Jump to content

10 Things NEVER to Say to a Black Coworker


lictor616

Recommended Posts

AH the marvellous strengths of diversity...

to help us navigate the minefield of challenges that seem to permeate diverse workforces... the frighteningly orwellian people at "diversityInc" have came up with a list of things which white swine like us are not permitted to say when dealing with our superiors (I mean blacks here of course)

these include:

1) You're so articulate

2) Is That Your Real Hair?

3) "You" people

4) Do you eat a lot of (plug in the offending stereotype here)

5) Why are you so angry?

6) Why are you acting white?

7) You don't sound Black over the phone.

8) I don't think of you as Black.

9) You graduated from where?

10) The N-word

http://diversityinc.com/content/1757/artic..._Black_Coworker

We know now that the new "Egalitarian Heaven" is realized on earth by the abolition of private property (which comrade Obama is actively in the process of carrying out) and the absolute subjection of all individuals to the complete tyranny of an omnipotent government, which nobly enforces brotherly love and perfectly abject equality, and magnanimously confers on its well-trained and helpless slaves the blessings of DIVERSITY.

We now exist in abject slavery to which we prepared to subject ourselves with the advent of third world immigration and Egalitarianism.

one can see the day now when displeasure to a black by daring to call him "articulate" will be punishable by 10 years of forced labor in a GULAG, and having ones property turned over to the offended victimized black.

Now that would be "PROGRESS" huh!

Edited by lictor616
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 258
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You don't get out much do you?

There is a list I have of 10 things I'd like to say to you. But I would not be allowed on this forum anymore.

I doubt that you'd be kicked... I,ve already been called a monster, hitler loving, goose stepping, less-worthy-then-rapist-drug-dealer, stupid, idiotic, and all manner of expletives ... with not so much a whiff of reprimand..

in fact, most of the replies I receive are ad hominems... and never actually address points I've made...

so go right ahead... it imposes on me not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not say any of these things to a black co-worker. Nor do I go about insulting co-workers who are white or of other backgrounds either. It's not "Orwellian", it's basic civility.

If one doesn't care about being civil to one's co-workers, he should at least consider the bottom line: conflict in the workplace is bad for business.

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that you'd be kicked... I,ve already been called a monster, hitler loving, goose stepping, less-worthy-then-rapist-drug-dealer, stupid, idiotic, and all manner of expletives ... with not so much a whiff of reprimand..

Nah, what I want to say, I would be kicked/banned and not allowed to return ever again. Some of us are pretty cruel, but that is nothing compared to what I'd like to say to you. Hell, not even BC deserves what I have in my mind :D

in fact, most of the replies I receive are ad hominems... and never actually address points I've made...

You keep changing points or modifying your original stance, to the point where you have nothing left to stand on. We have seen this so far in no less than 5 threats that you personally have started.

so go right ahead... it imposes on me not.

I bet you lost some sleep over this last night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not say any of these things to a black co-worker. Nor do I go about insulting co-workers who are white or of other backgrounds either. It's not "Orwellian", it's basic civility.

If one doesn't care about being civil to one's co-workers, he should at least consider the bottom line: conflict in the workplace is bad for business.

-k

still its nice to know that the government is so busily regimenting our interactions with other people, telling us how to act, what specific words to say and even go so far as doing us the service of punishing transgressions by suing, firing or imprisoning people don't follow the governmental guidelines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lictor,

still its nice to know that the government is so busily regimenting our interactions with other people, telling us how to act, what specific words to say and even go so far as doing us the service of punishing transgressions by suing, firing or imprisoning people don't follow the governmental guidelines.

This isn't true. You can say whatever you want, and you will get fired for it. You can't disseminate hate literature or broadcast it, but that's not the same thing.

You really love misrepresenting things, but what you don't seem to realize is that when you do so, you convince no one and do your cause a disadvantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lictor,

This isn't true. You can say whatever you want, and you will get fired for it. You can't disseminate hate literature or broadcast it, but that's not the same thing.

You really love misrepresenting things, but what you don't seem to realize is that when you do so, you convince no one and do your cause a disadvantage.

as if there wasn,t any double standard in what constitutes "hate speech"... a black person is absolutely permitted to say that she is proud to be black, invert the races an employee saying he's proud to be white.. and know what happens...

The Hypocrisy and Double Standards of Canada's Hate-Speech Cops

Mark Steyn recently wrote about how Canada's Human Rights Commission refused to take any action against a man with a Muslim-sounding name who advocated killing Canadians and, especially, Jews [h/t to Eva]:

.... if you're Salman Hossain and you want to expound on the benefits of killing Canadian troops and shooting Jews, party on:

'I hope the German brothers were gonna blow up US-German bases in their country. We should do that here in Canada as well. Kill as many western soldiers as well so that they think twice before entering foreign countries on behalf of their Jew masters,' he wrote...

In addition, he singles out Jews, writing: 'When do I get to shoot a few Jews down for attempting to blow up dozens of mosques in America right after 9-11 - why f---ing target the Americans when the Jews are better?'

Also: calling people "kemosabe" in the workplace can lead to serious law suits...

Is "KEMOSABE" Racist? ("[Canadian] Highest court asked to rule on old Lone Ranger term")

CBC News ^ | 12/22/04 | CBC News

Posted on Thu Dec 23 2004 12:03:24 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time) by dangus

Highest court asked to rule on old Lone Ranger term Last Updated Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:07:01 EST

HALIFAX - The Supreme Court of Canada is being asked to hear arguments on whether the word "kemosabe" is racist to native people.

The request comes from the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, which is dealing with a grievance dating back to 1999. ''We think it's time to … have some ground rules so people know what's permissible and what isn't.' – human rights lawyer

Dorothy Kateri Moore, a Mi'kmaq woman working at a sports store in Sydney, N.S., had complained that her boss, Trevor Miller, referred to her and other workers as "kemosabe" – the term used by the 1950s TV character Tonto, the Lone Ranger's sidekick, to describe the masked cowboy.

Moore said Miller told her the word meant "friend." But she claimed it was a racial slur and that its repeated use led to a poisoned work environment.

Last February, a human rights board of inquiry ruled Moore was not discriminated against because she hadn't shown she was offended by the word, nor did she ask her boss to stop using it.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal upheld that ruling in October, saying Moore had not shown the term was "notoriously offensive."

For the first time in its 37-year history, the commission has asked the Supreme Court of Canada to appeal a decision of the province's Court of Appeal.

Commission lawyers say they will argue employees were afraid to speak up to their employer and they want the Supreme Court to draw the line on what language is acceptable in the workplace.

http://www.steynonline.com/content/view/2216/128/

'Here’s what I suggest we do … just throw out the Jews (by religion or blood) out of the instruments of mainstream media, finance/banking, government/politics, and the intelligence/secret services.'

'That’s how the Muslims have done it in the past, especially when they were in power and glorious. Leave behind the token Jew here and there just to appear non-discriminatory.

'Then send the Jews packing on a different ship to their own territory or maybe the South Pole to live with the penguins. Do this before they claim we gonna do another ‘holocaust.’ There’s no Jew better than an exile Jew.'

Feel free to quote Mr Hossain all you want. Unusually for Queen Jennifer's realm, these sentiments are entirely legal:

'The OPP reviewed the case with Crown counsel. As a result of that review, it was determined that insufficient grounds existed to support willful promotion of hatred charges,' said Detective-Sergeant Brent Young.

a white person expressing those views would have had a very different reaction:

again the words of Daniel Hannan ring true... :

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lictor

as if there wasn,t any double standard in what constitutes "hate speech"... a black person is absolutely permitted to say that she is proud to be black, invert the races an employee saying he's proud to be white.. and know what happens...

The Hypocrisy and Double Standards of Canada's Hate-Speech Cops

Mark Steyn recently wrote about how Canada's Human Rights Commission refused to take any action against a man with a Muslim-sounding name who advocated killing Canadians and, especially, Jews [h/t to Eva]:

.... if you're Salman Hossain and you want to expound on the benefits of killing Canadian troops and shooting Jews, party on:

'I hope the German brothers were gonna blow up US-German bases in their country. We should do that here in Canada as well. Kill as many western soldiers as well so that they think twice before entering foreign countries on behalf of their Jew masters,' he wrote...

In addition, he singles out Jews, writing: 'When do I get to shoot a few Jews down for attempting to blow up dozens of mosques in America right after 9-11 - why f---ing target the Americans when the Jews are better?'

Also: calling people "kemosabe" in the workplace can lead to serious law suits...

Is "KEMOSABE" Racist? ("[Canadian] Highest court asked to rule on old Lone Ranger term")

CBC News ^ | 12/22/04 | CBC News

Posted on Thu Dec 23 2004 12:03:24 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time) by dangus

Highest court asked to rule on old Lone Ranger term Last Updated Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:07:01 EST

HALIFAX - The Supreme Court of Canada is being asked to hear arguments on whether the word "kemosabe" is racist to native people.

The request comes from the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, which is dealing with a grievance dating back to 1999. ''We think it's time to … have some ground rules so people know what's permissible and what isn't.' – human rights lawyer

Dorothy Kateri Moore, a Mi'kmaq woman working at a sports store in Sydney, N.S., had complained that her boss, Trevor Miller, referred to her and other workers as "kemosabe" – the term used by the 1950s TV character Tonto, the Lone Ranger's sidekick, to describe the masked cowboy.

Moore said Miller told her the word meant "friend." But she claimed it was a racial slur and that its repeated use led to a poisoned work environment.

Last February, a human rights board of inquiry ruled Moore was not discriminated against because she hadn't shown she was offended by the word, nor did she ask her boss to stop using it.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal upheld that ruling in October, saying Moore had not shown the term was "notoriously offensive."

For the first time in its 37-year history, the commission has asked the Supreme Court of Canada to appeal a decision of the province's Court of Appeal.

Commission lawyers say they will argue employees were afraid to speak up to their employer and they want the Supreme Court to draw the line on what language is acceptable in the workplace.

http://www.steynonline.com/content/view/2216/128/

'Here’s what I suggest we do … just throw out the Jews (by religion or blood) out of the instruments of mainstream media, finance/banking, government/politics, and the intelligence/secret services.'

'That’s how the Muslims have done it in the past, especially when they were in power and glorious. Leave behind the token Jew here and there just to appear non-discriminatory.

'Then send the Jews packing on a different ship to their own territory or maybe the South Pole to live with the penguins. Do this before they claim we gonna do another ‘holocaust.’ There’s no Jew better than an exile Jew.'

Feel free to quote Mr Hossain all you want. Unusually for Queen Jennifer's realm, these sentiments are entirely legal:

'The OPP reviewed the case with Crown counsel. As a result of that review, it was determined that insufficient grounds existed to support willful promotion of hatred charges,' said Detective-Sergeant Brent Young.

a white person expressing those views would have had a very different reaction:

again the words of Daniel Hannan ring true... :

Needless to say, you didn't produce a single instance that supported your case.

1. You stated that a white person couldn't state they were proud of their race, then didn't produce an example.

2. You produced a nonsequitor case where somebody posted something about rooting for foreign armies online, then no counter-example. The case is useless unless you have an example of the opposite which was treated unfairly.

3. A case where somebody was called a purported racial slur at work, in a case that is still pending.

4. I didn't understand the final example. It was something close to what you've posted on here, in terms of anti-semitism. Are you arguing that you're a racist ?

As usual, there's nothing to go on here. Your pattern is to post some kind of hyperbole, then try to back it up with a series of unrelated anecdotes. It really gets tiresome after awhile, and I'm starting to resent the time I'm spending on your posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

still its nice to know that the government is so busily regimenting our interactions with other people, telling us how to act, what specific words to say and even go so far as doing us the service of punishing transgressions by suing, firing or imprisoning people don't follow the governmental guidelines.

The web page you cited to start this thread isn't a "government guideline". DiversityInc is, from what I have read, a privately owned business that funds its activities with support from corporate sponsors and by providing diversity training to private corporations.

I have not seen any government guidelines on how you may interact with people. However, most employers do have some sort of policy on this subject. Employers care about this stuff. If not because a significant portion of prospective employees and prospective customers are not white, then at least because they don't want to get their asses kicked in a "hostile work environment" lawsuit.

And don't be so quick to poo-poo the idea of a "hostile work environment" lawsuit. It might be your only recourse when the Swarthy Overlords have taken over!

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. You stated that a white person couldn't state they were proud of their race, then didn't produce an example.

Well, he's right about this one, of course. If someone says black pride or brown pride or gay pride or whatever, it's taken in a positive sense... "I am affirming my value!" But if someone says "white pride", immediately people react as if they're a neo-Nazi.

We had a hundreds-post long thread about that, didn't we?

2. You produced a nonsequitor case where somebody posted something about rooting for foreign armies online, then no counter-example. The case is useless unless you have an example of the opposite which was treated unfairly.

He mentioned Mark Steyn, who had to defend himself against the HRC for statements that compared to Hossain's are quite mild. Ezra Levant is another well known example.

4. I didn't understand the final example. It was something close to what you've posted on here, in terms of anti-semitism. Are you arguing that you're a racist ?

I think he is again saying that if a white person said the stuff Hossain wrote, they'd probably find themselves in deep trouble.

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he's right about this one, of course. If someone says black pride or brown pride or gay pride or whatever, it's taken in a positive sense... "I am affirming my value!" But if someone says "white pride", immediately people react as if they're a neo-Nazi.

There's a very real historical context to this. White Pride has been for well over a century a calling card of the racists. I'm sure, to some extent, that also applies to some of the more fanatical Black Pride types, who are also pretty racist, but it simply does not have the historical connotations of the term "white pride".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In full agreement with the OP, every citizen should have an undeniable constitutional right to be an a.. hole and/or an i..ot. Without them, life would be too plain, simple and uneventful.

Being an asshole is a right that I will defend to the end.. some times I wonder about the abortion issue - that a million people that should be here and some in positions of leadership...are not here - and lunitics that are poor in mind and spirit now run the world - I could swear that the population has gotten more politically correct and more stupid - we aborted the smart people - now look at this mess... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

k,

I think he is again saying that if a white person said the stuff Hossain wrote, they'd probably find themselves in deep trouble.

It's ok to second-guess Lictor, I suppose, in order to better articulate his arguments. God knows he needs it. But do we really want that kind of affirmative action on MLW ?

I'm left-of-center but I more closely identify as a poster who wants to read a supported and clearly articulated point of view, not an emotional outpouring. Case in point is the sorry example of the 9/11 conspiracy people who hopscotch all over the web blaming Bush for everything wrong with the world.

If the idea is that we want to supports posters like Lictor so that they stick around and improve their thinking, then I'm all for it. Even Jerry Seinfeld (the poster not the comedian) supported moderate Muslims recently which shows some openness. But seriously - what is the point of coddling a poster by restating his arguments for him, if he's only going to soil the place forever ?

I'd much rather see him leave if he's not going to improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,764
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    robretpeter42
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...