can people of color be racist?

see4

Well-Known Member
So you are attempting to make the claim that if a black man is referred to as a nigger he suffers more
than an Indian man who is referred to as
dot head
are you seriously that stupid ?

or are these rules just for racer boy ?
No doubt both terms are offensive. However the term "dot head" does in fact refer an actual thing that in itself is not derogatory. The dot is part of Hindi religion as it pertains to meditation. The term "nigger" simply is a word rooted from negro or nigre, to mean black. The only use of the term "negro", "nigre" or "nigger" when referring to a human, is to express a racial slur.

The term "nigger" is clearly a lot more offensive as it refers to an entire race of people.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
i do not think folk like buck are so worried about accuracy when they wish to offend Indian gentlemen
why did you lie about me using that term?

and why have you not spoken up against any of the righties on this forum using racial slurs against blacks, hispanics, muslims, and the like?

do you just want to make it transparent that you are a butthurt racist?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
You were caught denying your racism again
how many Indian gentlemen have you referred to as "dothead" recently ?

its a shame you do not take your definition of racism from the dictionary
why did you lie about me using that term, liar?
 

bluntmassa1

Well-Known Member
nigger is the most offensive word in the english language.

now you're trying to compare indentured servants to american slaves again.

just give it up and try to spread your white supremacy rhetoric elsewhere.
I think it depends who your talking to them Inuit don't like Eskimo Latinos hate spic too.
 

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
why did you lie about me using that term, liar?
Why do you support the use of the term "dot head" ?
why did you not call raceboy out as a racist just as you would of done if another user had used the term nigger
you tried to make light of it by calling it shorthand

there are only two possibilities,
you were offended by racer boys comments but you are too much of a coward to hold true to your own convictions and call him out
or
you have no true convictions at all and you change your beliefs like the wind changes direction
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Why do you support the use of the term "dot head" ?
why did you not call raceboy out as a racist just as you would of done if another user had used the term nigger
you tried to make light of it by calling it shorthand

there are only two possibilities,
you were offended by racer boys comments but you are too much of a coward to hold true to your own convictions and call him out
or
you have no true convictions at all and you change you beliefs like the wind changes direction
yawn.

why did you lie and say i used that term?

why should anyone believe the lies of a known liar like you?
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
As a person who learnt Irish history in school (like everyone else in this nation), I'm pretty sure there were no Irish slaves.

If we made it to Murica, we at least expected a load of whiskey and bacon to build your railways, roads, major cities, etc.

That's not slavery, that's heaven.
 

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
yawn.

why did you lie and say i used that term?

why should anyone believe the lies of a known liar like you?
lol they can read the thread and see how you fawn yourself to mods, apparently dropping all you precious principles

you're a coward and a hypocrite with zero integrity
 

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
As a person who learnt Irish history in school (like everyone else in this nation), I'm pretty sure there were no Irish slaves.

If we made it to Murica, we at least expected a load of whiskey and bacon to build your railways, roads, major cities, etc.

That's not slavery, that's heaven.
historically they were referred to as "servants" but many were treated like slaves
they were still rounded up and shipped out without freedom of choice
 

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
The English didn't "own" Irish people, you need to check your facts dude.
i did not say the English people owned them, some left of free will some had no choice
they were sent to Africa Jamaica and British colonies in america

The English government variously referred to Irish to be
transported as rogues, vagabonds, rebels, neutrals, felons,
military prisoners, teachers, priests, maidens etc. All
historians call them servants, bondsman, indentured servants,
slaves, etc., and agree that they were all political victims. The
plain facts are that most were treated as slaves. After their
land was confiscated by England, which drove them from their
ancestral homes to forage for roots like animals, they were
kidnapped, rounded up and driven like cattle to waiting ships and
transported to English colonies in America, never to see their
country again. They were the victims of what many called the
immense "Irish Slave Trade."

All writers on the 17th century American colonies are in
agreement that the treatment of white servants or white slaves in
English colonies was cruel to the extreme, worse than that of
black slaves; that inhuman treatment was the norm, that torture
(and branding FT, fugitive traitor, on the forehead) was the
punishment for attempted escape. Dunn stated: "Servants were
punished by whipping, strung up by the hands and matches lighted
between their fingers, beaten over the head until blood ran,"
--all this on the slightest provocation.(30) Ligon, an eyewitness
in Barbados from 1647-1650 said, "Truly, I have seen cruelty
there done to servants as I did not think one Christian could
have done to another.

All writers on the 17th century history agree that between
one-half and two thirds of white immigrants in the British West
Indies and mainland America were servants, most of them severely
mistreated. Most all Irish immigrants were 'servants.' Irish were
almost exclusively Catholic (at least they were when they left
Ireland) and most were of ancient Irish families even though they
appeared in English records as English, if recorded at all.
After 20,000 Puritans arrived in the American colonies from
1630-1640, migration of English colonists all but subsided. Some
writers say after 1640 only a trickle of English colonists
arrived. In 1632, many Irish were on Antigua. In 1637, 69 percent
of whites on Montserrat were Irish. In 1650, 25,000 Irish were on
St. Kitt's and Nevis and some were on other Leeward islands. In
1652, prior to the wholesale transportation of Irish, most of 12
thousand political prisoners on Barbados were Irish.
 
Last edited:

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
historically they were referred to as "servants" but many were treated like slaves
they were still rounded up and shipped out without freedom of choice
so why do you give kynes and other members a complete pass on racist statements and then lie and claim i said stuff that i didn't?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
i did not say the English people owned them, some left of free will some had no choice
they were sent to Africa Jamaica and British colonies in america

The English government variously referred to Irish to be
transported as rogues, vagabonds, rebels, neutrals, felons,
military prisoners, teachers, priests, maidens etc. All
historians call them servants, bondsman, indentured servants,
slaves, etc., and agree that they were all political victims. The
plain facts are that most were treated as slaves. After their
land was confiscated by England, which drove them from their
ancestral homes to forage for roots like animals, they were
kidnapped, rounded up and driven like cattle to waiting ships and
transported to English colonies in America, never to see their
country again. They were the victims of what many called the
immense "Irish Slave Trade."

All writers on the 17th century American colonies are in
agreement that the treatment of white servants or white slaves in
English colonies was cruel to the extreme, worse than that of
black slaves; that inhuman treatment was the norm, that torture
(and branding FT, fugitive traitor, on the forehead) was the
punishment for attempted escape. Dunn stated: "Servants were
punished by whipping, strung up by the hands and matches lighted
between their fingers, beaten over the head until blood ran,"
--all this on the slightest provocation.(30) Ligon, an eyewitness
in Barbados from 1647-1650 said, "Truly, I have seen cruelty
there done to servants as I did not think one Christian could
have done to another.

All writers on the 17th century history agree that between
one-half and two thirds of white immigrants in the British West
Indies and mainland America were servants, most of them severely
mistreated. Most all Irish immigrants were 'servants.' Irish were
almost exclusively Catholic (at least they were when they left
Ireland) and most were of ancient Irish families even though they
appeared in English records as English, if recorded at all.
After 20,000 Puritans arrived in the American colonies from
1630-1640, migration of English colonists all but subsided. Some
writers say after 1640 only a trickle of English colonists
arrived. In 1632, many Irish were on Antigua. In 1637, 69 percent
of whites on Montserrat were Irish. In 1650, 25,000 Irish were on
St. Kitt's and Nevis and some were on other Leeward islands. In
1652, prior to the wholesale transportation of Irish, most of 12
thousand political prisoners on Barbados were Irish.
so why did you lie about what i said and give complete passes to every other racist on this forum?
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
i did not say the English people owned them, some left of free will some had no choice
they were sent to Africa Jamaica and British colonies in america

The English government variously referred to Irish to be
transported as rogues, vagabonds, rebels, neutrals, felons,
military prisoners, teachers, priests, maidens etc. All
historians call them servants, bondsman, indentured servants,
slaves, etc., and agree that they were all political victims. The
plain facts are that most were treated as slaves. After their
land was confiscated by England, which drove them from their
ancestral homes to forage for roots like animals, they were
kidnapped, rounded up and driven like cattle to waiting ships and
transported to English colonies in America, never to see their
country again. They were the victims of what many called the
immense "Irish Slave Trade."

All writers on the 17th century American colonies are in
agreement that the treatment of white servants or white slaves in
English colonies was cruel to the extreme, worse than that of
black slaves; that inhuman treatment was the norm, that torture
(and branding FT, fugitive traitor, on the forehead) was the
punishment for attempted escape. Dunn stated: "Servants were
punished by whipping, strung up by the hands and matches lighted
between their fingers, beaten over the head until blood ran,"
--all this on the slightest provocation.(30) Ligon, an eyewitness
in Barbados from 1647-1650 said, "Truly, I have seen cruelty
there done to servants as I did not think one Christian could
have done to another.

All writers on the 17th century history agree that between
one-half and two thirds of white immigrants in the British West
Indies and mainland America were servants, most of them severely
mistreated. Most all Irish immigrants were 'servants.' Irish were
almost exclusively Catholic (at least they were when they left
Ireland) and most were of ancient Irish families even though they
appeared in English records as English, if recorded at all.
After 20,000 Puritans arrived in the American colonies from
1630-1640, migration of English colonists all but subsided. Some
writers say after 1640 only a trickle of English colonists
arrived. In 1632, many Irish were on Antigua. In 1637, 69 percent
of whites on Montserrat were Irish. In 1650, 25,000 Irish were on
St. Kitt's and Nevis and some were on other Leeward islands. In
1652, prior to the wholesale transportation of Irish, most of 12
thousand political prisoners on Barbados were Irish.
Penis...Penis MC Menis
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
wouldn't dot head be for females only?

men don't wear them.
i almost dated this girl from kerela india, and she even had a term for women from india that wore those dots on their heads.. it wasn't dot head, but i can't remember exactly what she called them.. it did make me lol though...
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
here is racerboy's full quote.



that's the worst thing i've ever seen him say and there has never been any hint that he is racist besides this. so i conclude insensitivity.
i have to admit, that stems from my 75 year old mother, the term.. i wouldn't call her racist, just that things were different back then, and i guess the term dot head for peoples from india rubbed off on me, watt can i say? i guess i'm guilty of being insensitive.. :hump:
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
I had the hottest indian girlfriend in highschool, she did not have the dot, or a hymen after.
this girl was smoking hot, and was only 21 at the time.. i really should have put the moves on her, but idk, i felt a bit odd, being, well, older than her by a good bit and all, so we just remained friends.. but holy hell, some days i do regret it, but not really..
 
Top