Is a WW Racist Because She Refuses To Date BM?

Seriously you guys need to stop going back and forth about this whole definition of racism and the question of the existence of racist ww. Face it guys, there is, always have and always will be racist people and white women are not excluded from that. Dont let it bother you, there are tons of white women out there who cannot wait to be wrapped in the arms of a loving black male so dont let the ignorant ones get to you. Do what i do and replace bitterness with negligence in this case.

 

You're right. It's nothing to argue over (at least not anymore), but I wasn't taking him seriously, because he doesn't even know what he's arguing with me about, or why.

 

Good grief ole' riley! I am going to as apprehensive as one can logically be and be done with it. "SardonicGenie", I could, of course, by nature intended, go into some esoteric state by the sheer labyrinthine of belief and make my English completely enigmatic; there will only be a contrivance of lucent ambiguity, disrupt the nature of simpleton English and nobody would understand me, expect those of exceptional English diction. Then again, this is not about my use of English and minor grammatical mistakes that you also process is it!?

#2 -- chosenone, was logically concise and fore thoughtful in his perspective; he was able to recognise my objective perspective regarding the issue: even when I challenged him, he didn't try to take sniper shots in cowardice and demandedly impede his perspective incoherently. This resulted in clear dialog and no shaming language on the behalf of "snickery." He may agree with SOME of your assertions -- true! But, he is clearly not as closed minded! You should realise this and I will again be as apprehensive as one logically can be; this is not to pit you against him for the sake of argument, but he clearly process far more critical thinking ability because he is not clearly as close minded!

This has nothing to do with "practicing what I preach", but you insist that this is about my hypocrisy. Perhaps, if you weren't so emotional about this topic, this behaviour doesn't precede your logic.

 

Erm 7Seven, not to be a pain-in-the-neck, but i hope you were not implying that you speak and use better English than anyone of us on here. Quite frankly, there isnt any amount of verbosity that could cover up for senseless points. I am not saying you make any but what im saying is that meaningless ideas wrapped up in fancy language is as good as saying nothing.

And as a matter of fact, i understood everything you were trying to say so i beg to differ. Just so you know, you certainly arent the only one who has a profound grasp of English/Literatural patterns of speech.

 

Did this logic escape you!?

Then, I made it a point to state this:

Most people here are waiting to jump down my thought and be a "pain-in-the-neck" without comprehending what I AM SAYING. Evil 7Seven, "thinks" he is more intelligent than everybody else! :lol: This never gets old I tell ya!

 

You know something 7Seven, i have understood firmly that you seem like the type who is ready to argue on just about anything. I, on the other hand, like to argue-n fact debate- about things that actually make sense. So i have no intention of going back and forth with you. You might have gotten that outta SardonicGenie but i wont go down that lane with you. All i have to say is meaningless points wrapped up in fancy language is a waste of time.

 

hey cris, your old girlfriend is very pretty, how long did you date her?

 

Umm..... "argue-n fact debate"!?!?!?!?!? :lol: What points are meaningless and who using fancy words!? You haven't seen me use fancy words here! The meaning of words are of utmost importance, it is how we communicate our concepts, SO HOW CAN ANY WORDS BE MEANINGLESS!? THIS SHIT DON'T WASH MATE or make a damn bit of sense! Good blimey ole' riley.....I think i'll take a break from this site!

 

dated her from Sep 2001-Dec 2002. Things went wrong so we had to break up. Yeah she's really pretty which i admit but not as pretty as my dear Eva. 8)

 

Do you even know what apprehensive means? :lol: And, this is just more of your crybaby self-pampering.

Still calling the kettle again, I see. No wonder anyone ever takes you seriously. By the way, if saying that your logic is skewed is a sniper shot, then you're just paranoid, if you think about it.

And, what was close-minded about my assertions if he did agree with it? If you had actually read what he said, then you would see that he agreed with me on almost everything.

Because he doesn't poke fun at your crap, he isn't as close-minded? Yeah, way to go, hero.

Please, like you are ever cool and calm in any of your posts. I bet you can't even count how many fingers and toes you have on your have on your hands and feet in the dark. You made the whole argument about me being this and that the whole time, and then, as usual, turned your emotions unto me, but then claim that I was the emotional one. That's the same 'magic word' you use in all of your debates, when everyone in here knows that you couldn't be in denial more.

But, continue to misuse and misspell words that contradict their meanings , flatter yourself, and play the victim about how 'illogical', 'emotional' and 'close-minded' I am, to make yourself feel good, even though taunting your idiocy doesn't make me or anyone in here as close-minded as you.

 

Maybe it doesn't because you keep it alive and well. :lol: If you weren't so busy playing the victim all the time and flattering yourself, like the egomaniacal hypochondriac you seem to be, then you wouldn't get these types of responses.

But, I forgot, despite what everyone else is telling you, I'm the close-minded one. :roll:

:lol:

 

Jesus Christ, in all attainable knowledge you know not a thing, your only debate tactic is to attack the man. Intellect is something I make a strong emphasis about, this is an outlet in your mode of defiance; but, you never argue from a position of knowledge. This whole debate has been about "the man" even from your very first post to combat my assertion.

I made not a point or post to you, yet, you erected your moronictism here by taking sniper shots. Who else uses the concepts: Ugly Duckling and feminazi!? Onto to whom made up these concepts!? Sniper shots AT THE MAN not the argument.

Yes, I will keep using circular logic, until you understand this logic: critical thinking can be applied to any theoretical concept, yet, you continued to attack the man, because well, you can never debate from a position of knowledge as your first assertion against pkd was an attack here:

You go about "you need read their post", when, they have read their post but do not comprehend your bias perspective. When someone doesn't reassure your thinking, because they have caused you hit a mental block, you go about singing colourful magic words like "stupid", "dumbass", "idiot", "lame projection", "dick", "dickhead", "crybaby" your vocabulary is superciliously spectacular I tell ya -- with more attacking the man:

I have kept, an almost religious faith with the meaning of words, this is one of the first concepts I learned whilst in Oxford....if you can prove that my play on words "contradict" and the usage is false PROVE IT.

Yet, again, we have attacking the man here...as the chosenone stated here:

Here is a man who respects objective viewpoints without retorting to attacking the man. Yes, my response to him was recognising his view point, as he did my own. Also, if one has even the slightest metacognitive critical thinking ability, you would see that he is still using words and phrases like, "not certain" , "not all", "no guarantee", etc, etc, etc. He objectively realises he could very well be wrong and recognises one can ever be certain: he is only speaking probability and my point is you can not be certain with words.

Yes, as circular logic, I will continue to point out your irrelevancies and debate tactics and for that, lack of metacongitive abilities robs you of this, because you lack conscious awareness of your own knowledge and the conscious ability to understand, control, and manipulate your own cognitive processes. Your whole argument against me thus far has been my hypocrisy, when, I state my position that of objectivity, yet, you go about this:

For your pleasure and mental comfort, I will entertain your argument AND dispel your argument against me in a few words. Feminazi is the premiere racist WW, their only goal is to rob men of autonomy and monetary wealth for the sake of equality, they do not go about this whilst helping white men or other "men of colour" from poorer backgrounds, but of their ownselves, this also known as oppression -- this is what makes them racist. Ugly Duckling Syndrome is the effect of this mentality: This mentality crosses RACIAL LINES and forms A PHYSICAL MANIFESTATION ONTO BM.

I know, I will here more of your cynical remarks, I really have no more to say.........

 

This is what you said about the rest of us who disagreed with you:

And, then:

And, when I responded to it, it set you off again.

Along with that, it seems that you can't take what you enjoy dishing out, in fact, over 97% of your posts will confirm that, if I were to go back and quote some more of them.

And, when I wrote that post about 'using skewed logic', it wasn't in direct response to YOU either, but you sure took it that way, even when you are not the only one who was outraging Ugly Ducklings/feminazis in here altogether, but was the one who originated those labels from the git-go. (I'm sure tuck is proud of you for that, eh?)

Because he was trolling obviously. I guess with all of your 'genius', you didn't notice it, along with the fact that not only have I seen YOU attack trolls on the site yourself, but have attacked almost every member in this site, for simply disagreeing with you one way or another, but then cry when the shoe is on the other foot. Sweet deal. :roll:

Same way YOUR vocabulary is, with words like, 'moronic', 'pathetic', 'Straw Man', 'piss arse', 'ignorant stupidity', 'Stupid should hurt', 'piggy', and other things you foam at the mouth about in your posts over and over again, and as for being bias, well, your comments about women, black Americans, 'vague' American definitions, us so-called 'Nice Guys' in here, etc., all fall into the category of that, as well as your incessant generalizing.

Your play on words like 'naive real', 'false truths', and other made up words contradict their meaning, and the Oxford College Dictionary defines racism the same exact way I do. Bet you didn't even know that.

Guess what? You never attacked HIM either, and I guess you could learn a thing or two from him as well, instead of calling the kettle over and over again, as always. And, I never said that all white women were racist for not wanting to date black men, in fact, Chosen stated that most of them are.

Funny. When I did the same thing to you in that other thread about white women's obsession with weight, you couldn't handle it, and now, you have the nerve to write something like this. Yes, continue to use your circular logic. (if you can call it logic, that is) By the way, your whole argument against me was about my cynicism, which doesn't change a thing I said either.

I never asked you to define your labels of racist white women.

You can't hear me from behind a computer screen, that's one thing, and my cynical remarks don't cancel out anything I said in here about you, so keep playing the victim, why don't you?

The self-proclaimed 'more powerful than god, Shallow Pig', is whining about someone else's cynicism. How about that? :lol:

 

Everyone give it up. You are all RIGHT! OK?!?! Happy? Move on.

 

7even and sardonicgenie always turn a discussion into a debate. I couldn't imagine what this site would be without them doing that....

 

:lol: Each and everyone of my antagonistic responses were all dependent on your attacking man in shallow Straw Man style. You only speak of one definitive meaning when referring "shallow" about me, this, being emotionless; but, this connotation of "shallow" escapes you here: Lacking depth of intellect, or knowledge, in classic "Sardonic" style -- Forced; unnatural; insincere; hence, derisive, mocking, malignant, or bitterly sarcastic; -- applied only to a laugh, smile, or some facial semblance of gayety, snickery. This is your debate tactic, you have been exposed, you can no longer hide your lack of knowledge on this tactic. I WILL ALWAYS MAKE IT A POINT TO USE CIRCULAR LOGIC UNTIL YOU UNDERSTAND THIS!

You can never state my positions are not of knowledge or esoteric thought, or having a bias. You haven't made ANY effort to recognise YOUR psychological investments and acknowledge your bias here. Racism has always been a vested interest is a particular cause of bias for BM in the dealings of WW; which occurs not simply when one unreasonably favours a preferred perspective, but in fact, favours a perspective which provides them with specific benefits, i.e. individual rights to choose to date WW. Well, this is only personal validation on your part as to EVEN accept some claim or phenomenon as valid based solely upon a few personal experiences and/or subjective perception, prior beliefs, expectations or hypotheses about the world. AS CIRCULAR LOGIC, I WILL CONTINUE TO POINT OUT YOUR EMOTIONAL INVESTMENTS, WHEN, YOU ARE NOT USING CRITICAL THINKING! You OF ALL PEOPLE should know, I will not stand of intellectual myopia in a "debate" and will challenge you to think past what you already know. How you intercept it, well, that is all due upon your perspective.

 

ATTENTION: LET THIS DEBATE END RIGHT NOW. :evil: WE GET IT, YOU GUYS ARE SMART AND ALL, NOW ITS JUST GETTING TRIFLING. ITS STRAINING TO THE EYE HAVING TO FOLLOW QUOTED THREADS HERE AND THERE. 7SEVEN AND SARDONIC, GIVE IT UP NOW. I RESPECT BOTH OF YOU BUT ITS STARTING TO GET SLIGHTLY WORTHLESS GOING BACK AND FORTH. IM SURE MOST OR EVERYONE ELSE FEELS THE SAME WAY.

 

Once again, don't be the pot calling the kettle black. You started off doing the same thing before I did.

So, you will repeat yourself over and over again for no reason until I agree with you? And, just because you know what Sardonic means doesn't make you smarter than me, or anyone else in here. Try to be original from now on.

I already did, in case you haven't noticed it yet.

We already covered all of this earlier, but that still escapes you too, and it's pretty stupid of you to compare my psychological investments by my screen name, when my screen name doesn't cancel out anything I said in here, nor does it cancel out anything I said about you, furthermore, I never denied any of your rants about my cynicism that you continue to bring up over and over again, but then call me close-minded, and my cynicism has no revelance to what this thread pertains to, so stop boring me again.

Right back at ya, slick.

 

The answer is simple: No.

We all have our preferences, likes and dislikes.

Here's a twist on the same question: Is a white person racist for refusing to date whites? Is a black person racist for refusing to date blacks?

 

Oh Paige!!!!!! this can not be about preferences because that would make 90 percent of black men whom prefer white female partners over black female partners racist. It would also make the majority of black men racist whom find something detestable in the nature of black women to condemned them all undesirable! :lol: I do not think they can see the irony about their predicament!