Jump to content
LOTROCommunity
Doro

The Rage Corner

Recommended Posts

As far as the confederate battle flag controversy resulting from the racially motivated massacre of church goers I'll just say this.  A flag is a symbol and a message.  It is ultimately the responsibility of those who hold up that symbol to preserve it's message.   If over the course of decades or a century one allows others to modify or co-opt that message without lifting a finger or a voice to keep the message clear; one can't complain about protests of a symbol you allowed to be corrupted.  By inaction one grants tacit approval of the "modified" symbolism.   It's too late now to cry about "historical accuracy", that should have been done back when it would have done some good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the confederate battle flag controversy resulting from the racially motivated massacre of church goers I'll just say this.  A flag is a symbol and a message.  It is ultimately the responsibility of those who hold up that symbol to preserve it's message.   If over the course of decades or a century one allows others to modify or co-opt that message without lifting a finger or a voice to keep the message clear; one can't complain about protests of a symbol you allowed to be corrupted.  By inaction one grants tacit approval of the "modified" symbolism.   It's too late now to cry about "historical accuracy", that should have been done back when it would have done some good.

The Confederate flag was voted on to be removed from several states in the South back in 2001.  It's still there along with the states that have similar flags to the confederate flag.

They're actually going to follow due process, rather than listen to idiots in the media and pull it, like the retailers have.

It's something that has been flown in the South since the civil war, and if they want to keep on flying it, they should, as it's their flag, and helps highlight just how different the South is from the rest of the country.

That the media wants to portray all Southerners as racists doesn't help things either....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't like this political correct attacking of cultural symbols that, among many other valuable things, also have a reference to the past of slavery.

We have it in Holland as well, with the 'Zwarte Piet' (Black Pete) discussion. It's a folkloristic childrens fest, centered around an old catholic bishop and his band of black servants, who sail their steamboat to Holland every year in December to bring kids presents. The guy is called Sinterklaas and is basically the root of Santa Claus.

It's heritage, and it's meant as a fun thing for all Dutch children. Funny enough, the development of 'Zwarte Piet' over time reflects well how much has changed. Decades ago he was the boogie man underling, and kids actually feared him (1950's). Nowadays he is a hero on his own accord, much hipper and more fun than that old bearded fart.

But no. He is a parody and reminds us that black used to be slaves and therefore can make children think blacks are 'less' or the reminder is painful so he must go.

I'm now waiting for the religious rape victims to complain about Sinterklaas as well, he's as much a parody (old bearded fart in a dress?!?!) as Zwarte Piet and all those children that sit on his fucking lap... If I were ever raped by a priest, I don't think I could watch that without cringing. Certainly there will be mobilized some lobby group to end Sinterklaas this year.

Let the southerners keep their confederate flag. Let the Dutch keep their Sinterklaas. Rather than attack symbols, teach and educate and bring people of all races closer together so they appreciate their differences and embrace all the have in common. But that would be hard huh? That would also mean you're really going to strive to get that black guy treated equal when he's applying for a job. Way too hard. Nah. Screw them a little because they screwed our generations past unmeasurably hard indeed. We'll feel vindicated and victorious. And have accomplished the opposite: a further breach between people, rather than unite.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's only a controversy (or in this case, worthy of a "rage corner" thread) because of someone's fragile male ego.

​The injustice against fathers is real. Don't confuse this with male ego's or whatever. There is a reason there aren't as many fathers out there for whom a video such as this could be made.

The majority of fathers that raise their children on their own are widowers.

The majority of mothers that raise their children on their own are divorced/single.

And there is the reason you won't see fathers that raise their children on their own being praised on mother's day. That is one of the days in particular they remember their wife who passed away. A mother's day indeed.

 

Edited by Rainothon
spelling
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best part about this whole flag controversy is that while they're busy denouncing a historical flag as a symbol that they've applied to it themselves, they're happy to wave a flag that many countries see as oppressive, arrogant, violent and a symbol of death. The ol' stars and stripes is fine for them because they think it is, regardless of how the rest of the world sees it. But the confederate flag is abhorrent because they think it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best part about this whole flag controversy is that while they're busy denouncing a historical flag as a symbol that they've applied to it themselves, they're happy to wave a flag that many countries see as oppressive, arrogant, violent and a symbol of death. The ol' stars and stripes is fine for them because they think it is, regardless of how the rest of the world sees it. But the confederate flag is abhorrent because they think it is.

​yes yes america is the great big evil.  down with america.

/sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than attack symbols, teach and educate and bring people of all races closer together so they appreciate their differences and embrace all the have in common. But that would be hard huh? 

​obviously it is.  i think we have a few more generations of hate that has to die before we get there.

but by then, we'll have somebody else to hate.  welcome to the human race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​The injustice against fathers is real. Don't confuse this with male ego's or whatever. There is a reason there aren't as many fathers out there for whom a video such as this could be made.

The majority of fathers that raise their children on their own are widowers.

The majority of mothers that raise their children on their own are divorced/single.

And there is the reason you won't see fathers that raise their children on their own being praised on mother's day. That is one of the days in particular they remember their wife who passed away. A mother's day indeed.

 

​i never said that father's don't face injustice.

considering it was doro who posted the video and comment, my ego remark was right on the money as it applied to him only.

do you have data that says the majority of the fathers that raise their children on their own are widowers?

so the only way dad gets the kids is when mom dies??

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tumblr_mlf0dlgO541s2wqsvo1_400.gif

​and you obviously missed the point of why the confederate flag should have been retired to a museum ages ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​and you obviously missed the point of why the confederate flag should have been retired to a museum ages ago.

​Which has entirely nothing to do with the point I was making. Congratulations on continuing to be a retard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Which has entirely nothing to do with the point I was making. Congratulations on continuing to be a retard.

​that's because you don't have a point, obviously.

other than to prove you're lousy at trolling people.

let me know when you come up with an original thought.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​that's because you don't have a point, obviously.

other than to prove you're lousy at trolling people.

let me know when you come up with an original thought.

​Since you're so fucking stupid you're incapable for seeing an obvious point, let me walk you through it.

The meaning of a flag depends on the person viewing it. In this case, some see it as racist, some see it about heritage. The same with the US flag, where some see it as one thing, others see it as another. Get it, fucktard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Since you're so fucking stupid you're incapable for seeing an obvious point, let me walk you through it.

The meaning of a flag depends on the person viewing it. In this case, some see it as racist, some see it about heritage. The same with the US flag, where some see it as one thing, others see it as another. Get it, fucktard?

​still waiting on that original thought....no? ok, didn't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​still waiting on that original thought....no? ok, didn't think so.

​Are you really that dense that you can't understand something so simple? I think I gave you too much credit when I expected you to understand simple words. Let me try again. FLAG BAD FOR SOME. FLAG GOOD FOR OTHERS. PROBLEM MADE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​i never said that father's don't face injustice.

considering it was doro who posted the video and comment, my ego remark was right on the money as it applied to him only.

do you have data that says the majority of the fathers that raise their children on their own are widowers?

so the only way dad gets the kids is when mom dies??

 

Data? Well. I did look at some data just now, both US and NL, and it seems I was wrong. Yep: the most common way for a father nowadays to become a single father would be indeed to divorce. I didn't see that coming.

Still, what struck me was that 80% of single parents are mothers, and of the single dads 4% was widower and of the single moms only 1% was widow. So there are, relatively speaking, a lot more single father widowers than single mother widows. I still think you wouldn't see such a video made for single fathers on mother's day.

But it's not really empathic for both sides actually.

 

 

Edited by Rainothon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best part about this whole flag controversy is that while they're busy denouncing a historical flag as a symbol that they've applied to it themselves, they're happy to wave a flag that many countries see as oppressive, arrogant, violent and a symbol of death. The ol' stars and stripes is fine for them because they think it is, regardless of how the rest of the world sees it. But the confederate flag is abhorrent because they think it is.

 

​There is one slight difference outside embassies that flag doesn't fly in their capitals.  The core controversy is the flying of a flag on a states capital property that 35%(is this correct?) of it's population finds offensive.  Ultimately, whether a state flies it or not was/is/ and will be a result of what that states voting constituency ultimately decides.  As far as the big retailers ultimately market forces will decide.  The controversy would never have existed(at least to this degree and scale) if the "historical significance" crowd thought it's message and symbolism was worth defending in the 1st place.  Only now do they change their minds and oh but this is what it really means.  They were obviously fine not defending it's symbolism when groups were suborning it's message and meaning for decades to suite their own purposes.

 

Can't have it both ways

Edited by Bendin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best part about this whole flag controversy is that while they're busy denouncing a historical flag as a symbol that they've applied to it themselves, they're happy to wave a flag that many countries see as oppressive, arrogant, violent and a symbol of death. The ol'  stars and stripes is fine for them because they think it is, regardless of how the rest of the world sees it. But the confederate flag is abhorrent because they think it is.

​Stars and Stripes? You meant the Union Jack? Rule Britannia!

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't like this political correct attacking of cultural symbols that, among many other valuable things, also have a reference to the past of slavery.

We have it in Holland as well, with the 'Zwarte Piet' (Black Pete) discussion. It's a folkloristic childrens fest, centered around an old catholic bishop and his band of black servants, who sail their steamboat to Holland every year in December to bring kids presents. The guy is called Sinterklaas and is basically the root of Santa Claus.

It's heritage, and it's meant as a fun thing for all Dutch children. Funny enough, the development of 'Zwarte Piet' over time reflects well how much has changed. Decades ago he was the boogie man underling, and kids actually feared him (1950's). Nowadays he is a hero on his own accord, much hipper and more fun than that old bearded fart.

But no. He is a parody and reminds us that black used to be slaves and therefore can make children think blacks are 'less' or the reminder is painful so he must go.

I'm now waiting for the religious rape victims to complain about Sinterklaas as well, he's as much a parody (old bearded fart in a dress?!?!) as Zwarte Piet and all those children that sit on his fucking lap... If I were ever raped by a priest, I don't think I could watch that without cringing. Certainly there will be mobilized some lobby group to end Sinterklaas this year.

Let the southerners keep their confederate flag. Let the Dutch keep their Sinterklaas. Rather than attack symbols, teach and educate and bring people of all races closer together so they appreciate their differences and embrace all the have in common. But that would be hard huh? That would also mean you're really going to strive to get that black guy treated equal when he's applying for a job. Way too hard. Nah. Screw them a little because they screwed our generations past unmeasurably hard indeed. We'll feel vindicated and victorious. And have accomplished the opposite: a further breach between people, rather than unite.

​Grrr... I'm born Canadian but my ancestry is Dutch... grrr... Leave Sinterklass and Zwarte Piet alone... grrr...

I've heard this as well and it boils my balls. (my birthday is Dec. 6th as well = Dutch will understand that reference)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​​There is one slight difference outside embassies that flag doesn't fly in their capitals.  The core controversy is the flying of a flag on a states capital property that 35%(is this correct?) of it's population finds offensive.  Ultimately, whether a state flies it or not was/is/ and will be a result of what that states voting constituency ultimately decides.  As far as the big retailers ultimately market forces will decide.  The controversy would never have existed(at least to this degree and scale) if the "historical significance" crowd thought it's message and symbolism was worth defending in the 1st place.  Only now do they change their minds and oh but this is what it really means.  They were obviously fine not defending it's symbolism when groups were suborning it's message and meaning for decades to suite their own purposes.

​True, excluding when they're actually occupying a country. Flying a confederate flag on capital property does seem odd (so they have 3 flags, the US flag, their state's flag, and the confederate flag?). And if it does appear that a majority vote don't want them up, fair enough. But if we're just talking a minority opinion, then it's not happening (35% as in the black population? I thought it was only 15%?).

The problem currently is that one viewpoint is being held as valid and the other is not. Those who think it's racist seem to think only their opinion counts in the matter. If they shout loud enough, they'll get what they want. And because of this, this is the only time that the 'historical significance' crowd has needed to leap to its defence (obviously there's a difference between people using it wrongly and people wanting it removed).

There's a similar situation in my own country, where the English flag occasionally meets a ridiculous policy that it should be banned from being displayed, for fear of offending foreigners (or even nationals with foreign heritage). Technically, the English flag is outdated now (much like the county flags are), considering we have the Union flag. They're purely for ceremonial purposes. But until the majority vote and decide to remove them, they should fly freely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​True, excluding when they're actually occupying a country. Flying a confederate flag on capital property does seem odd (so they have 3 flags, the US flag, their state's flag, and the confederate flag?). And if it does appear that a majority vote don't want them up, fair enough. But if we're just talking a minority opinion, then it's not happening (35% as in the black population? I thought it was only 15%?).

The problem currently is that one viewpoint is being held as valid and the other is not. Those who think it's racist seem to think only their opinion counts in the matter. If they shout loud enough, they'll get what they want. And because of this, this is the only time that the 'historical significance' crowd has needed to leap to its defence (obviously there's a difference between people using it wrongly and people wanting it removed).

There's a similar situation in my own country, where the English flag occasionally meets a ridiculous policy that it should be banned from being displayed, for fear of offending foreigners (or even nationals with foreign heritage). Technically, the English flag is outdated now (much like the county flags are), considering we have the Union flag. They're purely for ceremonial purposes. But until the majority vote and decide to remove them, they should fly freely.

http://www.wyff4.com/news/house-votes-in-favor-to-begin-debate-on-confederate-flag-issue/33731474

"The fact of the matter is it causes pain to 35 percent of South Carolinians," Sen. Tom Davis said. 

but like any statistic I'm not sure which 35% he's referring too or in what manner or how it's broken down

I suspect a % will be against removal a % for, a % who are mildly for and % mildly against, a % who don't care or don't understand the question, and % who went surfing and missed the whole thing.

 

It just bugs me that when people are misusing the imagery of the flag many of these people are silent.  Nothing but crickets chirping.  Been like that for as long as I can remember.  But as soon it's threatened with removal BECAUSE of the very imagery they allowed to propagate via their silence; they come out of the woodwork citing historical relevance.  Rather selective honesty if you ask me

Edited by Bendin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It just bugs me that when people are misusing the imagery of the flag many of these people are silent.  But as soon it's threatened with removal BECAUSE of the very imagery they allowed to propagate via their silence; they come out of the woodwork citing historical relevance.  Rather selective honesty if you ask me

​I suppose it (ironically) depends on your view of it. From my position, misuse of a symbol is different to restricting a symbol. One is a freedom people should have (just as they should be free to mock, twist, and criticise any symbol/icon, be it political, religious, governmental, or corporate). The other is removing a freedom to display a symbol/icon.

Sure, if the majority do decide they don't want it on governmental buildings, then that's fair enough. I've got a feeling it wouldn't end just there, though, and may potential spill into affecting personal freedom of citizens. We'll see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​I suppose it (ironically) depends on your view of it. From my position, misuse of a symbol is different to restricting a symbol. One is a freedom people should have (just as they should be free to mock, twist, and criticise any symbol/icon, be it political, religious, governmental, or corporate). The other is removing a freedom to display a symbol/icon.

Sure, if the majority do decide they don't want it on governmental buildings, then that's fair enough. I've got a feeling it wouldn't end just there, though, and may potential spill into affecting personal freedom of citizens. We'll see what happens.

​If we're talking about a T Shirt or bumber sticker, private property or something like that sure.  But on state house grounds that represents government speech not free speech, and should be representative of all not some.

Edited by Bendin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×