CommentsComments 14801–14820 back, including replies. Only comments on poems

Dovina replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 2:09 PM
Standard College Dictionary, Harcourt, Brace and World: Race: "One of the major zoological subdivisions of mankind, regarded as having a common origin and exhibiting a relatively constant set of genetically determined physical traits. On the basis of the more commonly used criteria such as pigmentation, hair form, epicanthic folds, facial and bodily proportions, mankind has been divided into primary stocks or races, each of which is regarded as including a varying number of ethnic groups. According to some, the primary stocks are the Caucasoid, the Mongoloid, and the Negroid. A number of groups, such as the Polynesian, are of doubtful classification."
Dovina replying on I don't rhyme enough, eh? by Niphredil 1 Nov 2005, 1:26 PM
I don't see how it could be unflattering to me, but certainly I don't want to be unflattered. His escape might have been from the harsh reality of manhood, a condition he felt trapped in.
Dovina replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 1:22 PM
Webster's New World Dictionary: Race: "any of the different varieties or populations of human beings distinguished by a) physical traits such as hair, eyes, skin color, body shape, etc.: traditionally, the three primary divisions are Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid, although many subdivisions of these are also called races b) blood types c) genetic code patterns d) all their inherited characteristics which are unique to their isolated breeding population."
ALChemy replying on I don't rhyme enough, eh? by Niphredil 1 Nov 2005, 1:10 PM
I think my roomate became a transvestite to escape the harsh reality he was brought into. To delve any further into it's meaning, I think would be unflattering to you and them.
Dovina replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 1:00 PM
You define "race" so nebulously that the word carries no meaning. Only by holding the traditional "physical charisteristics" test is the word any good. Ms. Dictionary says so. And If you wish, you may add the words "I think" a dozen or more times into the above comment.
ALChemy replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:56 PM
Did you ever? Sorry, You left yourself open on that one. Agreed. Most things are made more complicated by it. But most of mankind is lazy and stupid like that.
zodiac replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:53 PM
Who are you to say a "modern, contorted" definition isn't as good as a traditional one? (Suggestion: Mrs Dictionary!!!) My point (and -=Dark_Angel=-'s) from the beginning has been that defining races is useless. You're the only one caught with your pants down now.
Dovina replying on The Gospel According to Zodiac by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:51 PM
Yes, lol, that's good advice.
Dovina replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:50 PM
If you wish to use one of the modern, contorted definitions of race, then of course you are right. These broad definitions, including almost any trait, physical or not, in defining races are useless, but politically acceptable. They basically say nothing.
ALChemy replying on The Gospel According to Zodiac by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:49 PM
If you're going to use sarcasm in literature please make it at least slightly noticable. No one can hear the accentuation in your voice that makes sarcasm so common in spoken language. PS. Try to pass that knowledge on to DA if it's at all possible.
zodiac replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:46 PM
"Modern man" is an arbitrary distinction. So is "mutt". I agree with the rest. I just don't agree with making things easier.
zodiac replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:45 PM
You're right. For all your insistence of dictionaries, you haven't actually defined race, dictionary definition or not. So let's get on the same page. This one: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=race Some highlights: "2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race." "The biological aspect of race is described today not in observable physical features but rather in such genetic characteristics as blood groups and metabolic processes, and the groupings indicated by these factors seldom coincide very neatly with those put forward by earlier physical anthropologists." CONCLUSIONS: You basically have no leg to stand on saying Cockney, Muslim, and Jew aren't races except a traditional definition long ago superseded. Other mainstream thinking until radical politics got mixed in it includes (1) the white race is superior other races, (2) other races are subhuman animals, especially Jews (cf. the Aryan movement). I suppose you'll want to defend those traditional definitions now, too?
ALChemy replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:39 PM
Take a deep breath. now count to ten. Ok. There is an African tribe who's genes are closer to the original genes of modern man than any other group of people on earth. The rest of us are just mutts. By the way. the more diverse you're genes are the more genetically superior you are. So the philosophy of race has no validity but is still present and will be for a great long time because it makes people easier to catagorize.
Dovina replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:38 PM
I never said there are only three races, even though a long time ago that was the definition. Read again; I said other divisions are acceptable, but only based on physical characteristics. And that was the mainstream thinking until radical politicals got mixed into it.
zodiac replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:32 PM
What, in your opinion, is the wide difference between white and black races? (Hint: Black is the opposite of white!!!) Besides, by your definition, there are only three races. Are you really only saying 'the difference between the white and black races is wider than between the black and asian races or the white and asian races'? Or have you already forgotten your own defintion? Your traditional definition goes on to say that the traditional definition is completely flawed and widely disregarded by most people. Ace!!!
Dovina replying on The Gospel According to Zodiac by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:30 PM
Yes, but I was kidding. lol. :)
zodiac replying on The Gospel According to Zodiac by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:28 PM
Granted. I guess we ran that conversation out. Record time, too.
Dovina replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:28 PM
Oh, I see, my statement is one a moron makes. Again, you do not use the dictionary definition. I said the difference is debatable, but you must admit there is a wide difference between the white and black races, wider than between most races. And besides it's a side issue, not the thrust of my comment. Race is distinguished only by physical characteristics in the traditional definition.
zodiac replying on The Gospel According to Zodiac by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:24 PM
"I thought of Square Pantsed Bobbers as TNT-clothed Muslims."
zodiac replying on Racism by Dovina 1 Nov 2005, 12:22 PM
You moron. Do you really believe the black race is the "most different" from the white race? On what basis? Skin color alone? That's the most preposterous of all the preposterous things you've said on this site. If you don't get it, I'm fucking pissed. PS-Do your fucking research. The genetic differences between, say, Pacific Islanders and whites are far greater than the genetic differences between blacks and whites. Dectuple that if you're talking about African- or Anglo-Americans, or any blacks in a former white colony. Dim, dim, dim, dim, dim, dim. PPS-The definitions I've posted are from the EXACT SAME DEFINTION you used above. Learn to fucking scroll down, honey. The definition of racism is from dictionary.com too.