Students Asked To Leave Multicultural Room For 'Police Lives Matter' Sticker

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
28,423
Trophies
2
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
25,876
Country
Poland
1. I don't. I made assumptions and conjecture based on their actions. If they are proven not racist, I'll be the first in line to admit I was wrong and apologize.

How do you know they are not racist, and were not there to incite aggression?

2. Personally? I don't know. Nor have I made the statement that all cops are racist. Or that any of them are racist. My argument is that the POC in this situation are offended by the racist connotations that have been associated with the Blue Lives Matter banner.

Should the institution itself be proven to have either been built upon racist intent, or influenced by it in its current state, would you be willing to change your view?

3. You're absolutely right. And just as the white students were free to incite and engage, the students of color were free to harass (to fit both our sides of this perspective). At no point was anyone physically assaulted or threatened. We've already agreed (maybe not you in particular) in an earlier comment that things escalated.

You seem to misunderstand the point of the MCC. There's no segregation going on. It's free for white people to enter. It was designed to embrace all cultures, not specifically white peoples'. Maybe the one girl of color went a little overboard, but when triggered by agitators, well... at least it's legal, right?

I mention his skin color because it's relevant to the situation, and I don't know his name (also irrelevant. I don't know anyone else's names either, for the record). If the roles were reversed? It depends. If white people had been subjected to the same treatment POC have the past ~300 years, everything from discrimination, to systemic racism, to slavery, go on and so on, then yes, I'd be equally upset. My concern isn't skin deep, it's over the ethical treatment people have against each other based on deep rooted, abstract hatred.
If you are making assumptions based on their actions, and those assumptions are that these kids are racist, they must’ve performed some kind of action that you consider racist in nature. If they have, which action was it?

I can safely assume that they are not racist because I have no reason to assume that they are - I haven’t seen any evidence of racism. In the absence of evidence pointing to guilt, I operate on the presumption of innocence, which is reasonable.

I can see that the people in the video are getting offended. I don’t care that they’re offended, we’ve been over this. Their feelings are not evidence of any wrong-doing on the part of the kid, it’s evidence of poor impulse control.

The institution of “the police” wasn’t built with the express intention of persecuting minorities - it was built with the intention of enforcing the law. The law was, at one point, racist, and by extension, enforcing it was also racist. This is no longer the case. I wouldn’t be willing to change my stance on the police based on past events because I live in the present. As much as I would like to be the next incarnation of Doctor Who, I’m afraid that I’m just a mere human.

You are never free to harass another person. In fact, that’s illegal.

The MCC clearly doesn’t embrace everyone, it’s on tape. You are right - things sure did escalate. As a side note, the word “assault” doesn’t entail physical contact - that’s “battery”. Badgering someone in a threatening manner in order to force them to act a certain way or do something specific, for instance leave a public space, can constitute assault. I’m not a judge, if the kid wants to sue then he’s welcome to do so, I’d consider that overreacting since little harm was done, if any. I’m not the “emotional distress” kind of guy.

Thank you for confirming that his skin colour plays a factor in your judgement of the events in the video. I’m afraid that the wrongs committed 300 years ago have no bearing on the present and the kid is in no way guilty of any of them. He’s just a guy with a sticker, in the present. If you take a step back and think about this with a cool head, you *might* be able to see that you are putting a whole lot of labels on the guy based on two things - “white police supporter = racist slaver” is not a reasonable train of thought.

EDIT: As a complete aside, am I the only one here who raises an eyebrow at the term “people of colour”? How is that anything other than calling someone “coloured” with extra steps? It’s so bizarre to me, you got rid of a slur just to replace it with another segregating term. The obvious term to use is just “people”, I don’t see how their complexion is relevant.
 
Last edited by Foxi4,

SyphenFreht

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2016
Messages
119
Trophies
0
Age
120
XP
595
Country
United States
If you are making assumptions based on their actions, and those asdumptions are that these kids are racist, they must’ve performed some kind of action that you consider racist in nature. If they have, which action was it?

I can safely assume that they are not racist because I have no reason to assume that they are - I haven’t seen any evidence of racism. In the absence of evidence pointing to guilt, I operate on the presumption of innocence, which is reasonable.

I can see that the people in the video are getting offended. I don’t care that they’re offended, we’ve been over this. Their feelings are not evidence of any wrong-doing on the part of the kid, it’s evidence of poor impulse control.

The institution of “the police” wasn’t built with the express intention of persecuting minorities - it was built with the intention of enforcing the law. The law was, at one point, racist, and by extension, enforcing it was also racist. This is no longer the case. I wouldn’t be willing to change my stance on the police based on past events because I live in the present. As much as I would like to be the next incarnation of Doctor Who, I’m afraid that I’m just a mere human.

You are never free to harass another person. In fact, that’s illegal.

The MCC clearly doesn’t embrace everyone, it’s on tape. You are right - things sure did escalate. As a side note, the word “assault” doesn’t entail physical contact - that’s “battery”. Badgering someone in a threatening manner in order to force them to act a certain way or do something specific, for instance leave a public space, can constitute assault. I’m not a judge, if the kid wants to sue then he’s welcome to do so, I’d consider that overreacting since little harm was done, if any. I’m not the “emotional distress” kind of guy.

Thank you for confirming that his skin colour plays a factor in your judgement of the events on the video. I’m afraid that the wrongs committed 300 years ago have no bearing on the present and the kid is in no way guilty of any of them. He’s just a guy with a sticker, in the present. If you take a step back and think about this with a cool head, you *might* be able to see that you are putting a whole lot of labels on the guy based on two things - “white police supporter = racist slaver” is not a reasonable train of thought.
The act of not at least acknowledging the offense they presented, regardless of intent, in a place where that offense is apparent, and instead arguing over the validity of their stance in regards to the stance of the POC in their own space, given to them by the ASU, shows a complete disregard for the struggles they went through to be awarded that space, even after being told of said struggles. That complete disregard at least is in line with racist views, in my book.

That's a noble thing to uphold, and I wish more people held that view. Unfortunately, when you see the video for what is being presented, it seems that the students are there only to incite. If you wish to prove their innocence, please do. Otherwise, the only way to continue assuming their innocence is to acknowledge their blatant ignorance, which seems a little far fetched.

Maybe. Or maybe it was an appropriate response to a premeditated incite to aggression. Without multiple view points, you can only base conjecture on what's being shown. To deny any of the facts to further your own point is dismissive.

Again, you've nitpicked my argument to bolster your point. I'll ask again. Should you find that the current police institution is in any way influenced by racist views and activities, would you still hold the same view?

Antagonizing is harassment. Utilizing this argument, the two white students broke the law first.

The MCC doesn't embrace racist antagonizers, which is what the two white students are portraying themselves as. If they don't want to be seen that way, they shouldn't portray themselves that way.

Antagonizing someone by bringing triggering propaganda into a well known triggered space to get them to act a certain way is assault.

Of course skin colour plays a factor. This wouldn't be an issue if every person involved was the same color. I feel like you're trying to insinuate something. It'd be easier to just say it.

No one is saying what happened 300 years ago is playing a part now. I'm not even saying that police brutality is playing a part. I'm saying that two white students showed up to a place they knew they could trigger POC, triggered them, and then got butthurt when they got called out. The fact that any of this conversation gravitated from that came from people who evidently needed examples as to why these kinds of things are bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xzi

D34DL1N3R

Nephilim
Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2008
Messages
3,632
Trophies
1
XP
3,103
Country
United States
I don't care about you. I care enough about how you present yourself in this thread to reply based on how you argue. "... usually racist people don't vote Democrat..." Usually, non racists don't have to defend their non racism. Chances are, if you have to say you're not racist by including your relationships with POC, you're probably a little racist, and only associate with POC because you're ashamed of your ridiculous, backward views. But please, try to convince me of your all inclusiveness with more examples of all the black people you roll with. Maybe pictures? Oh, get a picture of you fist bumping a black guy. That'll be dope, son.

Attack away then. When you start getting your comments erased because you'd rather focus on personally attacking someone over adding to the conversation, you have no to blame but yours-... No, in all likelihood you'll blame the fascist moderators who want to dismantle free speech. Your arguments would be cute if they weren't so predictable.

You're right. I have so much hatred. I shouldn't hate racists or people who mimic racist ideals, I should join hands with them and sing kumbaya.

I'm curious to know what my platform is, if I'm holding hatred and separation. Who am I trying to separate? Who am I trying to attack? Who am I standing up for? Please, tell me about myself. I'm genuinely curious.

"Usually, non racists don't have to defend their non racism."

Usually, I'm not being called a racist from a complete stranger for no reason other than their own blind assumptions. And guess who the one constantly playing the race card in this conversation is? Hmmmmm. You want to talk about hypocrisy yet, you are the one being the most hypocritical. Like I said. Closet hatred and separation/segregation is all you're spreading. Making all the references about the skin color as was already pointed out to you by someone else. You're the only only in this conversation that IS actually being racist.

The second part of your waste of time post sounds like your feelings are hurt. Did someone call you names? Boo-effing hoo. Cry me a river. But when a sticker rattles you to the bone... I guess. Funny thing about the moderators though? I'll let you in on a secret. Because they have to do their job, it does not equate to them either agreeing or disagreeing with anyones posts that are removed.

Mimic racist ideals? You're the one calling for segregation and pulling all the race cards around here. Clap clap. I mean. :rofl2:

You're asking ME what your own platform is? You're asking me who you're attacking and standing up for? Is there seriously a need for me to go back and quote everything you've said? And if I did, what purpose would it serve? You would just find some way to try disputing it all anyway. It's not like if I took the time to do that you are suddenly going to say "Oh! I see now! You were right!" So exactly what purpose did your questions serve? What were you planning to use the answers for? Why the bad faith requests? Ohhhhhhhhh... so you could try using it against me with your already baseless and mind-numbingly stupid racist accusations that all started because I didn't fall in line with your closet hatred, racism and hypocrisy.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SyphenFreht

SyphenFreht

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2016
Messages
119
Trophies
0
Age
120
XP
595
Country
United States
I'm playing the race card, in a discussion, about race. You do understand what race and racism is, right? Like, there's no way you can be this oblivious. Or I guess maybe you can. God forbid I make a blind assumption solely on your method of argument. You do realize what constitutes a blind assumption, right? You have the entirety of the internet at your fingertips, and yet you still choose to be unintelligent in your arguments. At least you're fun.

Idk bro, you're the one getting pretty adamant with personal attacks and letting your emotion bleed into your responses. Do we have a therapy section here? Maybe you should start one. Seems to me like you're projecting some of this "closet racism and hatred" I've been hearing about. At least I haven't had to back up my stance with poorly proven examples of how I sometimes associate with POC. You must be a paragon to your community.

I'm being hypocritical. I'm attacking. I'm... asking for segregation (I wish I could heart that statement alone. I might make that my tag). But then instead of proving your own accusations, you make alternating arguments and then dissuade it, absolving you of any responsibility of backing those claims up. No, I asked the question because, for someone who accuses me of making baseless claims, you sure are making some yourself. I guess I could call you a hypocrite, but actually it'd be more fun to say that you're thinking you're arguing with me on my level, using my own logic against me, but you can't even do that properly, cuuuuuz...

"I can't be racist, *you're* racist!"

I love arguing with children. It's fun to watch them squirm as they blatantly refuse to argue at any higher of an intellectual level. Tell you what. Hmu with something that's actually worth arguing about, maybe I'll entertain you some more. Otherwise, check your meds, put on some tea, play some ambient music, go back to sewing your hood for the next KKK rally, okay pumpkin? It's adult swim for the rest of us, time for angry kids to hit the hay.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: HalfScoper and Xzi

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
28,423
Trophies
2
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
25,876
Country
Poland
The act of not at least acknowledging the offense they presented, regardless of intent, in a place where that offense is apparent, and instead arguing over the validity of their stance in regards to the stance of the POC in their own space, given to them by the ASU, shows a complete disregard for the struggles they went through to be awarded that space, even after being told of said struggles. That complete disregard at least is in line with racist views, in my book.

That's a noble thing to uphold, and I wish more people held that view. Unfortunately, when you see the video for what is being presented, it seems that the students are there only to incite. If you wish to prove their innocence, please do. Otherwise, the only way to continue assuming their innocence is to acknowledge their blatant ignorance, which seems a little far fetched.

Maybe. Or maybe it was an appropriate response to a premeditated incite to aggression. Without multiple view points, you can only base conjecture on what's being shown. To deny any of the facts to further your own point is dismissive.

Again, you've nitpicked my argument to bolster your point. I'll ask again. Should you find that the current police institution is in any way influenced by racist views and activities, would you still hold the same view?

Antagonizing is harassment. Utilizing this argument, the two white students broke the law first.

The MCC doesn't embrace racist antagonizers, which is what the two white students are portraying themselves as. If they don't want to be seen that way, they shouldn't portray themselves that way.

Antagonizing someone by bringing triggering propaganda into a well known triggered space to get them to act a certain way is assault.

Of course skin colour plays a factor. This wouldn't be an issue if every person involved was the same color. I feel like you're trying to insinuate something. It'd be easier to just say it.

No one is saying what happened 300 years ago is playing a part now. I'm not even saying that police brutality is playing a part. I'm saying that two white students showed up to a place they knew they could trigger POC, triggered them, and then got butthurt when they got called out. The fact that any of this conversation gravitated from that came from people who evidently needed examples as to why these kinds of things are bad.
1. Why should he acknowledge any offense at all? He’s just as entitled to be there as any other student. If the students were awarded this “space” by the ASU because a bunch of white people enslaved a bunch of black people 300 years ago then the ASU is administered by chipmunks.

2. I don’t have to prove their innocence. It is a given until you can prove their guilt, that burden is on you. Even if they are there to troll people into giving them an emotional reaction (and succeeding) to demonstrate that the student body is not tolerant of certain viewpoints, not only they’re entitled to do that, they’re also in the right. If the situation was reversed and it was some kind of “white kid sorority” with two black kids messing around with a BLM sticker, you’d be clapping with every appendage including your ears.

3. We see the entire encounter. I don’t see any incitement of violence, I see a guy sitting there with his laptop minding his own business and a some crybabies getting bent out of shape because they don’t like his sticker.

4. I don’t see any conclusive evidence of racial bias in policing, police presence and police interactions by race are directly proportional to the levels of criminality by race. The whole matter is also thoroughly uninteresting to me.

5. Harassment is a persistent and repetitive pattern of behaviour aimed at a specific person or group with the intention to cause distress and in disregard of the wishes of said person or group. The guy is literally just sitting there, you have no evidence that him or his friend have ever shown up at that spot before and no evidence that they were ever asked not to display such messaging by anyone with any degree of authority. If anything, they’re being harassed, by two other people, repeatedly, until they have to leave. In fact, another student even steps in to defend their right to be there, but he’s no match for the ladies going Full Karen. Thoroughly embarrassing.

6. The MCC embraces pearls very tightly, because that’s next level clutching. You are once again ascribing racist intent based on someone being white and supporting the police. You’ve literally invented an imaginary crime to excuse your own cognitive dissonance.

7. “Triggering propaganda” and “triggered place” is pretty funny terminology, but we’re not in kindergarten. Grow up. The kid didn’t assault anyone, he was passively sitting there and doing absolutely nothing until he was accosted by babies.

8. I’m not insinuating anything, you’re the one judging people by the colour of their skin. There’s a term for that.

9. You *just* said that it does, and that it was the reason behind awarding the students this baby cot. You’ve also rambled for the last couple of posts that the sticker is triggering because the police is, supposedly, a racist institution. Let’s say that you’re right about their intentions - let’s say that the two students showed up to see just how embracing this “safe space” was, and to catch it on video. If that’s the case, they have succeeded in their task and made the people accosting them look like giant crybabies. Good on them for challenging this ridiculous institution that operates on the false premise of tolerance when it only tolerates one specific point of view. Commendable and effective trolling, which is evidenced by the fact that we’re talking about this event at all.
 

Xzi

Arm Cannon Enthusiast
Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
13,360
Trophies
2
Location
Spiraling Out
Website
gbatemp.net
XP
13,494
Country
United States
Was not my experience with the police officers I know and work with. (no, I'm not a cop. State govt. job.) But that's here where I live, which isn't everywhere so I dunno maybe in Iowa or Oregon they didn't wear them on the job. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yeah, that might be the case where you are, but it's anecdotal. There's no way 62% of officer deaths last year would've come from COVID if the majority were wearing masks whenever they interacted with the public.

For fucks sake. THEIR OWN PAGE stated that they are a political movement. Yet here someone is arguing about what BLM is or is not.
Read again. I said the STATEMENT "black lives matter" is not inherently political. As a STATEMENT, not as an ORGANIZATION. Of course the organization is politically involved and politically active, its purpose is advocating positive change via local and federal government. Considering the alternative, I'd think you'd be okay with that.

All lives matter and police lives matter are not meant to be dismissive of BLM. As much as people butt hurt about those statements would like to believe otherwise, it's simple NOT the case. Nor are they intentionally confrontational... unlike BLM who actually are. Sit down. You literally don't know wtf you're talking about and I VERY highly doubt you've had any real life experience with violent and/or disruptive BLM crowds/protestors.
"SIT DOWN AND STFU!" Not exactly a compelling argument for how you're trying to avoid provocation and confrontation. If you're viewing "black lives matter" or BLM as an attack on you personally from the outset, of course you're going to try to find a slogan which counters or dismisses them. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of their purpose, however, unless you happen to be a crooked, racist cop.
 

Benja81

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
894
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
1,593
Country
United States
All lives matter/blue lives matter is petty white people who don't understand or accept that POC are being abused and killed everyday. By saying those things (and its unbelievably obvious you are only saying that because of BLM not because you fucking care) what you are really saying is that black lives don't matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xzi

WiiMiiSwitch

RiiConnect24 STAN
OP
Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2020
Messages
1,717
Trophies
1
Age
22
Location
Not Society
XP
3,483
Country
United States
All lives matter/blue lives matter is petty white people who don't understand or accept that POC are being abused and killed everyday. By saying those things (and its unbelievably obvious you are only saying that because of BLM not because you fucking care) what you are really saying is that black lives don't matter.
The problem is the Black Lives Matter movement has problems, not the people
Not all Africian Americans disagree with blue lives matter
 

Benja81

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
894
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
1,593
Country
United States
The problem is the Black Lives Matter movement has problems, not the people
Not all Africian Americans disagree with blue lives matter
I'll admit at first did not see the harm in "all lives matter." But think about it, did you ever hear about that crap before BLM came about? Here we have a group of human beings screaming at us for help saying we are being abused and mistreated, and then instead of supporting them and believing them we are correcting their statement and then doing fuck all to help. I could see why it pisses them off. And plus if someone loves the police so much to start a movement for them, they should make up their own catch phrase. But the reason for blue lives matter is not to support police, its to belittle and oppose the black lives matter movement. They made that obvious with the name choice. Plus if racist cops didn't fuck w/ POC so much, they wouldn't have had to start the movement in the first place. Yes I know perfectly well all cops are not bad, but the bad ones did more than enough damage for the lot and there is an old saying that all it takes for evil to endure is good people/good cops doing nothing. And while I don't know that they "did nothing" the good ones evidently did not do nearly enough to make a difference according to POC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xzi
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
4,466
Trophies
3
XP
6,809
Country
United Kingdom
EDIT: As a complete aside, am I the only one here who raises an eyebrow at the term “people of colour”? How is that anything other than calling someone “coloured” with extra steps? It’s so bizarre to me, you got rid of a slur just to replace it with another segregating term. The obvious term to use is just “people”, I don’t see how their complexion is relevant.
I just assumed it was a regional thing so tried to ignore it, but yeah I find that term pretty meh. I'd rather not have the distinction at all, but again, I'm for actual equality whereas a lot of people seem to want special treatment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxi4

Dr_Faustus

Resident Robot Hoarder
Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
165
Trophies
0
Age
31
Location
The Best State on The Best Coast
XP
194
Country
United States
Who's looking down on who? The MCC students who wanted to study culture other than white culture? Which somehow translates into looking down on white culture? Despite white culture being predominantly taught over the past ~300 years? Gotcha.

More Irish immigrants were indentured servants than any kind of slave, stateside. They also didn't suffer ~250 years of subhuman level discrimination and conditions, but please, go on about how your ancestors ran out of potatoes and sold their kids to protect their family assets.

No one here is saying the Irish didn't have it bad as well, or any other POC, be it white skinned or not. The problem here is everyone wants to defend racism by invalidating the feelings and opinions of non white citizens because... why? Jealousy? Quid pro quo? Objection to change? Get over it. You can't pick and choose what's offensive to who and why, and the more you continue to invalidate the struggles people go through, the more we're going to see situations like the OP vid. Either get with the times and progress like the rest of the society, or get out of the way. Simple.
Just ignore the whole Know-Nothing movement and the mob torching/killing of Irish and other foreigners because the only races that deserves any kind of historical attention and apology are the ones who are easily identifiable by the colour of their skin right?

I am not trying to defend racism, but if you or anyone thinks that racism is going to be somehow eradicated in our or in any lifetime its clearly never going to be the case. The human race is too much at comfort to sort things in orders mentally to make things easier for themselves. This includes the ordering of people by race, sex and value. Its not at all a thing I like or support, but its something that exists and will continue to exist as the foundation of our society is built on this concept. Even if you eliminated the concept of racism in its existing form you can still order people in groups of class and value, which is just as bad at the end of the day. You will need to rework society as a concept from the ground up, which will never happen in any way.


What I am trying to say is that rather than trying to change the world in impossible ways we can just learn to ignore the small things that should not be causing such outrage and instead just focus on the things that remind us that we are all on the same goddamn boat at the end of the day. We are all dealing with shit, struggling with things in our life and all have our problems. If I had the free time to give two shits about something so non existent as a sticker somehow offending me then that shows just how absolutely removed from reality I am to care about such a first world problem. By the way, meanwhile there are still countries out there where if you are an independent woman or gay you get stoned to death or get taken by the secret police. But lets not focus too hard on the problems in the world and instead focus on how having a sticker supporting the police is the equivalent of supporting racial genocide.

I'll admit at first did not see the harm in "all lives matter." But think about it, did you ever hear about that crap before BLM came about? Here we have a group of human beings screaming at us for help saying we are being abused and mistreated, and then instead of supporting them and believing them we are correcting their statement and then doing fuck all to help. I could see why it pisses them off. And plus if someone loves the police so much to start a movement for them, they should make up their own catch phrase. But the reason for blue lives matter is not to support police, its to belittle and oppose the black lives matter movement. They made that obvious with the name choice. Plus if racist cops didn't fuck w/ POC so much, they wouldn't have had to start the movement in the first place. Yes I know perfectly well all cops are not bad, but the bad ones did more than enough damage for the lot and there is an old saying that all it takes for evil to endure is good people/good cops doing nothing. And while I don't know that they "did nothing" the good ones evidently did not do nearly enough to make a difference according to POC.
Honestly I feel this is more of a person to person view or opinion of its purpose. Some see it as that while some see it as a response to all Police being classified as racist automatons without any humanity or life outside of the badge. People forget that not all police are bad people but in the same way a racist person can try to convince you that all POC's are bad, the alternate side is trying to do the very same with saying that all Police are bad. That they do not deserve respect or humanity, which is just as inhuman to say at the end of the day. Every goddamn person matters, if someone dies at the hands of another or just of a circumstance, do we care for them less because of what they represent or should we still care for them regardless because they were at the end of the day a human being that was trying to live their life for themselves and probably their family. When we start stripping that away you are no better than the racists honestly.


To be better people you have to abandon the tools of the past. It's easy to group people in bad and good ways, its hard to actually realise that not everyone is so easily categorized as good or bad. That is the truth of the situation, there is no true ultimate good or evil here, just people trying to live lives and some trying to take advantage of that in the wrong way. We should not blanket term anyone from those outliers. Otherwise it does not make you look any different than the wrongful profilers that have been doing this for all of human history. Blame the person(s) responsible, not the group, not the people. That is how things change for the better for everyone. Accountability where it matters, and not spread onto everyone.
 

SyphenFreht

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2016
Messages
119
Trophies
0
Age
120
XP
595
Country
United States
1. Why should he acknowledge any offense at all? He’s just as entitled to be there as any other student. If the students were awarded this “space” by the ASU because a bunch of white people enslaved a bunch of black people 300 years ago then the ASU is administered by chipmunks.

Because if he was a decent person who truly was only there to study, then he would have been ignorant to the offense POC took from his sticker. If he was truly ignorant and not just there to cause a ruckus, he would've been at least confused and curious, rather than immediately defensive and combative. If he was a decent person, he would not have also allowed his temper to escalate (yes, I am implying that the one POC escalated as well and may not have been a decent person. I am not opposed to understanding that people on both sides can be cruel and antagonistic)

2. I don’t have to prove their innocence. It is a given until you can prove their guilt, that burden is on you. Even if they are there to troll people into giving them an emotional reaction (and succeeding) to demonstrate that the student body is not tolerant of certain viewpoints, not only they’re entitled to do that, they’re also in the right. If the situation was reversed and it was some kind of “white kid sorority” with two black kids messing around with a BLM sticker, you’d be clapping with every appendage including your ears.

Not really. I'm not in support of antagonizing anyone under any circumstance in order to prove a false viewpoint. When you purposely antagonize someone to get a result, you *usually* aren't opposed to using underhanded techniques to illicit the kind of response you're looking for. It's similar to the idea of entrapment, only you're using innocent people to push an agenda that they normally wouldn't be behind under normal circumstances.

3. We see the entire encounter. I don’t see any incitement of violence, I see a guy sitting there with his laptop minding his own business and a bunch of crybabies getting bent out of shape because they don’t like his sticker.

And you're entitled to that viewpoint. That doesn't make you right. Understandably, that doesn't make me right either, as neither side shows the same scenario from multiple viewpoints and therefore most of what we're arguing is conjecture, but take from that what you will. You see nothing wrong, I see antagonistic behavior.

4. I don’t see any conclusive evidence of racial bias in policing, police presence and police interactions by race are directly proportional to the levels of criminality by race. The whole matter is also thoroughly uninteresting to me.

Then we'll agree to disagree on this one, especially considering any further conversation covering this topic in particular strays from the OP. I wouldn't mind discussing this with you in another thread at some point, should you find interest in it.

5. Harassment is a persistent and repetitive pattern of behaviour aimed at a specific person or group with the intention to cause distress and in disregard of the wishes of said person or group. The guy is literally just sitting there, you have no evidence that he’s shown up at that spot numerous times and no evidence that he was ever asked not to display such messaging by anyone with any degree of authority. If anything, he’s being harassed, by multiple people, repeatedly, until he has to leave.

Again, this is based on the fact the he could be innocent based on ignorance, which is a lot more far fetched than my original view. Even if the base argument was "He knows it's triggering, but he's only there to study", the next point to discuss would be why he chose that room in particular to study, knowing he had triggering propaganda. We're not going to get past the point that people who are triggered need to control their triggers, something I don't wholeheartedly agree with but have empathy toward, but I do assume that if the POC should have the decency to control their triggers, these students should at least have the decency to understand why the POC are triggered and agree to find a happy medium, rather than trying to argue their position with people who are clearly already triggered and clearly emotional.

6. The MCC embraces pearls very tightly, because that’s next level clutching. You are once again ascribing racist intent based on someone being white and supporting the police. You’ve literally invented an imaginary crime to excuse your own cognitive dissonance.

Except at no point have I described a crime. You've described harassment, and I've given a very solid counter argument that would be admissible in a court of law. Both parties can be accused of harassment, and depending on mitigating factors, both parties can be found guilty of harassment, and probably other things. You want to blame the POC so bad for being aggressors, when they were in their designated area, minding their business, when two students with triggering propaganda sat in their designated space, and got confrontational when asked to, at first, hide their propaganda

7. “Triggering propaganda” and “triggered place” is pretty funny terminology, but we’re not in kindergarten. Grow up. The kid didn’t assault anyone, he was passively sitting there and doing absolutely nothing until he was accosted by a bunch of babies.

I am grown up. That's why I recognize things as triggering propaganda and safe spaces, both of which are simply new age terms for ideals that people long before our generation have dealt with. "Triggering propaganda" in itself can be as much as swastika and hammer n sickle signs everywhere, or jet sounds and gun fire to someone with PTSD. My triggering space comment was a typo in my end, I apologize, I must've glossed over that. It was supposed to say "safe space", as in a place that's supposed to be designated free from discrimination if any kind. You can argue all you want that the POC were being discriminatory, but then you can't deny the two white students were guilty of the same thing.

8. I’m not insinuating anything, you’re the one judging people by the colour of their skin. There’s a term for that.

Who's judging who by the colour of their skin? Just because I use skin colour as a descriptor does not mean I judge them by it. I judge them based on their behaviors. But you also can't argue against racial description in a thread based around a racial event. That's like describing slavery but only listing people by name, not skin colour descriptors.

9. You *just* said that it does, and that it was the reason behind awarding the students this baby cot. You’ve also rambled for the last couple of posts that the sticker is triggering because the police is, supposedly, a racist institution. The students showed up to see just how embracing this “safe space” was and to catch it on video. They have succeeded in their task and made everyone there look like a giant crybaby. Good on them for challenging this ridiculous institution that operates on the false premise of tolerance when it only tolerates one specific point of view. Commendable and effective trolling, which is evidenced by the fact that we’re talking about this event at all.

At no point were the students there to merely observe. They knowingly brought something that had a history of triggering POC into a space where that kind of behaviour should not have been tolerated. When you wilfully antagonize someone, you get results. In this case, they showed that the POC can escalate things just as bad as white people when confronted with antagonistic behavior. Otherwise, the only thing they've shown is that whenever POC have something set up to celebrate their heritage or multicultural background, white people come along and trample over it.

EDIT: As a complete aside, am I the only one here who raises an eyebrow at the term “people of colour”? How is that anything other than calling someone “coloured” with extra steps? It’s so bizarre to me, you got rid of a slur just to replace it with another segregating term. The obvious term to use is just “people”, I don’t see how their complexion is relevant.

Probably not. But in a thread about race, you need to be able to identify which party is which, and since no one here knows there names, and at no point had anyone here used skin colour as anything more than a descriptor... idk what to tell you. Just because someone says "That white guy" or "That black girl" doesn't mean they're using slurs. There's a difference between identifying someone by skin colour and using it as a derogatory term
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    KennieDaMeanie @ KennieDaMeanie: https://youtu.be/0VHx7gERE-Y it's just a prank bro