I believe high school was much more diverse than college for me. In high school everyone was forced to integrate into classes, so you had no choice but to meet people of all races (well depending on what high school you went to). But in college, all the integration was thrown out the window, because fraternities and sororities encourage hanging with your own race and everything became segregated again to cliques of different races.
I didn't say it's great that people WANT to offend these people. Do you think that was the purpose of this party? To purposefully offend? We are becoming way too emotional as a country.
ima, Though I disagree with most of your political posts, you come across to me as a decent guy, so I think your sincere when you ask "What is the solution?" Part of the solution is for other white people to withdraw their approval through silence or even vocal support for this stupid ****. It's speaking up when this kind of thing happens around you and saying "Hey, that is f_cked up." If that happens to kids like these a few times, they won't be ignorant anymore.
Yeah, if she wasn't offended. People have different senses of humor. If I threw a party where people dressed up like priests and had little dolls attached to them, I would expect a lot of Catholics to be upset about it and would expect a backlash of some sort.
Oh yea I forgot these parties were on KRS-One's b'day NOT on MLK weekend. I'm sure MLK fought hard for hip hop culture Also, this is off-topic but refers to macalu's quote, you must not know what "hip hop culture" is. The media defines hip hop culture in the negative connotation always so I'm not surprised. Thugs and gangsters are not hip hop. The notorious gang MS13 are based on heavy metal culture and I laugh when the news bumps rap in the background when talking about the history of the gang. Thugs/gangsters use hip hop to get paid, hip hop doesn't use them. Thug life and hip hop life are similar but not interchangeable.
That's a bad comparison because these kids didn't throw their silly little party at a black fraternity house, they threw it at their own private trailer park...and I assume they didn't invite any black people (or they would probably not be alive right now).
if that's the case, shouldn't you not the joke at all? no matter who it's to? if people have different senses of humor, then the folks who threw the party thought it was funny. why is that wrong then?
So why would you tell a joke to someone that isn't offended when you know that if you said it to your mom in law that she would be offended?
people throw parties on st. patrick's day and dress up like little green leprecaun's "making fun" of the irish. is that wrong?
Thanks, and it WAS a sincere question. I can buy that. For what it's worth, I do NOT approve of this party. I guess my point is that you can't really change how people think so why worry about it? I personally don't have the time or energy to worry about things that I can not change. If you think you CAN change how people think, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Me telling a joke about a Catholic priest to one person and not another is a little different than me waiting until all my black friends to leave before calling them n****rs. What kind of sense of humor makes it OK to use racial slurs? I wasn't comparing the two, I was trying to point out how stupid it is, IMO to say that no one should get offended by anything.
I don't see how being offended about your religion is any different than being offended about your race. What kind of sense of humor makes it ok to talk about child molestation?
halfbreed, do you truly expect a population of more than a group of people will ever not be offended at something? I also think the defenders or "cheekers" are over-blowing the outcry over this. I don't see anyone over-reacting to this, unless not agreeing with this is over-reacting. An over reaction would be calling the kids head or wanted them in prison, which I haven't seen in this thread or forum or any forum in that matter.
I'm not trying to be sarcastic here: How do you think we got to this point in society in 2007 compared to 1907? No one has said a thing about throwing people in jail, or even any sort of punishment for that matter. We're just posting disapproval on a message board. I would be pretty disturbed if no one had a word to say upon seeing some of those pictures. Would you find it acceptable if no one said a word about the Michael Richard's rant?
Obtuse? I'm just trying to see how you can apply one set of rules to one and not the other. You can't say that you shouldn't offend one group of people and never say anything offensive about them but another group of people its ok to offend if they aren't around or if the person that you are telling isn't offended.
