New topic
PrintableSupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: 2elijah said: Sorry, Supa...but on this one, I don't agree with you, but still respect your opinion anyway. It is what it is. When someone states "You're not black so you won't understand" it is not telling them they can't offer their opinions on black/white issues, they are basically saying "You can understand but only to a limited degree" basically, because they don't walk in their shoes, or may not have seen situations the poster has experienced, such as what you yourself Supa has experienced with some of your friends and the situation at the airport that you posted about on this thread. There's a difference. It's the same as a white person telling me that I could never understand their experience on racist issues, as I don't walk in their shoes. If they tell me they experienced racial prejudice, how can I tell them they didn'tt? I'm not them, so it would be foolish for me to disagree. Well I think there needs to be another way of phrasing it then. Because it tends to make people feel excluded. And the reality is that they can't be included in an experience they will never experience for the sake that they don't have the pre-requisites which lead to those experiences but it's not fair on either side to say you can't understand when an experience doesn't have to happen to someone for them to see that it happening to someone else is wrong. I don't agree, I see no reason why certain orgers have to "rephrase" a line that has been used for years. That line has been used in many situations, not just race. For example, there's been women who have been abused, those who have been addicted to drugs, children whose lived in foster homes, and I could never understand their experience unless I walked in their shoes, but it doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion or stop them allowing me to do so. So I see no reason for that phrase to be rephrased in the discussion of race. I owe no apologies for what I stated. I'm sick and tired of seeing "certain" orgers get "special treatment" and get away with saying what they feel, while others are asked to explain theirs or "rephrase" certain terms or phrases for the "special" comfort of others. [Edited 5/23/08 11:34am] | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Serious said:  It is often expressed in a way (here on the org) that gives you the feeling you better shut up as you don't know shit.This isn't exclusive to the black community. "Groups" of all kinds do it. I have said the same type of thing to someone because they are not gay and it's always because someone is dismissing the issues I and my community face. I do my best though not to carry that over into any and all responses. I try and give people the benefit of the doubt but when it comes to this issue, some of the serial "dismissers" I feel are doing it to get people's goats and to aggrivate and not for altruistic reasons. But yeah, I can definitely understand the frustration.  I understand that people do it because of experiences they have made over and over again and the atmosphere here sure adds to that a lot. Some orgers (whites and blacks) know exactly what they have to say to bring out the worst of others. I just tried to explain that I am frustrated as well .With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2elijah said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Well I think there needs to be another way of phrasing it then. Because it tends to make people feel excluded. And the reality is that they can't be included in an experience they will never experience for the sake that they don't have the pre-requisites which lead to those experiences but it's not fair on either side to say you can't understand when an experience doesn't have to happen to someone for them to see that it happening to someone else is wrong. I don't agree, I see no reason why certain orgers have to "rephrase" a line that has been used for years. That line has been used in many situations, not just race. For example, there's been women who have been abused, those who have been addicted to drugs, children whose lived in foster homes, and I could never understand their experience unless I walked in their shoes, but it doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion or stop them allowing me to do so. So I see no reason for that phrase to be rephrased in the discussion of race. I owe no apologies for what I stated. I'm sick and tired of seeing "certain" orgers get "special treatment" and get away with saying what they feel, while others are asked to explain theirs or "rephrase" certain terms or phrases for the "special" comfort of others. [Edited 5/23/08 11:34am] I mean it for all sides including myself. Believe me, I'm one of the biggest defenders of the black community against the dismissive nature of some peoples approach. But there needs to be consideration of how we are expressing ourselves so as to not turn someone away from us who in reality is an ally and is on your/my/our side.2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: This isn't exclusive to the black community. "Groups" of all kinds do it. I have said the same type of thing to someone because they are not gay and it's always because someone is dismissing the issues I and my community face. I do my best though not to carry that over into any and all responses. I try and give people the benefit of the doubt but when it comes to this issue, some of the serial "dismissers" I feel are doing it to get people's goats and to aggrivate and not for altruistic reasons. But yeah, I can definitely understand the frustration. I understand that people do it because of experiences they have made over and over again and the atmosphere here sure adds to that a lot. Some orgers (whites and blacks) know exactly what they have to say to bring out the worst of others. I just tried to explain that I am frustrated as well .And that is why I think a lot of the issue is personality conflict [Edited 5/23/08 11:40am] 2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2elijah said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Well I think there needs to be another way of phrasing it then. Because it tends to make people feel excluded. And the reality is that they can't be included in an experience they will never experience for the sake that they don't have the pre-requisites which lead to those experiences but it's not fair on either side to say you can't understand when an experience doesn't have to happen to someone for them to see that it happening to someone else is wrong. I don't agree, I see no reason why certain orgers have to "rephrase" a line that has been used for years. That line has been used in many situations, not just race. For example, there's been women who have been abused, those who have been addicted to drugs, children whose lived in foster homes, and I could never understand their experience unless I walked in their shoes, but it doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion or stop them allowing me to do so. So I see no reason for that phrase to be rephrased in the discussion of race. I owe no apologies for what I stated. I'm sick and tired of seeing "certain" orgers get "special treatment" and get away with saying what they feel, while others are asked to explain theirs or "rephrase" certain terms or phrases for the "special" comfort of others. [Edited 5/23/08 11:34am] When I have discussed issues such as child abuse I have never heard the line that I don't understand because I have not been a victim of abuse myself. With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: 2elijah said: I don't agree, I see no reason why certain orgers have to "rephrase" a line that has been used for years. That line has been used in many situations, not just race. For example, there's been women who have been abused, those who have been addicted to drugs, children whose lived in foster homes, and I could never understand their experience unless I walked in their shoes, but it doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion or stop them allowing me to do so. So I see no reason for that phrase to be rephrased in the discussion of race. I owe no apologies for what I stated. I'm sick and tired of seeing "certain" orgers get "special treatment" and get away with saying what they feel, while others are asked to explain theirs or "rephrase" certain terms or phrases for the "special" comfort of others. [Edited 5/23/08 11:34am] I mean it for all sides including myself. Believe me, I'm one of the biggest defenders of the black community against the dismissive nature of some peoples approach. But there needs to be consideration of how we are expressing ourselves so as to not turn someone away from us who in reality is an ally and is on your/my/our side.With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: 2elijah said: I don't agree, I see no reason why certain orgers have to "rephrase" a line that has been used for years. That line has been used in many situations, not just race. For example, there's been women who have been abused, those who have been addicted to drugs, children whose lived in foster homes, and I could never understand their experience unless I walked in their shoes, but it doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion or stop them allowing me to do so. So I see no reason for that phrase to be rephrased in the discussion of race. I owe no apologies for what I stated. I'm sick and tired of seeing "certain" orgers get "special treatment" and get away with saying what they feel, while others are asked to explain theirs or "rephrase" certain terms or phrases for the "special" comfort of others. [Edited 5/23/08 11:34am] I mean it for all sides including myself. Believe me, I'm one of the biggest defenders of the black community against the dismissive nature of some peoples approach. But there needs to be consideration of how we are expressing ourselves so as to not turn someone away from us who in reality is an ally and is on your/my/our side. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Serious said: I understand that people do it because of experiences they have made over and over again and the atmosphere here sure adds to that a lot. Some orgers (whites and blacks) know exactly what they have to say to bring out the worst of others. I just tried to explain that I am frustrated as well .And that is why I think a lot of the issue is personality conflict
[Edited 5/23/08 11:40am] Very true. And another big problem is different background/use of words without being willing to try to understand where the other one is coming from. Such as the different definition of the term racism in different countries. With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2elijah said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: I really don't agree. What we are dealing with is a personality conflict on all fronts. I think Laurel, althought challenging some of the most outspoken orgers is very fair when it comes to race issues. Sorry, Supa...but on this one, I don't agree with you, but still respect your opinion anyway. It is what it is. When someone states "You're not black so you won't understand" it is not telling them they can't offer their opinions on black/white issues, they are basically saying "You can understand but only to a limited degree" basically, because they don't walk in their shoes, or may not have seen situations the poster has experienced, such as what you yourself Supa has experienced with some of your friends and the situation at the airport that you posted about on this thread. There's a difference. It's the same as a white person telling me that I could never understand their experience on racist issues, as I don't walk in their shoes. If they tell me they experienced racial prejudice, how can I tell them they didn't? I'm not them, so it would be foolish for me to disagree. The bottom line is, there are posters that can't handle discussions on race, and should know it is a very,sensitive topic and emotions, anger, judging, name-calling, insults will somehow find its way in some of those threads, but I do not ever recall any non-white orgers telling white orgers they could not post their opinions on race in those type of threads and I believe those accusations are just another form of "playing victim." [Edited 5/23/08 11:23am] There is a massive difference between saying "you are not black you don't understand racism" and saying "you are not black you don't know what it is like to be a black person in America" One says that because of skin colour it is not possible to comprehend an issue of humanity and the other says that one has not experienced the same thing. One is a racist statement the other is a statement of fact. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: And that is why I think a lot of the issue is personality conflict
[Edited 5/23/08 11:40am] Very true. And another big problem is different background/use of words without being willing to try to understand where the other one is coming from. Such as the different definition of the term racism in different countries. Well yes, that is an issue. I am not saying Non American's aren't free to add their opinions and statements to race threads but there are different racial realities in America vs other parts of the world. Europe's history is of dominance and destruction, kingdoms and warring. Europe has had to face it's religious past as religion really fueled so much of the differences and the conflicts over the centuries. Europe is at a place where real equality is starting to take root. This isn't to say that Europe doesn't have it's share of their issues but America has never ever had to face it's past the way Europe has done. And when American blacks speak of their experiences they don't live in a society or a country that is truly striving for equality. Those of us in the minority have to still fight for it. Gay marriage was just legalized in California and yet my community will still have to fight society even though the court is supposed to be the decider  This is what black Americans face and Europeans would be wise to understand that and let that color their approach. I think the vast majority are fair and are balanced and do understand but there are a few that stoke the fires with their unwillingness to concede a different reality exists outside their own world. And this applies to black people who don't consider the European perspective. But European oppression isn't really the discussion is it?
just food for thought. 2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2elijah said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Well I think there needs to be another way of phrasing it then. Because it tends to make people feel excluded. And the reality is that they can't be included in an experience they will never experience for the sake that they don't have the pre-requisites which lead to those experiences but it's not fair on either side to say you can't understand when an experience doesn't have to happen to someone for them to see that it happening to someone else is wrong. I don't agree, I see no reason why certain orgers have to "rephrase" a line that has been used for years. That line has been used in many situations, not just race. For example, there's been women who have been abused, those who have been addicted to drugs, children whose lived in foster homes, and I could never understand their experience unless I walked in their shoes, but it doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion or stop them allowing me to do so. So I see no reason for that phrase to be rephrased in the discussion of race. I owe no apologies for what I stated. I'm sick and tired of seeing "certain" orgers get "special treatment" and get away with saying what they feel, while others are asked to explain theirs or "rephrase" certain terms or phrases for the "special" comfort of others. [Edited 5/23/08 11:34am] Oh i agree totally with that statement, too many people on here have to rephrase shit so as not to upset people. Too much sensitivity when inflection is not heard. It is a shame also when people get pissed at others "playing victim" and then do it themselves  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mdiver said: 2elijah said: I don't agree, I see no reason why certain orgers have to "rephrase" a line that has been used for years. That line has been used in many situations, not just race. For example, there's been women who have been abused, those who have been addicted to drugs, children whose lived in foster homes, and I could never understand their experience unless I walked in their shoes, but it doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion or stop them allowing me to do so. So I see no reason for that phrase to be rephrased in the discussion of race. I owe no apologies for what I stated. I'm sick and tired of seeing "certain" orgers get "special treatment" and get away with saying what they feel, while others are asked to explain theirs or "rephrase" certain terms or phrases for the "special" comfort of others. [Edited 5/23/08 11:34am] Oh i agree totally with that statement, too many people on here have to rephrase shit so as not to upset people. Too much sensitivity when inflection is not heard. It is a shame also when people get pissed at others "playing victim" and then do it themselves Some victims are actual victims! That attitude is what pisses people off. 2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Serious said: Very true. And another big problem is different background/use of words without being willing to try to understand where the other one is coming from. Such as the different definition of the term racism in different countries. Well yes, that is an issue. I am not saying Non American's aren't free to add their opinions and statements to race threads but there are different racial realities in America vs other parts of the world. Europe's history is of dominance and destruction, kingdoms and warring. Europe has had to face it's religious past as religion really fueled so much of the differences and the conflicts over the centuries. Europe is at a place where real equality is starting to take root. This isn't to say that Europe doesn't have it's share of their issues but America has never ever had to face it's past the way Europe has done. And when American blacks speak of their experiences they don't live in a society or a country that is truly striving for equality. Those of us in the minority have to still fight for it. Gay marriage was just legalized in California and yet my community will still have to fight society even though the court is supposed to be the decider This is what black Americans face and Europeans would be wise to understand that and let that color their approach. I think the vast majority are fair and are balanced and do understand but there are a few that stoke the fires with their unwillingness to concede a different reality exists outside their own world. And this applies to black people who don't consider the European perspective. But European oppression isn't really the discussion is it?
just food for thought. I was talking about the definition of the term racism that is different and not that racism is different in different parts of the world. But of course that's true as well  .With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Well yes, that is an issue. I am not saying Non American's aren't free to add their opinions and statements to race threads but there are different racial realities in America vs other parts of the world. Europe's history is of dominance and destruction, kingdoms and warring. Europe has had to face it's religious past as religion really fueled so much of the differences and the conflicts over the centuries. Europe is at a place where real equality is starting to take root. This isn't to say that Europe doesn't have it's share of their issues but America has never ever had to face it's past the way Europe has done. And when American blacks speak of their experiences they don't live in a society or a country that is truly striving for equality. Those of us in the minority have to still fight for it. Gay marriage was just legalized in California and yet my community will still have to fight society even though the court is supposed to be the decider This is what black Americans face and Europeans would be wise to understand that and let that color their approach. I think the vast majority are fair and are balanced and do understand but there are a few that stoke the fires with their unwillingness to concede a different reality exists outside their own world. And this applies to black people who don't consider the European perspective. But European oppression isn't really the discussion is it?
just food for thought. I was talking about the definition of the term racism that is different and not that racism is different in different parts of the world. But of course that's true as well .OK, is Europe going to have 50 different definitions? For that matter, will we?   2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Serious said: I was talking about the definition of the term racism that is different and not that racism is different in different parts of the world. But of course that's true as well .OK, is Europe going to have 50 different definitions? For that matter, will we? No as far as I know just one.  With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: 2elijah said: I don't agree, I see no reason why certain orgers have to "rephrase" a line that has been used for years. That line has been used in many situations, not just race. For example, there's been women who have been abused, those who have been addicted to drugs, children whose lived in foster homes, and I could never understand their experience unless I walked in their shoes, but it doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion or stop them allowing me to do so. So I see no reason for that phrase to be rephrased in the discussion of race. I owe no apologies for what I stated. I'm sick and tired of seeing "certain" orgers get "special treatment" and get away with saying what they feel, while others are asked to explain theirs or "rephrase" certain terms or phrases for the "special" comfort of others. [Edited 5/23/08 11:34am] When I have discussed issues such as child abuse I have never heard the line that I don't understand because I have not been a victim of abuse myself. So just because you haven't heard that response or statement in that particular category makes the statement invalid or dismissive? Well, I have and don't expect that everyone else would. My point was, to give an example that the phrase is often used in particular situations, not just regarding to race. I am sticking to my opinion that I posted in this thread. Some of the reactions do not surprise me at all, it was pretty much expected, but it's all good. I have no hate or malice towards any of you, since you don't pay my bills or turn me over in the morning and give me a good morning kiss and other things, but I have a right, just like you, to post my opinion about how I feel about the treatment of many orgers around here. I don't expect you to agree with most of it, but it is my honest opinion about how I feel about it. Now as far as someone saying I'm playing victim.. for what? That's your opinion and a role you are more familiar with than I, but what else is new?
It's been good conversing with some of you, but I've said what I had to say, in this particular forum, and if you don't agree, no hard feelings. Have a great day, great holiday and safe weekend! Peace. [Edited 5/23/08 12:35pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: mdiver said: Oh i agree totally with that statement, too many people on here have to rephrase shit so as not to upset people. Too much sensitivity when inflection is not heard. It is a shame also when people get pissed at others "playing victim" and then do it themselves Some victims are actual victims! That attitude is what pisses people off. And who is to say who has been and who hasn't? You don't know my experience just as i don't know yours. The way it works is this.....don't question others if you don't wanna be questioned yourself | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Serious said: I was talking about the definition of the term racism that is different and not that racism is different in different parts of the world. But of course that's true as well .OK, is Europe going to have 50 different definitions? For that matter, will we? Well, given that you speak English i figured you would stick to that definition but it just does not fit in the US. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2elijah said: Serious said: When I have discussed issues such as child abuse I have never heard the line that I don't understand because I have not been a victim of abuse myself. So just because you haven't heard that response or statement in that particular category makes the statement invalid or dismissive? Well, I have and don't expect that everyone else would. My point was, to give an example that the phrase is often used in particular situations, not just regarding to race. I am sticking to my opinion that I posted in this thread. Some of the reactions do not surprise me at all, it was pretty much expected, but it's all good. I have no hate or malice towards any of you, since you don't pay my bills or turn me over in the morning and give me a good morning kiss and other things, but I have a right, just like you, to post my opinion about how I feel about the treatment of many orgers around here. I don't expect you to agree with most of it, but it is my honest opinion about how I feel about it. Now as far as someone saying I'm playing victim.. for what? That's your opinion and a role you are more familiar with than I, but what else is new?
It's been good conversing with some of you, but I've said what I had to say, in this particular forum, and if you don't agree, no hard feelings. Have a great day, great holiday and safe weekend! Peace. [Edited 5/23/08 12:35pm] Awwwww a veiled stab  I am touched  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mdiver said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: OK, is Europe going to have 50 different definitions? For that matter, will we? Well, given that you speak English i figured you would stick to that definition but it just does not fit in the US. I have no idea what your defition actually is. 2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: mdiver said: Well, given that you speak English i figured you would stick to that definition but it just does not fit in the US. I have no idea what your defition actually is. It is not my definition Richard. The "tweaking" of the definition to require a power base or system of government is not necessary The Oxford English Dictionary describes it as: the belief that there are characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to each race. 2 discrimination against or antagonism towards other races. [Edited 5/23/08 13:47pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Lord, I'm so tired of all this bullshit....  No wonder Rhonda is leaving.
 "Let love be your perfect weapon..." ~~Andy Biersack | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Wow, I peek in on this thread and find out that Rhondab is planning on leaving in the near future. This, in addition to actions taken recently against Mutha and Graycap23 only reinforce (rightly or wrongly) what has long been a complaint of lopsided moderation here at the Org.
Racist posts and patterns of race-related baiting have a history on the Org. It often seems to be the tool of choice among folks who want to get a rise out of other Orgers. And, on the flip side, too often responding Orgers indulge the fools who would seek to provoke them and, as a result, act just as foolishly. This is a place where we can examine -- and even laugh about -- each other's experiences. I'm a black, mid-thirties businessman but I recently was asked a "stockboy" question in a supermarket by an old white man... while I was dressed in business attire. Just as in that situation I had a choice how to respond, I think folks at the Org have a choice in how they respond to foolish provocation, regardless of the race of the person issuing it. Personally, I think it best to just ignore people when they do something suspect. Report it, if you feel strongly about it. But don't demean yourself or the Org by arguing with someone in the name of "discussion." No minds will be changed, only tempers provoked and fools encouraged. To Org mods, I would caution you to take a hard look at patterns of behavior, punishment and banning. The longtime charge of inconsistent moderation -- even if attributed to various, well-intentioned people voluntering their time and judgment -- warrants a sober look and a significant sign of redress. When longtime Orgers express frustration over recurring patterns -- to the point that some declare their pending departure -- it's time to find a solution. Peace. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: Wow, I peek in on this thread and find out that Rhondab is planning on leaving in the near future. This, in addition to actions taken recently against Mutha and Graycap23 only reinforce (rightly or wrongly) what has long been a complaint of lopsided moderation here at the Org.
Racist posts and patterns of race-related baiting have a history on the Org. It often seems to be the tool of choice among folks who want to get a rise out of other Orgers. And, on the flip side, too often responding Orgers indulge the fools who would seek to provoke them and, as a result, act just as foolishly. This is a place where we can examine -- and even laugh about -- each other's experiences. I'm a black, mid-thirties businessman but I recently was asked a "stockboy" question in a supermarket by an old white man... while I was dressed in business attire. Just as in that situation I had a choice how to respond, I think folks at the Org have a choice in how they respond to foolish provocation, regardless of the race of the person issuing it. Personally, I think it best to just ignore people when they do something suspect. Report it, if you feel strongly about it. But don't demean yourself or the Org by arguing with someone in the name of "discussion." No minds will be changed, only tempers provoked and fools encouraged. To Org mods, I would caution you to take a hard look at patterns of behavior, punishment and banning. The longtime charge of inconsistent moderation -- even if attributed to various, well-intentioned people voluntering their time and judgment -- warrants a sober look and a significant sign of redress. When longtime Orgers express frustration over recurring patterns -- to the point that some declare their pending departure -- it's time to find a solution. Peace.
Thank you so much for saying this. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Stymie said: Can someone kill this thread already? It's become pointless.
Richard, I appreciate that you started this thread. That is only your opinion... I don't think its pointless. How can differences be resolved if no one ever gets to talk about them? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Serious said: I don't agree with a lot of things mdiver says in P&R nor do I agree with the way he says some things on this forum as it just adds to the atmosphere, but IMO he has a point here. Although abusive may be a hard word the black community here often doesn't give whites the impression that their opinion is something they are interested in hearing and value and that's a shame. I don't even think that most do that on purpose, but that's the way they make me and others feel  . As I don't think it's fun to discuss with people who give me the impression I better shut up I rarely post here. 
[Edited 5/22/08 5:26am] In all honesty, some have dismissed outright concerns of black members and their experiences. Anymore I don't know if the real reason for that is an open minded attitude or if some agenda is cloaked in open mindedness. Just the other day I got off the train and there was a guard checking departing passengers for their passes and the guard asked a black man for his pass and he showed him and the guard grabbed it from him and then started examining it up and down, back and forth and there was a fray at the edge and the guard claimed that passes don't fray and that it was fake. Meanwhile I cannot pass and be on my way because of this. I looked at my pass and saw that the edge of my pass did the same thing as that man's and while the guard was telling him it was fake and he could fine him $250 if he wanted to, I pushed my pass in front of the guard telling him our passes are made of paper and mine is fraying too. He just looked at me blankly and then continued lecturing the black guy. Now some will come in and always claim that black people are reading racism into it, meanwhile what the hell is it if his focus was not on me or any other non-black person? There are a lot of subtle ways in which blacks still suffer from racism in this country and they are real and I personally appreciate the utopian ideal and pursuit of a colorblind society but some who claim that is their goal still dismiss real things that are happening to real people. If that was happening to you, do you think you'd be open if that is what you encountered every time you expressed your grievences? a fucking shame.... truth told. TY Richard | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: Wow, I peek in on this thread and find out that Rhondab is planning on leaving in the near future. This, in addition to actions taken recently against Mutha and Graycap23 only reinforce (rightly or wrongly) what has long been a complaint of lopsided moderation here at the Org.
Racist posts and patterns of race-related baiting have a history on the Org. It often seems to be the tool of choice among folks who want to get a rise out of other Orgers. And, on the flip side, too often responding Orgers indulge the fools who would seek to provoke them and, as a result, act just as foolishly. This is a place where we can examine -- and even laugh about -- each other's experiences. I'm a black, mid-thirties businessman but I recently was asked a "stockboy" question in a supermarket by an old white man... while I was dressed in business attire. Just as in that situation I had a choice how to respond, I think folks at the Org have a choice in how they respond to foolish provocation, regardless of the race of the person issuing it. Personally, I think it best to just ignore people when they do something suspect. Report it, if you feel strongly about it. But don't demean yourself or the Org by arguing with someone in the name of "discussion." No minds will be changed, only tempers provoked and fools encouraged. To Org mods, I would caution you to take a hard look at patterns of behavior, punishment and banning. The longtime charge of inconsistent moderation -- even if attributed to various, well-intentioned people voluntering their time and judgment -- warrants a sober look and a significant sign of redress. When longtime Orgers express frustration over recurring patterns -- to the point that some declare their pending departure -- it's time to find a solution. Peace. YES! Thank you! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
paintedlady said: Stymie said: Can someone kill this thread already? It's become pointless.
Richard, I appreciate that you started this thread. That is only your opinion... I don't think its pointless. How can differences be resolved if no one ever gets to talk about them? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Stymie said: paintedlady said: That is only your opinion... I don't think its pointless. How can differences be resolved if no one ever gets to talk about them? I thought that right after I posted, and thought "ah hell..." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: Wow, I peek in on this thread and find out that Rhondab is planning on leaving in the near future. This, in addition to actions taken recently against Mutha and Graycap23 only reinforce (rightly or wrongly) what has long been a complaint of lopsided moderation here at the Org.
Racist posts and patterns of race-related baiting have a history on the Org. It often seems to be the tool of choice among folks who want to get a rise out of other Orgers. And, on the flip side, too often responding Orgers indulge the fools who would seek to provoke them and, as a result, act just as foolishly. This is a place where we can examine -- and even laugh about -- each other's experiences. I'm a black, mid-thirties businessman but I recently was asked a "stockboy" question in a supermarket by an old white man... while I was dressed in business attire. Just as in that situation I had a choice how to respond, I think folks at the Org have a choice in how they respond to foolish provocation, regardless of the race of the person issuing it. Personally, I think it best to just ignore people when they do something suspect. Report it, if you feel strongly about it. But don't demean yourself or the Org by arguing with someone in the name of "discussion." No minds will be changed, only tempers provoked and fools encouraged. To Org mods, I would caution you to take a hard look at patterns of behavior, punishment and banning. The longtime charge of inconsistent moderation -- even if attributed to various, well-intentioned people voluntering their time and judgment -- warrants a sober look and a significant sign of redress. When longtime Orgers express frustration over recurring patterns -- to the point that some declare their pending departure -- it's time to find a solution. Peace. Thank you, threadbare. I totally agree. "Let love be your perfect weapon..." ~~Andy Biersack | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |