Paula Deen fans vent their outrage at Food Network

[LionofJudah]

Who are... they?



The timing does seem a little suspect. Gonna be a tough case to prove, tho. Hope all goes well.

Who determines definitions of words? Seriously, this isn't that hard of a question to figure out, nor verify. Hell, look at an old dictionary.

 

[UserNameless]

Who determines definitions of words? Seriously, this isn't that hard of a question to figure out, nor verify. Hell, look at an old dictionary.

Have you looked?

 

[LionofJudah]

Have you looked?

I'm telling you this, aren't I? I'll give you another example. The word 'bytch' used to only mean a female dog-now look up bytch and see what comes up. Like I've stated, definitions are ADDED to words over time.

 

[JahBuhLun]

Who are... they?



The timing does seem a little suspect. Gonna be a tough case to prove, tho. Hope all goes well.

The manager that laid me off was disciplined because his lack of control over the department. So you can draw a conclusion, plus he cried in front of us when he informed us that she was being let go. I was the only person in my area with college degree in graphic design. They made me give a temp that didn't work for Hallmark my log in and password so that he could do the work that I was supposed to do.

 

[UserNameless]

I'm telling you this, aren't I? I'll give you another example. The word 'bytch' used to only mean a female dog-now look up bytch and see what comes up. Like I've stated, definitions are ADDED to words over time.

Still didn't answer the question, man.

But I just looked in a 1969 American Heritage Dictionary

Defintion: the notion that one's own ethnic stock is superior.

That's all it says.

Good job...now, let's look at this a little more.


According to your theory, adding to the definition was done so blacks could not be excluded as racists?

What makes you think that?

What in the old definition leads you to believe that this concept of racism couldn't include blacks?

It most certainly could.

 

[DrunkenNovice]

My grandmother was a slave as well, its called working for a living

How much more disconnected can you be.

 

[LionofJudah]

Still didn't answer the question, man.

Didn't answer what question?

But I just looked in a 1969 American Heritage Dictionary

Defintion: the notion that one's own ethnic stock is superior.

That's all it says.

This is a dictionary you had laying around, or you saw this online?

Good job...now, let's look at this a little more.

According to your theory, adding to the definition was done so blacks could not be excluded as racists?

What makes you think that?

What in the old definition leads you to believe that this concept of racism couldn't include blacks?

It most certainly could.

It's not my 'theory', it's according to the white man's definition of racism. If we're strictly talking about my personal view on the subject, Blacks still can't be racist because our views on race are formed due to the treatment we receive, not because we're inherently born hating other races, especially whites. Blacks are the most accepting people, hence you got c00ns in here trying to defend Paula Deen. Whether or not you choose to accept that is on you.

 

[UserNameless]

Didn't answer what question? This is a dictionary you had laying around, or you saw this online?

You didn't directly answer the question whether you looked the word up in an old dictionary.


But yeah... my old school dictionary has been passed down for years. Can't go online for stuff like that.

It's not my 'theory', it's according to the white man's definition of racism.

How so? I'm having trouble trying to follow your line of thought.

If we're strictly talking about my personal view on the subject, Blacks still can't be racist because our views on race are formed due to the treatment we receive, not because we're inherently born hating other races, especially whites. Blacks are the most accepting people, hence you got c00ns in here trying to defend Paula Deen. Whether or not you choose to accept that is on you.

Not really concerned with your personal view, albeit biased and bigoted in and of itself. But I appreciate you sharing that.

I'm just concerned about how you've concluded that "they" added to the definition to make blacks eligible to be racists...

To even begin to make that kind of assumption and attempt to defend it, you'd first have to see the year in which racism (2) was added...

The manager that laid me off was disciplined because his lack of control over the department. So you can draw a conclusion, plus he cried in front of us when he informed us that she was being let go. I was the only person in my area with college degree in graphic design. They made me give a temp that didn't work for Hallmark my log in and password so that he could do the work that I was supposed to do.

Ugh...It seems like you're gonna push it. That's about all you can do from a legal standpoint.

 

[FaTaL]

its not like shes getting fired

she just wont have her show renewed

 

[LionofJudah]

You didn't directly answer the question whether you looked the word up in an old dictionary.

But yeah... my old school dictionary has been passed down for years. Can't go online for stuff like that.

Yes, I've looked it up and this should have been obvious by what I've said to you.

How so? I'm having trouble trying to follow your line of thought.



Not really concerned with your personal view, albeit biased and bigoted in and of itself. But I appreciate you sharing that.

I'm just concerned about how you've concluded that "they" added to the definition to make blacks eligible to be racists...

To even begin to make that kind of assumption and attempt to defend it, you'd first have to see the year in which racism (2) was added...

If you're having trouble following my 'line of thought', then that's willful on your end. I could care less if you think my view is biased or bigoted, it is what it is. I don't shy away from people calling me 'racist', I laugh and keep it moving. Whites have done enough evil in society for me to hate them if I choose. What's hilarious is how you don't realize that if one definition essentially states that anyone can be racist, then why would another one be needed to indicate how 'power' would be included? It wouldn't be. It would just go under the other definition of racism. Again, the definition has been added to. Take it or leave it.

 

[JahBuhLun]

Ugh...It seems like you're gonna push it. That's about all you can do from a legal standpoint.

That's why I hired an attorney. Retaliation is hard to prove, because no one is going to come out and admit, "yeah I laid him off because I was upset that they fired a coworker of mine." the sambo remarks are not. One thing companies try hard to do is to avoid PR problems,they don't want it to be publicized that they try to sweep racism under the rug because it gives people who may not have spoken out about what they have been through, the courage to speak up.

Trust me, had they laid me off and I had not been called sambo, then I wouldn't have a claim because I would've been unable to prove it was because I'm Black. So we either mediate in private, or we go public with a court trial, where every incident of harassment and racial claims will be brought to light.

 

[UserNameless]

Yes, I've looked it up and this should have been obvious by what I've said to you.



If you're having trouble following my 'line of thought', then that's willful on your end. I could care less if you think my view is biased or bigoted, it is what it is. I don't shy away from people calling me 'racist', I laugh and keep it moving. Whites have done enough evil in society for me to hate them if I choose. What's hilarious is how you don't realize that if one definition essentially states that anyone can be racist, then why would another one be needed to indicate how 'power' would be included? It wouldn't be. It would just go under the other definition of racism. Again, the definition has been added to. Take it or leave it.

Thanks for directly saying that you've looked it up.

So if anyone could be eligible to be a racist under the old definition, then blacks would have to necessarily be eligible.

But you assert that "they" added to the definition of racism to now make blacks eligible to be labeled as such.

Doesn't make sense.

And I've never disputed that definitions aren't expanded as years pass.

 

[UserNameless]

...or we go public with a court trial, where every incident of harassment and racial claims will be brought to light.

Yeah...If anything, a civil suit would get all of your grievances on record, which is available to be viewed publicly.

 

[LionofJudah]

Thanks for directly saying that you've looked it up.

So if anyone could be eligible to be a racist under the old definition, then blacks would have to necessarily be eligible.

But you assert that "they" added to the definition of racism to now make blacks eligible to be labeled as such.

Doesn't make sense.

And I've never disputed that definitions aren't expanded as years pass.

I don't think you're listening...I've seen dictionaries that claim power is necessary for racism, and I've seen dictionaries that state it is a belief of superiority to other races. I didn't say Blacks could be eligible under the old definition, you did. Again, I've already mentioned that dictionaries are added to and/or changed and taken away from over the years. If the definition of racism suddenly disappeared from all dictionaries worldwide, does racism itself disappear? Use your brain and stop trying to save the white man.

 

[UserNameless]

I didn't say Blacks could be eligible under the old definition, you did. Again, I've already mentioned that dictionaries are added to and/or changed and taken away from over the years. If the definition of racism suddenly disappeared from all dictionaries worldwide, does racism itself disappear? Use your brain and stop trying to save the white man.

In your initial post...your initial premise was

They added to it so they could claim so called minorities (especially Blacks) could be racist.

Thank you said:

you don't realize that if one definition essentially states that anyone can be racist,then why would another one be needed to indicate how 'power' would be included? It wouldn't be. It would just go under the other definition of racism.

But you you still haven't proven your initial premise. It's all conjecture and baseless assumptions.

This is all over the place. It's been real, tho. I'm done.