circlehead (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775942) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:44 PM Author: Irradiated address Please state the positions on which you are not shitlib and link to any relevant posts on those subjects (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775738) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:47 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I am well known as a self-hating shitlib. I routinely rant against the stupidity of SJW, hate the Clintons, and take a reasonable position on gun control. I also hate the cultural emphasis on virtue signaling and slavish devotion to supporting a tiny percentage of low-IQ sexual deviants. Most vocal minority advocates are idiots and movements like BLM are misguided at best. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775758) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:54 PM Author: Irradiated address Your implication in title was that you aren't normally a shitlib, so your opinion on the issue should be given more weight since it's again your general views.
That apparently is untrue, so I'm not sure why you included it in your title. It's like someone like Doodikoff saying "I'm far right on the college rape court issue". No shit |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:59 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Or, it's an easy way to signal my position and anticipate XO's impending freak out that someone dare align with the NYT shitlib polite opinion on a controversial issue. Your argument is just an attenuated assumption and whiny that I'm somehow disingenuous because I correctly labeled my perspective as shitlib. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775841) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:01 PM Author: Irradiated address There was no need to label your position as shitlib. Everyone knows it's shitlib. The only reason to put it in there was to make it seem like you aren't usually shitlib. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775854) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:03 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I may as well have said 'I'm a total fag' on the Redskins issue. It is phrasing and rhetoric. Your fixation on using the simple nature of the OP to make some collateral attack on the point at issue isn't constructive save for it seems to make you feel vindicated in some fashion. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775873) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:08 PM Author: Irradiated address There are plenty of other arguments against it, some of which I've repeated in this thread. Looks like you stopped responding to the substantive arguments though.
I'm just pulling you down from your high horse. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:14 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You're just creating a subthread wasteland due to your fixation on the idea that I was somehow disingenuous with the thread title. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775943) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:05 PM Author: Green menage if this isn't shtick, you either need to:
1. start taking supplemental testosterone
2. commit suicide |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:08 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena There is no benefit to keeping the name 'Redskins' and there is a benefit to changing it. A significant number of people implicated by the name find it offensive and many of us who are not directly implicated find it offensive that we celebrate and protect an offense to these people. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775909) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:10 PM Author: Irradiated address No one would be offended if you didn't constantly remind them they are supposed to be. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775918) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:15 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena That's ridiculous. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775944) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:46 PM Author: Crusty Glassy Office Elastic Band Crazy how even CNN , Washington Post and ESPN use the term so freely now (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775753) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:49 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena It's no different than 'The San Francisco Coolies.' It implies nothing but an ugly caricature enforced by a white perspective. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775769) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:23 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino "Redskin" is a term coined by Indians to describe themselves, dood. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775988) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:24 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum White libs have decided it's offensive. The conversation is over, okay? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775995) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:29 PM Author: Crusty Glassy Office Elastic Band Not arguing any of that. It's just weird how they advocated never using that term again in early 2015. Then they're back to using it like nothing happened (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776037) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:32 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Can you imagine naming an expansion team the Redskins?
I understand the natural conservative impulse to preserve tradition. It's fundamental. But we all live with the reality that culture is progressive and things change. We know what we did to those people and there is no need or inherent value in labeling a prominent football team with something directly tied to genocide and misery perpetrated by our marauding ancestors.
Stating that 'BUT ITS THEIR OWN TERM GUIS!' ignores so much about history and culture that I don't care to figure out where to start. You know it, too. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:44 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum let's assume Natives actually don't mind the name, as the polling indicates
Let's assume that they view it as making their continued presence in the US apparent
You'd still demand it be removed? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:51 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Are you actually asking me to assume that it will somehow lower the status of First Nations people if we change the name?
I'm all for hypos but when we're talking about a concrete issue, magical realism scenarios where the Indians all just fade into history if we stop using 'Redskins' doesn't really offer any insight.
I address the polling stuff lower in the thread. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:53 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Lol you are making these maximalist arguments that evidence a low IQ. you really didn't address the polling or make any cogent arguments in this thread besides YOU think it's wrong. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776185) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:57 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I don't really care about the polling, see below.
Nobody in here is making a cogent pro 'Redskins' argument that is even incrementally more developed than FUCK SHITLIBS. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:57 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Charles absolutely devastates you in a lengthy screed below. I await your response. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776228) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:01 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Nothing better than hugging another man's nuts when he does the intellectual lifting you aren't capable of! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776265) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:04 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Fact!
Do you have other things you demand minorites be offended at that they currently dgaf about? Do their views matter at all to you? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:15 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I responded to him.
The rest of your comment is you directing your frustration into insulting me and questioning my motives, not actually waging an argument against me. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:18 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Nah I think the argument that we should show some deference to the actualy opinion of the people who you insist should be offended is valid, hombre (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776403) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:19 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Do you think we should pay out reparations if a majority of black people tepidly say it seems like a good idea? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776418) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:25 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Nice try. A better parallel would be record studios refusing to release rap music with black rappers saying n word bc the execs think it's wrong.
I think you've identified one of the major weak spots in your argument. Maybe make this thread again in a month after some further reflection. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:33 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You could have just admitted that you only endorse the idea of deferring to racially confined polling when it suits your purposes. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776495) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:35 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum I don't think so. I don't think it's right to say negro or other once innocuous words that now offend black people. Obviously it can only go so far, but I think a general stance of deference makes sense.
But I guess that means since you feel comfortable ignoring them saying something doesn't often them it is also alright to ignore when something does offend? It's your world Mr white savior. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:37 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Assume 65% of black people are indifferent to being called negro. The rest fall on some spectrum of dislike to outright offense and feel it should constrain free speech due to its offensive and worthless nature. Are you going to argue to a black audience that they should just get over it because hey, a simply majority is simply OK with it? Hey guys, c'mon, it's all right there in the polling! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776541) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:45 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Gg (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776625) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:10 PM Author: Up-to-no-good Bawdyhouse Mad-dog Skullcap In fairness you have made no real point ITT so there's no much to say. As far as I can tell you're saying "yeah I realize native Americans don't care but by god they should, so change it!" which is at best dumb and at worst paternalistic.
The more important criticism of your fairly stupid point is actually made in the other thread on the front page right now where the guy points out that the reason it's deeply important to libs like you that this name change happens is that if you were to accept the premise that his kind of cosmetic paternalism is actually not important at all - as the native Americans seem to have done - then you'd have to confront the fact that most of what libs stand for is entirely cosmetic and irrelevant, and in many cases actively wrong, and the only real purpose is virtue signaling. This is understandably uncomfortable for you which is why even in the face of overwhelming indifference of native Americans you MUST stand by the premise that this is important. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:18 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You guys are hiding behind some questionably valuable polling data like it's a panacea for your troubled arguments. Say there are only 100K true indigenous descendants with connection and affiliation with your ethnic culture. If 10K of them feel that using 'Redskins' is fucked up and degrading, is that not a good enough reason? What does it cost white majority culture to acknowledge their grievance with calling a major sports franchise a name that they take as a slur?
LOL at implicating virtue signaling. Consider the forum I have chosen, dummy. I'm inviting attack by raising the issue here. I have a great track record of lampooning virtue signaling and I hate it as much as the most ardent reptile. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:20 PM Author: buff swashbuckling filthpig ape I’m offended by your grotesque stupidity. can you scamper away now? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776420) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:22 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Solid contribution, brother.
|
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:24 PM Author: Up-to-no-good Bawdyhouse Mad-dog Skullcap There is absolutely no evidence that even 10% of people consider it fucked up and degrading. I understand that you deeply need to believe that some football team name could ever rise to anywhere near the level of "fucking up and degrading" an entire culture, but it doesn't - as evidenced by the fact that 90% of natives think it's fine and the remaining 10% may prefer another name but don't find it fucked up or degrading per any poll.
What's fucked up and degrading is that liberal whites believe that minorities are weak enough to be fucked up or degraded by a historical anachronism that wasn't even meant with offense. That's simply an embarrassing and fucked up view. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:27 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena The same poll everyone is alluding to but not citing indicates this is the case. You guys are perfectly willing to defer to united statistics when arguing your point but completely deny the validity of the same statistics in the same stroke.
"What's fucked up and degrading is that liberal whites believe that any human being is weak enough to be fucked up or degraded by a historical anachronism that wasn't even meant with offense. That's simply an embarrassing and fucked up view."
OK, then no issue with the 'Washington Spearchuckers?' I mean, hey, it even celebrates their proud substance hunting tradition, athleticism, and cultural virility! |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:29 PM Author: Up-to-no-good Bawdyhouse Mad-dog Skullcap Please link to the poll showing 10% thought it "fucked up and degrading." Thanks.
If spearchuckers was meant with no offense at the time the name was enacted and 90% of blacks recognize that and didn't presently GAF then no problem. Was there supposed to be a point to this? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:35 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You're right man, you got me, they don't actually say it's fucked up and degrading. Good job.
I linked the wikipedia page discussing multiple polls farther down in the thread.
If you are going to argue with me that there is no realistic issue with calling a sports franchise the 'Spearchuckers' then you'll have to forgive me if I direct my attention to the people who are trafficking in reality to some degree. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:37 PM Author: Up-to-no-good Bawdyhouse Mad-dog Skullcap You're a complete fucking retard dude. You brought up spearchuckers which is in no way analogous and I said if it was actually analogous it wouldn't be a problem - not that it was analogous. At this point you're just embarrassing yourself. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776540) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:40 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena It's only not analogous because you reject the basic notion that 'Redskins' can be offensive. You can't take that position and find any kind of ethnic designation offensive. That's the kind of painful mental gymnastics you have to run through to maintain your position. But please, tell me all about how the San Francisco Coolies is in no way ugly or detrimental. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776570) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:52 PM Author: Up-to-no-good Bawdyhouse Mad-dog Skullcap Lmao. It's not my position. The people who don't find the name offensive are the native Americans themselves. The only mental gymnastics going on here is your attempt to say that a team name used to refer to people that the people themselves don't find offensive is still offensive. Your attempt to argue other facts won't help. If the facts were different and it was a different name meant with offense that people took with offense then you things would be different. Unfortunately for you, the facts are that the name was not intended with offensie and the overwhelming majority of native Americans therefore take none. There is no inconsistency here. Sorry.
As an aide I find your attempts to sucks Charles's cock ITT hilarious. The implication being that you're a smart and thoughtful guy deigning to take his posts seriously because they might approach your level of thoughtfulness. But you're not thoughtful and your arguments ITT are embarrassing. You can't argue the facts so you simply try to change them. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:55 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Let me teach you an editing trick, and this is from a notoriously longwinded writer.
"I defer to the polls and that is the entirety of my reasoning that I am willing to admit to. I think it's gay that you're being congenial to Charles."
See how that conveys the exact same information? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:59 PM Author: Up-to-no-good Bawdyhouse Mad-dog Skullcap you're right you are long winded and since you were kind enough to help me I'll do the same for you: "I have no reason to believe that Native Americans themselves think the team name is offensive but as a white liberal I know better than them so it is." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776757) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:03 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena It seems clear that you will feel better about what you did in here if you take the last word, so please go ahead. I am sure you can find at least one more way to rephrase the exact same point. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776782) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:05 PM Author: Up-to-no-good Bawdyhouse Mad-dog Skullcap no u (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776795) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:30 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/new-poll-finds-9-in-10-native-americans-arent-offended-by-redskins-name/2016/05/18/3ea11cfa-161a-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html?utm_term=.febcd2c5d303 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776477) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:47 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino "Can you imagine naming an expansion team the Redskins?"
Only because of people like you, so what's the point? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:55 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Demonizing some kind of imagined leftist thought police is beneath you. Bestowing dignity on the remains of an collective of ingenious cultures with a tragic history of oppression and ruin directly tied to the values and equity of NFL football is not some kind of shitlib carnival development and I would even argue it transcends two-party politics. Argue that there is true value and merit in the name that outweighs the negative association and I will listen. Unless you start hand-waiving about slippery slopes and the broader value of not being made to do shit by shitlib nanny culture because that is already addressed elsewhere. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776209) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:03 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino "some kind of imagined leftist thought police"
Bro have you been awake for the past decade? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:22 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Don't take the easy route of mistaking histrionic social media and internet neckbeard persecution of academia for some kind of nascent paradigm shift. Elsewhere you argue that coveting our indigenous people like some kind of glorified pet is a proud and valuable tradition and now you're deferring to some kind of witless Rush Limbaugh anxiety about the damn liberals wrecking everything good. Again, I am a fan of your posting and I know you to be much more thoughtful than this. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776435) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 8:29 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino "Don't take the easy route of mistaking histrionic social meeting bleating and internet neckbeard persecution of academia for some kind of nascent paradigm shift."
Why shouldn't I? There has clearly been one. Even a basic glance at social history makes it obvious that people now (or at least a culturally influential subgroup) are far more sensitive regarding mascots, statues, and just about anything that has some ethnic aspect to it. "Cultural appropriation" literally didn't exist as a concept until the 1980s, but now it's an obsession. Just listen to yourself in this thread, where you admit you can't even accept utterly neutral names like Braves or Chiefs. You basically are uncomfortable with American Indians being cultural entities. I think that's actively bad.
"Elsewhere you argue that coveting our indigenous people like some kind of glorified pet is a proud and valuable tradition"
That's your view, not mine. I just don't see mascotification as inherently demeaning, even when it involves caricatures. Mascots are affectionate and often an expression of local pride, and I think the vast majority of people feel that way. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:13 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena If you call your team the Washington Niggers, then no amount of local pride and affection makes it acceptable. Your personal take on whether or not the name somehow celebrates Native Americans (it really doesn't and nobody asked us to) does not attenuate the shitty nature of it.
The first part of your post is more of the same. 1. Fear mongering about the shitlib thought police turning us into Sweden, and 2. Most people who disagree with using 'Redskins' hold similar positions on the Braves and Indians. I have no discomfort with indigenous people as participants in our culture. That's purely you making an attack on me and suggesting my position is driven by some kind of latent weirdness over indigenous people.
Shitlibs got a lot of mileage out of the picture. It captures some of the issue. Making them our mascots encourages that guy to paint his face red and many indigenous descendants find that degrading. Anyone can understand that. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:25 AM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino If the n-word were a historically neutral term created by blacks that simply was decreed to be offensive for no reason except general ignorance, then the Washington N*****s would be a totally fine name. It's not any of those things and you know it.
"I have no discomfort with indigenous people as participants in our culture."
Bullshit. You clearly do and you've shown it repeatedly. Maybe you don't realize it or don't accept it, but it's still the case. If you can't handle Tonto, a literal heroic Indian character, then you're not comfortable with Indians as equal participants in cultural life. They're just some victim class to you. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:35 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Lol man, I didn't select Tonto out of thin air because it bothers me. I would honestly suspect you're trolling me with this stuff save for your manic insistence that I'm some kind of crypto-racist who freaks out if Native Americans show up on my TV.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/is-the-new-tonto-any-better-than-the-old-tonto-4… |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:49 PM Author: Gaped area i, as a somalian, take offense to the pejorative term "pirate." we should change the pittsburgh pirates' name too. one person offended is enough. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775762) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:49 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena That's silly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775772) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:51 PM Author: Gaped area ok, so your standard isn't "one person being offended," your standard is some objective discussion of "offense," which people actually disagree on, so maybe the high horse should be put away. lol @ your tone in op. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775783) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:53 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Many, many First Nations descendants find 'Redskin' to be outright racist and offensive. It reminds of a miserable history of oppression, cultural devastation, slavery, war, and hatred. There is value in learning to take a more humane and appreciative approach to the people who lived here before we engaged in conquest for profit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775794) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:55 PM Author: Gaped area the terms "pirates" and "raiders" remind me of the disgusting perception of my people among ignorant americans. they are offensive caricatures.
you can't judge me otherwise because you have not had my lived experience. don't call my feelings "silly."
one person offended should be enough to force them to change. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:05 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Again, that's a childish argument and not worth waging. We all understand that an ethnic designation has different implications and history than a historical vocation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775891) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:17 PM Author: Gaped area why? my people are being caricatured and degraded for the sake of a business, just as are native americans.
this is the lived experience of my people and myself, who are you to judge whether my claim is "silly" |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:20 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena We can do better than that and society only benefits when we reject our most base practices. We can use inhumane child labor in foreign countries to make cheaper consumer electronics to distract ourselves and bolster equity but that doesn't mean there is nor moral dimension to the practice. Your supplanting an actual position with willfully blindness to the complexity of the issue. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775969) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:56 PM Author: trip theater stage psychic nobody is saying that there's "no moral dimension" to any of this. but it's not helpful to run around saying "this is offensive, we should get rid of it" when a) the standards of what is "offensive" are ambiguous and b) when you are not setting some clear empirical standard as to what passes and what does not, whether based on some measure of attitudes among the supposedly harmed people or something else. you've somewhat addressed b) by specifying ethnic slurs but most libs have not, and they find names like "braves" and "chiefs" just as offensive, which opens up a different and more sweeping debate (though even by your standard the case of "indians" is ambiguous). it's not just a question of "business/profits versus morals." dan snyder isn't the only one fighting to keep the name. it's quite clear that most redskins fans and nfl fans would prefer to keep it too. these people have no financial skin in the game on this, they are just people who have a personal emotional investment in a shared institution. it's reasonable to argue that, just as a matter of taste, we should find a "slur-like" mascot objectionable even if less than 10% of natives actually give a shit (though you seem to be basing your argument in part on the quantity of people offended, and it doesn't seem like many natives really do care). but the institution has a great deal of social value and you're ignoring that part of the issue, as though changing the mascot would be a pretty simple change and that it's just a matter of dan snyder being willing to take whatever financial hit he might take. the mascot wasn't designed to offend people when it was introduced and it's since evolved to become an institution which is greater than the dictionary meaning of the word, and something which people care about. this isn't as simple as asking ownership to take a hit for moral reasons. and again, most libs are making a broader argument which doesn’t hinge on the status of a word as a “slur” anyways. the argument as you’ve constructed it isn’t exactly the same as most of the popular argument for changing these names. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:01 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena This is a thoughtful post and I'll respond in more detail but I should say that Brave and Indians and even Chiefs are all shitty. But Redskins has a different history and it was inarguably used as a pejorative at times. It directly implicates a tradition of treating First Nations people as an other, as lower, as a relic, as a conquered people adjacent to white society. Chief Wahoo is profoundly fucked up too.
Where I start to wobble is the pushback against high school teams being called the 'Warriors' and the like. This has actually happened all over the place and it's usually driven by the students. I'm not saying they aren't the stooges of their shitlib parents and youtube echo chamber, but it is indicative of changing cultural standards when it comes to openly marginalizing ethnic groups. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:23 PM Author: trip theater stage psychic i can at least appreciate the argument against ‘redskins’ and chief wahoo but a) again, most libs almost completely ignore the aspect of sports teams as social institutions, as though it was just a matter of business / profits vs. morals, and b) when you start arguing against names like “braves” and “chiefs” then charles’ point below is right. names like “illini” and “seminoles" and “utes” are great ways by which to honor local history and the culture of these people, and names like “braves” and “chiefs” and “warriors” are all quite respectful and laudatory. i actually think it would have been a great honor and sign of respect for local history for the okc thunder to have named themselves after a local tribe rather than give themselves a shitty generic name like “thunder.” the name “fighting irish,” which grew out of the caricature of the belligerent irish drunk, is actually much more offensive in nature, and “celtics" is also a somewhat offputting and purely “ethnic” name without any laudatory aspect, much like “redskins.” but nobody argues against these. i think it’s very silly to undermine historical american institutions about which people care, and which really aren’t disrespectful (many of them explicitly laudatory), and which weren’t born out of disrespect, for the sake of popular moral crusades which don’t seem to have a strict and objective set of standards, just a lot of emotions for ethnic minorities / “people of color.” maybe that’s not why you’re arguing against these names but then i don’t think you have a good argument at all against names like “chiefs” and “braves” and “seminoles” – especially the latter, which isn’t even a caricature. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 3:09 PM Author: 180 mentally impaired azn So assume he's talking about Vikings instead of Raiders. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34782670) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:49 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Lol let me let you in on a little secret: this has nothing to do with being offended and everything to do with muscle flexing and coercing whites to do things. Even if this one made sense, why set a precedent (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775766) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:51 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena There is no detriment to the white race if we're not allowed to call a football team a name that is racially offensive to a significant portion of a racially distinct group of people who have many legitimate grievances with white civilization. It's a slap in the face to them and our pushback is irrational bluster that lacks any serious justification. A slippery slope argument is a childish application. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775784) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:54 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Lol please see Kaczynski, Ted on how libs treat concessions made to them. If we determine something is egregious, we should change it. Redskins is simply not that bad and doesn't even bother most Indians. The people agitating for this have ulterior motives. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775806) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:11 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Congratulations on being the first person to say "hey it doesn't even often 'em all!" You're in good company with the 300 lbs. guy with mustard in his beard being the smartest guy at that end of the bar.
You're also aligning with a psychopathic and mentally ill murderer with little sign of self-awareness, but XO Ted references are always appreciated.
The ulterior motives is typically conservative paranoid thinking.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paranoid_Style_in_American_Politics
|
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:22 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Yawn, you're in good company with the screeching adolescent girl in the freshman dorms. I didn't catch an argument in what you poasted above or anywhere else in this thread (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775978) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:15 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Just because college kids are made to read that doesn't mean it lacks value or insight. It's out of date but a full third of the posts ITT are baseless rants about how shitlibs are going to be empowered if they win the Redskins issue and that seems to be viewed as a legitimate reason for supporting 'Redskins.' (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778918) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:57 PM Author: Irradiated address There is detriment. Everyone knows shitlibs will never be satisfied and will keep going to eliminate anything and everything they deem offensive. Changing Redskins name will just give them more confidence moving on to their next one.
|
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:59 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum *Lol stop making slippery slope argument, everyone knows that's a fallacy*
*son removes penis with hedge clippers* |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:15 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena The world has always been insane. That's not a good excuse for failing to do better when it costs us nothing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775949) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 3:13 PM Author: 180 mentally impaired azn You really seem to be discounting the opinions of Indians who *like* the "Reskins" team name (not to mention speaking for them). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34782707) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:17 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I already addressed the silly nature of a paranoid slippery slope argument.
And anecdotally speaking, I know some very rock-ribbed conservatives who agree with me on this issue. Having respect for other cultures and rejecting racism is not inherently conservative and it's 110 IQ reddit territory to believe that defending the use of 'Redskins' is edgy+cool. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:49 PM Author: odious stage shitlib (rancid shitlib on almost everything) (exactly who you thought op would be) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:59 PM Author: Irradiated address (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775846) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:23 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I troll against women and BLM types all the time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775984) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:50 PM Author: Emerald Becky they did a poll and an overwhelming supermajority of native first indigenous two-spirits couldn't be bothered to give a fuck (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775778) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:53 PM Author: Hairraiser abode crotch Yeah but they were all drunk when they took the survey (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775792) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:15 AM Author: zombie-like supple blood rage 180 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778921) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:01 PM Author: Irradiated address But but they just don't understand that they are supposed to be offended (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775859) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:04 PM Author: adulterous cream toaster some things are just categorically offensive and some red niggers are too stupid to understand that (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775881) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:11 PM Author: laughsome step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778084) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:27 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Redskins_name_opinion_polls
I am aware. I don't think issues like this necessarily fall to some crude 'polling' reduction of democratic values. We're using an ethnic caricature as a mascot for a sports team, and that caricature is intimately tied to a history of brutality and cultural devastation. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:28 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino But enough about the Vikings. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776027) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:30 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Oh please. I know you're smarter than this. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776040) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:43 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino No, I actually have no patience for this. Nobody has a problem with caricatures of European cultures (even historically marginalized ones), and they're mostly okay with select other places like Japan too. At heart, the issue here is that YOU view Indians as some inferior group, so any remotely non-serious portrayal of them or their history is an offensive caricature that must be removed.
America mistreated the Indians, but guess what? Even 100 years ago this was widely regarded as a BAD THING. Using Indian imagery wasn't some kind of ridicule, it was a way of actually celebrating their heritage (which was uniquely American) and incorporating them into the cultural framework. This involved plenty of caricaturing and simplification, because that's what happens when a group is actually part of cultural discourse. To Americans in the first half of the 1900s, Indians were actually complex, interesting people: Dangerous warriors, unique cultures, both allies and enemies, and often sympathetic victims. People like you want to sterilize them into a morality play that nobody can ever portray or discuss except in the most serious light. And if you can't joke about or caricature Indians, they're culturally dead. Compare modern America to 80 years ago and American Indians have FAR less of a cultural presence, because we've decided that simply acknowledging their existence is, in most cases, too offensive. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:14 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena "Nobody has a problem with caricatures of European cultures (even historically marginalized ones)"
Very silly. Context matters. The fact that any pro 'Redskins' argument has to scramble for a twisted explanation about how they sort of just passively accept it is very telling. And you can't really apply it to any other ethnic group and yet you're crying about 'European cultures' like this is all hinged on some broad and reasonable principle.
"YOU view Indians as some inferior group"
Not at all and nothing I have said should lead you to assume this. This is a borderline generic response to anyone who points a finger at racist attitudes. There are multiple other instances in this thread where you rail against the perceived paternalism and superiority of shitlibs rather than the argument I'm waging.
"non-serious portrayal of them or their history is an offensive caricature that must be removed."
Non-serious is BS minimizing of the issue. Seriousness doesn't matter. A sambo caricature is just as offensive as saying nigger and if you're honestly debating that then you should examine what is motivating you. I guarantee it's not a profound belief that acknowledging the dignity and equality of all ethnic groups is a clear benefit to civilization.
"Even 100 years ago this was widely regarded as a BAD THING. Using Indian imagery wasn't some kind of ridicule, it was a way of actually celebrating their heritage (which was uniquely American) and incorporating them into the cultural framework."
100 years ago you could put a sign in your window that said 'NO DOGS OR INDIANS WELCOME.' And people did it, everywhere. Society was openly hostile to First Nations people, and at we have become experts at burying this legacy with an 'unserious' treatment of them in modernity. You seem to be celebrating this uncomfortable compromise. But you're sadly in lunatic territory if you're going to point toward history as some great example of how we ought to regard indigenous people. I know from your interests and politics that you're prone to making this sort of argument, but stop and think about how you're going about this.
This is like the Stockholm syndrome Larry Kramer shit you see in the gay community where you have brain-damaged old gays suggesting that it's tragedy that 'queer culture' has been opened up to the masses by the sanitized Modern Family regard for gay people.
You're celebrating a potentially not accurate and fully condescending fetishism of tribal whoop whoop Indians as some sort of important cultural legacy that we're keeping alive with the 'Redskins.' That's shit, brother, and I would love to see you openly espouse this idea to a First Nations person who takes well informed pride in their ethnic identity and history. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:18 PM Author: buff swashbuckling filthpig ape https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-arizona-a-navajo-high-school-emerges-as-a-defender-of-the-washington-redskins/2014/10/26/dcfc773a-592b-11e4-8264-deed989ae9a2_story.html?utm_term=.7b4788d6f389 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776404) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:25 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Ben Carson is black and he's against Affirmative Action therefore any reason for wanting to abolish Affirmative Action is valid. Because a black guy agrees prima facie for some reason. Geeze we should have just cut to the chase sooner! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776455) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:33 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum 9 out of 10
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/new-poll-finds-9-in-10-native-americans-arent-offended-by-redskins-name/2016/05/18/3ea11cfa-161a-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html?utm_term=.febcd2c5d303 |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:40 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena The wikipedia page on Redskins polls is linked below and it has been posted to XO numerous times. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776577) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:37 PM Author: buff swashbuckling filthpig ape the data point I linked undercuts the historical racist connotation argument, which seems to be the only substantive point you’ve made ITT, and which has been repeatedly debunked by my link and historians. ergo, your analogy to a sports team called the “spearchuckers” is idiotic, and you are an imbecile for making it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776527) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:42 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You're reiterating the same silly argument.
GUYS THIS PARTICULAR RACIST TERM IS OK IF YOU JUST LOOK AT IT THE RIGHT WAY SO WE GOTTA KEEP IT GUYS, WE JUST HAVE TO, FOR SOME REASON, RIGHT GUYS? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:07 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino If a term doesn't have a racist origin, and isn't used as a racist term now, now is it actually racist? This has the feeling of white libs being uncomfortable with any word that is archaic + racial. A lot of people complain about the word Negro in the same way even though it was never a slur. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776814) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:14 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Most black people will be taken aback and offended to some degree if a white person refers to them as a negro. It goes to respect and acknowledgement and I think would agree that healthy societies embrace those values.
The other argument you make boils down to your perspective. Some people do take it as a slur and it's racially sourced term from a period where First Nations people were treated awfully by a nation that has horrible, horrible history with them. That is undeniable. Just because you can characterize something one way, other facts are not irradiated. You have to deny the history I just mentioned to fully bite off on your argument. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 8:31 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino "Most black people will be taken aback and offended to some degree if a white person refers to them as a negro."
Probably, but literally only because the word is old. Negro has never been a slur. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:04 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena But in our society, we acknowledge that some terms are offensive to some people, possibly for stupid or irrational reasons as you seem to argue, but are nonetheless offensive. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778044) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:29 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino That's a sound argument for not using the terms in new instances, but it's a weak argument for compelling an existing institution to change its name. The proper response in such cases is to educate, not whine and make unreasonable demands. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778210) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:04 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Reasonable minds can disagree that it's unreasonable to call for change. First Nations people still feel the effects of racism. Without being openly hostile, we make light of their culture and history all the time. 'Redskins' was applied to the team when we had more regressive standards and awareness of these things. Society was openly racist in many ways. Doesn't mean we can't improve a little bit in the current era. And let's not act like the Redskins are some wonderful institution that exists beyond scrutiny. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778463) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:22 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Are you in Canada? First Nations isn't a term used in the US, so if you're American it seems like a really weird affectation, especially when you've been attempting to claim there is no overzealous PC movement.
That said:
1. How do we make light of their history or culture, let alone all the time? And no, I don't think a team name is enough to prove that. 2. What is actually wrong with making light of culture? Once again, you seem to be treating Indians as some sad morality play and not actual cultures with history and distinctive traits and imagery. Nobody minds making light of the Irish, or the Japanese, or the Egyptians, or the Russians. And no, I don't think there's a difference here, except that you've decided Indians are special and sacred. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:58 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I mostly used it because I know it has a smug shitlib ring to it and I wanted people to engage the thread. I picked it up reading about Inuit bros. Same book inspired this thread:
http://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3574115&mc=98&forum_id=2
We constantly belittle indigenous culture. Chief Wahoo is tolerated. Tonto. A crying Indian in a head dress because somebody littered. There are many books about only this topic and I suspect you're playing dumb too some extent when you act mystified at the suggestion that Indians have been portrayed inaccurately in ways that rage from silly to outright negative.
Most of our depictions of them are crude, simplistic, cartoonish. You couldn't get away with the same thing with other dark skinned ethnic groups. The closest example is Apu from the Simpsons and the other gentle lampooning of model minorities, and they correctly get pissed off about it. If we agree to everything you're stating, then Redskins is no different than Fighting Irish. You know there is a difference and I don't have to spell it out for you. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:19 AM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Those are pretty weak examples of belittling. Chief Wahoo is literally just a cartoon logo. I guess is has exaggerated red skin...but how is that hateful? Cartoons have exaggerated features. You just sound terrified of anything that involves skin color, as if it's talismanic or something. Tonto is a heroic character who in some iterations speaks bad English (like you might expect a foreigner to). The crying Indian was literally in a position of moral superiority in that ad. That hardly seems like some vast record of belittling and humiliation.
Compare with, say, Family Guy's take on the Irish:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_lJbpVmyKgo
I'd call that WAY more belittling than anything you listed. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:32 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You completely ignore the history, both our history with Native Americans and our history of appropriating their images in disrespectful and offensive manner. As for Chief Wahoo, I guess you're really not playing dumb. If you can't even imagine how that rubs people the wrong way, then you're truly some kind of wide-eyed, unspoiled babe in the woods. The crying Indian has been singled out many times, by actual indigenous descendants, as a ridiculous depiction of a Native American that is born entirely from stereotyping.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Indians_name_and_logo_controversy#Chief_Wahoo_as_a_racial_caricature |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:52 AM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino I'm not playing dumb at all. I just think the argument that Chieg Wahoo is actually harmful is ridiculous. I've asked repeatedly for you to explain how and you keep just falling back on other people complaining. You're literally only providing more evidence for my point that people are simply trained to oppose these things without any clear reason why. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779105) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:59 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Did you notice there is an entire well developed wikipedia page on the subject and yet you're evidently so annoyed at me personally than you're demanding, on the internet, that I personally explain to you why its perceived as offensive? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779155) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:09 AM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Hardly. The page is mostly:
1. Simply repeating that a caricature is obviously evil (I've been asking you to explain why this is), 2. Listing orgs denouncing it as racist, and 3. Making comparisons to Little Black Sambo, which is another case of something being deemed racist simply because of its color and pretty much nothing else.
The only part that resonates a bit is the complaint that including a feather is blasphemous, but this actually generalizes specific tribal norms to all Indians without justification. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:16 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena If you are arguing that something like a sambo is innocuous and just misunderstood then you are so much more unorthodox in this entire area than I thought. We're not going to agree on anything and your tone has increasingly suggested that you're taking the argument personally.
What are your feelings on black face? Is that offensive or are we all just cretins for clutching our pearls because somebody puts a little shoe polish on their face? |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:21 AM Author: trip theater stage psychic as i mentioned above there is a very good argument to be made that 'fighting irish' is much more offensive in nature than 'redskins.’ if you want to say that indians are more marginalized and therefore deserve greater protections than the irish then you can say that but don’t say that “you know there is a massive difference between fighting irish and redskin” while providing no rationale and insinuating that your rationale should be self-evident. you've effectively been doing that throughout this thread without addressing some of the more reasonable arguments coming from others. in any case your burden to show that something is abhorrently “offensive” becomes much greater when you raise the standard from ‘redskins’ to ‘redskins’ plus ‘chiefs’ plus ‘seminoles.’ just keep that in mind. you can’t fall back on “redskin is a slur.” |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:37 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Is it a cop out, in your mind, if I cite to the many, many Native American groups who really want them to change the name? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779029) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:45 AM Author: trip theater stage psychic no. but if that’s the point that you’re making you need to make it clear rather than insinuate that your reasoning is self-evident, as though we should all get your point and are ignorant / intentionally obtuse for failing to do so, when i can count a number of possible conclusions that i could have drawn from your post above, some of which i think are less reasonable than others. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779073) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:37 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena That is fair.
On XO I usually avoid subthreads where the disagreement leads to some MAF poster DEMANDING that someone explain every single presumption and opinion they hold in painstaking detail.
It happens constantly on XO and it's an absurdly aspie means of arguing that never creates a coherent discussion. The DEMANDS for EXPLANATION of something that really doesn't require one started early ITT so I deliberately withheld to some degree. For some reason, angry bored guys debating on the internet feel they're entitled to whatever explanation they DEMAND and they substitute this for making their own statements and arguments. It's a crap interrogation style that I have weakly utilized as well, so I know how dumb it is. It's much easier to have your 'opponent' write a few hundred words and then pick at it with autism-spectrum obsessiveness over some imaginary cogency standard for opinions.
But anyway, there was a lot of hand waiving about the polls earlier. I also declined to really get into that but I did say that the polling doesn't matter to me that much. That is because I think the opinions of a vocal and informed minority of indigenous descendants is sufficient for not using 'Redskins.' And the leadership of many tribal organizations and advocacy groups are against it. They find it offensive, demeaning, regressive, and they don't want it. That's a good enough reason on its face. If it makes a significant number of the people it claims to depict feel unhappy, then fuck it, why are we protecting it?
The answer to that, of course, was FUCK LIBS and SLIPPERY SLOPE or YOU HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS and of course EXPLAIN EXPLAIN EXPLAIN. Some of the pushback against changing the name is also a racist cypher from people who privately delight in the last few bastions of openly implicating race in society. Native Americans have been getting the worst of that bullshit for a while now. Depriving anyone of that outlet is worthy because it comes at the cost of dignity. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 3:20 AM Author: trip theater stage psychic ok but saying that “there’s a difference between ‘fighting irish’ and ‘redskins’ and i don’t have to spell it out for you” is begging the question to some extent. that difference a major factor in this debate and you didn’t tell us whether the difference is in the ridiculousness of the caricature or the offense which people take to them, or something else. i gather that you’re arguing for some combination thereof but when i read this kind of argumentation it just makes me doubt the strength of your reasoning and whether we can have a debate in good faith. that's all.
as for “If it makes a significant number of the people it claims to depict feel unhappy, then fuck it, why are we protecting it?” i'll revert to what i said before, it’s an institution about which tens of millions of people care (really hundreds of millions since even fans of other teams have strong feelings about this) and which has been a non-negligible part of american culture for the better part of a century. it’s not just a case of dan snyder wanting to avoid the one-time restructuring cost and it’s not a case of hundreds of millions of closet racists holding onto one last bastion of old-school racism. and again the ‘redskins’ institution has evolved beyond the dictionary meaning of the word, and pretty much any american with any meaningful exposure to nfl football has an intuitive understanding of this, indians included. that's not to ignore claims that some find ‘redskins’ demeaning, but if it were as simple as “it hurts one group of people and does nothing to another group of people, so getting rid of it would be pareto efficient excepting dan snyder,” then there wouldn’t be a heated debate around the issue. there’s more than one side with something at stake.
from there we can hand-wring over how much we should weigh the claims of the offended, our distaste of the name ‘redskins’, etc. against the social value of the institution, but there’s no clean solution either way, even if you think that indians are clearly suffering more harm. that's why i brought up confederate street names / statues issue below. my general stance is that i can get why a black person would be upset about living near a statue of john calhoun, but a) the shared history and institutions of those areas are not worthless to locals, and b) it’s not my place to tell mobile, alabama how much those shared institutions are worth, or whether it can or cannot have certain statues. so if the local councils agree to keep the statues that’s up to them, and if people feel so strongly that they can’t put up with it then they can relocate to a region with a different history and culture, or which treats its legacy differently. it sucks for some people but most understand that, for those who want to keep it, it’s more about preserving local history than about preserving racism as such as a living force, b/c the historical institution and its importance to people today isn’t the same as what some of that stuff meant in 1850. keeping a confederate statue isn’t akin to preserving slavery or jim crow laws.
there's no immediately similar democratic process for making decisions over mascots but assuming that team owners are looking to maximize profits the decision still falls back on the sentiments of consumers of the nfl. and they’ll obviously overwhelmingly favor keeping the name b/c the fraction of nfl consumers who oppose is very small. but again, most football fans, indians included, understand that the symbol is a historical artifact that means something to people not as a racist symbol but as its own institution, and that that’s why people want to keep it, not out of a desire to preserve racism, because they don’t even wield it as a racist object to begin with – much like confederate street names today. it sucks for indians who don’t like it and who are conscious enough about nfl football to be annoyed by it but if they really don’t like it then they don’t have to watch. it would be a different story if this was a new team with no history adopting the name ‘redskins’ but if it were then the popular outcry, unchecked by a sense of historical context and social value, would be too overwhelming for it to last.
maybe you say that dan snyder is still god in this situation so it’s on him to weigh the racial offense to indians over the social value to other fans for moral reasons. but again it’s not an easy one-sided decision, and people understand the institution in historical context.
and again the scale would tip even further away from the opposition for names like “braves” which aren’t intrinsically offensive outside of the fact that they are caricatures, and even further for names like “seminoles" which many non-indians and indians see as a sign of respect. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:10 PM Author: buff swashbuckling filthpig ape it’s not an argument, mouth-breather. it’s a historical fact that the term isn’t “racist” (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776835) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:17 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Glad I finally learned that racism is a simple A or B analysis.
You're playing in the same sandbox as the mentally ill SJWs when you take this approach. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:46 AM Author: claret galvanic shrine mexican "Glad I finally learned that racism is a simple A or B analysis ... there's just SO MUCH to UNPACK here!"
jfc shitlibs |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:39 AM Author: claret galvanic shrine mexican absolutely devastating OP has no (intelligent) response to this scholarship (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779327) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:52 PM Author: adulterous cream toaster "oklahoma" means red people. fucking disgusting (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775788) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:54 PM Author: geriatric fluffy legal warrant "senate" is from latin word "senex" which means old man. can't believe half of Congress is sexist. in 2017. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775805) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:56 PM Author: adulterous cream toaster (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775817) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 4:57 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum I also believe they were called "senators" during slavery and Jim crow (Some even supporter these policies). Dustbin of history time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775832) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:04 PM Author: Carmine stimulating toilet seat If shitlibs and Indians are that bothered by it, they are welcome to buy the team or conquer it by force. That's how it works. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775885) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:07 PM Author: Fragrant church building u already lost embarassingly (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775904) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:22 PM Author: Drab Godawful Headpube I’ve been a redskins fan for 25 years and am a STH. Would be fine if they changed the name (and they probably should from a biz perspective — think of all the new merchandise!!). However, 90 percent of native Americans don’t mind the name. And a significant percentage of naive Americans actually would be upset if the name changed. This is from the WaPo poll 2 years or so ago. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34775981) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:26 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Man you're a glutton for punishment. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776011) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:44 PM Author: Drab Godawful Headpube Became a fan in 1991 (super bowl run) when I was in first grade. They are an awful franchise for a ton of reasons but it’s what I got. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776136) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:29 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena If a pol showed that a majority of First Nations descendants think that we ought to dismantle our nuclear arsenal, would you suggest that policy carries greater legitimacy? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776035) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:50 PM Author: Drab Godawful Headpube No, because that policy isn’t really relevant to the poll. If a majority of all Americans thought that, then it probably would be fair to say that such policy would have more legitimacy, though it’d still be a dumb idea in my opinion.
Here, though, the issue is that the name is arguably offensive to a specific group. That the vast majority of that group does not in fact find the name offensive (and many actually like the name) is highly relavent to the issue. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:29 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I don't form my opinions around what the unwashed masses respond to in telephone polls. Normally XO laughs at that sort of thing too. But ITT it's being deferred to as a matter of convenience. Suggesting that this is pure shitlib paternalism is both a double standard and cuts against the snooty 'We're smarter around here' mentality that XO brings to almost any subject.
Very early in the thread I addressed the inevitable development that dumbs would start yelling about how THE INDIANS DONT EVEN CARE WHY CHANGE IT. And yet here are. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:41 PM Author: Drab Godawful Headpube And yet here are indeed. I don’t really care if they change it or not but LOL at not considering the views of the allegedly aggrieved people on the subject to be relevant. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776586) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:43 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Who says I don't consider them?
The only difference is that you guys are scrambling to pretend the people who do find it offensive somehow don't exist. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:27 PM Author: impressive flushed cruise ship snyder would have PWNED libs if he just changed the name to "washington rednecks" & simultaneously made their theme song "are u ready 4 some football" by hank jr (which at the time had been banned by libs).
pros:
-white rednecks/working class would have LOVED it -chill black DC sports fans wouldn't have cared (& also didn't care about the redskins name") -american indians would have continued to not care about the issue -libs would have been ENRAGED (they're margininalizing non-white viewers!!!)
cons:
?? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:28 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Holy shit 180. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776032) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:30 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino That wouldn't pwn libs at all because they love ridiculing lower-class whites and use "redneck" all the time.
Libs are ultimately huge hypocrites on this shit. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:32 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum Libs would say it is glorifying a hateful culture and be irate. Rednecks would love it. I think this represents a path forward but will need OP to weigh in. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776053) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:38 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Often the best solutions are not feasible.
But the same inability to progressively accept what's best and smartest also drives the irrational devotion to calling the team the 'Redskins.' |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:36 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Lashing out at the ignorant lower class isn't something unique to shitlibs. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776081) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:48 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Being a huge hypocrite in the process is. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776158) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:32 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You're one of the most principled and articulate conservatives on a board stuffed full of people who think they have the absolute best take on politics and society. I can't believe you're so quick to turn this into a simple FUCK SHITLIBS AND THEIR STUPID SHITLIB CULTURAL POLICE bitchfest. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776488) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 9:13 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Concern trolling aside, I get irate about this because it's so pigheaded. It doesn't matter if Indians are actually offended. It doesn't matter whether the term was a slur when it was coined (it wasn't). It doesn't matter whether it was meant as a slur when the team was created (it wasn't). And it doesn't matter whether the term is actually used as a slur now (have you ever seen an actual Indian called a redskin, negatively or otherwise? I have not). You've brushed aside all those questions as largely unimportant, and still insist the name must go, because you simply feel it's disrespectful. I'm entirely serious when I say that you seem to simply be uncomfortable with Indians having any casual presence in American culture. I find that really sad. The ability to have your heritage used for sport, or humor, or symbolism, or whatever, has bizarrely become a variant of white privilege, all because people insist on finding offense in everything. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34777724) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:10 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena It's not white privilege to say that the name and logo reduce First Nations people to caricature. This is offensive to some of them and makes their culture and history appear cartoonish.
I have probably spent more time around 'Indians' than most people posting in this thread. I have no problem with their presence in culture. Quite the opposite.
The rest of your post cuts toward the same SHITLIBS WRECK EVERYTHING WITH THEIR POISON line that you have been attempting to inject into the debate. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:39 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino "It's not white privilege to say that the name and logo reduce First Nations people to caricature. This is offensive to some of them and makes their culture and history appear cartoonish."
So? Being caricatured is a part of having a real culture. Other cultures are caricatured all the time. The only problem is overly hurtful or hateful caricatures. You've just decided that for Indians almost any public portrayal is hurtful; in essence they're a special class of untouchables, and culturally dead as a result.
"I have probably spent more time around 'Indians' than most people posting in this thread. I have no problem with their presence in culture. Quite the opposite."
Bullshit. If you think a team being called the "Chiefs" is offensive, then you're simply uncomfortable with Indians having a cultural presence, at least one that isn't strictly controlled. And the end result of strict control is that they'll simply be absent, because they'll be sterile and boring. Indians are reduced to a museum piece. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:22 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You seem deliberate in your conflation of mere portrayal and caricature. The Redskins, the Braves, The Indians, all caricature that has very little to do with actual indigenous culture. It reduces a diverse and complex group of ancient cultures to our white societal rendering of all indigenous people as some monolithic 'Red Man' concept.
You're repeating yourself ad nauseam with the accusations about me being some conflicted racist or whatever you're alluding to. I have tried to refrain from letting this do the arguing for me, but I'll draw your attention to it here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Washington_Redskins_name_change_advocates
Plenty of lucid, well informed stakeholders disagree with your notion that this is all a bunch of whiny witch hunting by shitlibs who just don't understand that 'Redskins' is somehow all about affection and celebration. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:36 AM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino "You seem deliberate in your conflation of mere portrayal and caricature. The Redskins, the Braves, The Indians, all caricature that has very little to do with actual indigenous culture. It reduces a diverse and complex group of ancient cultures to our white societal rendering of all indigenous people as some monolithic 'Red Man' concept."
You know what else does that? Literally any team called the Knights. We have a stock image of knights that is simplified, caricatured, and monolithic which totally ignores huge variations between cultures. And it doesn't matter. There are plenty of other examples. Modern portrayals of Vikings are grossly inaccurate much of the time. Same goes for samurai, or Mongols, or Italians, or whatever. There's nothing wrong with simplified portrayals of things, as long as they aren't hateful.
I haven't been calling you a racist, if that's how you've been taking it. I've simply been pointing out the nature of your complaints. You are not demanding that Indians be treated the same as other groups (I.e. fairly). You're demanding they be treated DIFFERENTLY from other groups, and this demand, to me, seems rooted in an infantilization of Indians as a group. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:40 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I'm not talking about the treatment of indigenous people because that's not what the thread is about. It's shitty to make all these odd personal insinuations about me because I'm attempting to stay on topic.
Knights is not analogous. We're talking about a real and existing ethnic group. Under your explanation I'm a hypocrite because I'm fine with Cowboys but not Redskins. When you have to get as abstract as you're trending, it usually means you no longer grounded in much except your desire to be correct. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:10 AM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino "Knights is not analogous. We're talking about a real and existing ethnic group."
Europeans aren't a real or extant ethnic group? There aren't still knights today, in a modified fashion? |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:22 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Again, I understand the point you are making but this is junior high shit. Would you feel comfortable making this argument to an intelligent person IRL?
"Well Bob, I'm just dumbfounded that someone would suggest that Native Americans may be offended by the Redskins. Nobody ever asks how the nobles of Europe feel about how their ancestors are just reduced to silly images of plate armor and swords!"
It seems that you deny that indigenous people could or should be offended by any depiction. Is there any depiction of Native Americans you do think present racist notions or characters them in a negative light? |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:35 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776075) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:30 PM Author: ocher church Hey shitlib, EXPLAIN why the founders of our country are more morally culpable for their actions and results than any other people alive at the same time? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776045) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:37 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena You're always delightfully unhinged but you have to expand on this before anyone can actually address it. Why pave the way for a subthread wasteland when you can concisely state your point? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776087) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:40 PM Author: histrionic fishy stead Damn a shitlib and a sports cuck? That blows. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776113) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:41 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I love sthports! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776117) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:59 PM Author: Primrose misanthropic nursing home keepsake machete (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776244) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 5:50 PM Author: beady-eyed hunting ground I’ll never give an inch to white people upset about a mascot. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776171) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:43 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena If more people were just honest about this we would all be better off. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776603) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:10 PM Author: buff swashbuckling filthpig ape FUCK YOU (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776355) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:18 PM Author: Primrose misanthropic nursing home keepsake machete (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776402) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:27 PM Author: Brilliant charismatic potus you're also a rancid shitlib on everything else (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776464) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:46 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I discuss my shitlibbery an open and self-deprecating way.
The only thing I take pride in is that I don't turn into a fuming Yosemite Sam faggot when people disagree with me on the internet. Many of XO's most vocal conservatives turn into hysterical women the moment they are confronted with different opinions. On the internet. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:36 PM Author: Glittery Bright Affirmative Action Cumskin Native Americans have huge problems with alcoholism, schooling, and unemployment. To act like the name of a football team is even in the same pantheon as those issues is the real offense here. Shitlibs obsession with the Redskins name is rancid SJWism at it's worst. The subsidies and cash payments we give to native Americans is more than enough (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776521) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:48 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena So paying out a tiny bit of money to a hideous and broken 'sorry 'bout that' system of federal subsidies means we shouldn't scrutinize our attitudes and the way we address First Nations people?
The fact that they face profound cultural detriments in modern society in no way justifies the use of 'Redskins.' Your comments are completely tangential the argument. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:01 PM Author: Glittery Bright Affirmative Action Cumskin My point is that your stance on this issue is completely ridicolous. Why not address the astronomical suicide rates first?
In convinced you're never even known a Native American in your life. I'd be happy to take you to a reservation in North Dakota or tell you a story of one of my ex-co-workers talking one down from a bridge. Native Americans don't give a shit about this issue for a reason.
You really come off as an out-of-touch limousine lib ITT. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:03 PM Author: Spectacular whorehouse useless brakes The profound cultural detriments they face are almost exclusively self-inflicted.
Would any of them really take the following deal: Give up antibiotics, food certainty, climate control in exchange for being able to run free across the forests.
If you want to create some sort of collectivized report card for the impact of whites on them i'd say its an A
If you and other gay shitlibs really cared about these people you would address the actual issues facing them. Drug/Alchy abuse, broken homes, domestic violence, etc. But no, you don't actually give a shit about them. You could literally have an aboriginal dood next door suffering from alcoholism and instead of trying to help him you would be furiously typing away at XO poasters about how we need to change a the name of a team because it could hurt peoples' feelings. Your concern is phony.
If you want to really "help" people like you and your shitlib ilk like to claim you desire, then focus first on your immediate circle of influence. Not grandstanding about national debates. But the former is a lot harder and requires mastery of your own self and involves getting your hands dirty and doing hard work and we can't have that now can we |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:05 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena LMAO, 180. Whole thread was worth it just for this shining specimen of CGM retardation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776799) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 6:56 PM Author: Copper Motley Theater This "debate" is still happening? Thought this was big 5 years ago but the libs lost and stfu about it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776736) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:10 PM Author: ruddy bat shit crazy regret place of business Nope. It’s over. Shitlibs lost. Bigly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776839) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:21 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena There was major shitlib outrage over adding the 'Washington Team' to the Thanksgiving day schedule. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776905) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:05 PM Author: Mint deep prole It's almost like America learned nothing from the hateful "Nantucket Niggers" Saga/debacle. LOVE WINS (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776797) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:19 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Lol brother, I knew where you would stand on this.
I do think the fact that some people get actually MAD at the suggestion that we ought to just change the name is telling. The anger comes from being told something is racist and being told what to do by the shitlib boogie man, not a serious reflection on the name of the team. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:06 PM Author: ruddy bat shit crazy regret place of business Good to see full blown mental illness is alive and well on this bort (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776807) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:07 PM Author: Self-centered market sound barrier wow i am definitely not reading this dumpster fire of a thread (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776816) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:10 PM Author: Crimson Box Office Community Account (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776842) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:17 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776881) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:17 PM Author: milky diverse selfie (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776884) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:25 PM Author: Talented Sneaky Criminal Location (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776936) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 8:31 PM Author: histrionic fishy stead (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34777479) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:39 PM Author: Hideous Chartreuse Windowlicker Public Bath (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778273) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 7:53 AM Author: pale set genital piercing (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779947) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:12 PM Author: Onyx Orchestra Pit Serious question, where do you stand on teams using “crusader” as a mascot ? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776853) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:18 PM Author: milky diverse selfie should only be used by Catholic schools or similar organizations, Proddies cannot appropriate the defense of Jerusalem by pontiff's call (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776887) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:20 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena WTF are you guys just trolling Charles now? This thread is about heaping abuse on gross old Law Beaver. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776897) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:23 PM Author: Onyx Orchestra Pit Libs opposition to the use of “redskin” or other Indian name uses the exact opposite logic of their opposition to schools using crusader as a mascot. With Indians, they say having an Indian mascot mocks Indian culture and minimizes it to a cheap trope at sporting events. Then they also oppose using crusader as a mascot because it celebrates crusading and may make Muslim/non Christian attendees feel uncomfortable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776928) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:26 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Most of our deeply cherished political beliefs are stupid and contradictory when you put them under a microscope. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776944) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 8:35 PM Author: learning disabled mad cow disease casino Fun fact: A HS team name on Pine Ridge Indian Reservation is the Crusaders. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34777506) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:25 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Can't wait for TMF to discover this thread, then make his lonely trek through it, lazily blank-bumping and 180ing every single person who called me an asshole. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776938) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:27 PM Author: Onyx Orchestra Pit Can you answer my question on colleges using crusader as a mascot ? Thank (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776953) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:34 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I have never thought about it and didn't realize there was controversy. I understand the comparison but it's only a relevant example in the sense that shitlibs are mad about the potential to offend. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34777013) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:28 PM Author: bossy burgundy dysfunction forum I think you comported yourself with dignity ITT, given what I view as the weakness of your position (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34776961) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 7:32 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Thank you brother, mighty white of you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34777000) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 9:27 PM Author: Very tactful dilemma Wasted way too much of my time reading this thread. OP, your argument is incredibly weak and seems to boil down to that the name 'Redskins' is racist because you believe it to be so. Haven't seen any decent rebuttals to the many good points raised by the other side. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34777808) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:00 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I disagree and it's not as if I'm the only person to take this position. I tried to reasonably respond to everyone, even the posters who didn't express much more than FUCK SHITLIBS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Washington_Redskins_name_change_advocates
I agree with the SCOTUS decision, by the way. And I think reasonable people can fall on either side of the line but ultimately there aren't any many strong arguments against rejecting the name. People like Mike Holmgren aren't exactly genderqueer shitlib activists when they share this position. |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:07 PM Author: Very tactful dilemma This is just an appeal to authority though. The crux of the issue to me is whether the name is even offensive at all, and I haven't seen any decent reason to conclude that it is. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778064) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:42 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Thus the reason I didn't link that initially.
But the link also answers your question. PLENTY of Native American people don't like it and they find it offensive. We're steamrolling any consideration of that fact that many well informed stakeholders disagree with the using the name and image with these abstracts arguments that reduce to 'hey what's offensive even really mean anyway, man?' |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:51 AM Author: Very tactful dilemma Disagree with that. The only real evidence we have about what the larger native american community feels on the issue is based on the polling, and the overwhelming response has been that most of them don't care. 90% is a massive response on any issue. you'll never reach consensus on anything, but that's pretty close to it. I would hesitate to take the opinion of 'native american activists' as representative or authoritative because they have an incentive to blow up the issue to keep themselves relevant. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779363) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 9:47 PM Author: Multi-colored fuchsia home fanboi OP is seriously a garbage faggot (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34777938) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:08 PM Author: laughsome step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778072) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:13 PM Author: buff swashbuckling filthpig ape (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778553) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 9:51 PM Author: Olive balding coldplay fan Lol Louis Posteur.... i appreciated your recent long screed gaping 29tp (http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=3787019&mc=104&forum_id=2#34617994) but this is just a weakass attempt at xo clickbait. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34777954) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:06 PM Author: Abnormal stage (Stalker dork) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778053) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:10 PM Author: Olive balding coldplay fan sup Louis P / FPLB / "beers" / "stevedore" / "NCAA" / "the notion of solvency is itself a chimera" / ""'"" / whatever else you're calling your stable of very obvious alts these days... of course you'd NEVER stalk poasters around here and blurt out 1000+ word book reports of their lives the instant the opportunity presents itself! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778079) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:12 PM Author: Abnormal stage I know exactly who you are irl, and you need to retire now. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778090) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:16 PM Author: Olive balding coldplay fan ditto! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778110) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:08 PM Author: laughsome step-uncle's house lol, of all the things to be upset about. polls show that almost no one associates "Redskins" with anything other than football now (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778068) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:09 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I think there was some discussion of polling in this very thread, now that you mention it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778074) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:40 PM Author: Hideous Chartreuse Windowlicker Public Bath Everyone in this thread, on both sides of the issue, is 110 IQ at best. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778278) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:11 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778535) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 10:59 PM Author: provocative amber depressive property All of OP's arguments could be used to argue that the NAACP should change its name. I'm sure at least 10% of black people would be offended if a white person called them a "colored person," etc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778416) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:11 PM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I admit that it's a more complicated matter if Dan Snyder wants to call his team the Heebs. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778533) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:55 PM Author: provocative amber depressive property So you have no problem with the NAACP calling themselves that because they themselves are cool with it, and the analogy would be that it's no big deal if a Jew wants to call his own team by a Jew slur? But per your bleating ITT this would be a travesty because "heeb" is a racial term for a minority group with a history of being degraded and marginalized etc. How is "the NAACP is okay with calling themselves that" any different than "90% of Native Americans are cool with 'Redskins'"? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778827) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:04 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena That was a joke brother, calm down. You're on the internet and nobody. This is a safe space.
Do you not see any difference between the two? One is an old-fashioned term selected by people advocating for themselves that has since come to be viewed negatively. They have their reasons for not changing it but many people disagree. Google it.
The Redskins are a pro sports team with no actual affiliation or connection with any indigenous cultures. They're taking a broadly stylized depiction of that culture and name that some members of that culture and ethnic group find troubling. The team uses the depiction and name to produce profits through their brand. It's not the same. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:21 AM Author: provocative amber depressive property "One is an old-fashioned term selected by people advocating for themselves that has since come to be viewed negatively."
Redskin is also an old-fashioned term that wasn't considered offensive at the time but has since come to be viewed negatively. What does it matter who picked it? Some black leaders picked it, therefore we should assume most blacks are okay with it? Your whole argument ITT is that most members of a group being okay with it (c.f. the "90% of natives" polls) is not good enough.
Why does having an affiliation with that culture make a difference? Suppose Dan Snyder and every single Redskins player and employee were all Native Americans themselves. All your arguments would apply just as forcefully: "It's wrong to name a team after an archaic ethnic term, a sizable number of the group doesn't like it, etc." Unless you think Snyder et al. being Native would suddenly reduce the percentage of Natives offended by it from 10% down to whatever completely arbitrary percentage that would mean it's no longer necessary to change the name?
What percentage of black people being offended by the name "NAACP" would cause you to take the same stance on the NAACP changing its name as you do for the Redskins?
"The team uses the depiction and name to produce profits through their brand. It's not the same."
So what? What, like ethnic groups have a collectively held copyright on stuff associated with their culture and anyone profiting off that stuff owes them royalties, or something? |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:26 AM Author: Vermilion plaza i actually agree with you but you seem pretty fucking dumb. this not a gotcha they're fucking different. \ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778974) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:37 AM Author: provocative amber depressive property oh, a fucking pumo simultaneously AGREES with me but also thinks I'm DUMB. what a useful contribution to this discussion. care to share more astute comments with us? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779031) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:22 PM Author: Spruce flatulent station I have a feeling the low IQ "might makes right" chorus ITT will be whistling a different tune when China brutally tramples the US under its boot. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778610) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:25 PM Author: Gaped area nobody argued "might makes right" itt, that's just you projecting / filling in gaps where you can't let yourself open up to arguments you don't agree with (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778632) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2017 11:46 PM Author: Spruce flatulent station rofl ok low iq pumo :) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778775) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:09 AM Author: Gaped area if anything that's fplb's argument, as he's ultimately appealing to the "i know it's wrong and so do you, listen to the masses" argument without making a clear case for why it's more offensive than other mascots (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778898) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:46 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I think the masses side against me. But I also didn't think I needed to make out the case that it's different than other mascots and names, or that it has a recognized offensive dimension.
It was extremely angry and IR8 posters who demanded that I somehow lay out the entire argument for both sides rather than state their opinions.
It's offensive because it portrays a diverse group of cultures with rich individual histories as a cartoonish simplification of their skin color that was created by white people and this is in the context of cultural genocide perpetrated by the same wealthy white interests that profit form the team and control the NFL. Agree with it or not, that captures most of the arguments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Redskins_name_controversy
A lot of ink has been spilled over this topic but there are posters in here who seem to regard the issue as some kind of shitlib blogger fantasy rather than a legitimate public debate. And yes I just teed up a great WaPo joke for somebody. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:52 AM Author: provocative amber depressive property "cultural genocide perpetrated by the same wealthy white interests that profit form the team and control the NFL."
Can you list the names of one or more white people who both perpetrated cultural genocide and profit from the Washington Redskins? |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:24 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena We already had this argument. Nobody is talking about how living whites should feel culpable. We honor and respect history and tradition in all kinds of contexts. We can do it for the histories and traditions of other cultures than our own, particularly when we benefit from the destruction of that culture's history. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779281) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:36 AM Author: provocative amber depressive property You just said that the same "white interests" both perpetrated genocide and profit from the team. Which "white interests" are these? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779313) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:44 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena White majority culture and equity. Rich white people. The establishment The shitlib boogie man. I am aware that Dan Snyder did not directly obtain profit from the proximate source of Native American genocide. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779347) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:02 AM Author: Curious half-breed pervert this issue seems stupid to be sure. but its just the name of a fucking football team. if it genuinely causes some group of people distress, just fucking change the name. who gives a fuck?
Both sides can make me want to punch them. But I certainly want to punch the anti-name change people more because they don't even have a fig leaf of a reasonable ground to stand on. |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:02 AM Author: fear-inspiring bearded state HOW THE FUCK DID THIS SHIT THREAD GET 200 SERIOUS REPLIES? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778868) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:04 AM Author: Curious half-breed pervert (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778876) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 12:04 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34778879) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:15 AM Author: trip theater stage psychic op, would be curious to know your stance on confederate street names and why the redskins issue is different if at all (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779257) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:26 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena I still have to respond to your earlier posts brother, shitty of me to take as long as I have since it looks like you're making some of the most reasonable arguments in here. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779287) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:31 AM Author: territorial sable locus fess up OP...what cocktail of drugs inspired this poast? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779298) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 1:43 AM Author: slap-happy clear striped hyena Just the usual marijuana abuse but I was not intoxicated when I wrote any of the posts in here. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779338) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 2:02 AM Author: buff swashbuckling filthpig ape a lot of your posts in this thread are flat-out horrible, evincing either intoxication or recovery therefrom. you = a smorgasbord of unhinged gobbledygook. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779388) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 4:35 AM Author: White razzmatazz famous landscape painting Reptiles are so fucking unhinged on here (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34779664) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 9:19 AM Author: Cerebral bbw cuckoldry This. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34780286) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 9:30 AM Author: Brilliant charismatic potus so. much. this. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34780323) |
|
Date: November 27th, 2017 3:01 PM Author: Garnet idea he suggested What if changing it would offend any First Nations people? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3809491&forum_id=2#34782595) |