Bari Weiss and the Left-Wing Infatuation With Taking Offense

by Guest Wed Feb 21, 2018 9:17 pm

The mob was unusually vociferous, even for Twitter. After the California-born ice skater Mirai Nagasu became the first American woman to land a triple axel at the Olympics, the New York Times writer Bari Weiss commented “Immigrants: They get the job done.”

What followed that innocuous tweet was one of the sillier, manufactured controversies I have ever seen on Twitter. Twitter’s socially conscious denizens probably only realized they should be outraged at Weiss after they saw other people being outraged, as is so often the case. Outside of Twitter, some of
Weiss’s Times colleagues were also offended by the tweet—and even hurt by it. Thecritics’ objection was that Nagasu isn’t herself an immigrant, but rather the child of immigrants, and so calling her one was an example of “perpetual othering.”

I, too, am the child of immigrants. And if I were an Olympic figure skater and people associated me with immigrants—or called me an immigrant outright—I wouldn’t think twice. I would take it as a compliment, particularly because immigrants are one of the main reasons America is great.

Perhaps Weiss should have acknowledged the hurt she caused and apologized—or at least tried to understand why her comments were perceived as insensitive, or worse. But the premise behind this suggestion is itself problematic: Just because hundreds of people found something offensive doesn’t mean that it was, in fact, offensive.

As an Arab and a Muslim, I get the questions “Where are you from?”—by which people usually mean “Where are you really from?”—and “Were you born here?” quite often. It doesn’t usually occur to me to get offended. Similarly, when I ask someone where they’re from originally, and they tell me Connecticut, I am tempted to roll my eyes, since I don’t necessarily care that they’re from Connecticut. It’s only recently, as I’ve engaged more deeply in debates around identity politics, that I’ve become more conscious that I am often the only Muslim in a room.

In our identitarian age, the bar for offense has been lowered considerably, which makes democratic debate more difficult—citizens are more likely to withhold their true opinions if they fear being labeled as bigoted or insensitive. (The irony, of course, is that I can be a critic of identity politics without being labeled racist in part because of identity politics.) In the longer term, the effects of identity-driven discussions become even more pernicious. As I recently argued, basing our positions on who we are rather than what we believe is polarizing precisely because identities are more fixed than ideas.

This is why identity politics can sometimes seem like a new sort of political theology. Belief and conviction are good things, but only if there’s something to believe in. Identity politics and the virtue-outbidding it necessitates often signal the absence of religion in search of religion—with followers mimicking its constituent elements: ritual, purity, atonement, and excommunication.

In purely practical terms, moral posturing doesn’t usually change anyone’s mind, because people intuitively interpret it “as a form of jockeying for in-group status.” But it doesn’t need to change minds, nor is it necessarily supposed to. Its point is to transform politics into a question of purity. It’s not enough to have the right opinion or intent: The precise words used to convey the right opinion become just as important, as Weiss herself quickly found out. Within this framework, acknowledging the legitimacy of different opinions—if the language used can conceivably be seen as insensitive to a disadvantaged group—becomes more than difficult, too; it becomes a moral failing.

The disagreement within the left about the role and relevance of identity has bled into the larger culture. It is a dangerous disagreement, and it needs to be fought. Identity politics, as the backlash to Weiss shows, is divisive; it is polarizing; and it distracts from more fundamental debates. The large part of the country that is left-of-center, if it has any interest in winning elections, cannot simply depend on anti-Trumpism. It needs new ideas, but that requires actually having them. In the place of ideas, there is whatever this is: small differences, indignation, and an infatuation with being offended.

https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/553550/?utm_source=twb&__twitter_impression=true

by Ben Reilly Wed Feb 21, 2018 9:50 pm

I don't think it's just a left-wing obsession when it comes to taking offense. You bash Trump in the wrong setting and you're going to trigger an awful lot of people.

by Guest Wed Feb 21, 2018 9:54 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:I don't think it's just a left-wing obsession when it comes to taking offense. You bash Trump in the wrong setting and you're going to trigger an awful lot of people.

I agree, its both sides of the political compass, but surely you agree, some PC radical leftists take it to an extreme level?

Creating more hate and harm, than seeking to create good.

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 21, 2018 10:25 pm

Didge wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:I don't think it's just a left-wing obsession when it comes to taking offense. You bash Trump in the wrong setting and you're going to trigger an awful lot of people.

I agree, its both sides of the political compass, but surely you agree, some PC radical leftists take it to an extreme level?

Creating more hate and harm, than seeking to create good.

no more so than Evangelicals or gun nuts.

both are probably more harmful to society too

by Guest Wed Feb 21, 2018 10:38 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

I agree, its both sides of the political compass, but surely you agree, some PC radical leftists take it to an extreme level?

Creating more hate and harm, than seeking to create good.

no more so than Evangelicals or gun nuts.

both are probably more harmful to society too

They are harmful to society, but and here is the but.

Western culture based around secularism. Is often a barrier to such evangelical extremism spreading to the point of mass harm today. Where as Islamism, has gone unabated in taking advantage of those most vulnerable, than even the Catholic Church ever did.

The reason why, they have 4 major concepts, that allow people to feel as righteous, instead of butchers. More than any religious belief.
1) A claim to the last prophecy. An open invitation to violence

2) Transgression. A view to fight eternal jihad, based on land they formerly conquered.

3) Jihad. A form, that is more often based violently and not peacefully.

4) Martyrdom. Manipulating naive people. Its better to expend your life needlessly murdering people. To them claim it as righteous.

Many people act courageously in war

Many act not on beliefs. They do this on instinct. To save others, by throwing themselves on a grenade.

Those doing so based on indoctrination, is because of brainwashing.

The first one is willing to give his life to save others and based on no belief other than wanting to help. Is as near as it gets to an unselfish belief. The moment you introduce religion doing this. It becomes a selfish act. You are then doing this for yourself.

That any former crime is absolved by one single barbaric act. That again wrongly, is seen as righteous in any religion.

Hence why Martyrdom and Jihad in Islam, are dangerous. As is Herem if Judaeo-christian beliefs

Just as the Catholic Church was, when he held sway over parishioners. When they could not read.

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:01 pm

umm Jihadists are RW extremists Neutral

SO my point is that ALL groups have whingy geranium Wink

whining about someone not respecting your gender preference is as valid than whining about someone disrespecting you Imaginary sky giant

by Guest Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:07 pm

veya_victaous wrote:umm Jihadists are RW extremists

SO my point is that ALL groups have whingy geranium

whining about someone not respecting your gender preference is as valid than whining about someone disrespecting you Imaginary sky giant

Jihadist are religious extremists

Its their reasoning that is based sometimes politically.

You agree it is a problem

As it is with Christian extremists and Jewish extremists.

So I agree on you point.

So why is it we see more Muslims react based on your last point?

by Cass Thu Feb 22, 2018 12:46 am

How about saying great job and good luck instead of trying to look edgy and stir the crap up?

by Maddog Thu Feb 22, 2018 1:54 am

I think the difference is many on the left are offended and do not want you to have the right to offend them. Those on the right that get offended tend to get pissed off, but generally accept that you have a right to offend them.

I don't see the rise in whiney little bitches to be an issue, unless those whiney little bitches are attempting to silence you, by using the power of the government to intimidate or threaten you.

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:15 am

Maddog wrote:I think the difference is many on the left are offended and do not want you to have the right to offend them. Those on the right that get offended tend to get pissed off, but generally accept that you have a right to offend them.

I don't see the rise in whiney little bitches to be an issue, unless those whiney little bitches are attempting to silence you, by using the power of the government to intimidate or threaten you.

LOL

Bari Weiss and the Left-Wing Infatuation With Taking Offense 3350646086

until they shoot you our Threaten to kill you or Make Bomb threats
seem that the LW want to protest and debate reasons while the RW tend toward violence and threats

by Maddog Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:17 am

Cass wrote:How about saying great job and good luck instead of trying to look edgy and stir the crap up?

Because edgy gets more clicks.

There is so much media out there chasing the same dollar, that the titles have to get peoples attention.

by 'Wolfie Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:50 am

Maddog wrote:I think the difference is many on the left are offended and do not want you to have the right to offend them. Those on the right that get offended tend to get pissed off, but generally accept that you have a right to offend them.

I don't see the rise in whiney little bitches to be an issue, unless those whiney little bitches are attempting to silence you, by using the power of the government to intimidate or threaten you.

Gun nuts are dominated by extreme RW and anti-government types..

Open carry and concealed carry nongs are usually quite conservative, i.e. strongly opposed to an ever-changing world..

Jihadist are right wingers..

IRA, PLO, KKK == all are ultra-conservative organisations, i.e. right wingers

The biggest whinging, whining groups of people you're ever likely to encouter will be conservative 'snowflakes' pining for their imagined "good old days" and opposed to some current event passing them by.

by Maddog Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:02 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
Maddog wrote:I think the difference is many on the left are offended and do not want you to have the right to offend them. Those on the right that get offended tend to get pissed off, but generally accept that you have a right to offend them.

I don't see the rise in whiney little bitches to be an issue, unless those whiney little bitches are attempting to silence you, by using the power of the government to intimidate or threaten you.

Gun nuts are dominated by extreme RW and anti-government types..

Open carry and concealed carry nongs are usually quite conservative, i.e. strongly opposed to an ever-changing world..

Jihadist are right wingers..

IRA, PLO, KKK == all are ultra-conservative organisations, i.e. right wingers

The biggest whinging, whining groups of people you're ever likely to encouter will be conservative 'snowflakes' pining for their imagined "good old days" and opposed to some current event passing them by.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. I support your right to give it. Cool

What the fuck in a nong?

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:17 am

nong

in Australian slang, nong is used as a pretty mild and/or endearing insult. a bit of a twit, or idiot. nothing too mean or horrid is meant by calling someone a nong.

hey mate, you put your trackie-daks on inside-out, ya silly nong!

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nong

by Maddog Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:59 am

veya_victaous wrote:
nong

in Australian slang, nong is used as a pretty mild and/or endearing insult. a bit of a twit, or idiot. nothing too mean or horrid is meant by calling someone a nong.

hey mate, you put your trackie-daks on inside-out, ya silly nong!

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nong

Oh, I'm a nong all the time.

I'm an open carry guy (supporter), and most concealed carry guys think open carry is for nongs. Cool

by Guest Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:52 am

Cass wrote:How about saying great job and good luck instead of trying to look edgy and stir the crap up?

How is a compliment edgy?

Who was offended here?

Leftist, non-immigrants?

The point is true here, and I am a son of immigrants, many of who have helped this country.

Many of whom have made America into the economic powerhouse that it is.

The problem is those offended here, as what really is there to be offended about what was said?

Its those PC taking something complimentary and taking offense, that is the problem here.

Again we see something that was not intended to insult and those offended being the problem here.

What we see at times, is even more worrying is when the intent is to offend, and we see violence erupt from this, we have those PC defend those committing violence. Everyone has a right to condemn poor things said, that are intended to insult, but there was no intention to even insult here. The offense was created by those on the left, when again they are not even immigrants.

Its up to people to be offended, but to actually compliment people and claim it offensive, shows these people have no idea what it means to actually be immigrants.

I do, being as I come from a family of immigrants

I think this best sums up what is wrong with some on the left

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:25 am

@didge
to be Fair, even though my dad migrated here, I Don't consider myself anything but Australian and would be offended if someone implied otherwise. Neutral

I think those 'rightfully' offended include any Integrated children of Migrants, here called 'first gen aussies'

And comments like that are 'a bit racist' even though the intent is well meaning. I know plenty of Asian decent Aussies that still get asked where they are from even though they are 2nd generation Aussies with Aussie accents. they are as Aussie as me (or more) and I don't get asked that, people don't imply I'm from France just because my Dad was. and it does seem to come down to Skin Colour.

while I largely agree with the OP, there is also the Flip side.
I or the Author are NOT immigrants, we Didn't have to go through the difficulties associate with Migration, particularly to a Nation where you don't speak the Language etc.
Do I or the Author have right to Claim the Trials and tribulations of the immigrant? when we never went through it directly. isn't it a bit like claiming to be a Veteran Solider when you where only a member of the armed services during peace time?

by Guest Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:32 am

veya_victaous wrote:@didge
to be Fair, even though my dad migrated here, I Don't consider myself anything but Australian and would be offended if someone implied otherwise.
I think those 'rightfully' offended include any Integrated children of Migrants, here called 'first gen aussies'

And comments like that are 'a bit racist' even though the intent is well meaning. I know plenty of Asian decent Aussies that still get asked where they are from even though they are 2nd generation Aussies with Aussie accents. they are as Aussie as me (or more) and I don't get asked that, people don't imply I'm from France just because my Dad was. and it does seem to come down to Skin Colour.

while I largely agree with the OP, there is also the Flip side.
I or the Author are NOT immigrants, we Didn't have to go through the difficulties associate with Migration, particularly to a Nation where you don't speak the Language etc.
Do I or the Author have right to Claim the Trials and tribulations of the immigrant? when we never went through it directly. isn't it a bit like claiming to be a Veteran Solider when you where only a member of the armed services during peace time?

Why would you be offended though?

I am British, English, but also very much ethnically Irish, Maltese, Sicilian.

Its like denying a part of you that you are.

Its up to you, if you do not have a connection to your ethnic roots, but that does not mean people should be offended by this, when in every way it was a compliment.

I often get asked, by those who are foreign, where I come from. Seriously, they also think I am foreign, as they think I have an Aussie or American accent, seriously. I even get asked this by Australians, South Africans and Americans, again seriously. I am not offended and actually find it funny.

There is the problem, its people who have little to no experience of what it is to be an immigrant trying to speak for others. I grew up experiencing racist first hand, during the height of the IRA bombings. My best friend, was Half Jamaican and half Irish, not accepted by either ethnic group. Thankfully times have changed much more for the better, where no such unions are accepted between mixed ethnic groups.

Where was anyone denied their right to be American here? When America as a nation has and still is built on immigration? Being American and Aussie, is just a concept and at the end of the day we are all born from immigrant ancestors. Nobody is even denying them that status to be American or Aussie here.

by Guest Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:40 am

Anyway am back off to bed for a couple of hours

Night Veya

by Maddog Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:01 am

Actually, not that it really matters, but in the US children of immigrants can be considered immigrants. The former Maddog Main Squeeze was born in Brooklyn NY of Albanian immigrants. Because her first language was Albanian as her parents were still learning English, she experienced the same thing as if she had been born in Albania and moved here at 5. She started school knowing virtually no English with immigrant parents that knew very little.

She calls herself an immigrant and doesn't care if you ask her about where she's from.

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:02 am

because I'm Not French confused

I am Australian of French Decent, but I've never even been to France, so how could I be French?

it's not that I'm 'offended' as much as it is inaccurate and if someone should know better because of previous interactions (or an Athletes Bio) and they were to still say it, it's disrespectful cause I'm not an Immigrant. I think the OP says Quite Accurately if the mistake was acknowledged originally (which could have been a simple as saying ' sorry, I meant the Child of Immigrants') then there isn't any reason to be offended since the mistake was corrected.

AND what do you think of the Flip side?
does a non-immigrant have the right to claim or accept the status of one?

at the end of the day we are all born from immigrant ancestors.

which is sort of the point... each Individual has their own birthplace, and if we start classifying Individuals by their ancestors it is a slippery slope particularly for Multiethnic people.
Dad may be French But Mum's Family descends from convicts of mixed British Ancestry. If I have kids with girl that's half Saudi and half Indian What are the Kids?
We can only really Classify people for who they are, cause where do you draw the line otherwise???

by Guest Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:04 am

veya_victaous wrote:because I'm Not French I am Australian of French Decent, but I've never even been to France, so how could I be French?

it's not that I'm 'offended' as much as it is inaccurate and if someone should know better because of previous interactions (or an Athletes Bio) and they were to still say it, it's disrespectful cause I'm not an Immigrant. I think the OP says Quite Accurately if the mistake was acknowledged originally (which could have been a simple as saying ' sorry, I meant the Child of Immigrants') then there isn't any reason to be offended since the mistake was corrected.

AND what do you think of the Flip side?
does a non-immigrant have the right to claim or accept the status of one?

at the end of the day we are all born from immigrant ancestors.
which is sort of the point... each Individual has their own birthplace, and if we start classifying Individuals by their ancestors it is a slippery slope particularly for Multiethnic people.
Dad may be French But Mum's Family descends from convicts of mixed British Ancestry. If I have kids with girl that's half Saudi and half Indian What are the Kids?
We can only really Classify people for who they are, cause where do you draw the line otherwise???

Its up to you if you do not view yourself as French.

Many other people will identify as their ethnic groups and you will have some just as offended if you do not refer to them this way.

It does not matter what you do, some people will be offended, when no offense is even meant. It means they are the ones creating the problem for themselves. Again we are talking about intent here, where again its not even intended to offend. The reality is many people do identify by their ethnicity. I mean are you really suggesting that indegenous people can not identify themselves by their indegeneous group?

So why should it be corrected when no offense was intened and again its not even offensive to many immigrants?

That is thus declaring that it is offensive, when its subjective to claim it is, when as seen many immigrants are clearly not offended or believe it is offensive. Its based on the opinion of people, where clearly the view is divided.

So if you want to identify as Aussie, no problem, but how can you then want to deny those who do want to identify as immigrants?

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:25 am

here everyone born here will say Aussie, but say for example Aussie Lebanese if they want to reference their heritage and I will say Aussie French if there is a discussion about race. If your Born here Your Aussie and you're not an Immigrant Because you didn't Migrate, you descend from where ever ( Suspect

Is this like Tommy Identifying as a Gold medal Olympian)

Remember here Everyone but the Aboriginals (that don't need to add the Aussie) is of Immigrant Decent, in my age group 8th or 9th Generation to get back to the first fleet. I'm 8th on Mum's side but like most Anglo Celtic Aussies there is a bunch of later migrants from later fleets and free settlers which come from all over Britain, in my family a lot came from Ireland and Wales, some English, no Scots but there is a few unknown fathers too so who knows. Bari Weiss and the Left-Wing Infatuation With Taking Offense 2190311264

Bari Weiss and the Left-Wing Infatuation With Taking Offense 2190311264

The fact a Bunch of convict decent Aussies (the Majority white group) have 'limited' knowledge about ancestors beyond a few generations (since there wasn't great record keeping for convicts plus 'frontier' life) probably also adds to the outlook that 'your a bit of wanker' if you say for example you're french Aussie but you have one relative 4 generations back.

by nicko Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:29 am

My Mom was Irish, my Dad was A Scot..........I like both Whiskeys !

by Guest Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:47 pm

veya_victaous wrote:here everyone born here will say Aussie, but say for example Aussie Lebanese if they want to reference their heritage and I will say Aussie French if there is a discussion about race. If your Born here Your Aussie and you're not an Immigrant Because you didn't Migrate, you descend from where ever ( Is this like Tommy Identifying as a Gold medal Olympian)

Remember here Everyone but the Aboriginals (that don't need to add the Aussie) is of Immigrant Decent, in my age group 8th or 9th Generation to get back to the first fleet. I'm 8th on Mum's side but like most Anglo Celtic Aussies there is a bunch of later migrants from later fleets and free settlers which come from all over Britain, in my family a lot came from Ireland and Wales, some English, no Scots but there is a few unknown fathers too so who knows.

The fact a Bunch of convict decent Aussies (the Majority white group) have 'limited' knowledge about ancestors beyond a few generations (since there wasn't great record keeping for convicts plus 'frontier' life) probably also adds to the outlook that 'your a bit of wanker' if you say for example you're french Aussie but you have one relative 4 generations back.

Everyone?

Are you sure about that?

Including all indegeneous?

Again Veya, you cannot claim to be or say what others think. That is so subjective its beyond belief, when you know full well there is some indegeneous that seek self determination.

You cannot dictate who people are based on your beliefs.

This though is about the perceived view on offense and its generally not coming from immigrants here, but people who hold political PC views.

That is the major difference here

Even the indegeneous, are of descendents that came here tens of thousands of years ago
Thus immigrants.

The point I am trying to make is based on offense and intent.

There was no intent to offend here, but actually praise and sadly its been taken by some to feel offended, why?

How can praise be an offense, when many countries including Australia, has become an open great nation based on immigration?

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:26 pm

did you read the 2nd paragraph? I clearly said the Aboriginals don't have to add Aussie

the Inescapable fact is "you're not an Immigrant Because if didn't Migrate", pretty Simple like Tommy can't be an Olympian if he hasn't been to the Olympics. You don't get to claim something your Ancestors did as a Personal Achievement, that is Just wrong and Racist.

And Intent was Fine but what they said was FALSE UNTURE INACCURATE so they should not have had a problem correcting it if it was an honest mistake.

And You are what we call 'a bit of a Wanker' Wink

by Guest Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:33 pm

veya_victaous wrote:did you read the 2nd paragraph? I clearly said the Aboriginals don't have to add Aussie

the Inescapable fact is "you're not an Immigrant Because if didn't Migrate", pretty Simple like Tommy can't be an Olympian if he hasn't been to the Olympics. You don't get to claim something your Ancestors did as a Personal Achievement, that is Just wrong and Racist.

And Intent was Fine but what they said was FALSE UNTURE INACCURATE so they should not have had a problem correcting it if it was an honest mistake.

And You are what we call 'a bit of a Wanker'

I did read that Veya, but again you are making claims, based on you knowing a miniscule amount of people.

So you are saying I cannot state, whether I am an immigrant, based on your subjective reasoning. Even though I have been certainly treated as such growing up and even been denied the right to class myself as English and British by some postyers? Again, by people stating what and how I can state myself

Can you not see the problem in that?

I am fine if you think I am a wanker

Was the intent to praise here or to offend or even be humour. I would take the later and not offended, but you see again, you fall foul of what you claim of others. Saying you can take the piss, but that when people praise, you claim offense for no offense you have recieved here.

You do not even understand racism, which is a view of superority over another racial group

Please explain to me, what racial group is an immigrant?

In other words, an immigrant is universal.

So how can it be racist?

What was said was based on opinion on the view that this person was better based on them being an immigrant or in this case the child of immigrants.

So if I was to say to you that certain Asian cultures instill a belief to work hard and do well at education.

Is that racist or actually true?

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:43 pm

Immigrant definition
a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/immigrant

No Racial Group is Immigrants by default, that doesn't even make Sense.
INDIVIDUALS are Immigrants if they Migrated to a new country.

Immigrant is NOT A RACE it has nothing to do with Race, it has to do with MOVING COUNTRIES.

by Guest Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:45 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Immigrant definition
a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/immigrant

No Racial Group is Immigrants by default, that doesn't even make Sense.
INDIVIDUALS are Immigrants if they Migrated to a new country.

Immigrant is NOT A RACE it has nothing to do with Race, it has to do with MOVING COUNTRIES.

Well done, so how can it be racist as you claimed?

Immigrants is not a race and yet you claimed it was racist

So claiming someone won because they were immigrants is not racist is it?

It would have to be based on social factors?

Or in reality indivdual skill?

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:54 pm

No, I said it was INCORRECT to say an Immigrant won when the Winner is not an Immigrant.

I said the mentality behind comments like it are 'a Bit Racist' because a White Skinned child of migrants doesn't get the same comments made to/about them. So when Something Only occurs to people because of their Skin Colour that is The literal definition of Racism Wink

by Maddog Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:56 pm

Children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants. They are considered immigrants because they often face the same issues as first generation immigrants, and are less like native born children of native born parents.

by Guest Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:59 pm

veya_victaous wrote:No, I said it was INCORRECT to say an Immigrant won when the Winner is not an Immigrant.

I said the mentality behind comments like it are 'a Bit Racist' because a White Skinned child of migrants doesn't get the same comments made to/about them. So when Something Only occurs to people because of their Skin Colour that is The literal definition of Racism

Incorrect? So if she classed herself as an immigrant, you are now defining whether she can?

Come again

You just made it racist by defining as white.

Did anyone mention white skin, but you?

Its youy defining this racially

Again you do not understand racism

Jews are what is classed as white skinned and were persecuted for not being classed as white.

The same as the Irish in America before, when they were classes compared to people with black skin.

In other words, its always people that think racially, that creat a racial problem.

We ae all one human race.

That is universal.

So is immigrants universal

Its you and others creating a divide

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:22 am

Maddog wrote:Children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants. They are considered immigrants because they often face the same issues as first generation immigrants, and are less like native born children of native born parents.

THAT is the precisely the Racism that is being argued Against.
they are considered Immigrants By Racists that Exclude Individuals they perceive as 'different' from the group they themselves Identify as Even though BOTH have Equal Claim to that group.
and Falsely put them in a group which they are not (again by the dictionary Definition) to try and Validate their attempts to Exclude them.

This is BAD for the so highlighted in the Trump Campaign and the fear of 'Mexicans' rubbish that was really pushing for Discrimination of Latino Americans, Individuals Both born in the USA to US citizens are equally AMERICANS.

And they only face the same problem is societies that fail at integration a.k.a NOT what people are aiming for Wink

and it still doesn't Change the Fact they personally did not Migrate,
are you an Olympian because Your Parent was an Olympian?

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:28 am

Didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:No, I said it was INCORRECT to say an Immigrant won when the Winner is not an Immigrant.

I said the mentality behind comments like it are 'a Bit Racist' because a White Skinned child of migrants doesn't get the same comments made to/about them. So when Something Only occurs to people because of their Skin Colour that is The literal definition of Racism

Incorrect? So if she classed herself as an immigrant, you are now defining whether she can?

Come again

You just made it racist by defining as white.

Did anyone mention white skin, but you?

Its youy defining this racially

Again you do not understand racism

Jews are what is classed as white skinned and were persecuted for not being classed as white.

The same as the Irish in America before, when they were classes compared to people with black skin.

In other words, its always people that think racially, that creat a racial problem.

We ae all one human race.

That is universal.

So is immigrants universal

Its you and others creating a divide

First hand have seen, more time than I can Count, the Difference that I, a white child of a Migrant, receive compared to Asian and Indian Decent Individuals.

No Immigrant is NOT universal
Again DICTIONARY says

Immigrant definition
a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/immigrant

Notice IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WIOTH RACE

What is Racist is the Assumption that a Non-White is an Immigrant.

by Guest Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:28 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Maddog wrote:Children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants. They are considered immigrants because they often face the same issues as first generation immigrants, and are less like native born children of native born parents.

THAT is the precisely the Racism that is being argued Against.
they are considered Immigrants By Racists that Exclude Individuals they perceive as 'different' from the group they themselves Identify as Even though BOTH have Equal Claim to that group.
and Falsely put them in a group which they are not (again by the dictionary Definition) to try and Validate their attempts to Exclude them.

This is BAD for the so highlighted in the Trump Campaign and the fear of 'Mexicans' rubbish that was really pushing for Discrimination of Latino Americans, Individuals Both born in the USA to US citizens are equally AMERICANS.

And they only face the same problem is societies that fail at integration a.k.a NOT what people are aiming for
and it still doesn't Change the Fact they personally did not Migrate,
are you an Olympian because Your Parent was an Olympian?

But nobody was excluded here Veya

It was the child of immigrants that won

Hence why praise was met and why the point on immigration was made in a positive light

You are taking a positive light here and actually trying to create racism

Why?

If anything, immigrants should be shown and their children in a positive light and you are trying to argue this as a bad thing?

Again why?

I think the best way to combat Trump racism, would be to have someone of Latino descent win medals for the US, to shut up his clear bigotry, dont you?

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:32 am

Children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants.

to Clarify My point
What is a Second Generation migrant? they are A First Generation American

Which an individual Choose to Classify them as, speaks volumes about their racial outlook.

by Guest Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:37 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants.

to Clarify My point
What is a Second Generation migrant? they are A First Generation American

Which an individual Choose to Classify them as, speaks volumes about their racial outlook.

That does not matter

Does she class herself an immigrant?

Does that speak volumes about her racial looks, or your perceived racial views?

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:45 am

Didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Maddog wrote:Children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants. They are considered immigrants because they often face the same issues as first generation immigrants, and are less like native born children of native born parents.

THAT is the precisely the Racism that is being argued Against.
they are considered Immigrants By Racists that Exclude Individuals they perceive as 'different' from the group they themselves Identify as Even though BOTH have Equal Claim to that group.
and Falsely put them in a group which they are not (again by the dictionary Definition) to try and Validate their attempts to Exclude them.

This is BAD for the so highlighted in the Trump Campaign and the fear of 'Mexicans' rubbish that was really pushing for Discrimination of Latino Americans, Individuals Both born in the USA to US citizens are equally AMERICANS.

And they only face the same problem is societies that fail at integration a.k.a NOT what people are aiming for
and it still doesn't Change the Fact they personally did not Migrate,
are you an Olympian because Your Parent was an Olympian?

But nobody was excluded here Veya

It was the child of immigrants that won

Hence why praise was met and why the point on immigration was made in a positive light

You are taking a positive light here and actually trying to create racism

Why?

If anything, immigrants should be shown and their children in a positive light and you are trying to argue this as a bad thing?

Again why?

I think the best way to combat Trump racism, would be to have someone of Latino descent win medals for the US, to shut up his clear bigotry, dont you?

I'm Not saying it's Bad to highlight the positive impact Immigrants have on a nation, I'm Saying it's Bad to Classify someone inaccurately in a way that makes them Different from Yourself for no reason other than their racial descent, that is literally the definition racism.

Racism is often Not INTENDED to be negative but it doesn't mean it's not.

and Yes a Latino American winning Medals and showing an example of a Modern American would be wonderful Basketball

by Guest Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:47 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

But nobody was excluded here Veya

It was the child of immigrants that won

Hence why praise was met and why the point on immigration was made in a positive light

You are taking a positive light here and actually trying to create racism

Why?

If anything, immigrants should be shown and their children in a positive light and you are trying to argue this as a bad thing?

Again why?

I think the best way to combat Trump racism, would be to have someone of Latino descent win medals for the US, to shut up his clear bigotry, dont you?

I'm Not saying it's Bad to highlight the positive impact Immigrants have on a nation, I'm Saying it's Bad to Classify someone inaccurately in a way that makes them Different from Yourself for no reason other than their racial descent, that is literally the definition racism.

Racism is often Not INTENDED to be negative but it doesn't mean it's not.

and Yes a Latino American winning Medals and showing an example of a Modern American would be wonderful

But they are different

They just won a gold medal

Should that not be used to dispell rascism?

That immigrants are just like everyone else

No matter their skin colour, everyone is indidviduals

This more than anything should be used to dispell racism should it not?

Not an argument over political correctness?

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:51 am

Didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants.

to Clarify My point
What is a Second Generation migrant? they are A First Generation American

Which an individual Choose to Classify them as, speaks volumes about their racial outlook.

That does not matter

Does she class herself an immigrant?

Does that speak volumes about her racial looks, or your perceived racial views?

Yes, it does Speak Volumes of her Racial Outlook.

Probably feels Excluded, unintegrated, unwelcomed in the country she was born in.
Otherwise she could be Racist and feel the Descent Culture is Superior.
And of course a combination of the 2 if they suffered life in a Racial Ghetto Suspect

You can Class Yourself as an Olympian All you want, If you've never been to the Olympics you not one Wink

by Guest Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:53 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

That does not matter

Does she class herself an immigrant?

Does that speak volumes about her racial looks, or your perceived racial views?

Yes, it does Speak Volumes of her Racial Outlook.

Probably feels Excluded, unintegrated, unwelcomed in the country she was born in.
Otherwise she could be Racist and feel the Descent Culture is Superior.
And of course a combination of the 2 if they suffered life in a Racial Ghetto

You can Class Yourself as an Olympian All you want, If you've never been to the Olympics you not one

So again you are speaking for her and deining her based racially.

Not on what she thinks, but what you think

Do you not see how you are one of the problems here?

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:56 am

Didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

But nobody was excluded here Veya

It was the child of immigrants that won

Hence why praise was met and why the point on immigration was made in a positive light

You are taking a positive light here and actually trying to create racism

Why?

If anything, immigrants should be shown and their children in a positive light and you are trying to argue this as a bad thing?

Again why?

I think the best way to combat Trump racism, would be to have someone of Latino descent win medals for the US, to shut up his clear bigotry, dont you?

I'm Not saying it's Bad to highlight the positive impact Immigrants have on a nation, I'm Saying it's Bad to Classify someone inaccurately in a way that makes them Different from Yourself for no reason other than their racial descent, that is literally the definition racism.

Racism is often Not INTENDED to be negative but it doesn't mean it's not.

and Yes a Latino American winning Medals and showing an example of a Modern American would be wonderful

But they are different

They just won a gold medal

Should that not be used to dispell rascism?

That immigrants are just like everyone else

No matter their skin colour, everyone is indidviduals

This more than anything should be used to dispell racism should it not?

Not an argument over political correctness?

If everyone is an Individual then they should be classified by their OWN individual Attributes
Like where they were born or have citizenship, not the skin colour they inherited.

by Guest Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:00 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

But they are different

They just won a gold medal

Should that not be used to dispell rascism?

That immigrants are just like everyone else

No matter their skin colour, everyone is indidviduals

This more than anything should be used to dispell racism should it not?

Not an argument over political correctness?

If everyone is an Individual then they should be classified by their OWN individual Attributes
Like where they were born or have citizenship, not the skin colour they inherited.

I agree that they should, but what if they dont want to be classed that way?

What if they actually want to be defined as an immigrant to make a point against racism?

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:05 am

Didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

That does not matter

Does she class herself an immigrant?

Does that speak volumes about her racial looks, or your perceived racial views?

Yes, it does Speak Volumes of her Racial Outlook.

Probably feels Excluded, unintegrated, unwelcomed in the country she was born in.
Otherwise she could be Racist and feel the Descent Culture is Superior.
And of course a combination of the 2 if they suffered life in a Racial Ghetto

You can Class Yourself as an Olympian All you want, If you've never been to the Olympics you not one

So again you are speaking for her and deining her based racially.

Not on what she thinks, but what you think

Do you not see how you are one of the problems here?

it's not a statement of Race, it is a Statement of NATIONALITY, she is an American born in America.
Her Parents are Immigrants AGAIN if they said Child of Immigrants that would be Fine because it's true.

it is Racist to try and Define someones Nationality by Skin Colour Wink

by Guest Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:06 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

So again you are speaking for her and deining her based racially.

Not on what she thinks, but what you think

Do you not see how you are one of the problems here?

it's not a statement of Race, it is a Statement of NATIONALITY, she is an American born in America.
Her Parents are Immigrants AGAIN if they said Child of Immigrants that would be Fine because it's true.

it is Racist to try and Define someones Nationality by Skin Colour

So you are stating that based on her nationality, you can decide her ethnicity then?

Nobody denied her nationality based on skin co,lour here

Its only you inventing this here

by Maddog Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:14 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

So again you are speaking for her and deining her based racially.

Not on what she thinks, but what you think

Do you not see how you are one of the problems here?

it's not a statement of Race, it is a Statement of NATIONALITY, she is an American born in America.
Her Parents are Immigrants AGAIN if they said Child of Immigrants that would be Fine because it's true.

it is Racist to try and Define someones Nationality by Skin Colour

For about the third time on this thread let me explain this to you. The children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants, and therefore immigrants.

Not because of where they were born, but because many of them share the same life experiences as first generation immigrants, due to their parents immigrant status.

A five year old girl going to school in the US, not speaking any English has the same experience whether she was born here, or came here at 4 years of age.

by Guest Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:19 am

Maddog wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

it's not a statement of Race, it is a Statement of NATIONALITY, she is an American born in America.
Her Parents are Immigrants AGAIN if they said Child of Immigrants that would be Fine because it's true.

it is Racist to try and Define someones Nationality by Skin Colour

For about the third time on this thread let me explain this to you. The children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants, and therefore immigrants.

Not because of where they were born, but because many of them share the same life experiences as first generation immigrants, due to their parents immigrant status.

A five year old girl going to school in the US, not speaking any English has the same experience whether she was born here, or came here at 4 years of age.

100% true

+1

Night everyone

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:32 am

Maddog wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

So again you are speaking for her and deining her based racially.

Not on what she thinks, but what you think

Do you not see how you are one of the problems here?

it's not a statement of Race, it is a Statement of NATIONALITY, she is an American born in America.
Her Parents are Immigrants AGAIN if they said Child of Immigrants that would be Fine because it's true.

it is Racist to try and Define someones Nationality by Skin Colour

For about the third time on this thread let me explain this to you. The children of immigrants are called second generation immigrants, and therefore immigrants.

Not because of where they were born, but because many of them share the same life experiences as first generation immigrants, due to their parents immigrant status.

A five year old girl going to school in the US, not speaking any English has the same experience whether she was born here, or came here at 4 years of age.

AND HOW MANY TIMES TO I HAVE TO TELL YOU TO READ FUCKING DICTIONARY
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/immigrant
one that immigrates: such as. a : a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence. b : a plant or animal that becomes established in an area where it was previously unknown.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/immigrant
immigrant meaning, definition, what is immigrant: a person who has come to a different country in order to live there permanently
www.dictionary.com/browse/immigrant
Immigrant definition, a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/immigrant
Immigrant definition: An immigrant is a person who has come to live in a country from some other country...

A second generation Immigrant is an AMERICAN, they were born in AMERICA they DID NOT MIGRATE!!!
YES I understand that the USA is Very Racist and Racists in the USA say 2nd generation immigrant because they are racists that don't want to call them What they Are AMERICAN!!

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:36 am

Didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Didge wrote:

So again you are speaking for her and deining her based racially.

Not on what she thinks, but what you think

Do you not see how you are one of the problems here?

it's not a statement of Race, it is a Statement of NATIONALITY, she is an American born in America.
Her Parents are Immigrants AGAIN if they said Child of Immigrants that would be Fine because it's true.

it is Racist to try and Define someones Nationality by Skin Colour

So you are stating that based on her nationality, you can decide her ethnicity then?

Nobody denied her nationality based on skin co,lour here

Its only you inventing this here

YES you are denying HER NATIONAILTY
You are claiming she is an IMMIGRANT when she was Born in the Nation and is American by BIRTH not Migration.

When did I EVER MENTION ETHNICITY !!!!!
it is YOU that has INCORRECTLY Conflated Nationality with Ethnicity.
American or Australian is NOT an ethnicity it is a Nationality defined by CITIZENSHIP
NOT Race NOT Ethnicity NOT skin Colour

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:41 am

Didge and Maddog
have conclusively Shown WHY people are upset with this Announcer and Why it is Valid Because there is still a lot of People that DON'T understand the pretty fucking basic concepts of the Individuals Nationality and Ethnicity
And Not Saying Shit that is NOT TRUE about some one because of skin colour or Appearance. the Announcer wouldn't have said anything if it had been a White Girl even if she was actually an Immigrant.

by Sponsored content