Racist black activist Angela Davis discovers her descendants were on the Mayflower and actually own SLAVES

[Nationalist]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

Who (besides you) says she was not? When you hold slaves, NOTHING is "consensual." 

Says a lot (bad about you) that you believe ^this tragedy is funny.

Did I say there was consensual sex? No. I said it could have been. Quit being such a powder puff.

It is ironically funny. But you Libbies hate comedy. I mean...you think Stephen Colbert is funny I bet.

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Deluge said:

Agreed, and all the more reason to jump Davis' shit for not channeling her concerns on her own family tree. 

What does "channeling her concerns" mean? It was most likely a total surprise to her at the time and MAYBE she was unable to immediately process all the implications.

[robosmith]

Just now, Nationalist said:

Did I say there was consensual sex? No. I said it could have been. Quit being such a powder puff.

And I'm saying NOTHING is "consensual" when you hold slaves. Do you not understand the meaning of that?

Just now, Nationalist said:

It is ironically funny. But you Libbies hate comedy. I mean...you think Stephen Colbert is funny I bet.

Tragedies (like rape and slavery) ARE NEVER FUNNY.

[Nationalist]

8 minutes ago, robosmith said:

And I'm saying NOTHING is "consensual" when you hold slaves. Do you not understand the meaning of that?

Tragedies (like rape and slavery) ARE NEVER FUNNY.

So you're trying to say real love affairs could never happen in a master/slave situation? Well that's just...ignorant.

Really...stop being such a poofter. 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

So you're trying to say real love affairs could never happen in a master/slave situation? Well that's just...ignorant.

Really...stop being such a poofter. 

I'm saying what I said. A master/slave relationship is  NEVER consensual.

[Nationalist]

Just now, robosmith said:

I'm saying what I said. A master/slave relationship is  NEVER consensual.

Well ain't that both presumptuous an racist all at the same time.

[reason10]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

You are such an arrogant PRlCK when YOU BELIEVE you have "won" an argument. 

Because  you're LYING ALL THE TIME when you say that.

I don't have to lie. I'm right and you're wrong. It's not a matter of believing anything.

You have yet to post ANYTHING remotely intelligent. You have yet to find a reliable, factual source. All you've done is have temper tantrums every time the facts go counter to your goose stepping feelings.

[reason10]

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Well ain't that both presumptuous an racist all at the same time.

If it is racist to suggest that a master/slave relationship is never consensual, I wonder why your Democrat ancestors outfitted the  slave ships with leg irons to chain the slaves to the lower decks and march them out to the slave auctions in chains. Why didn't those slaves CONSENT to be shipped across the pond?

(If you're thinking slaves were brought here on Carnival Cruise Lines with staterooms, you're hitting the meth too much.)

Concepts of consensual relationships between the slave owner and the slave are ridiculous. Female slaves were no more given a choice in the matter than female hogs who were bred to produce more stock. Your Democrat Party slave owners referred to blacks as property, same as a mule, a horse, or a plow.

Roe V. Wade came from the Dred Scott decision, (where the slave Dred Scott was returned to his DEMOCRAT owner because the Supreme Court had ruled that a black slave is the PROPERTY of the white slave owner, as well as the recently freed BLACK slave owner, and there were plenty of those.)

[Michael Hardner]

This is a new low... The troll army believes that a Black activist should be embarrassed about an ancestor (known to them as a descendant) was raped by a white man.

 

Please, some of you put just one of them on ignore and make my day...

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

start by preaching what you say. 

You answered first this thread. 
 . 

They're on ignore.  I can still see thread titles.

[Aristides]

5 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Well ain't that both presumptuous an racist all at the same time.

Consensual implies an agreement among equals. 

[Aristides]

On 2/25/2023 at 6:32 AM, Deluge said:

Why should he go away? I find it interesting that a black activist had slave owners in her family tree. Do you not see the irony? It's delicious.

How is it delicious that slave owners treated their slaves as sexual objects to be used at their whim.

[Hodad]

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

So you're trying to say real love affairs could never happen in a master/slave situation? Well that's just...ignorant.

Really...stop being such a poofter. 

Does your son know the nature of his sexuality is something you use as an insult in conversation with others? Boy, that can't feel good.

[Hodad]

5 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Well ain't that both presumptuous an racist all at the same time.

No, you need to change your thinking. The power asymmetry makes consent impossible in the same way that there cannot be consent between and adult and a minor child. 

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Well ain't that both presumptuous an racist all at the same time.

No, it's a FACT. Do you know WHY relationships between bosses and subordinates are consider unethical? Esp when the boss is married.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, reason10 said:

I don't have to lie. I'm right and you're wrong. It's not a matter of believing anything.

You have yet to post ANYTHING remotely intelligent. You have yet to find a reliable, factual source. All you've done is have temper tantrums every time the facts go counter to your goose stepping feelings.

Just cause you don't understand what I'm telling you does not mean my posts are unintelligent.

It just means you're a dim witted FOOL whose ONLY contribution here is calling posters childish names. ?

[Nationalist]

7 hours ago, Aristides said:

Consensual implies an agreement among equals. 

Ya...nice try...

[Nationalist]

7 hours ago, Hodad said:

Does your son know the nature of his sexuality is something you use as an insult in conversation with others? Boy, that can't feel good.

Lol...nothing intelligent to offer then...eh?

[Nationalist]

7 hours ago, Hodad said:

No, you need to change your thinking. The power asymmetry makes consent impossible in the same way that there cannot be consent between and adult and a minor child. 

Well there's a stretch of reality. 

[Nationalist]

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

No, it's a FACT. Do you know WHY relationships between bosses and subordinates are consider unethical? Esp when the boss is married.

Because it would be breaking the bond of marriage. None of which means a sexual relationship between a slave woman and her master is impossible. 

[reason10]

8 hours ago, robosmith said:

Just cause you don't understand what I'm telling you does not mean my posts are unintelligent.

It just means you're a dim witted FOOL whose ONLY contribution here is calling posters childish names. ?

I understand that you write at a Florida third grade level, and that you've never actually done anything intelligent in your life.

It's not namecalling. It's definition of character. If you act like a Nazi, you're going to be called a Nazi.

[Hodad]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Lol...nothing intelligent to offer then...eh?

Nothing more. I just found it profoundly sad. I can't imagine what it would have felt like if my parents had used a fundamental part of my identity as a casual insult.

[Aristides]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Ya...nice try...

It isn't consensual if you don't have the power to refuse.

[Deluge]

19 hours ago, robosmith said:

What does "channeling her concerns" mean? It was most likely a total surprise to her at the time and MAYBE she was unable to immediately process all the implications.

A surprise at the time, I guess so, but what was her response? What is she doing now to rectify the past? 

Edited February 27, 2023 by Deluge

[Deluge]

12 hours ago, Aristides said:

How is it delicious that slave owners treated their slaves as sexual objects to be used at their whim.

Point out where I said that it's delicious that slave owners treated their slaves as sexual objects to be used at their whim.