NASCAR TWEETS SUPPORT FOR LGBTQ COMMUNITY

[impartialobserver]

While I do not think that InBev made all that big of a gaffe.. I do think that NASCAR did. Most drink Budweiser for its lack of flavor and lower price. This crosses the socioeconomic lines. I know liberals who drink Pabst and Bud regularly. As for NASCAR.. it is firmly rooted in white, conservative culture. While someone flying a flag means nothing to me.. I think NASCAR is going to feel some pain. 

Edited June 2, 2023 by impartialobserver

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 minute ago, Perspektiv said:

Can trans women have periods?

Periods of what?

Do you mean do they menstruate?

They do not.

So your claim that tampon commercials will only feature trans women is even more moronic, huh....

You just keep saying the stupidest shit.

It's almost as if it's all you know 

[Perspektiv]

2 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

You don't like these things, correct.

Couldn't care less.

2 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

So you're being victimized by a system you never signed on for.

Am not a victim. You can perceive me as such, but am far from it. 

[CrakHoBarbie]

2 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

While I do think that InBev made all that big of a gaffe.. I do think that NASCAR did. Most drink Budweiser for its lack of flavor and lower price. This crosses the socioeconomic lines. I know liberals who drink Pabst and Bud regularly. As for NASCAR.. it is firmly rooted in white, conservative culture. While someone flying a flag means nothing to me.. I think NASCAR is going to feel some pain. 

I applaud NASCAR for saying a big "F__k you" to the Jethro's.

We'll see what happens to their bottom line.

[CrakHoBarbie]

2 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Couldn't care less.

Am not a victim. You can perceive me as such, but am far from it. 

Your the one complaining about being "forced" to accept trans folk into society.

As long as you complain, you are projecting yourself as the victim.

 

[Perspektiv]

1 minute ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Do you mean do they menstruate?

Also known as periods. I don't ask my wife "period of what?!" when she is doubled over in pain responding to me asking whats wrong, as likely would get a phone book thrown at me. I will just trust her, and all women I have dated that "period" is an acceptable term.

4 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

They do not.

Okay, so what is incorrect about my statement? 

Would you use a biological woman to advertise beard grooming products for men? It would be ridiculous. Is that statement sexist?

5 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

So your claim

You mean my exaggerated statement, based on the premise of allowing anything to go, regarding activist desires regarding what can acceptably be marketed? 

1 minute ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Your the one complaining about being "forced" to accept trans folk into society

You're completely twisting my words.

[CrakHoBarbie]

Just now, Perspektiv said:

Also known as periods. I don't ask my wife "period of what?!" when she is doubled over in pain responding to me asking whats wrong, as likely would get a phone book thrown at me. I will just trust her, and all women I have dated that "period" is an acceptable term.

Okay, so what is incorrect about my statement? 

Would you use a biological woman to advertise beard grooming products for men? It would be ridiculous. Is that statement sexist?

You mean my exaggerated statement, based on the premise of allowing anything to go, regarding activist desires regarding what can acceptably be marketed? 

Ok. Now you are just repeatedly being dishonest in your posts.

So, I'm taking away the privilege of having me respond to your garbage.

Enjoy!!

[impartialobserver]

3 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

As long as you complain, you are projecting yourself as the victim

Welcome to the modern day. If anything that you do not like is on TV, commercials, or any other outward promotion.. you are supposedly being forced to accept it. I used to hear this from folks in Idaho regarding the Mormon Church. The bilboards, signs, numerous churches  apparently were indoctrination. And yet when I asked if they were being forced at gunpoint to go into that church.. they would fire back with "That's not the point". 

[Michael Hardner]

Is anyone else here disturbed that consumer choices are now a proxy for moral discussion in the public sphere ?

Is the arrival of compromise on social issues itself so detestable that it requires protest ?  

What about the private moral beliefs of corporate owners ?  Does it make any sense at all to boycott a national chain of stores because the owner is Christian ?  

Are such things signs that politics has failed ?  I feel like that could be the case.

[Perspektiv]

24 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

I'm taking away the privilege of having me respond to your garbage

Thank you.

[Michael Hardner]

NASCAR already banned the confederate flag at their events, and is trying to change their image.

If you don't like it, there are other entertainment options.  But, again, I would rather just have conversations about moral choices than get a new Pepsi can design with a requisite freedom symbol on it.

[impartialobserver]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

NASCAR already banned the confederate flag at their events, and is trying to change their image.

If you don't like it, there are other entertainment options.  But, again, I would rather just have conversations about moral choices than get a new Pepsi can design with a requisite freedom symbol on it.

As for myself.. I am a die hard sports fan. The outside noise (kneeling, confederate flags, etc. ) does not deter me in the least. I actually care about the game itself and the narratives (first time in a super bowl or whatever). 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Wow.... You have so little self realization.

You stated:

"If am silent, they take over and sooner or later, tampon commercials will feature trans women only."

That, my moronic transphobic friend, is a transphobic slur.

 

Ahhh - so he didn't actually call anyone anything.  He made a joke comment in the form of reducio ad absurdum and you're claiming it's a slur.

Sorry kiddo  - not a slur.  You just don't like it. That's not the same thing

1 hour ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Ok. Now you are just repeatedly being dishonest in your posts.

So, I'm taking away the privilege of having me respond to your garbage.

Enjoy!!

Typical of the left - "i don't like what you're saying and i can't refute it so i'll just stick my head in the sand!!! Neener neener!"

LOL !

[CrakHoBarbie]

3 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

Welcome to the modern day. If anything that you do not like is on TV, commercials, or any other outward promotion.. you are supposedly being forced to accept it. I used to hear this from folks in Idaho regarding the Mormon Church. The bilboards, signs, numerous churches  apparently were indoctrination. And yet when I asked if they were being forced at gunpoint to go into that church.. they would fire back with "That's not the point". 

It's frightening how uneducated and obstinately stupid so many of the posters here are.

They even get the most basic things wrong and then dig their moronic feet in, demanding their right.

It's like a plague of stupidity.

[BeaverFever]

9 hours ago, Nationalist said:

This is true as well Beave.

Coloured folk don't have a corner on under qualified or just plain not up to the task. But hiring under qualified folk just because of their skin colour does create a lot of havoc in the work place.

But how do you know they were hired for skin colour despite being unqualified?  We all onow lots of seemingly unqualified white people who were hired, why do we assume something else is going on if the unqualified person appears to be non-white?

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

It's frightening how uneducated and obstinately stupid so many of the posters here are.

Sure - but we love you anyway.  You may be obstinate and stupid, but you're always amusing

3 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

They even get the most basic things wrong and then dig their moronic feet in, demanding their right.

Yeah but that's part of your charm.

3 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

It's like a plague of stupidity.

We prefer to think of you as more of a rash than a plague.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

But how do you know they were hired for skin colour despite being unqualified?  We all onow lots of seemingly unqualified white people who were hired, why do we assume something else is going on if the unqualified person appears to be non-white?

Well we can't read minds...but we can quote corporate directives.

I've been through the ol' equity and inclusion lectures and even passed their tests a couple times now as a contractor. Know how? There's always a question like...

You are the hiring manager for a position that has 10 good applicants. Of them, 2 are stand-outs. Of them, 1 is black and 1 is white. The candidate that fits your requirements best is white. Question: Which of the 2 candidates is the correct choice?

The correct answer will not surprise you...the black candidate.

No 2 people have the same capabilities. No 2 hiring managers see the same thing in candidates. But when the major corporations are instructing hiring managers to score skin colour over capabilities...

Houston...we have a problem.

Edited June 3, 2023 by Nationalist

[Nationalist]

8 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

While I do not think that InBev made all that big of a gaffe.. I do think that NASCAR did. Most drink Budweiser for its lack of flavor and lower price. This crosses the socioeconomic lines. I know liberals who drink Pabst and Bud regularly. As for NASCAR.. it is firmly rooted in white, conservative culture. While someone flying a flag means nothing to me.. I think NASCAR is going to feel some pain. 

You're probably right. Meh...'Know your clientele'.

Hey wouldn't it be funny if someone painted all the garage door pull-ropes rainbow colors?

Sorry...jus' bein' quirky...

Edited June 3, 2023 by Nationalist

[BeaverFever]

37 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Well we can't read minds...but we can quote corporate directives.

I've been through the ol' equity and inclusion lectures and even passed their tests a couple times now as a contractor. Know how? There's always a question like...

You are the hiring manager for a position that has 10 good applicants. Of them, 2 are stand-outs. Of them, 1 is black and 1 is white. The candidate that fits your requirements best is white. Question: Which of the 2 candidates is the correct choice?

The correct answer will not surprise you...the black candidate.

No 2 people have the same capabilities. No 2 hiring managers see the same thing in candidates. But when the major corporations are instructing hiring managers to score skin colour over capabilities...

Houston...we have a problem.

Ok let’s assume your description is accurate  (I’ve had DEI  and it’s never said anything that explicit). NOTE that your example doesn’t suggest the black person is unqualified. In fact it says they are a standout so how do you get from there to “unqualified”?

 

The answer is in the second part of your post. No  2 hiring managers see rhat same thing and in the real world probably either standout applicant can meet the hiring manager’s requirements   At the end of the day the hiring manager doesn’t really know how good each final candidate be and is making an educated guess based on a number of factors including subjective and unconscious factors like physical appearance.  Even amongst white people, attractive candidates are vastly favoured to less attractive ones. I’ve known a lot of people who look great on paper and in interviews but can’t hold down a job because they can’t get along with people and that’s not something that will show up on a resume or job interview and relying on references is a weak safeguard. In fact so-called “high achievers” with fancy degrees and resumes are often notoriously difficult to work with  and can be very costly when their toxic personality causes other team members to quit or complain or become demotivated. Then when you finally terminate them they litigate excessively . 

[Rebound]

15 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Its effective. If I get angry, then am against gay rights. If am silent, they take over and sooner or later, tampon commercials will feature trans women only.

"See! Perspektiv is transphobic. Proof these victims need our help".

It allows them to pressure businesses to show they are "inclusive enough".

Whats this even mean?

I opted for my current work vs RCMP job I qualified for, because they had race quotas. 

Me being black, made me a better fit than a white cop who was more qualified based on testing.

To some minorities this is great, but to be a cop and know am not the best possible officer for the job, to me is disturbing.

On paper they are inclusive, due to the volume of women and minorities.

How is this not anything more than virtue signaling?

Kind of like Trudeau stating 50% of his cabinet is female.

Okay, good for you. Are they all qualified for the job? When did this stop mattering? 

“They take over?”

One trans person in a beer commercial?

”They let a black person on the Supreme Court! The blacks are taking over!” 
“They let a woman in the US Senate! They’re taking over!”

Pretty obvious you’re just a bigot.

Edited June 3, 2023 by Rebound

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

“They take over?”

One trans person in a beer commercial?

So your argument is that there has never ever been any gay or trans activism other than that one incident?

And here's the thing. Rather than actually address the concerns you have to make dishonest statements.

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, Rebound said:

“They take over?”

One trans person in a beer commercial?

”They let a black person on the Supreme Court! The blacks are taking over!” 
“They let a woman in the US Senate! They’re taking over!”

Pretty obvious you’re just a bigot.

It's actually the Dems that can't stand a black man in the SC:

Gotta hand it to ya though, y'all got Kamala Harris into the WH and you elected Maxine Waters 100 times ? 

Honest to God, if we took the warning labels off of everything the Dems could never get elected. 

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Ok let’s assume your description is accurate  (I’ve had DEI  and it’s never said anything that explicit). NOTE that your example doesn’t suggest the black person is unqualified. In fact it says they are a standout so how do you get from there to “unqualified”?

Can you point out the word "unqualified" below? Or a term/phrase/sentence that says in a roundabout way that the black person is unqualified?

Quote

You are the hiring manager for a position that has 10 good applicants. Of them, 2 are stand-outs. Of them, 1 is black and 1 is white. The candidate that fits your requirements best is white. Question: Which of the 2 candidates is the correct choice?

The correct answer will not surprise you...the black candidate.

No 2 people have the same capabilities. No 2 hiring managers see the same thing in candidates. But when the major corporations are instructing hiring managers to score skin colour over capabilities...

Houston...we have a problem.

The candidate that best fits your requirements... Get it?

There are a lot of things that make candidates "stand outs". If you ever run a business you'll meet people that you wish you could hire if they only had experience in the areas that you need them to have experience in, but if they don't have it, they don't have it, and you can waste a lot of time and energy training someone to do something that either they eventually suck at or maybe they'll just decide that this job's really not for them for whatever reason.

The nice thing about hiring people who are qualified is that they already have the exact type of experience that they need to fit in, and if they aren't up to snuff after gaining all that prior experience then you can tell instantly, not after 3 months of training. "Hire slowly, fire quickly." Like, really quickly. 

There are actually a million ways to suck at any job that's worth paying someone a decent sum of money for. You could fill a set of encyclopedias with them all. I honestly hate this topic now that I think about it. 

[Rebound]

17 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Also known as periods. I don't ask my wife "period of what?!" when she is doubled over in pain responding to me asking whats wrong, as likely would get a phone book thrown at me. I will just trust her, and all women I have dated that "period" is an acceptable term.

Okay, so what is incorrect about my statement? 

Would you use a biological woman to advertise beard grooming products for men? It would be ridiculous. Is that statement sexist?

You mean my exaggerated statement, based on the premise of allowing anything to go, regarding activist desires regarding what can acceptably be marketed? 

You're completely twisting my words.

You still use phone books?

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

So your argument is that there has never ever been any gay or trans activism other than that one incident?

And here's the thing. Rather than actually address the concerns you have to make dishonest statements.

What “concern”? You’re “concerned” that minorities are being treated equally, as if these people are human beings with the same rights as anyone else?

[Perspektiv]

24 minutes ago, Rebound said:

You still use phone books?

No, I use yellow pages online app.