Will the Liberals demand that Obama pay reparations?

Report: Obama’s Ancestors Owned Slaves

WASHINGTON (AP)- A genealogical researcher says presidential hopeful Barack Obama had white ancestors who owned slaves.
William Reitwiesner, in …

Your definition of Black is skin color not mine. My definition is history and culture, get it?

Theworldisnotenough on March 2, 2007 at 2:10 PM

Well then, you are a victim of PC.

Who said anything about “making fun?” You said that “cultural” hair (which I took to mean “nappy” hair) was one racism that some educated black women have towards whites. That opinion is not you “making fun” of the hair.

I guess I’m just astonished that you view a black woman who wears her hair in its existential state and picks a method of styling it which is conducive to that state as something political.

See? You automatically assume that you’re being called a racist; what’s that about? And no one twisted your words; we just don’t understand *why* hair is part of the package that you described. The texture of one’s hair is something with which he/she is born.

BTW, white kids w/ dreadlocks do not have nappy hair–the term does not mean “uncombed.”

baldilocks on March 3, 2007 at 12:51 PM

baldilocks, you’re still doing it, you’re spinning and nitpicking at individual points while ignoring my larger point that I THOROUGHLY EXPLAINED. And nonfactor came about as close to calling my comments racist as possible, and you’ve clearly insinuated it.

You’re clearly not reading my comments, based on the fact that you’re still talking about “texture” of hair… Where did I say anything about that? It’s a style, but again it has nothing to do with the larger point, it’s just the cherry on top. As I THOROUGHLY EXPLAINED, there are so many different groups of people who feel the need to sport some kind of hair style or dress a certain way just to prove what they’re all about. I feel that she chooses this big poofy fro because it’s part of that whole “culture”… But I don’t even care, YOU’RE OBSESSED WITH THE HAIR. I just pointed out how it’s just part of the stereotype that her type insists on applying to themselves. Sure, there are plenty of other people who may just like the hairstyle, but like a gay who needs to have a rainbow sticker on his car, etc. in my opinion she chooses to have this hairstyle specifically because it goes along with the whole persona. I’m kind of surprised she’s not wearing an African style necklace, and any other number of the items and styles she needs to prove just how black and in touch with her African roots she is? You telling me you’ve never encountered someone who is obsessed with “blackness” and “black history” and lives there life around it? Clearly you have, and I think we can agree that this woman is one of them. But more often than not, these type of people need to have hair and clothing that makes them stand out in a crowd, not because it’s just something that comes naturally to them considering they grew up in the same cities as the rest of us, but because they need to make sure everyone sees them and knows what they’re about.

(Here’s the part where you still ignore that I drew parallels explaining how this has nothing to do “race” outside of the fact that the “hair” is one component of the self-imposed stereotype of people belonging to the group this woman does. Other groups have their own. And I don’t think (even though you do) that her hair is nappy nor do I have a problem with the “texture”, and I don’t even think it looks bad. It just goes along with her whole “image”. Others can have it and not be the same type of person, it’s not like it’s a gang symbol… and there are plenty of other styles, it’s not just a specific style… it’s just the big poof thing… She could do the two big cone things, she could have wrapped it in some “African-style” design piece of cloth, etc. It doesn’t matter, there’s nothing wrong with it… All I’m saying is she makes a conscious effort to do it, among other things, to be that stereotype and it’s obnoxious, the same way it is for other types. It’s no different than (as I’ve explained extensively) hippy college kids, or how about the “goth” kids in high school, etc.

But again, this is where you come in and ignore everything and totally misinterpret everything I’ve said, even though you know you’re choosing to selectively quote me to support your argument, and ignoring my point which wasn’t even intended to be “a point”, just a passing mention of something.

It is? I thought it was this:

I want to look like me, not a cheap knock-off of white, Latina or Asian women. Of course there’s nothing wrong with looking like a white, Latina or Asian woman, if you are one. I’m not, don’t want to be one and don’t want to look like one.

you guys latched on to this hair thing as if I’m here making fun of black people’s hair.

Who said anything about “making fun?” You said that “cultural” hair (which I took to mean “nappy” hair) was one racism that some educated black women have towards whites. That opinion is not you “making fun” of the hair.

I guess I’m just astonished that you view a black woman who wears her hair in its existential state and picks a method of styling it which is conducive to that state as something political.

twist my words and call me a racist all you want, that’s fine..

See? You automatically assume that you’re being called a racist; what’s that about? And no one twisted your words; we just don’t understand *why* hair is part of the package that you described. The texture of one’s hair is something with which he/she is born.

BTW, white kids w/ dreadlocks do not have nappy hair–the term does not mean “uncombed.”

Nonfactor on March 2, 2007 at 7:37 PM

baldilocks on March 2, 2007 at 7:44 PM

I typed a lengthy response to both of you, but it hasn’t shown up… maybe it will later, but I’m not going to waste time retyping all of it again… Here’s the gist – You can extrapolate whatever you want from my comments to insinuate that what I said was racist, and think I was making racist comments about “nappy” hair (a word I never used, and I don’t even think accurately describes her hair)… The hair thing was really irrelevant, and I was only pointing out that the stereotype this woman chooses to make herself by making everything about race, defining herself by blackness, etc. etc. it’s always necessary for her type to do something with their hair to prove just how cultural and connected with their roots they are. I don’t even agree that it has anything to do with African roots, just like I don’t think hip-hop is “black culture”, but you know as well as I do that these stuck up condescending black women always have to make themselves stand out just so you know where they’re coming from.

In my lengthy reply I gave example such as rednecks always feeling it’s necessary to have the Calvin and Hobbs peeing sticker on their truck’s back window, or gays needing to sport their rainbow. It’s nothing about those individual displays, it’s just an obnoxious stereotype that they’re choosing to take part in. Or like the college kid who’s parents are filthy rich and he’ll probably spend the next 10 years in school living off of them, while looking like a scumbag hippy and wearing a Che shirt, showing up at anti-war rallies with a scarf wrapped around his head. These kids like to pretend they aren’t the rich kids they are and that they aren’t happy with their lives.. .then climb in their Volvo or Land Rover and head down to the mountain for a weekend of snowboarding with their new board and thousands of dollars in gear. I would make the same “cultural hair” comment as I saw one who decided to really “make a statement” by having his white kid dreadlocks (what I would actually call “nappy”), because it’s obnoxious that they can’t just be who they are, without having to make themselves look a certain way just so you can spot them a mile away. Sure there are exceptions like “crunchy cons”, but seeing some wannabe hippy rich white college kid sporting dreads just completes the package and makes you embarassed for them, because they are so lame for deliberately trying to fit the stereotype. This is all I was saying about this woman, and you guys latched on to this hair thing as if I’m here making fun of black people’s hair.

Well, that ran on a little longer than I expected, but whatever… hopefully this one (and the earlier one) show up.

I dislike this woman as much as you do, but what you said in this post was racist. Or at least prejudiced and stereotypical.

So any black person who lets their hair grow naturally (that type of hair style is called a natural) is suddenly a caricature?

Nonfactor on March 2, 2007 at 7:37 PM

My comments were only stereotypical, because this woman is a stereotype… not because of my feeling about any given black person.

I’m not sure what this means in the context of your last two comments. How exactly should a black woman who has naturally nappy hair wear such and what does the style have to do with the political (or general) attitude of the woman in question? Or her education? Or her racism/lack of it? And what do white kids–most of whom don’t have nappy hair–have to do with the conversation at all?

The phrase seemed to indicate that you don’t care for the appearance of black women who don’t choose to emulate naturally straight-haired women in appearance. That’s fine, but it has absolutely no bearing on the attitude of the woman under the hair.

Signed,

A nappy-headed black conservative woman, who shaves her head nearly bald, but may grow some dreadlocks in the future just to defy yet another stereotype.

baldilocks on March 2, 2007 at 7:44 PM

You guys are all missing the entire point, I’m not saying anything about anyone’s “nappy” hair, and that wouldn’t even have been a word I would have ever thought to use to describe her hair because nappy has an entirely different image in my mind… But feel free to keep going on that “nappy” path that I never went on.

I’m talking about the stereotype that she is (See my full explanations above, like the rich white college kid determined to prove he’s not rich so he has to act like some grungy dreadlocked hippy wearing a Che shirt just so you know he’s as left as you can get, and so he can prove that he hates his parents’ wealth.) The hair is just one tiny part of her whole stereotypical behavior of one of these black women who has an attitude with every white person she encounters and is obsessed with “blackness” (it’s in the title of the book, and the whole discussion was about Barry not being black). She has to have that big attention grabbing fro, I’m sure she’s got a house full of African art to prove how in touch with her roots she is, etc. You guys are missing the entire point.

Back to the white college kid example… sometimes there is the occassional exception… the “chrunchy con”, but they are by far the exception, not the rule. Normally you see the kid and you can safely assume they’re going to be showing up at anti-war rallies and would jump at the opportunity to spray paint public property with “blood for oil” or “Bushitler”.

Now you guys can insist on focusing in on the hair and twist my words and call me a racist all you want, that’s fine..

I will however add that if you’re black then you haven’t lived “the white experience” and encountered condescending black people, usually women, who because they’re educated and have studied black history are obsessed with bringing it up constantly and talking down to every white person as if their condescending attitude is payback for some evils we’ve done to them. This woman’s whole image just goes along with it… the hair doesn’t actually have anything to do with it, other than this type of woman always feels the need to have the “cultural” hair to prove how in touch with her roots she is. The same way redneck’s complete the look with Calvin and Hobbs peeing sticker on their truck’s rear window, or gays have to have their little rainbow sticker, etc. The hair isn’t an insult, and there is nothing wrong with it. It’s just clear that the hair style is part of a conscious choice of showing off just how “black” she is… and part of the entire picture of what makes her obnoxious and racist herself, sense again, she isn’t a human or American first.. she’s “black” above all else.

But as I said, by all means, feel free to take it any way you like.

- The Cat

P.S. I still like Eva Gabor better.

I’m still waiting for the text books to point out that one of the largest slave owners (3rd largest to be exact) in the Carolinas was black.

RightWinged on March 2, 2007 at 4:09 PM

I’m not sure what this means in the context of your last two comments. How exactly should a black woman who has naturally nappy hair wear such and what does the style have to do with the political (or general) attitude of the woman in question? Or her education? Or her racism/lack of it? And what do white kids–most of whom don’t have nappy hair–have to do with the conversation at all?

The phrase seemed to indicate that you don’t care for the appearance of black women who don’t choose to emulate naturally straight-haired women in appearance. That’s fine, but it has absolutely no bearing on the attitude of the woman under the hair.

Signed,

A nappy-headed black conservative woman, who shaves her head nearly bald, but may grow some dreadlocks in the future just to defy yet another stereotype.

RightWinged on March 2, 2007 at 3:04 PM

I dislike this woman as much as you do, but what you said in this post was racist. Or at least prejudiced and stereotypical.

I’m talking about how it has to be styled in such a way that we know she’s really knows her black history and is connected with her African roots

So any black person who lets their hair grow naturally (that type of hair style is called a natural) is suddenly a caricature?

So my people used to own….my people.

“cultural” hair

RightWinged,

I’m not disagreeing with you, but I’m wondering why this phrase is included in your explanation.

Got a problem with naps?

baldilocks on March 2, 2007 at 3:18 PM

No, I don’t just mean “black people hair”… I’m talking about how it has to be styled in such a way that we know she’s really knows her black history and is connected with her African roots. She’s an annoying charicature. It’s like rich white college kids who dress like homeless people and have dread locks… they would say they just don’t care, but they are really working harder than everyone else to appear a certain way (then they climb in to the Land Rover daddy bought them for their birthday and head to the Mountain for the weekend.)

RightWinged,

I’m not disagreeing with you, but I’m wondering why this phrase is included in your explanation.

Got a problem with naps?

As for “telling on myself”… WTF? Are you insinuating that I’m a racist? I suspected one of “you people” would come with that sh**.

Yeah, I said “her type” and described her as the condescending educated black woman… I think everyone has encountered one of these bitchy black women with the “cultural” hair who think because they’ve got a college degree they’re above every white person they come across, and they view the world in terms of race (as she clearly does)… She doesn’t look at someone as an individual, she sees “white people” and oppression where it doesn’t exist. I’ve never heard of her before, but she comes off as a slightly nicer version of the Nation of Islam/Black Panther guys that occassionally show up on H&C calling Sean a “white devil” or insisting black people can’t be racist, etc. etc.

My second was to wonder which set of ancestors was being discussed.

csdeven on March 2, 2007 at 1:22 PM

Case in point, Tiger Woods. Clinton was considered the first black president, you may not think so, but poll the blacks and you will see, and he has no black ancestory. And it works the other way, many blacks adopted by white families do not identify with their black “brothers”. Do you think Thomas Sowell walks around saying he’s a brother. And we all know how a Judge Thomas and Condi (”she ain’t no black woman”) Rice is defined by her color.

If it is, it’s wrong. Black is a skin color. Anyone that says otherwise is a victim of PC.

If a white person has a black ancestor who was a slave then by your definition he is black. That’s just plain wrong.

csdeven on March 2, 2007 at 1:22 PM

Okay lets try reading comprehension 101. I stated:

“Just for the record Debra is right. Black defined by being in anyway African is a farce. Black is defined by history and culture, a history and culture that Obama does not share.”

You said:

“Black is a skin color. Anyone that says otherwise is a victim of PC.”

Your definition of Black is skin color not mine. My definition is history and culture, get it?

good grief.

Oh man! I’ve been hoping someone would find that Colbert video! Hilarious. And the best part is, that stereotypical condescending educated black woman thinks Colbert was being racist (because her type thinks everything is racist, and that blacks are incapable of racism), when in reality she’s the racist… and an idiot.

(you are telling on yourself Rightwinged)

Excuse me? When did she in anyway indicate that she thought Black people were incapable of racism? Debra Dickerson clearly indicates the context in which she is speaking. The American political context. Listen to it again.

During the interview Colbert says:
“If you had not told me he was not Black I would have thought I was supporting a Black person then I would have thought I was supporting a Black person. And then I would have been supporting all Black people. But now I won’t because he’s not”

Um that’s racist. Since some commenters want to jump on the content of one’s character bandwagon there you go… Voting based on skin color is racist whether it is for or against. And Colbert validates Debra’s other salient point which is Obama’s blackness is a critique of white self-congratulation, hmmm. (Listen to it again) Look he’s Black voting for him will make us feel so good. The best example being sports media falling all over themselves pre Superbowl. The constant pandering was gross.

She had no clue what was going on when he said she was judging blackness not on the color of someone’s skin, but on the content of their character… realizing Dr. King’s dream in a very special way.

No kidding. Because Colbert didn’t have a clue, he was trying to make a joke. A joke that did not make semse. How is voting for someone because they are Black a realization Dr. King’s dream? It’s not which exactly why she called it perverted.