Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike D
I agree, trust me, I'd like to be a part of the conversation. The agenda so far has not be inclusion...afterall, how can we possibly be a part of the conversation when the plaintiff's have their fingers in our faces saying we did this? Anyway, the picture that Young Drachma posted, clearly articulated who was part of the conversation and who wasn't, which is why it should be construed as offensive material.
|
Yes. Not to beat a dead horse here too much with the bingo chart but I think it shows exactly why there often isn't a conversation about race. It contains 25 squares, some of the squares are obviously supposed to be outlandish and ridiculous and then some of the squares are legitimate arguments. It would be like making a chart about arguing with a liberal on the Iraq War and having a square that says "Hug trees, make love" another says "Bush sucks" and then some of them actually contain real points about why the war is bad "Innocent children dead", "Cost", "Creates new enemies", etc... So what you have done is two things...
1) Marginalized all possible discussion points (including ones that would lead to meaningful discussion)
2) Implied that someone who wants to say "Why are people rioting and destroying their own shops and going after cops and the "system" (who arrested Zimmerman and prosecuted him for second degree murder)?" is the same as someone who says "I have black friends so..."
I am sure the response will be that it was just a joke but the bingo chart is a perfect symbol for how discussions like this usually go.