Loaded-Gun.Com - Anti-Social.Com's Rejects!
General Category => Politics, Philosophy, News and/or Current Affairs => Topic started by: fyrenza on April 02, 2010, 07:56:23 PM
-
Just got our census form (short one) and am HORRIFIED!!!
WTF?!?
There are NOW only 5 races that folks can be? White; Black; Asian; Indian; or Pacific Islander. (And PACIFIC ISLANDER??? WTF is THAT about? They're ASIAN!)
Well, here's what I think it's about:
Native Hawaiians will be given preferencial treatment, as our newest MINORITY.
All Hispanics will now be known as White folks, since actual white folks have become the minority, and THAT cannot be allowed.
Am I totally out in the ozone on this, and/or what do YOU think is going on?
-
I'm still thinking of sending it in saying I'm a Mexican family of 12 ...
-
Hispanic/Latino is not a race. They are an ethnic group.
It is a separate question. It was last time, too.
-
Fyr... Call a samoan or maori 'asian'... I dare you.
-
Pacific Islanders are melanesian or polynesian. Indians are Australoids, same as Abo's. Niggers are negroid. Whiteys are caucasoid. East Asians are mongolids.
Hispanics as you know them are mixed race.
-
STFU beaners are from Mexico.
-
Who cares what the race is... the important thing is who is winning.
-
Yeah, see I think mexicans would fall into the indian race, rather than white,
but I also thought EVERYONE was of the Human Race, and that we ALL started out somewhere in Africa,
so ...
But, okay, explain to me how Japanese asians and Chinese asians AREN't the same race, again?
p.s. How much does anyone want to bet that all the mexicans are going to fill in the "Other" race option with:
(wait for it ... )
MEXICAN?
As far as honesty on the thing is concerned, I read about fines of up to $500 PER ANSWER for lying on it,
and fines of up to $100 per answer for leaving them blank.
wEnder how much the fine for purposefully putting it in the envelope the wrong way is going to be? rofl!!!
Fyr... Call a samoan or maori 'asian'... I dare you.
Well, not that they ARE asian, but they're descended from asian peoples, and if asian is a race ...
-
Michele Bachmann says not to participate iss good nuff for me. This is clearly part of the whole Ayers/Acorn thing. I mean do you ever remember filling out a "Census 2010" form BEFORE Obama came into office? Show us your birth certificate, friend!
-
I read Fyr's post... I need to lie down for a bit.
-
People can believe whatever they want, that doesn't change the meaning of the words. "Mexican" is not a race. It isn't even an ethnicity. It is a nationality.
-
They built a fence for Luke. They're Mexican.
-
nggres
-
I guess what I was trying to say was:
Look, if we're ALL members of the HUMAN RACE? Then the ONLY differences amongst us are our ethnic ones.
And, please! GUAMANIAN as a RACE?!? Or HAWAIIAN?!? Shit, WE'VE been there, as well as the Japanese, for over a hundred years, so ALL they could be is a Mixed race.
As an aside, I find it absolutely AMAZING (in the most horrible sort of way) that our GOV and doctors are ENCOURAGED to "profile" us,
but our police are PUNISHED for it.
Another one of those: If It's A Good Idea? It's A Good Idea For EVERYONE! thangs.
-
Racial profiling by doctors is ok because some diseases are more prevalent among particular racial groups.
The government is interested in part because they develop statistical measurements of things like education level in racial groups, earnings in racial groups, etc. Because contrary to the post racial talk, racism is alive and well.
Racial profiling by police is inherently unfair and reinforces racial biases, as well as may be completely ineffective according to many studies.
That's why race is ok to consider in some instances and not under others.
-
They built a fence for Luke. They're Mexican.
... yet, it still didn't stop the swine flu
-
My census form reveals that I am a lesbian living with my white Mexican girlfriend.
-
Nice ...
-
I'll watch porn from anywhere
-
Oklahoma?
-
Racial profiling by doctors is ok because some diseases are more prevalent among particular racial groups.
The government is interested in part because they develop statistical measurements of things like education level in racial groups, earnings in racial groups, etc. Because contrary to the post racial talk, racism is alive and well.
Racial profiling by police is inherently unfair and reinforces racial biases, as well as may be completely ineffective according to many studies.
That's why race is ok to consider in some instances and not under others.
I don't know if you know this or not, but doctors are also profiling for intelligence.
And I still stand with: If it's a Good Idea? It's a Good Idea for EVERYONE. Whatever made it a good idea for one group, makes it a good idea for ALL groups,
ACROSS THE BOARD.
Unfortunately, Emp, you've fallen for the lies, believing that racism lives in HUGE segments of our population, and I'm sorry, but I don't believe it. What I DO believe is that you have to be LOOKING for it in order to find it,
and if you're focused on finding something, you're much more sensitive to any little thing to grab hold of to prove your point.
The excuses that the gov gives for needing to know our races is absolutely BOGUS. We're ALL Americans, and our gov should care about the American people, and bringing us together,
not FURTHER segregating us.
Until NO ONE gets special treatment (good OR bad) based on the color of their skin, there will be racism. (It goes BOTH ways, see?)
When you "help" someone? You're saying that you're better than they are. You, for whatever reason, are in a better position than they are, and you honestly don't expect them to be able to rise to the challenges of their lives, not like you were able to.
So, who's the racist and who's the friend?
-
You can't address existing structural and institutional biases if you throw your hands up in the air and say, "everyone is equal." It is simply not true. The numbers on education, income, etc. indicate that it is not true based on both race and gender. You don't have to look very hard at the numbers to see it play it.
Helping people is certainly not "saying that you are better than they are." On the level of government, it is trying to address long standing inequalities that continue to exist.
-
-
DON'T YOU GET IT?!? To our GOV, WE SHOULD ALL BE CONSIDERED EQUAL!!!
Our fucking country was BUILT on that Big Idea, for crying out loud!
A: So we shall never read anything form you about Obama not being born in the USA, cause it dont matter cause he is a citizen.
B: Wrong. Equality had nothing to do with it. It was about money (taxes) and how it was used.
or
B: it was built on somebody elses land.
Your choice.
-
You can't address existing structural and institutional biases if you throw your hands up in the air and say, "everyone is equal." It is simply not true. The numbers on education, income, etc. indicate that it is not true based on both race and gender. You don't have to look very hard at the numbers to see it play it.
Helping people is certainly not "saying that you are better than they are." On the level of government, it is trying to address long standing inequalities that continue to exist.
Fuckin' amen, man.
-
We're all members of the HUMAN Race,
Enough. I don't think you understand the term. Race is a quasi-biological term used to refer to an inbreeding population within a species distinguishable by differing heritable characteristics. (NOTE: Inbreeding in this context means breeding within the population, not within the nuclear family or anything like that.) H. Sapiens sapiens could be considered a "race" as distinct from H. Sapiens idaltu, but as it is used commonly the term is applied to what biologically should only be considered sub-races. Does this mean that the common usage is imprecise and uneducated?
I would argue not.
Sub-species (i.e. racial) identification along gradients within a species is very common. I think it's sloppy, but ultimately this system of biological classification itself is sloppy. There is no clearly defined definition of a species. We speak of the "species concept," but the concept is so frequently excepted and so situationally applied that it is just as inaccurate as referring to traditional vernacular "races" as "races."
I mean, would you prefer the term used on the Census was "sub-race?" What an arbitrary and meaningless distinction to draw.
-
DON'T YOU GET IT?!? To our GOV, WE SHOULD ALL BE CONSIDERED EQUAL!!!
Our fucking country was BUILT on that Big Idea, for crying out loud!
A: So we shall never read anything form you about Obama not being born in the USA, cause it dont matter cause he is a citizen.
B: Wrong. Equality had nothing to do with it. It was about money (taxes) and how it was used.
or
B: it was built on somebody elses land.
Your choice.
I'm afraid you're wrong ~ Equal representation of EVERY CITIZEN is what it was about,
and the term Citizen, and the rights OF a citizen, were DEFINED.
Oh. And please don't let the fact that I refrain from, once again, producing the PROOF that Obama isn't a US citizen somehow convince you that I miraculously changed my mind and now believe the lies. I still don't.
But, hey! If you'd pass over a little of whatever it is you're smoking/snorting/slamming, perhaps I too can become an enlightened proponent of bald-faced lies.
-
Well at least you're consistent.
-
I'm afraid you're wrong ~ Equal representation of EVERY CITIZEN is what it was about,
yeah... You really believe that ? You ? You dont think it had anything to do with the fact that having more control over where taxation $ was spent by having reps and the chance for people to profit from that had nothing to do with it ? You... ha.
Sorry... You can't be suspicious of the motives of people with power and believe the revolution was all 'for the greater good'.
it's a bit like thinking no racists supported (voted) for desegregation.
-
You can't address existing structural and institutional biases if you throw your hands up in the air and say, "everyone is equal." It is simply not true. The numbers on education, income, etc. indicate that it is not true based on both race and gender. You don't have to look very hard at the numbers to see it play it.
Helping people is certainly not "saying that you are better than they are." On the level of government, it is trying to address long standing inequalities that continue to exist.
Fuckin' amen, man.
For real? Y'all are really saying that some folks are just "better" than others? (funny. when i said it, y'all jumped my shit like i was some sort of rabid skinhead and i wasn't even referring to different races of folks, just ALL folks, in general)
As far as the gov is concerned, every citizen SHOULD be treated equally. Some folks aren't smart enough to become rocket scientists, and that's a fact. But the gov has NO RIGHT to FORCE a school to accept an inferior intellect into it's top programs, and if the gov is meddling around trying to make sure everyone CAN get in, they're over-reaching their bounds, and CAUSING the very thing they're supposedly trying to STOP. (Wasn't it in this forum that GPA's were discussed, and the fact that the color of your skin made ALL the diff as to whether you were given a Special Consideration {'cuz everyone KNOWS certain colors of folks are just innately dumber than others}? Yeah.)
That part in { }'s? It's never SAID, but it's the implied Reason behind affirmative action. Way to show your lack of prejudice!
Please do not even try to brace up your statements with skewed statistics, which I thought we had all agreed could be made to say whatever we wanted them to say. Since I'm sitting here, with a census form that I can fill out any way I please, I beg to differ with whatever "findings" the number crunchers choose to flaunt. (For crying out loud, Obama, himself, stood proudly and LIED on his census form, calling himself "black" when the entire world knows that's he's mixed-race!)
-
I'm afraid you're wrong ~ Equal representation of EVERY CITIZEN is what it was about,
yeah... You really believe that ? You ? You dont think it had anything to do with the fact that having more control over where taxation $ was spent by having reps and the chance for people to profit from that had nothing to do with it ? You... ha.
Sorry... You can't be suspicious of the motives of people with power and believe the revolution was all 'for the greater good'.
it's a bit like thinking no racists supported (voted) for desegregation.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that just because someone figured out how to manipulate the system,
the system was set up FOR that manipulation.
-
The system was in place long before the revolution... the revolution just made it pay better.
-
(For crying out loud, Obama, himself, stood proudly and LIED on his census form, calling himself "black" when the entire world knows that's he's mixed-race!)
If you saw someone who looked exactly like Obama stealing your car, I very much doubt that you'd tell the cops that a "mixed" guy stole it.
And I'm not at all surprised this ended up being about affirmative action.
-
Actually, Si, I would describe the perp as a dark-skinned male, and try to remember all of the details about his appearance, such as height, weight, eye color and shape, hair color and/or style, etc.
But, thank you! I'm LMFAO imagining what you think I would have said!!!
btw, if the perp were hispanic or asian? I'd describe him as brown-skinned.
-
AZNs ain't brown. They yella.
-
I'm yet to meet a person with big ideas, ambition and drive who is stuck in poverty in the western world. 3rd world nations are a separate conversation.
-
How are Asian and Indian different? Is that supposed to be native Indian or something?
...because I don't think pakis/bengalis/Shri lankans would like bein classed as that.
-
Here are the various "Races" listed on our census:
White
Black, African Am, Negro
American Indian or Alaska Native (and you have to name the "tribe" you're from)
Asian Indian
Chinese
Filipino
other Asian (and write which race: Hmong, Laotian, Thai, Pakistani, Cambodian, ...)
Japanese
Korean
Vietnamese
Native Hawaiian ~ WTF is a "Native Hawaiian?" Someone born in Hawaii, or someone with Hawaiian ancestry?
Guamanian or Chamorro
Samoan
Other Pacific Islander (list which: Fijan, Tongan, ...)
Hispanics and Whites are NOT different enough to warrant separate Races,
but Hawaiians, Guamanians and Somoans ARE?!?
And Chinese is a completely different race than Japanese?
The truth is, Mexican hispanics are a lot closer to Native American Indians,
so what I want to know is this:
Why is the push on to weight the scales towards White being the majority?
On the one hand, we're lumping two verifiably different races together,
while on the other, separating one race into a bunch of nationalities.
It doesn't make good sense...
-
ah okay.
And I'm sure Japanese and Chinese are different.
-
But Indians and Pakis are not.
-
Hispanic does not mean white.
You can designate yourself as hispanic and then pick a race. There are a large number of black hispanic people, for example. Or they can designate Native American as their race and name one of the tribes that populated Mexico. Or you can claim white because of your Spanish ancestors. It's up to the individual how they choose to designate their race. South & central America tends to have a lot of people of mixed race.
The various Island races are separate races because they have been inbreeding with a relatively small population for hundreds or thousands of years. They are distinct. Japan and China were also distinct breeding population.
Native Hawaiian should be as obvious as Native American.
-
But Indians and Pakis are not.
It is pretty funny how strongly people identify with that arbitrary line the British drew down the middle of the region, though.
-
I'd feel strongly about it too with Kashmir in the balance. Kashmir kicks ass.
-
Hispanic does not mean white.
You can designate yourself as hispanic and then pick a race. There are a large number of black hispanic people, for example. Or they can designate Native American as their race and name one of the tribes that populated Mexico. Or you can claim white because of your Spanish ancestors. It's up to the individual how they choose to designate their race. South & central America tends to have a lot of people of mixed race.
The various Island races are separate races because they have been inbreeding with a relatively small population for hundreds or thousands of years. They are distinct. Japan and China were also distinct breeding population.
Native Hawaiian should be as obvious as Native American.
If a person is hispanic, from two hispanic parents, descended from Mexicans, THERE'S NO OPTION other than White for their race.
I don't believe you could find even just 10,000 "Native Hawaiians" that aren't Mixed Race, that are descended from Hawaiians AND born in Hawaii. Like I said before, other peoples have been "visiting" there for over 100 years, so to think that little to no OUTbreeding occurred is the height of stupidity.
In fact, just for shits and grins, how many of us, here in this forum, are PURE BRED anything?
So, if EVERYONE is Mixed Race, and we're just about to that point, imho,
what's the point in trying to segregate us into SPECIFIC Races?
-
Why ignore race? Celebrate it, man.
The fact is that there are certain phenotypic traits that are distinctly recognizable within the human population. That's nothing to be ashamed of.
What should be banned is the value-judging of races. Race A isn't any better on a value scale than Race B. That's not to say that differences such as prevalence for certain diseases or race-linked socio-economic positions within society should be ignored. Those aren't value-based issues. They're objective and clinical issues.
In theory the census is supposed to provide equality of voice from within different communities. That shouldn't be something you fear, but rather something you look forward eagerly to. Different views is what makes democracy democratic.
-
Directly from the 10 question form (http://2010.census.gov/2010census/how/interactive-form.php (http://2010.census.gov/2010census/how/interactive-form.php)):
Question 8 - Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish Origin?
No
Yes, Mexican...
Yes, Puerto Rican...
Yes, Cuban...
Yes, another Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish Origin...
Question 9 - What is Person 1's race?
White
Black
American Indian or Alaska Native
Asian Indian
Chinese
Filipino
Japanese
Korean
Vietnamese
Native Hawaiian
Guamanian or Chamorro
Samoan
Other Pacific Islander
Some Other Race
You can pick Hispanic in Question 8 and whatever race you want in Question 9. You can also write in whatever you want to call your race.
It's also not an issue of being "pure breed." It's distinct racial groups. Some mixing does not necessarily make the group at large less distinct.
I've already explained some of the reasons that the government and doctors care about racial groups. This is not a dream world where everyone is equal. And we don't live in a country that was founded on equality. We live in a country that might have struggled towards it at various points, but it certainly was not founded on it. We were founded on slavery, stealing land from native Americans, denying women rights, excluding the poor from various elements of life as a citizen, etc. That is absolutely not founded on equality in anything other than some idealistic language stuck into a document. And if you want "equality" to be anything other than some pretty language stuck in a document someplace, you have to do something other than prattle on about it.
-
But Indians and Pakis are not.
It is pretty funny how strongly people identify with that arbitrary line the British drew down the middle of the region, though.
my grandpa took me to see the border once
I'd feel strongly about it too with Kashmir in the balance. Kashmir kicks ass.
it's Indian I say!!
-
Maybe they should change the race part of the question to a colour bar, like the kind used to show degrees of teeth whitening...
And a series of eyes.
You would just check your skin shade and eye shape.
-
Yeah but then you're also ignoring noses, lips, badonkadonks, etc.
BTW Emp's posts in this thread are about the best thing I've read recently on this board.
-
Lets use phrenology and be done with it.
-
Penis size is the only way to judge a people. And by that I mean that women should be property, not citizenry.
-
Maybe they should change the race part of the question to a colour bar, like the kind used to show degrees of teeth whitening...
And a series of eyes.
You would just check your skin shade and eye shape.
there'd be an awful lot of orange boxes ticked.
-
Maybe they should change the race part of the question to a colour bar, like the kind used to show degrees of teeth whitening...
And a series of eyes.
You would just check your skin shade and eye shape.
there'd be an awful lot of orange boxes ticked.
I know, right? Especially in New Jersey.
-
I hate not being a prejudice asshole like the rest of you niggers!
-
Get it right dike jumper, I'm not prejudiced, I'm sexist.
-
I hate not being a prejudiced asshole like the rest of you niggers!
(nazi'd)
-
I know; am I not correct that I know? Especially in New Jersey.
Nazi'd. Also for the record I was being racial against Jersey Shore people who are of an orange pallor. Not real people.
Nice use of irony, though, regardless.
-
And I still stand with: If it's a Good Idea? It's a Good Idea for EVERYONE. Whatever made it a good idea for one group, makes it a good idea for ALL groups,
ACROSS THE BOARD.
Oh, you mean like Universal Health Coverage? How socialist of you.
Unfortunately, Emp, you've fallen for the lies, believing that racism lives in HUGE segments of our population, and I'm sorry, but I don't believe it. What I DO believe is that you have to be LOOKING for it in order to find it,
and if you're focused on finding something, you're much more sensitive to any little thing to grab hold of to prove your point.
Thanks for the laugh on that one. I love how people try to claim that racism is dead because we elected a non-white president.
The excuses that the gov gives for needing to know our races is absolutely BOGUS. We're ALL Americans, and our gov should care about the American people, and bringing us together,
not FURTHER segregating us.
Until NO ONE gets special treatment (good OR bad) based on the color of their skin, there will be racism. (It goes BOTH ways, see?)
Yeah, special treatment is great. Like not being able to drink from the "whites only" fountain.
Until you've been lynched or had dobermans sicced on you or been blasted with fire hoses or had your church blown up because you simply wanted the same rights as the next person, kindly shut the fuck up. Yes, some white people have it as bad as some black people, but to try to make it sound like all is equal is absolute horseshit.
-
I love how people try to claim that racism is dead because we elected a non-white president.
I'm convinced that Obama's election was a direct consequence of the shittiness of GW Bush as a president. There's no way to prove it, but I'm pretty certain that latent racism would have barred Obama in any other election cycle.
-
Perhap they should just make the race section into an essay question...describe your roots in 500 words or less.
-
That'd be effort, just ram a chip into every newborn and keep count of chips dying/being born, leaving/entering the country. If thr chip has race details on it problem solved.
-
We're already filled with perfectly usable code.
-
I agree with Sak. As long as all those chips come with an off switch.
-
Just as long as they aint Salt & Vinegar.
I cant stand Salt & Vinegar chips.
-
I like them, but my tongue peels after eating them. It's pretty gross.
-
Ditto.
-
I can't see how people eat them ...
-
Corn chips is where it's at.
-
They have Dill Pickle Pringles now.
Actually not bad. But still along the lines of the S&V
-
I'll pass, thanks ...
-
I'm with Daddy ~
Frito's, FTW!
I mean, I AM a Frito Bandito,
and have been,
since at least '68.
-
Fritos are boring as shit on their own and aren't even big enough to be useful for salsa. Snack FAIL.
-
Dude you have to get the BBQ flavor ones and eat them in handfuls.
-
Rap Snacks... BBQ'n wit ma Honey....
-
Rap Snacks ...
I haven't seen those in months ...