 Racism in the Queer
community |
FemmeFlame
lezzie
Posts: 174
Location: Oh...Around.
 |
|
Are you at Mayhem? http://www.canadianmayhem.com
Were you thinking about it but not sure because it's been enough coming out as queer and now what?! Kinky....
Well, lucky you! ... There's still time to join other newbies, rookies and wallflowers making there way to Mayhem.... No, you don't have to be at the play party... you've got sessions for sitting in community and learning... I mean really when last did Vancouver have a conference for queer women and transfolk connected to the women's community about sex?!
If you are coming... and you've got time for a caucus or two or three...
http://canadianmayhem.com/whattodo/other-events/caucuses
Consider the POC + Allies Caucus!
I am pleased to invite EVERYONE attending Mayhem to come by the hour long session for People of Colour and Allies.
Schedule announcement during the conference times.
Who's welcome?: Everyone!
This session will be supported by a few folks attending the conference - to name just two:
Rope Wolf (presenter of the Erotic Dominance D/s 24-7 workshop)
http://canadianmayhem.com/presenters/rope-wolf
Lamalani (IMSL 2009)
http://www.internationalmsleather.com/
What is it?: People of colour have been in Leather for a long time. Coming out and taking care of our growth while negotiating in multiple communities: queer, kinky, female-bodied and of colour. Navigating the hills and valleys of our leather walk both privately and publicly.
It's gonna be a fresh caucus that doesn't happen too often on the North American Leather conference circuit. Be in on it!
It's just the right spot for you if catch yourself thinkin':
"I'm of colour. I got kinky thoughts.I don't know what to do with them!"
or
"I'm not white and woah I don't often talk about being of colour and kinky in the same conversation!"
or
"I think I am the only kinkster of colour in the town most days"
or
"My partner is of colour and sometimes I feel like I don't really get her side of the experience and how the interracial part of our relations impacts our relationship in either direction"
or
"How comes it seems like there's so many stunning people of colour in town - but not at the play parties?!"
This space is POC-focused with room for partners and allies. It's quite possible it will be useful to witness if you feel some part of your identity has been hyper-visible and invisible at the same time while navigating the world of kink.
It will surely be useful if you are brand new on the scene looking for some more personal story-telling on entering the Leather community beyond the Newbies/Kink 101 caucus.
Looking forward to welcoming any superdyke.com member in attendance with the other participants!
Flame
__________________
Fierce. Black. Femme...not Flameproofed and the self-proclaimed QueenofOverWrite......for a better future.
|
|
04-20-2009 03:03 |
|
|
|
|
Racism is not against white people. I don't understand why us brown folk have to even say this. It goes back to a bigger issue than this y'all. White people are the ones who colonized us, enslaved us...
I'm NOT blamin every white person for what happened...but racism has to do with people of color being discriminated against by their race not white people. Sure, white people can deal with racial discrimination, but it sure as hell isn't racism.
Go back to history y'all, it comes from imperialism, colonialism, and slavery. We must remember.
We need to realize that we are allowed to feel like racialized peoples.
__________________
brown sister
|
|
|
11-19-2008 19:59 |
|
|
FemmeFlame
lezzie
Posts: 174
Location: Oh...Around.
|
|
Gawd.
__________________
Fierce. Black. Femme...not Flameproofed and the self-proclaimed QueenofOverWrite......for a better future.
|
|
|
05-06-2008 22:31 |
|
|
bruce
diehard vagina enthusiast
Posts: 908
Location: out in the ether
|
|
But first, just one more comment:
boy_wonder and digger are not the same person. boy_wonder would never have a tagline like digger's.
Not that there's anything wrong with it, it's just not BW's style.
My two cents...
__________________
the difference between a flower and a weed is a judgement...
(Anonymous or Asesh Datta, no-one really knows)
|
|
|
04-04-2008 16:29 |
|
|
|
|
This forum is about Racism in the Queer Community.... anyone want to discuss THAT?
|
|
|
04-04-2008 08:04 |
|
|
arachnia
Forum Legend
Posts: 1,865
Location: Coast Salish Territory, Vancouver BC
|
|
Is it really that hard to have a conversation without name-calling and antagonizing others? Surely you guys are intelligent enough to express strong opinions about an important subject in way that's respectful.
Please think about what you're writing before you post.
__________________
"Archaeology is the search for fact. Not truth. If it's truth you're interested in, Doctor Tyree's Philosophy class is right down the hall. So forget any ideas you've had about lost cities, exotic travel, and digging up the world. We do not follow maps to buried treasure and "X" never, ever, marks the spot. Seventy percent of all archeology is done in the library. Research. Reading."
- Indiana Jones
|
|
|
04-03-2008 21:48 |
|
|
|
|
| quote: |
Originally posted by digger
racism is not a result of systemic oppression. racism is a result of every single culture and color in the world wanting an enemy to hate. and every race does have a race of people it thinks it is better than. and it is used to justify hatred. |
__________________
I'm an agitator.
|
|
|
04-03-2008 07:49 |
|
|
digger
Nudist
Posts: 4
Location: here
|
|
| quote: |
Originally posted by mike_hunt
I did some googling as well -
Noun 1. asshole - insulting terms of address for people who are stupid or irritating or ridiculous |
i read some of your posts. it is nice to see you have a good grip on the type of person you come across as. 
__________________
don't hate me because i'm beautiful; hate me because of alberto!
|
|
|
04-03-2008 02:16 |
|
|
digger
Nudist
Posts: 4
Location: here
|
|
| quote: |
Originally posted by mike_hunt
digger, either you ARE boy_wonder or you two have the exact same disregard for period usage and capitals. |
i'm not boy_wonder. i did hear about this website from a new roomie and was reading through to see if i'd join. i think that in "community" forums it's ok to say your piece without a huge amount of time spent telling you who i am. like city hall meetings. i live in vancouver and have been here for a long time. lots of people use lowercase typing on forums. lots of people don't use proper grammar. or type too fast. or don't give a fuck.
i think you could say anything to justify the same crap over and over again. racism is not a result of systemic oppression. racism is a result of every single culture and color in the world wanting an enemy to hate. and every race does have a race of people it thinks it is better than. and it is used to justify hatred.
__________________
don't hate me because i'm beautiful; hate me because of alberto!
|
|
|
04-03-2008 01:24 |
|
|
|
|
I did some googling as well -
Noun 1. asshole - insulting terms of address for people who are stupid or irritating or ridiculous
__________________
http://www.vancouverislandreviews.com/
|
|
|
03-26-2008 21:56 |
|
|
|
|
ahah ya, coincidence... Probably not!
|
|
|
03-26-2008 21:47 |
|
|
arachnia
Forum Legend
Posts: 1,865
Location: Coast Salish Territory, Vancouver BC
|
|
Lol!
Amongst other characteristic things... 
__________________
"Archaeology is the search for fact. Not truth. If it's truth you're interested in, Doctor Tyree's Philosophy class is right down the hall. So forget any ideas you've had about lost cities, exotic travel, and digging up the world. We do not follow maps to buried treasure and "X" never, ever, marks the spot. Seventy percent of all archeology is done in the library. Research. Reading."
- Indiana Jones
|
|
|
03-26-2008 21:40 |
|
|
|
|
digger, either you ARE boy_wonder or you two have the exact same disregard for period usage and capitals.
__________________
http://www.vancouverislandreviews.com/
|
|
|
03-26-2008 20:54 |
|
|
arachnia
Forum Legend
Posts: 1,865
Location: Coast Salish Territory, Vancouver BC
|
|
Hmmm...
| quote: |
Originally posted by digger
the reason for a google of pakistan is simple. people of a variety of different races have been fighting and killing one another fora long time in that area. all for who's better. who has the right to be in control. at the expense of the every day citizens. it's still racism. yes, the british did the same thing too. but not for thousands of years. for 90 years. |
Any way you slice it, it's a heck of a lot more than 90 years. If the definition of racism is a sociological one (ie. where the focal point is systemic racism) then those who cling to that definition are bound to the stance that racism has only existed since about the 16th century, give or take a 100 years. Consequently, any discrimination based on race prior to that time is merely prejudice. The reason for this is because systemic racism is an institution which serves as the foundation for capitalism. Since capitalism dawned in 16th century England and the English are white, you could correctly say that white people invented racism. Racism was used to justify slavery, after the Christians tried to abolish it, by stating that non-white people were subhuman. Later it developed into the modern form we see running rampant in North America were it continues to oppress minorities through the system itself since capitalism relies on there being a class difference. I don't know how you arrived at 90 years as a figure, but from a Marxist perspective, it's started in the 1500's. However, for anyone to say that racism has been going on for thousands of years and in the same breath say that white people invented racism is a contradiction. Anyways, it's not thousands of years, but certainly more than 90.
I'm thinking there's more respectful ways to address inconsistencies, differences of opinion, or to make your point rather than calling someone racist and googling their history.
__________________
"Archaeology is the search for fact. Not truth. If it's truth you're interested in, Doctor Tyree's Philosophy class is right down the hall. So forget any ideas you've had about lost cities, exotic travel, and digging up the world. We do not follow maps to buried treasure and "X" never, ever, marks the spot. Seventy percent of all archeology is done in the library. Research. Reading."
- Indiana Jones
|
|
|
03-26-2008 19:48 |
|
|
|
|
Um, what? How is it in any way okay to point out someone else's own history to them? "you're a queer racist imho"--um, no. This is beyond offensive into hateful. SammyTomato is far from that. Read through their posts on here. And even if, by some stretch, you are still unconvinced, what does this have to do with the history of Pakistan that you googled? Don't bother answering. Please.
|
|
|
03-26-2008 12:57 |
|
|
|
|
continued from the below post:
| quote: |
The conclusion of this conflict was also followed by a realistic appreciation of the new situation by the political and military leadership of Pakistan. Bhutto, Pakistan’s new civilian president, held negotiations with India’s Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. They concluded the Simla Agreement on July 2, 1972 and agreed to resolve their disputes through bilateral negotiations. They also agreed not to unilaterally alter the existing "Line of Control" dividing their armed forces in Kashmir.
1979: War in Afghanistan
Bhutto’s government was replaced by a military regime when General Zia-ul-Haq seized power in 1977. He used Islamisation to legitimise his rule. When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, Pakistan acquired the status of a frontline state in the U.S.-Soviet Cold War. Pakistan’s army was used by the U.S. to organise resistance to the pro-Soviet regime in Afghanistan. During the late 1970s and early 1980s, Pakistan’s patronage to hard-line Islamists within the country, the massive recruitment for military and ideological training, and the spread of weapons provided by NATO countries, created a fertile ground in both Pakistan and Afghanistan for Islamic insurgency in the region.
1984: Kashmir Again
In April 1984, the Indian Army captured some mountain outposts in northern Kashmir. This placed the Indian army near Pakistan’s access routes to China. Casualties claimed by the harsh climate were greater than those caused by actual fighting.
1989: Campaign in Kashmir
Due to developments in Kashmir’s civil society, a qualitative change occurred in India-Pakistan relations in 1989. A massive public campaign for Azadi (independence) emerged in the Valley of Kashmir. This movement dramatically increased the tension between India and Pakistan and brought them to the brink of full-scale war.
The Azadi campaign began peacefully and was led mostly by secular nationalists. It quickly turned violent when India’s armed forces fired on peaceful public demonstrations. The Indian government then cracked down on all institutions of civil society. They used "cordon and search" operations: curfews were imposed and then house-to-house searches were carried out. There were numerous complaints of rape and torture. The Indian army eventually crushed the resistance led by secular groups. Pakistan was initially surprised by the Azadi campaign. Once it began, Pakistan’s military leadership tried to guide it in a direction that would be in its own interest. Besides the military, politically-powerful Islamist groups, were also ready to offer support to Kashmiri youth that were compelled to flee the Indian army. Weapons were easily available from the pipeline set up for the Afghan jehad. As a result, Indian armed forces continue to face effective resistance in Kashmir.
1992: The Ayodhia Mosque
The Hindu-fundamentalist Bharatya Janata Party (BJP) generally targets religious minorities for persecution and advocates a hard-line military stance against both Pakistan and China. In the 1980s, the BJP (whose members are well represented in the police) began a campaign to replace an historic mosque in Ayodhia with a Hindu temple. The BJP used this campaign to mobilise support to establish a Hindu fundamentalist and authoritarian political system.
In 1992, the BJP led an assault on the mosque and destroyed it. Violence against the Muslim minority, left at least 2000 people dead all over India. There was no serious effort by the Indian state to prosecute leaders or rank-and-file militants who committed these atrocities. The BJP benefited from this impunity and emerged as the largest party in parliament.
1998: Nuclear Tests
When the BJP formed the federal government in 1998, it moved swiftly to satisfy the demand of India’s national security establishment to test nuclear weapons. Pakistan responded with its own nuclear tests. When the Indian and Pakistani leaders began negotiations in 1999, Pakistan’s Prime Minister thanked his Indian counterpart for conducting the nuclear tests, for it had provided Pakistan the pretext to come out of the nuclear closet.
1999: Battle in Kashmir
In 1999, Vajpayee and Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif declared their intent to discuss Kashmir. This did not stop the fighting in Kashmir. Later that year, it was discovered that Pakistan’s army had captured strategic heights in Kashmir’s Kargil region. India responded with massive force to evict Pakistan troops, and Pakistan was isolated diplomatically and agreed to leave Kargil. Differences arising from the handling of this episode led to the overthrow of Sharif by Pakistan’s army. General Pervez Musharraf became the country’s new ruler.
In July 2000, the Hizb-ul-Muja-hideen (HM), the leading Kashmiri group resisting India’s armed forces, unilaterally offered a truce. Vajpayee accepted the offer and agreed to negotiate outside the framework of the Indian constitution. The truce broke down when India rejected the HM’s insistence on including Pakistan in the negotiations.
In July 2001, Vajpayee invited Musharraf for talks in India. Their meetings ended without a commun-iqu‚, as Vajpayee couldn’t convince Home Minister L.K.Advani to endorse the Pakistani demand for talks on Kashmir. During Musharraf’s visit to India he made a persuasive case for talks on Kashmir that was appreciated by many Indian opinion makers.
2001: Terrorist Attacks
The U.S. response to the September 11 attacks confronted the political leaderships of both Pakistan and India with unique challenges and opportunities. Pakistan had to quickly chose whether it would become an adversary of the U.S. and risk the expected consequences, or side with it, and confront its own Islamic-fundamentalist allies in Pakistan and Afghanistan. It chose to side with the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.
India wanted the U.S. to categorise all Islamist resistance to Indian armed forces in Kashmir as terrorism, and it wanted endorsment for its efforts to crush them. The U.S. did declare two such Islamist groups to be terrorist organisations, but the Indian expectation that all Islamist resistance in Kashmir be categorised as "cross border terrorism" was not realised.
India watched with concern as Pakistan again emerged as a frontline state in the latest U.S. assault on Afghanistan as Pakistan now had the chance to improve its economy and rehabilitate itself in the Western world. Sanctions imposed on Pakistan and India after the nuclear explosions of 1998, and Pakistan’s military coup of 1999, were rescinded.
On December 13, 2001, five people were killed in a terrorist attack on the Indian parliament which India said was orchestrated by Pakistani agents. India deployed its armed forces along the border and moved missiles to where they could be launched against Pakistan. Pakistan responded in similar fashion.
2002: Ayodhia Struggle
The confrontation over Ayodhia continues as Hindu-fundamentalist allies of India’s ruling BJP are attempting to begin another campaign to construct a temple on the site of the mosque they demolished in 1992. Hundreds of people have already been killed as this campaign is being kick-started.
It is a hopeful that the Indian government’s mobilisation for war, and its allies zest for religious strife has lost the Indian electorate’s support. The BJP’s government in India’s biggest state, Uttar Pradesh, was soundly defeated in March elections.
Unfortunately, progressive and secular forces in India and Pakistan are still very weak and unable to exert meaningful influence on the policies of their governments. Until that happens, it will not be possible to begin the process of peacebuilding in South Asia.
Source: Written for Press for Conversion! March 2002.
http://coat.ncf.ca/
March 2002 Issue #47:
"Divide and Rule: Understanding the India-Pakistan Conflict"
|
__________________
I'm an agitator.
This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by SammyTomato: 03-26-2008 08:41.
|
|
|
03-26-2008 08:41 |
|
|
|
|
ummmmmmmmmmm.............................
ok, thanks for posting a three-second "history" of the country my parent's are from...? how long did that take you to google, a couple of seconds?
here's a bit of a more accurate picture of MY fucking country that was raped and left in a gutter by WHITE british colonialists:
| quote: |
History of the India-Pakistan Conflict
Monday 8 December 2003 by Tariq AHSAN
History of the India-Pakistan Conflict By Tariq Ahsan, former teacher, Political Science and International Relations, Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad; a freelance writer in Ottawa.
1947: Partition & Colonialism
The conflict between India and Pakistan originated as a clash between Indian and Muslim nationalism during British colonial rule. The Indian National Congress led the Indian-nationalist struggle, while the principal Muslim-nationalist political organisation was the Muslim League. As the British government retreated from South Asia after WWII, it served notice on these two organizations to negotiate a constitutional framework for postcolonial India before its departure in 1947. But the bitter tensions created by the colonial legacy of divide and rule made it impossible for the parties to meet this demand within the prescribed time. Consequently, the British government imposed its own plan and departed. According to this plan, devised by the last British Viceroy, Louis Mountbatten, areas whose populations were predominantly Muslim, were to join Pakistan, while Hindu-majority areas were to be part of India.
In the 565 princely states of South Asia, which were not governed directly by the British, the decision to join either India or Pakistan was left to their rulers. They were, of course, not required to act according to their people’s wishes. Jammu and Kashmir had a largely Muslim population but was ruled by a Hindu who decided to join India.
The boundary between India and Pakistan was drawn by a British lawyer Cyril Radcliffe. The incompetence and apathy with which the British colonial regime handled its departure had catastrophic consequences. Some three million people lost their lives and seventeen million were compelled to leave their homes.
1947: First Kashmir War
India intervened in Kashmir in 1947 on the pretext that as a regional great power, it had an interest in maintaining order in this strategically sensitive region near China and the Soviet Union. Pakistan had inherited a very small army that was almost completely reliant on British officers. The British Commander-in-Chief of Pakistan’s Army initially refused to send Pakistani troops to bolster the rebellions against Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir. As a result, Pakistan’s political leadership felt the urgent need to acquire military readiness.
The competition for control over Jammu and Kashmir led to the first war between India and Pakistan in 1947. The continuation of the conflict and tension between the two countries led them to begin an arms race and helped consolidate the influence of their national security institutions.
Following this war, relations between the two countries remained calm and neither side sought to escalate the conflict. During this time, UN efforts to organise a plebiscite to determine the wishes of Kashmiris were unsuccessful, but neither country decided to intensify the conflict.
1960: Indus Water Treaty
In 1960, India and Pakistan concluded The Indus Water Treaty, which enabled them to peacefully share water from the Indus and its tributaries. As the Indus-basin irrigation system was central to survival of the ecology that sustains life in the northern region of South Asia, it was important for the two governments to arrive at an agreement.
The international community took an interest in the problem and made World Bank funds and technical know how available. The two countries set up a joint body to carry out the treaty and to handle disagreements. Even when India and Pakistan have been at war, they have meticulously observed their obligations under this treaty.
Although the construction of huge dams and the displacement of people, have had very destructive consequences, the fact is that the two governments did devise and run a system that maintained peace. This illustrates the ability of India and Pakistan to successfully resolve a serious problem.
1965: The Rann of Kutch
A dispute arose over disagreements regarding the border in the Rann of Kutch (a 20,000 sq. km. salt marsh). After serious skirmishes in 1965, India and Pakistan set up a special tribunal. The tribunal was strongly criticised in India, but the government carried out all its obligations. When, in accordance with the tribunal’s decision, a small piece of land was given to Pakistan, the leader of the Hindu-fundamentalist Jana Sangh Party, Atal Bihari Vajpayee (who is now India’s Prime Minister) tried to block the transfer, but did not succeed. The successful conclusion of the dispute demonstrates that when the two governments decide that co-operation is in their interest, they can overcome obstacles to achieve their common goals.
1965: Second Kashmir War
When Pakistan failed to get the Security Council to take new diplomatic initiatives to resolve the Kashmir dispute in 1964, it tried to compel India to make concessions by fomenting an uprising in Indian-administered Kashmir. India retaliated by attacking Kashmir and its army also crossed into Pakistan in the Punjab and Sindh. Pakistan prevented India from capturing any important towns, but as it had a small army and munitions, it would have faced difficulties if the war had continued.
As both the U.S. and the Soviet Union feared that China would enter the conflict on behalf of Pakistan, the UN Security Council called for an end to hostilities and the war stopped after seventeen days on September 22, 1965.
Pakistan’s government, led by President Ayub Khan accepted an offer for mediation made by the Soviet Union. Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and Khan met in Uzbekistan and concluded the Tash-kent Declaration on January 10, 1966.
This declaration became very unpopular in both countries. As both sides tried to convince people that they had achieved spectacular gains in the war, the accord was widely perceived as a bad bargain, and hard-line nationalists and religious zealots protested. In Pakistan, there was a division in the political establishment, as Foreign Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto soon left the government and criticised the declaration. The national security institutions in both India and Pakistan then became very conscious of the possible political costs of concessions to their adversaries.
1971: Another War
The second major conflict between India and Pakistan was also the result of state initiatives. In 1968, a mass movement against President Ayub Khan’s authoritarian rule had led to the re-imposition of direct military rule in Pakistan, with the military promising to hold elections for an assembly to frame a new constitution, and then convert into a parliament to govern the country. After the promised elections were held in 1970, and the Bengali-nationalist Awami League acquired an absolute majority in the assembly, the army changed its mind. Instead of handing over power to the Awami League, the army began a brutal military assault against it. The crisis quickly escalated into a major international conflict. India claimed that the presence of millions of Bengali refugees on its territory made it a party to the conflict. India attacked East Pakistan in December 1971 and the conflict spread to the Western borders as Pakistan launched limited air strikes and made a determined military push in Kashmir. The war ended on December 17, after the Pakistan army surrendered in East Pakistan. Bangladesh then emerged as an independent state.
|
__________________
I'm an agitator.
|
|
|
03-26-2008 08:40 |
|
|
LadyKona
hardcore lesbo
Posts: 706
Location: Vancouver
|
|
Are you kidding me?
Are you actually doing that?
Are you actually pointing that finger? Really?
Look. These conversations are supposed to be exactly that. they get heated and people take them personally. I've seen folks for the most part OWN their stuff.
Digger, you cross a line when you do what you've done.
Further more, you clearly have more reading to do. Which I encourage you to do. You come from silence to wield that?! How about introducing yourself to the conversation so that folks know who the hell is brandishing shit at them? Huh? How about exposing yourself the way so many people on all the different sides that have been?
You some from the shadows and DO EXACTLY what has been spoken of over and over: A drive by psychic bashing. this is the shit that people of colour talk about ALL THE TIME. You are a shining example of how those who are visible get mauled by those who are not.
You step the fuck up and expose yourself. Tell us who YOU are. What YOUR experiences are. Both Hellboy and Sammy have placed themselves in context before laying down their stuff. How about you?
Join the conversation. Don't walk in brandishing googled weapons!
A friend of mine used a phrase tis past weekend that I think is apt here:
EXHAUSTED HORROR
I feel FUCKING sick.
!K
__________________
[B]Lady Kona, Nubian Imp[/B]
Vancouver, BC, Canada
[URL=http://www.NubianImp.com]http://www.NubianImp.com[/URL]
My friends and I organize parties:
[URL=http://www.CanadianMayhem.com]http://www.CanadianMayhem.com[/URL]
|
|
|
03-26-2008 08:38 |
|
|
digger
Nudist
Posts: 4
Location: here
|
|
| quote: |
Originally posted by SammyTomato
| quote: |
Originally posted by Hellboy
First off.. Indian is not Native.The whole PC crap remember? East Indian is bad.. asian is bad.. so what the fuck do you call someone from there? Unless you know the specific country is pretty fuckin hard to pick one.
Anyway I was pointing how retarded this is all getting. As soon as someone gets wind in their sails they are no longer willing to take one small step at a time. They want to take EVERYTHING down at once. And in doing that they are alienating the people that might have otherwise listened. I know I'm done. All I see here is racism at its finest clothed in politically correct wording. |
Y'know, I could've kept my mouth shut (or fingers still) after seeing that. I've done it before. I grew up in Calgary, Alberta during the gulf war, and my last name is Hussain. I either got called a "Paki" everyday, twice a day at school, or was taunted about my family name. There were only so many things I could scream back before I just got used to it, I mean, it happened to me from age 7 to 9-years-old.
I am SO sorry that you have a hard time picking a name for me, SO sorry that you can't keep up with non-offensive terms to call me, SO sorry that whoever you asked about what my ethnicity is gave you the wrong information, please, PLEASE don't leave this conversation. I NEED you to listen. I WANT you to continue on in this very important subject.
Wait a minute, I don't care what YOU do, you can be as destructive and ignorant as YOU want to. But don't tell ME when or when I should not sit there and take it.
Sammy - Pakistani |
i've never posted here before. only been a reader but i signed up for this specifically because:
| quote: |
sammy said (from the things white people like): wow, if anyone thinks that name-calling and jokes are the reason we are oppressed then you have no idea whatsoever. The main reason Black people in the states rose up wasn't because they were constantly being referred to as 'n-words' (it perhaps played a small role), it's because of systemic discrimination, like having to sit in the back of the bus, or not having the right to vote, or not having equal protection under the law.
when people use that language now, it invokes anger because the person who says it most likely also believes that this form of systemic racial oppression should exist. so why does it sting you so for someone to poke fun at your whiteness? what sort of images does it invoke for you exactly????? maybe you should give me a clue, cause I have no idea.
i'm just going to come out and say it outright: Racism towards white people does not exist.
does that offend or hurt you in some way? awwww, there there, cheer up, everything will be ok Smile
i believe that subversive humour and subtext is completely important towards eliminating racism, because racism comes from white people, and unless someone wrenches their heads to face what we've been looking at for thousands of years, it ain't gonna happen. |
white people did not invent racism. i'm mixed heritage and i find it hard to believe anyone would say this in 2008. people of various races have been discriminating against one another for as long recorded history.
what if a white person said "aw, they only called you names when you were 7 and 8 and 9 years old. all kids are cruel. grow up and quit your snivelling?"
you're a queer racist imho. here's a history of where you decend from. pakistan.
"What is now Pakistan was in prehistoric times the Indus Valley civilization (c. 2500–1700 B.C.). A series of invaders—Aryans, Persians, Greeks, Arabs, Turks, and others—controlled the region for the next several thousand years. Islam, the principal religion, was introduced in 711. In 1526, the land became part of the Mogul Empire, which ruled most of the Indian subcontinent from the 16th to the mid-18th century. By 1857, the British became the dominant power in the region. With Hindus holding most of the economic, social, and political advantages, the Muslim minority's dissatisfaction grew, leading to the formation of the nationalist Muslim League in 1906 by Mohammed Ali Jinnah (1876–1949). The league supported Britain in the Second World War while the Hindu nationalist leaders, Nehru and Gandhi, refused. In return for the league's support of Britain, Jinnah expected British backing for Muslim autonomy. Britain agreed to the formation of Pakistan as a separate dominion within the Commonwealth in Aug. 1947, a bitter disappointment to India's dream of a unified subcontinent. Jinnah became governor-general. The partition of Pakistan and India along religious lines resulted in the largest migration in human history, with 17 million people fleeing across the borders in both directions to escape the accompanying sectarian violence.
Pakistan became a republic on March 23, 1956, with Maj. Gen. Iskander Mirza as the first president. Military rule prevailed for the next two decades. Tensions between East and West Pakistan existed from the outset. Separated by more than a thousand miles, the two regions shared few cultural and social traditions other than religion. To the growing resentment of East Pakistan, the West monopolized the country's political and economic power. In 1970, East Pakistan's Awami League, led by the Bengali leader Sheik Mujibur Rahman, secured a majority of the seats in the national assembly. President Yahya Khan postponed the opening of the national assembly to skirt East Pakistan's demand for greater autonomy, provoking civil war. The independent state of Bangladesh, or Bengali nation, was proclaimed on March 26, 1971. Indian troops entered the war in its last weeks, fighting on the side of the new state. Pakistan was defeated on Dec. 16, 1971, and President Yahya Khan stepped down. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto took over Pakistan and accepted Bangladesh as an independent entity. In 1976, formal relations between India and Pakistan resumed.
Pakistan's first elections under civilian rule took place in March 1977, and the overwhelming victory of Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP) was denounced as fraudulent. A rising tide of violent protest and political deadlock led to a military takeover on July 5 by Gen. Mohammed Zia ul-Haq. Bhutto was tried and convicted for the 1974 murder of a political opponent, and despite worldwide protests he was executed on April 4, 1979, touching off riots by his supporters. Zia declared himself president on Sept. 16, 1978, and ruled by martial law until Dec. 30, 1985, when a measure of representative government was restored. On Aug. 19, 1988, Zia was killed in a midair explosion of a Pakistani Air Force plane. Elections at the end of 1988 brought longtime Zia opponent Benazir Bhutto, daughter of Zulfikar Bhutto, into office as prime minister.
In the 1990s, Pakistan saw a shaky succession of governments—Benazir Bhutto was prime minister twice and deposed twice and Nawaz Sharif three times, until he was deposed in a coup on Oct. 12, 1999, by Gen. Pervez Musharraf. The Pakistani public, familiar with military rule for 25 of the nation's 52-year history, generally viewed the coup as a positive step and hoped it would bring a badly needed economic upswing.
To the surprise of much of the world, two new nuclear powers emerged in May 1998 when India, followed by Pakistan just weeks later, conducted nuclear tests. Fighting with India again broke out in the disputed territory of Kashmir in May 1999.
Close ties with Afghanistan's Taliban government thrust Pakistan into a difficult position following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Under U.S. pressure, Pakistan broke with its neighbor to become the United States' chief ally in the region. In return, President Bush ended sanctions (instituted after Pakistan's testing of nuclear weapons in 199
, rescheduled its debt, and helped to bolster the legitimacy of the rule of Pervez Musharraf, who appointed himself president in 2001.
On Dec. 13, 2001, suicide bombers attacked the Indian parliament, killing 14 people. Indian officials blamed the attack on Islamic militants supported by Pakistan. Both sides assembled hundreds of thousands of troops along their common border, bringing the two nuclear powers to the brink of war."
__________________
don't hate me because i'm beautiful; hate me because of alberto!
This post has been edited 2 time(s), it was last edited by digger: 03-25-2008 23:01.
|
|
|
03-25-2008 21:31 |
|
|
|
|
|
  |
Privacy policy
|
