What is woke and how does it impact you?

[Jeffros Furios]

Just now, Dawnrazor said:

You need to shave that wee mustache off.

The tache is for winter , makes me look like an even bigger deviant . Or bigger gammon 1

[Dawnrazor]

1 minute ago, Jeffros Furios said:

The tache is for winter , makes me look like an even bigger deviant . Or bigger gammon 1

Hairy Gammon.......I think I've met her.

[Unknown user]

10 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

I thought you weren't going to reply to me🤣

Youre correct, you haven't denied it, I've asked you a few times if you'd abuse a black or asian person down to the colour of their skin, you've not denied it and haven't even in this post, so, would you? For the fourth or fifth time I think.

 

So you were talking pish, cool. And you're talking pish again, I didn't say I wasn't going to reply to you.

 

When someone makes a statement, you have a habit of going straight to what you think they mean instead of what they actually said, and that's your problem, not mine.

Enjoy your evening!

[Watt-Zeefuik]

30 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

It depends if that albino was black, you do know how black albinos are treated in some cultures? I'd think calling a black albuno "Pinkie" could be racist yes.

I'll try and keep this simple for you,

if abusing a black, asian or mixed race person because all I see is the colour of their skin is or would be racist as you agreed, would abusing a white person due to nothing but the colour of their skin not also be racist, "white" is a recognised race as is black and asian.

 

You changed the question to suit you. Not what I asked. You've made race all about skin color, and now you're trying to weasel out of it because it doesn't hold water.

 

In only very rare circumstances can one be racist to white people, because racism isn't simply about two individual interaction. Racism as we know it is an entire system of beliefs, names, science, laws, and "just facts" constructed to favor white people. There are a few instances where white people might face an agglomerated power system constructed against us but they're vanishingly rare and thus not really worth arguing over.

 

30 minutes ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

Albino or burn victims aren't a recognised race, you've deliberately picked exceptions to the rule.

 

You are going a long way round to say you can't be racist to white people. 

 

I'm not the one who said race was only about skin color. If race is only about skin color, then abusing albino people or burn victims is racist. Only after I brought it up did "recognized races" (recognized by whom?) suddenly spring to life.

[Dawnrazor]

Just now, Smithee said:

 

So you were talking pish, cool. And you're talking pish again, I didn't say I wasn't going to reply to you.

 

When someone makes a statement, you have a habit of going straight to what you think they mean instead of what they actually said, and that's your problem, not mine.

Enjoy your evening!

I wasn't talking pish, you posted a joke about keeping me, the idiot or similar, in suspence and then just ignoring the further posts, you knew that and have made a bit of a tit of youself by answering.

It's fairly obvious what you meant, it's not my problem really. 

I see you see you've still not denied that you'd not abuse a bame person purley down to the colour of their skin, deary me!

 

 

[Dawnrazor]

3 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

You changed the question to suit you. Not what I asked. You've made race all about skin color, and now you're trying to weasel out of it because it doesn't hold water.

 

 

What part of the question did I change?

You were banging on about Albinos despite knowing that an Albino isn't a race, it's you that's trying to weasil out as your argument doesn't hold water.

I'll say it again, if the Albino was black then yes, calling them "Pinkie" could be racist, don't you?

I've not made racism about skin colour, millions of racists have done that, your inability to to see that being racist can be directed at white people speaks volumes about you, I'm sure, in a few years time when you've cought up you'll see the errors of your ways, you'll look back at your posts and realise that you sound like the "I'm not racist but...." and "it's just locker room banter" mob.

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

I wasn't talking pish, you posted a joke about keeping me, the idiot or similar, in suspence and then just ignoring the further posts, you knew that and have made a bit of a tit of youself by answering.

It's fairly obvious what you meant, it's not my problem really. 

I see you see you've still not denied that you'd not abuse a bame person purley down to the colour of their skin, deary me!

 

 

 

I didn't say that though, I took the dog out for a nice walk then came back.

 

Again, what you thought I meant and not what I actually said.

[Dawnrazor]

12 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 "recognized races" (recognized by whom?) 

The United States Census Bureau.

[Dawnrazor]

2 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

I didn't say that though, I took the dog out for a nice walk then came back.

 

Again, what you thought I meant and not what I actually said.

 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Just now, Dawnrazor said:

The United States Census Bureau.

 

Ah, good.

 

Did you know that the Census Bureau changes its definitions roughly every 10 years?

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/02/25/the-changing-categories-the-u-s-has-used-to-measure-race/

[Dawnrazor]

Just now, Led Tasso said:

 

Ah, good.

 

Did you know that the Census Bureau changes its definitions roughly every 10 years?

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/02/25/the-changing-categories-the-u-s-has-used-to-measure-race/

And?

[Watt-Zeefuik]

5 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

What part of the question did I change?

You were banging on about Albinos despite knowing that an Albino isn't a race, it's you that's trying to weasil out as your argument doesn't hold water.

I'll say it again, if the Albino was black then yes, calling them "Pinkie" could be racist, don't you?

I've not made racism about skin colour, millions of racists have done that, your inability to to see that being racist can be directed at white people speaks volumes about you, I'm sure, in a few years time when you've cought up you'll see the errors of your ways, you'll look back at your posts and realise that you sound like the "I'm not racist but...." and "it's just locker room banter" mob.

 

You constructed an entire argument about gammon being racist based entirely on it being about skin color, then went about accusing others who rightly called you out of saying it was okay to judge on skin color. I called shite. Now you're backpeddling and pulling in the Census Bureau and reactionary white grievance and saying I'm the one changing.

 

So let's go back to the start.

 

"Gammon" isn't racist because it's a joke about a fat old bloke who's gone red in the face from yelling invectives at minorities and gay people. Yes they tend to be white because it's largely white people who go red in the face from yelling at minorities and gay people.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

3 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

And?

 

You can't pull an appeal to authority as an escape from your collapsing argument about what is and isn't racist as if it's the final answer, when these same debates about what constitutes race changes what that very authority uses as its own definition.

[Dawnrazor]

Just now, Led Tasso said:

 

You constructed an entire argument about gammon being racist based entirely on it being about skin color, then went about accusing others who rightly called you out of saying it was okay to judge on skin color. I called shite. Now you're backpeddling and pulling in the Census Bureau and reactionary white grievance and saying I'm the one changing.

 

So let's go back to the start.

 

"Gammon" isn't racist because it's a joke about a fat old bloke who's gone red in the face from yelling invectives at minorities and gay people. Yes they tend to be white because it's largely white people who go red in the face from yelling at minorities and gay people.

You're seeing what isn't there as your argument continues to weaken.

"Gammo" is racist because it's abuse aimed at someone down to their skin colour, just as abusing bame person because of thier skin colour, saying "it's just a joke" is what people in the Scottish Cricket racism scandal were told.

[Dawnrazor]

3 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

You can't pull an appeal to authority as an escape from your collapsing argument about what is and isn't racist as if it's the final answer, when these same debates about what constitutes race changes what that very authority uses as its own definition.

Have they described "white" as a race?

[Watt-Zeefuik]

21 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

You're seeing what isn't there as your argument continues to weaken.

"Gammo" is racist because it's abuse aimed at someone down to their skin colour, just as abusing bame person because of thier skin colour, saying "it's just a joke" is what people in the Scottish Cricket racism scandal were told.

 

Okay, here we are again. Racism is abuse of someone because of their skin colour, right? Now tell me again why that doesn't apply to albino people or burn victims.

 

Because you said because albino people and burn victims aren't recognized by the authority you identified (that isn't actually an authority on race, hence https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority), abusing them isn't racist. Likewise, because the US Census doesn't identify "Gammon" as a race, abusing someone who's gammon can't be racist, right?

 

21 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Have they described "white" as a race?

 

White has always been identified as a race, despite it making no sense genetically. There wouldn't have been any point in inventing racism in the first place if you didn't have a category of who was supposed to benefit from it, now would there?

[Unknown user]

46 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

 

 

[Weakened Offender]

47 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

You're seeing what isn't there as your argument continues to weaken.

"Gammo" is racist because it's abuse aimed at someone down to their skin colour, just as abusing bame person because of thier skin colour, saying "it's just a joke" is what people in the Scottish Cricket racism scandal were told.

 

What an awful post. 

[Dawnrazor]

17 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

Okay, here we are again. Racism is abuse of someone because of their skin colour, right? Now tell me again why that doesn't apply to albino people or burn victims.

 

 

Okay, here we go again, An Albino isn't a race, thus has been pointed out to you a few times now so you can put that to bed as it's just your way of deflecting your poss poor reasoning.

If racism isn't about skin colour, what's the trigger for say a racially motivated attack?

A group of eight racist thugs looking to give someone a good kicking go into a club, how do they pick their victims?

[Dawnrazor]

Just now, Weakened Offender said:

 

What an awful post. 

Ta, considering it's you that said that a d your history of terrible posts I'll take that as a compliment as you're such a connoisseur.

[Dawnrazor]

24 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

Okay, here we are again. Racism is abuse of someone because of their skin colour, right? Now tell me again why that doesn't apply to albino people or burn victims.

 

Because you said because albino people and burn victims aren't recognized by the authority you identified (that isn't actually an authority on race, hence https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority), abusing them isn't racist. Likewise, because the US Census doesn't identify "Gammon" as a race, abusing someone who's gammon can't be racist, right?

 

 

 

Wrong, again.

"Gammon" is a derogatory term aimed at someone white because of their skin colour.

The US Cencus doesn't recognise "n@#@#@" or "P@#@#" but calling black or asian people these words is racial abuse is it not? What an utterly absurd argument. 

[Dawnrazor]

16 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

👍

[Gizmo]

5 hours ago, Ked said:

No.

Not seeing your point here .

I mean the point was obvious but I'll explain it anyway. White males cannot treat other white males in a racially prejudiced manner if we are all of the same one "white" race. 

Gammon is no more a racist term than redneck.  

I suspect the emotive response to the jibe and desperate, straw-man attempts to decry this as a racist label from some on here is more because they identify with the ideals and values held by these middle-aged, bloviating, ruddy-cheeked complexion, frothing at the mouth, war-mongering, conservative/Ukipper, right-wing arseholes and less about the word.  
 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

41 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Wrong, again.

"Gammon" is a derogatory term aimed at someone white because of their skin colour.

The US Cencus doesn't recognise "n@#@#@" or "P@#@#" but calling black or asian people these words is racial abuse is it not? What an utterly absurd argument. 

 

FFS.

 

Very few white people are gammons. It's a vanishingly small minority. It's like saying making fun of Hibs fans is racist because most Hibs fans are classed as white.

 

What a trainwreck of an argument.

[Taffin]

Not the debate I expected in here. Quite an interesting read 👍

 

The gammon stuff is a bit pointless though...surely nobody still uses it. It wasn't racist, and was funny and quite witty about 3 years ago. Now it's just not racist.

[Dawnrazor]

9 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

 

What a trainwreck of an argument.

It is!! But just humour me on the eight racists point I made, how would they decide?

[JudyJudyJudy]

12 minutes ago, Taffin said:

Not the debate I expected in here. Quite an interesting read 👍

 

The gammon stuff is a bit pointless though...surely nobody still uses it. It wasn't racist, and was funny and quite witty about 3 years ago. Now it's just not racist.

Exactly . Lumping a group together , who have similar gestures and then ascribing them with negative attributes  is racist I would say. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I once read that the victim got to define what was racist and what wasn't. Apparently not, according to this thread.

 

Anyway, getting bent out of shape over woke and gammon is for the pondlife on Twitter.

[indianajones]

Being woke must be exhausting. Seeking for offense at every opportunity even when a comment might not be directly aimed at you. 

 

All in the persuit of false moral gratification. Very strange behaviour. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

😂😂😂

 

 

https://www.gbnews.uk/news/york-dungeon-stands-firm-after-woke-idiots-call-for-dick-turpin-ride-to-be-renamed-richard-to-avoid-offence/350614?fbclid=IwAR0ku4P5UaidbH4OcC9N2w56O49Vuu24SaRzvShL_2ngcj5zaFBcxcRr2Eg&fs=e&s=cl

 

 

 

[Unknown user]

2 hours ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

I once read that the victim got to define what was racist and what wasn't. Apparently not, according to this thread.

 

Anyway, getting bent out of shape over woke and gammon is for the pondlife on Twitter.

 

That would be a mental state of affairs!

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Just now, Smithee said:

 

That would be a mental state of affairs!

To be fair, it was someone writing an article about some sociologist or something, probably in the same extreme field as all men are rapists. To me, that is the "academic" making a claim so that someone somewhere throws them some money for a study on something. Maybe I'm just too cynical in my middle age.

[Weakened Offender]

10 hours ago, Gizmo said:

I suspect the emotive response to the jibe and desperate, straw-man attempts to decry this as a racist label from some on here is more because they identify with the ideals and values held by these middle-aged, bloviating, ruddy-cheeked complexion, frothing at the mouth, war-mongering, conservative/Ukipper, right-wing arseholes and less about the word.  
 

 

The Kickback Gammonati won't be liking this 😁

[Weakened Offender]

11 hours ago, Dawnrazor said:

Ta, considering it's you that said that a d your history of terrible posts I'll take that as a compliment as you're such a connoisseur.

 

You've been slaughtered on this thread, mate. 😊

[A Boy Named Crow]

19 hours ago, Ked said:

Is it racist for a bame person to call a white person gammon?

If the white person demonstrates the behavioural characteristics of a 'gammon' then no it's not racist, if the white person doesn't have those personally flaws, and the bame person calls them a gammon on the basis of skin colour, then aye, it's racist.

 

I reckon most folk who get labelled 'gammon' it's their personality rather than their skin colour that's triggered it. Not sure why anyone is trying to push the racism line. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by A Boy Named Crow

[ZadokThePriest]

15 hours ago, Led Tasso said:

 

You constructed an entire argument about gammon being racist based entirely on it being about skin color, then went about accusing others who rightly called you out of saying it was okay to judge on skin color. I called shite. Now you're backpeddling and pulling in the Census Bureau and reactionary white grievance and saying I'm the one changing.

 

So let's go back to the start.

 

"Gammon" isn't racist because it's a joke about a fat old bloke who's gone red in the face from yelling invectives at minorities and gay people. Yes they tend to be white because it's largely white people who go red in the face from yelling at minorities and gay people.

 

I bet you'd have a different attitude if we started calling angry Blacks 'black pudding', going by the same logic.

[Dawnrazor]

4 hours ago, Weakened Offender said:

 

You've been slaughtered on this thread, mate. 😊

You wish, a bit rich considering the amount of times you get slaughtered on threads you'd know, you're the man that not being happy being destroyed under one name you even do it under two names🤣🤣🤣

Edited August 10, 2022 by Dawnrazor

[Unknown user]

58 minutes ago, jonesy said:

As a young lefty progressive with a swarthy complexion, I’m just trying to ensure there’s less, rather than more, prejudice in the world. Terms like gammon are divisive and say as much if not more about the user than the intended recipient.

 

Didn't know you were woke jonesy, that's very sweet of you!

[Konrad von Carstein]

On 09/08/2022 at 11:34, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

And the serial paedophile he chose not to prosecute. 

Unsurprisingly another post of ineptitude and wrongness from you.

It has widely been reported that he did no such thing.

And no I'll not be  providing a link.

Edited August 10, 2022 by Konrad von Carstein

[Seymour M Hersh]

3 minutes ago, Konrad von Carstein said:

Unsurprisingly another post of ineptitude and wrongness from you.

It has widely been reported.that he did no such thing.

And no I'll not be  providing a link.

 

So as the head of the CPS the buck didn't stop with him?

 

 

[XB52]

To answer the OP, not got a clue what is or isn't woke and it doesn't affect me in any way at all. 

P. S. I presume the poster claiming white people calling other white people gammon is racist is just having a laugh 

[Unknown user]

5 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

So as the head of the CPS the buck didn't stop with him?

 

As head of the government, the nick of the country is down to Boris and the Tories then, no?

[Konrad von Carstein]

6 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

So as the head of the CPS the buck didn't stop with him?

 

 

We have an MD in our company, do you think I run every initiative, audit plan or site visit by him?

I feck something up that's on me...the narrative around KS (who I have zero time for) and Savile is based on 20/20 vision after the fact.

You've obviously missed the fall out from when your hero the inept, hapless, serial philanderer and liar tried to divert attention from his own failings by trying to slur KS at PMQ's with this tosh...or you're ignoring it deliberately.

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, jonesy said:

I’m so woke that I don’t like woke people.

I'm so high they call me your Highness.

[Weakened Offender]

5 hours ago, Dawnrazor said:

You wish, a bit rich considering the amount of times you get slaughtered on threads you'd know, you're the man that not being happy being destroyed under one name you even do it under two names🤣🤣🤣

 

Oi! Don't be taking it oot on me, ya ***** 😡

[Watt-Zeefuik]

6 hours ago, ZadokThePriest said:

 

I bet you'd have a different attitude if we started calling angry Blacks 'black pudding', going by the same logic.

How on God’s green earth going by the same logic?

 

Some seriously tortured thinking going on here to try to manufacture white grievance.

[Dawnrazor]

Just now, Led Tasso said:

How on God’s green earth going by the same logic?

 

Some seriously tortured thinking going on here to try to manufacture white grievance.

I don't think anyone's trying to "manufacture white grievance" just pointing out the hypocrisy in you're ever weakening argument.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Just now, Dawnrazor said:

I don't think anyone's trying to "manufacture white grievance" just pointing out the hypocrisy in you're ever weakening argument.

My argument is unscathed at this point, just needs a rinse from all the shite y’all have been throwing around in here. 

[Dawnrazor]

Just now, Led Tasso said:

My argument is unscathed at this point, just needs a rinse from all the shite y’all have been throwing around in here. 

 "unscathed" ?

 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Just now, Dawnrazor said:

 "unscathed" ?

 

Yes, when you keep changing the subject and changing the parameters of the debate, that’s not an actual salient challenge, it’s just throwing shite.