The meening of kwanzaa

[Donnie]

RE: The meaning of klown

 

>"What is user rating system?"

>

>It allows users to rate the level of contribution a specific

>user makes to the community.

 

Check out some of the ratings and you'll see that Craig is not the only one to use the rating system to make a personal statement about the poster with no regard to their "contribution to the community":

 

Talvin DeMachio on Vince Tiexeira: "He is my best friend "

Traveller on Talvin DeMachio: "...a great fuck"

deej on Matt_Vancouver: "Good looking. Great in the sack. And just a damn nice guy too."

deej on Jason Reardone: "The guy I want to take home to meet Mom. (And later ravage behind the garage.)"

NASAguy on Michael Vincenzo: "He deserves 2 pts for just being so sexy."

BuckyXTC on Vegasboy Dave: "Dave gets my two points purely because he's soooo cute!!!"

Kevin 2 on AdamLVescort: "What a sweetheart and damn cute also!"

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

kwanzaa Craig -- Character or Caricature

 

Can there be any doubt????? I suspected this possibility early on in his discourses in other threads but in this thread he is so far over the top so often... this can't be a real person. They don't allow them off the assembly line in this condition........ do they?? NO, absolutely not, otherwise Lord help us. To paraphrase Jessica Rabbit: 'He not really ------ -- he just drawn that way.'

 

If I'm wrong then the obvious question: Is it Nature or Nurture? I personally don't think nature is this FUBAR.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>no, we honor african-americans by honoring their heritage,

>the same way we honor jews by wareing beanies on jew

>holidaies or muslims by putting up cresents.

 

Wait. We're supposed to wear beanies on Jewish holidays? I must not have gotten that memo. And I have yet to meet a Muslim that wants me to put up a crescent during Ramadan. I think you're thinking of Saint Patrick's Day, when people who aren't Irish do often wear green, go to parades and basically stereotype the Irish. McDonald's serves green tinted milkshakes and you can get green dyed beer. That's all fine and dandy, but it's also why Saint Patrick's Day is a crass, lightweight occasion as holidays go. Now it sounds like you're requesting that white people trivialize Kwanzaa. Aren't occasions that deal seriously with African American history, like MLK day, Black History Month, and Juneteenth celebrations better suited to honoring African Americans and their heritage?

 

>during kwanzaa, i AM african, if you are not its not a

>suprise, most white gay men in SF are very insensitiv, which

>is why theres so much anger from gay minorities - to white

>gay men like you who say things like - oh its THEIR holiday

>- them - the ones over there. fuck you.

 

Well you seem to be spending a lot of time defining white gay men as "them - the ones over there," but never mind. I think somewhere in your bitter rantings there is actually a serious point, which is that white people should express solidarity with Africans and African Americans and their struggle for justice and equality. Despite your assumptions to the contrary, I agree. But surely my going around claiming that I'm African for a few days isn't going to mean much. And don't look now, but compared to most Africans, you are extremely privileged, even during Kwanzaa. The gap between your reality and theirs is infinitely greater than the gap between your reality and mine, no matter how much you despise me because I admit to being perplexed by the "meaning of Kwanzaa." Do your Kwanzaa activities include going without food, plumbing and sanitation for a few days? That might at least connect you with the reality of life in Africa a little less superficially than lighting a few candles, railing against white people and declaring that you're African.

 

You haven't even shown that YOU have a clue what Kwanzaa's about. How can you expect me to? You haven't even told us what YOU'RE doing to celebrate Kwanzaa. So far your celebratory activities seem to be confined to talking about how much you hate the West and white people and to issuing extremely vague calls to "honor" Africans and African Americans. The most specific thing you've asked us to do is wear some kind of culturally appropriate equivalent to a beanie, but you didn't even say what that was. Apparently want me to honor Kwanzaa by honoring Kwanzaa. Could you at least be a little more descriptive?

[phage]

RE: kwanzaa Craig -- Character or Caricature

 

I agree TY. I’m not big on conspiracy theories and generally don’t give a damn who so-and-so “really is,” but it’s hard to believe that Craig isn’t someone’s idea of having fun with the board. No one can be that stupid, that shrill and vindictive, and that illiterate. A real person who was bright enough to speak multiple languages would surely use a spell checker to catch some of his errors. A real person would occasionally have a normal exchange or make a reasonable statement – just by accident.

 

I heard something last night that applies…Craig could eat a box of alphabets and shit out a more coherent thought than the ones that come out of his mouth. He can't be real.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

RE: kwanzaa Craig -- Character or Caricature

 

>I agree TY. I’m not big on conspiracy theories and

>generally don’t give a damn who so-and-so “really is,” but

>it’s hard to believe that Craig isn’t someone’s idea of

>having fun with the board. No one can be that

>stupid, that shrill and vindictive, and that

>illiterate. A real person who was bright enough to speak

>multiple languages would surely use a spell checker to catch

>some of his errors. A real person would

>occasionally have a normal exchange or make a

>reasonable statement – just by accident.

>

>I heard something last night that applies…Craig could eat a

>box of alphabets and shit out a more coherent thought than

>the ones that come out of his mouth. He can't be real.

 

Doh! I think you're right, phage. And to think I was duped into replying as if he could be taken seriously... x(

 

Too bad. It's a potentially interesting topic. It'd be nice if there were someone on the board who was actually familiar with Kwanzaa, actually celebrated it, and could actually write some lucid thoughts getting at its "meening."

[Guest TruthTeller]

>I

>think somewhere in your bitter rantings there is actually a

>serious point, which is that white people should express

>solidarity with Africans and African Americans and their

>struggle for justice and equality. Despite your assumptions

>to the contrary, I agree.

 

With deep sadness in my heart for not having done so sooner, I've decided to take your admonition to heart and "express solidarity with Africans and African Americans and their struggle for justice and equality" (is there something in the water that makes people in SF speak this way?). Before I can do that, though, I need to know exactly what this "struggle" is. Can you tell me, please?

 

By struggle for "equlity," do you mean their self-sacrificing efforts not to be given favorable treatment in government hiring, government contracting, college admissions, and a score of other processes, due to no reason other than their race? If so, I'm ready to express solidarity with them. If not, I need to know the "struggle for justice and equality" is so that I can express solidarity with it.

[Guest CraigSF39]

> Aren't occasions that deal seriously with African American

>history, like MLK day, Black History Month, and Juneteenth

>celebrations better suited to honoring African Americans and

>their heritage?

 

oh, sorry mister white man that african-americans are having to many holidaies than there allowed, please, suh, tell which of the hoidaies are better for black culture.

 

>And don't look now, but compared to most Africans,

>you are extremely privileged, even during Kwanzaa. The gap

>between your reality and theirs is infinitely greater than

>the gap between your reality and mine, no matter how much

>you despise me because I admit to being perplexed by the

>"meaning of Kwanzaa."

 

nothing worst than a white gay man telling why blacks have it so good in the us, your arrogants is dicusting.

 

>Do your Kwanzaa activities include

>going without food, plumbing and sanitation for a few days?

>That might at least connect you with the reality of life in

>Africa a little less superficially than lighting a few

>candles, railing against white people and declaring that

>you're African.

 

SICK!!!! you equate afriacn culture with disease, sickness, poverty, suffering, becasue you think that any place that doesnt have white people in it must be that way, you are sick.

 

>You haven't even shown that YOU have a clue what Kwanzaa's

>about. How can you expect me to? You haven't even told us

>what YOU'RE doing to celebrate Kwanzaa.

 

i attended a vigil for african victims of colonializing, had a traditional afriacan dinner at my brothers house, helped organize a reprataions speech by a local mosque leader, and spent alot of time educating ignorant white bigots like you about the importance and meaning of the holiday.

 

happy kwanzaa, maybe it will be used as a time by you and your family to reflect on your white priviledge that you didnt do anything to earn but are fighting so desperately to keep.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

Donnie,

 

A piece of sincere advice...

 

Hitch your wagon to someone who exists beyond the electronic ether.

 

P.S.

 

I really can't believe your the man behind kwanzaa Craig, so don't invest yourself any more, it will only lead to heartbreak.

 

Happy New Year

 

TY :-)

[Guest TruthTeller]

RE: kwanzaa Craig -- Character or Caricature

 

>No one can be that

>stupid, that shrill and vindictive, and that

>illiterate.

 

Go attend an "anti-war" rally, or virtually any meeting of any sort held in the city of San Francisco or in the East Village of NYC, and -- spelling abilities aside -- there will be nothing but little Craigs running around.

 

I don't know (and don't care) if Craig is real or not, but I do know that, in those circles, his attributes are far from extraordinary. There was this "anti-war rally" a couple months ago in NYC, and this repulsive bitch named Margarita Lopez, a City Councilwoman from the East Village (and a dyke), spoke and said, as shrilly and angrily as the human voice allows: "NOT IN MY NAME WILL THE WEST AND THE EVIL MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX BOMB AFGHAN WOMEN! NOT IN MY NAME WILL THE U.S. INVADE THIRD-WORLD COUNTRIES AND OPPRESS THEIR PEOPLES." And there was this whole litany of declarations which followed in which she dictatorially proclaimed that the U.S. "would not, in my name" engage in one evil or another (in all of which, hilariously, the U.S. then proceeded to engage).

 

Other than the fact that she (presumably) has a vagina, and (maybe) spells a little bit better, she is Craig, as are all the constituents in her district who voted for her. Countless organizations exist for the primary purpose of expressing group-based grievances with exactly the anger and sense of victimization and seething, vindictive hatred which Craig exdues.

 

Sadly, I don't find him notable or unusual in the slightest, and had his written English been a level or two better, my guess is that nobody else would have either.

[Will]

RE: kwanzaa Craig -- Character or Caricature

 

Amen! By the way, after the U.S. went ahead and did all of those things in the name of Ms. Lopez after she had told it not to, did she resign her seat on the city council, renounce her citizenship, turn in her passport, and emigrate to some utopia where everybody does exactly what Ms. Lopez believes to be the proper thing?

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>With deep sadness in my heart for not having done so sooner,

>I've decided to take your admonition to heart and "express

>solidarity with Africans and African Americans and their

>struggle for justice and equality" (is there something in

>the water that makes people in SF speak this way?). Before

>I can do that, though, I need to know exactly what this

>"struggle" is. Can you tell me, please?

>

>By struggle for "equlity," do you mean their

>self-sacrificing efforts not to be given favorable treatment

>in government hiring, government contracting, college

>admissions, and a score of other processes, due to no reason

>other than their race? If so, I'm ready to express

>solidarity with them. If not, I need to know the "struggle

>for justice and equality" is so that I can express

>solidarity with it.

 

LOL -- okay, TruthTeller, I guess "solidarity" was laying it on a little thick. When I referred to "justice" I was thinking of the fact that even though blacks and whites use drugs in roughly equal proportions, blacks are much more likely to be arrested and even more likely to be incarcerated for drug offenses. This is a travesty that only fuels the perception of African Americans that they are unlikely to get a fair deal in the judicial system, and the consequences are tragic not only for blacks as a group but for our society as a whole. Think about France, where the majority of prisoners are Arabs and North Africans from French slums -- the prisons there are breeding grounds for Islamic militancy. I was also thinking of an excellent article I read on why conservatives should oppose racial profiling -- it makes the case better than I could, so check it out if you like:

 

http://www.thenewrepublic.com/091001/forman091001.html

 

By "equality" I meant equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome. For example, black children are far more likely than whites to be educated in crumbling schools with outdated textbooks and too few computers -- this at a time when the opportunities for people without college degrees are shrinking. It's also been shown that black children, especially males, are perceived as trouble in the classroom from day one and treated accordingly -- an example of the "soft bigotry of low expectations" that conservatives don't like to talk about. African American children are also more likely to grow up with substandard health care. Again, in the long run the social costs hit everybody. Redlining by banks is another huge problem which discourages black entreneurship.

 

Finally, I understand the reasons in principle why many whites find affirmative action an irritant, but conservatives need to do a better job of explaining what would replace it. For all its flaws affirmative action has dramatically expanded the black middle class in this country, and we're all far better off for that having happened. At any rate it's a caricature to say that race is the sole criterion in blacks getting hired or admitted to universities through affirmative action programs. Yes, some "better qualified" whites may get displaced along the way, and that sucks, but our country's long, shameful history of enslaving, discriminating against, and denying the vote to black people is worse, was based solely on race, and cannot be corrected overnight. Taking a "let them eat cake" attitude has only given fodder to the rage of crackpots like Craig and the demagogues he gets his ideas from. I think this may be partly what James Baldwin meant by "the fire next time."

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>For all its flaws affirmative action has

>dramatically expanded the black middle class in this

>country, and we're all far better off for that having

>happened. At any rate it's a caricature to say that race is

>the sole criterion in blacks getting hired or admitted to

>universities through affirmative action programs. Yes, some

>"better qualified" whites may get displaced along the way,

>and that sucks, but our country's long, shameful history of

>enslaving, discriminating against, and denying the vote to

>black people is worse, was based solely on race, and cannot

>be corrected overnight.

 

Forgot to mention that nowadays many businesses support affirmative action because they see it as being in their self-interest to have a diverse workforce.

[Guest WetDream]

RE: your arrogants is dicusting....

 

mr. devon suh but yr pokey pointy titties gib me a fit ob de gigglements. dey almos be as sexie as smalltimejons dirty ol toenails.

[Guest TruthTeller]

>Forgot to mention that nowadays many businesses support

>affirmative action because they see it as being in their

>self-interest to have a diverse workforce.

 

Of course corporations say this (what else will they say?), but I didn't think there was anyone who really believed this.

 

The actual reasons corporations have affirmative action programs are:

 

(1) it's a great defense when they get sued for racial discrimination with regard to their hiring or promotion practices ("who? us? Look at all the nice black people we have working here; in fact, we have 4 managers in this department alone!"), and because if they don't have such programs, they are rendering lawsuits inevitable ("Corporation X only has Y % of blacks; therefore, they discriminate"); and

 

(2) becasue many governmental contracts can, by law, be awarded only to corporations which have affirmative action programs and/or sufficient levels of racial "diversity" (which leads to the repulsive practice where employers are required to keep track, and count like potatoes, all of their employees by race).

[Guest TruthTeller]

>When I referred to "justice" I was

>thinking of the fact that even though blacks and whites use

>drugs in roughly equal proportions, blacks are much more

>likely to be arrested and even more likely to be

>incarcerated for drug offenses.

 

The vast majority of drug arrests are for drug street SELLING, not for drug using. You're not suggesting, are you, that blacks and whites SELL drugs on the street in roughly equal proportion, are you?

 

Having said all that, how fucking pathetic is it that our Government imprisons adult citizens for doing NOTHING other than selling to other adult citizens a substance which the adult buyers have decided they want to buy and use?

 

>By "equality" I meant equality of opportunity rather than

>equality of outcome. For example, black children are far

>more likely than whites to be educated in crumbling schools

>with outdated textbooks and too few computers -- this at a

>time when the opportunities for people without college

>degrees are shrinking. It's also been shown that black

>children, especially males, are perceived as trouble in the

>classroom from day one and treated accordingly -- an example

>of the "soft bigotry of low expectations" that conservatives

>don't like to talk about. African American children are

>also more likely to grow up with substandard health care.

 

As phage pointed out, this argument confuses race with economic issues. Rich black kids go to private schools or to well-funded public schools just as easily and commonly as rich white kids do; poor white kids go to shitty public schools just as readily as poor black kids. Rich black kids have great health care; poor white kids have crappy health care. The scores of rich and middle-class black families -- along with the COMPLETELY equal treatment for the races under the law (except where it favors blacks) -- simply negates any argument that blacks don't have roughly equal opportunity.

 

>Finally, I understand the reasons in principle why many

>whites find affirmative action an irritant, but

>conservatives need to do a better job of explaining what

>would replace it.

 

What would replace it is a color-blind legal system - y'know, the thing Martin Luther King said he dreamed about.

 

>For all its flaws affirmative action has

>dramatically expanded the black middle class in this

>country, and we're all far better off for that having

>happened.

 

There is no more racist argument than this one. What it says is that blacks can't succeed unless they receive favorable treatment and unless standards are lowered for them. I don't think black middle-class families succeeded because of affirmative action; I think it's because of their diligence and abilities. Liberals, though, are so patronizing, racist, and self-absorbed, that they NEED to think: "Oh, look at all the nice things the black people have because we gave it to them through affirmative action."

 

It also illustrates one of the most pernicious harms of affirmative action: it casts aspersion on the success of every black person, because it promotes the idea - which you stated expressly - that absent affirmative action, their success could not have been achieved.

 

>At any rate it's a caricature to say that race is

>the sole criterion in blacks getting hired or admitted to

>universities through affirmative action programs.

 

When colleges receive admission applications, they separate them into different piles by race. The ones in the white pile need certain scores to gain admittance, and the ones in the black pile need lower scores. You don't find that repulsive? And why do you assume that, unless these piles are created and different standards of expectation applied, blacks won't succeed?

 

One quick (but highly illustrative) antecdote: I knew a black student who went to Dartmouth College and wanted to go to law school. Like most students at Dartmouth going to law school, he wanted to go to Harvard or Yale. The white students all needed 170 on the LSAT to be admitted, and studied accordingly, whereas the black students all needed 162, and studied accordingly. On practice exams, the black students would feel that they succeeded when they got to 162, whereas the white students didn't feel they succeeded until they got to 170.

 

That's how affirmative action breeds lower expectations for blacks. It assumes they can't perform as well, and then fosters that result. When the black students get to Harvard and Yale, all of their white classmates - and ultimately employers - see their acceptance as suspect, because they know that they only needed a 162 LSAT score (and a lower GPA), whereas the white ones needed 170 and a higher GPA.

 

Affirmative action divides people by race, assumes the worst about racial minorities, breeds resentment and suspicion, and is generally contrary to the ideal of a colorblind society which liberals claim to want.

[Guest Piltdown Man]

>kwanzaa must be honord and respected.<

 

I've always celebrated Kwanzaa by slapping the nearest moron. Exactly where are you located, craig?

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>The vast majority of drug arrests are for drug street

>SELLING, not for drug using. You're not suggesting, are

>you, that blacks and whites SELL drugs on the street in

>roughly equal proportion, are you?

 

Actually, I shouldn't have said drug "offenses," because that's too broad. The stats I was thinking of were specifically focused on drug possession charges, not on drug dealing charges.

 

>Having said all that, how fucking pathetic is it that our

>Government imprisons adult citizens for doing NOTHING other

>than selling to other adult citizens a substance which the

>adult buyers have decided they want to buy and use?

 

Extremely. We agree on that.

 

>>By "equality" I meant equality of opportunity rather than

>>equality of outcome. For example, black children are far

>>more likely than whites to be educated in crumbling schools

>>with outdated textbooks and too few computers -- this at a

>>time when the opportunities for people without college

>>degrees are shrinking. It's also been shown that black

>>children, especially males, are perceived as trouble in the

>>classroom from day one and treated accordingly -- an example

>>of the "soft bigotry of low expectations" that conservatives

>>don't like to talk about. African American children are

>>also more likely to grow up with substandard health care.

>

>As phage pointed out, this argument confuses race with

>economic issues.

 

Well, yes and no. I'd be thrilled if educational funding were redirected to poorer schools and poor white kids as well as poor black (and poor asian, latino, etc. kids) benefited. I still don't think that it simply doesn't matter that poverty disproportionately affects black children, and that there will be no social consequences to pay for this, but never mind. But you either dodged or missed the bit about black and white children being treated differently in the classroom. Or, for that matter, as adults. When my dad, who is white, was growing up, he worked in a full service gas station from the time he was twelve years old. His boss actually put my dad IN CHARGE of the ADULT black employees who had worked there for YEARS. That wasn't so long ago that we can be smug about our supposed color-blindedness as a society, even though I think Craig underestimates how far we've come. And it certainly wasn't long before the first affirmative action programs kicked in.

 

>>Finally, I understand the reasons in principle why many

>>whites find affirmative action an irritant, but

>>conservatives need to do a better job of explaining what

>>would replace it.

>

>What would replace it is a color-blind legal system -

>y'know, the thing Martin Luther King said he dreamed about.

 

I'm all in favor of a color-blind LEGAL system, but I was asking what would replace affirmative action, not what would replace racial profiling.

 

 

>>For all its flaws affirmative action has

>>dramatically expanded the black middle class in this

>>country, and we're all far better off for that having

>>happened.

>

>There is no more racist argument than this one. What it

>says is that blacks can't succeed unless they receive

>favorable treatment and unless standards are lowered for

>them. I don't think black middle-class families succeeded

>because of affirmative action; I think it's because of their

>diligence and abilities. Liberals, though, are so

>patronizing, racist, and self-absorbed, that they NEED to

>think: "Oh, look at all the nice things the black people

>have because we gave it to them through affirmative action."

 

Go, Truthteller, go! Demolish that straw target! I don't know about liberals (I've made some fairly conservative arguments in other threads and at this point in my life would more accurately described as a moderate or centrist), but I don't think "we" "gave" black people anything. I think affirmative action helped get a lot of blacks' feet through doors which had previously been closed to them, and those blacks who succeeded took the ball and ran with it. I don't see a contradiction between thinking affirmative action came at a necessary time in our nation's history (and that that time may not be over) and between thinking that middle-class black families have succeeded because of their diligence and abilities. I do, however, see that it's naive to assume that most people of any race get the jobs they get because we live in a meritocracy. You know the old saying, "It's not what you know, it's who you know" -- well, white people have far more opportunities to benefit from that phenomenon than African Americans. One thing affirmative action has done is to make it harder for workplaces to maintain a closed circle where White Joe's white buddy Rick gets the job so the boss doesn't have to run an ad and actually recruit somebody. Even if White Joe's boss is cynically thinking "oh, we'd better get a black guy in here or we'll get sued," it doesn't follow that the black guy who gets hired isn't up to the job, or that, through his diligence and abilities, he can't make a successful career for himself.

 

>It also illustrates one of the most pernicious harms of

>affirmative action: it casts aspersion on the success of

>every black person.

 

Actually, "it" doesn't cast aspersion. White people who take simplistic viewpoints about affirmative action and meritocracy are the ones who cast aspersion, and thats unfortunate. Happily, if those white people are openminded enough to actually give their black colleagues a chance, they often come around and say what you said -- that black people succeed through their diligence and abilities, not because something was "given" to them.

 

>When colleges receive admission applications, they separate

>them into different piles by race. The ones in the white

>pile need certain scores to gain admittance, and the ones in

>the black pile need lower scores.

 

Not all -- in fact, at this point, probably not even most, college affirmative action programs work this way today, partly, it must be admitted, because of the efforts of critics of affirmative action. I absolutely believe affirmative action, like anything, has improved because it has had to face up to some tough criticism. My point was that there are still reasons to consider race as one of many factors in university admissions. One of these reasons, incidentally, includes the enrichment of the entire student body. People do bring different perspectives to the table partly because of their different backgrounds, and students in a multicultural democracy benefit from hearing and debating them.

 

>When the black students get to Harvard...

 

Speaking of Harvard, talk about a pernicious form of affirmative action! Grade inflation is rampant and "benefits" (cheats is a better word) students of every color, while imbeciles get admitted because Daddy was an alum. Why this isn't a higher priority for reform than affirmative action is beyond me. Which brings us back to my point that with or without affirmative action, we're not quite living in a meritocracy. Too bad some conservatives are so selective about which unearned priveleges they want to do away with. I'll give you more credit than you gave me and assume you're not one of them.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>>Forgot to mention that nowadays many businesses support

>>affirmative action because they see it as being in their

>>self-interest to have a diverse workforce.

>

>Of course corporations say this (what else will they say?),

>but I didn't think there was anyone who really

>believed this.

 

I guess I believed it because I believed all those stories about the untapped markets in racial minorities of every stripe and the desire on the part of businesses to effectively tap into those markets. Marketing's changing, TruthTeller. To capture a niche market you need to have people who have a certain familiarity with that market.

 

>The actual reasons corporations have affirmative action

>programs are...

 

I don't doubt the "actual reasons" you cited, but I wasn't talking about corporations having their own affirmative action programs. Businesses have also lined up to oppose ballot initiatives aimed at overturning affirmative action in university admissions (and they've backed up their opposition with dollars) so they can have a well-educated, diverse workforce to hire from. Yes, I guess this could also provide some oblique defense against lawsuits, but I can't believe that's the whole story.

[Guest cp8036]

<...most white gay men in SF are very insensitiv,...>

 

 

Craig,

 

You are clueless, you cannot be for real. You contradict yourself within your own thread.

 

How can you possibly say MOST white gay men? What is your sample? How did you arrive at this conclusion? I suggest you get with Tampa Yankee for some assistance on polling.

 

I cannot say if MOST white gay men are insenitive or not, and I never asked most that I met. I would never dare say MOST about any population, especially when it is about a feeling or attitude.

 

I live in San Francisco as well, and one of my first comments upon moving here five years ago was the bay area and its knee-jerk liberalism. The extent that "we are the world" or all inclusive goes on here is laughable. Years ago we would call it the "gay parade". Here you need to take a deep breathe and say "the gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgendered-queer-questioning-curious parade.

[BewareofNick]

>>To that end, I leave you with a quote from someone I admire

>>very much:

>>

>>“I have a dream that my four children will one day live

>>in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of

>>their skin but by the content of their character.”

>

>nothing is worst then when a rasist says "oh, i like martin

>luther king." do you have black friends to? you post a song

>about african-americans bieng on welfare and crack and being

>criminals, and then justify it by saying i like mlk. your

>to vile for words

 

Once again, you have totally missed the point. I have friends Craig, but unlike you, I think of them as people. I don't divide them by color.

[Matt_Vancouver]

RE: Shame, shame, shame

 

>Italian Americans

>have Columbus Day. >

 

is this really an Italian American holiday??: )

matt(Canadjun)(citizen of Earth)

[Guest WetDream]

RE: Shame, shame, shame

 

Matt: I don't know about anywhere else, but in San Francisco Columbus Day (now passed off as Native American's Day) is a big deal in the Italian community of San Francisco. Don't even think about trying to go to North Beach.

[Guest pickwick]

>africa is about life and giving and love, unlike the west,

>which is about conquer and slavery and power. africa and

>african americans must be cherished and respected and

>celebrated.

 

 

Seldom have I seen so much bullshit packed into two short sentences.

 

Those who believe in principles like universal suffrage, sexual equality, freedom of speech and freedom of religion are aware that these principles have been codified, put into practice and spread to other lands by the West, not by Africa.

 

Sub-saharan Africa has certainly been badly treated by the West in generations past, but when left to their own devices we see that African countries perpetrate on their own people exactly the same outrages and atrocities of which they have long accused the West, their culture of "life and giving and love" notwithstanding. When these countries finally get their own houses in order there will be something to celebrate, not before.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

RE: your arrogants is dicusting....

 

>mr. devon suh but yr pokey pointy titties gib me a fit ob de

>gigglements. dey almos be as sexie as smalltimejons dirty

>ol toenails.

 

ROFLMAO, WetDream! Hmmm...almost as sexy as Smalltown John's dirty old toenails...I think there's real potential for a new marketing campaign here... :+

[RM]

RE: Shame, shame, shame

 

I had to check a holidays website.... it is indeed an Italian holiday....started by Italians in New York City on October 12, 1866. Italian-Americans throughout the country began celebrating the day, until it was made a federal holiday in 1937.