"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote:
It behooves all of us to be just as indignant about
racism in any venue, regardless of ethnicity of the
racist.


But whites are often the sole receipient of that indignation, Kim. Show
me
a message anywhere in any of these newsgroups at any time where you've
expressed any indignation whatsoever about the racism of any other racial
group. If you're typical, I seriously doubt you can do so. Instead, you
attempt to explain away the racism of others like you've done below.



I doubt I am typical, Dwight. I also don't know if you'd find any posts
like you describe above. However, you're quite wrong about my being
indignant toward *any* form of discrimination. I am and always have been,
as far as I know. I remember even as a kid being offended by such things.
I am just as adamant about women bashing men as I am about anyone else
bashing based on gender, race, etc.


That having been said, I can understand some of the
seclusion each race enjoys from others, IF the purpose
is cultural. What is specific to a black mayors
conference are those things specifically related to black
issues in the community(ies) they represent. (snip)


I thought a mayor is elected to represent the whole community, not
solely
the "black issues in the community(ies) they represent." What about the
whites issues in the communities they represent? Why aren't those black
mayors getting together to discuss those?


Dwight, for goodness sake. I am not going to get into a huge idiosynchratic
dialogue with you about this issue. Suffice it to say that days like Black
Mayoral Conferences are set aside to deal specifically with, well, specific
things. I have no doubt that someone who is on the up and up about their
position in a community--regardless of who they are--is doing their job as
they should be. It sounds like it's an issue for you, though. Sorry I
don't buy into it.


Since those black mayors won't,
who does address those issues? Absolutely nobody is the only answer.


Then, I doubt they'll be in office long. It's as simple as that.


If a
white mayor, or any other politician (black or white, police chief to
president), expresses even a hint of concern for white issues, the word
"racist" is immediately thrown around.


Sure. By nitwits who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. Do
you choose to listen to them, believe them, appreciate or agree with them?
I don't.


In the end, a concern for whites is
just about an ultimate sin in this government. And it is going to stay
that
way until whites start demanding some representation for their issues in
this government.


I don't know, Dwight. That sounds pretty serious to me...and I haven't
really witnessed such a thing. You point out behaviors that are certainly
around--I won't deny that. But, they are in the minority and displayed by
blithering idiots.



I am certain that if there were issues that needed addressing
in a "whites only" venue, then you'd see a white mayors
conference and, honestly, I am not so sure there isn't one.


Be serious, Kim. First, I suspect a conference like that would be
considered illegal by the Justice Department - minorities can but whites
cannot. Second, if such a conference were held, groups throughout the
country would be out outraged, demonstrations would be held, lawsuits
would
be filed, and people like you would be running around screaming your
indignation again.


"People like me"? People like me?! Describe a "people like me" won't you?
I'm quite offended by the characterization there, Dwight, I'll tell you
that.

The chaos you describe above is that of movies and books. I think this
country and the people in it have moved a little bit further ahead than the
concepts which you depict above. We're all still quite capable of senseless
rage once in a while--but, for the most part, we've become very civil in our
dealings with each other. Thank goodness for that. And, we have a long,
long way to go.


What we may find generally attractive in a representative for
the United States in a Miss America, is totally different from
what the Black/Negro/Colored (depending on the part of
society and geographical/historical perspective you come from)
find in a representative specific to Black America.


And that justifies the intentional and specific exclusion of other races
in those pageants?


Yeah. Probably.


Why would what you say not be true for whites, yet such
an event held by whites which specificially excludes other races is
illegal.


I doubt that quite seriuosly. Check out many clubs around this country and
let me know how many non-white members you see. Hell, there are probably
some golf courses Tiger Woods isn't allowed on, for goodness sake.


And I'll add to JJ's examples. What about black colleges which exclude
other races?


Are you as upset about gender specific schools? I gave some other examples,
such as women's sports, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Masons, Eastern Star--all
and many more of which are specific to "types" of membership, Dwight. I've
got pretty much no problem with them.


What about black owned businesses with not a single white
employee in the entire building (many in my town alone)?


Aw, c'mon. How many non-Chinese people are working at your local Chinese
restaraunt? Have *you* applied for a positoin at the company you mention,
above? Maybe no one's applied. Not saying they don't practice
discrimination. If they do, then they're as wrong as wrong can be. Do
something about it.



What about the
"Negro College Fund" which offers benefits only to blacks. What about
"Black
Entertainment Television?" I could list more. The point is that it would
all
be illegal (discrimination) if done by whites.


I think you're going way, way overboard. What about "SPIKE" TV? Ya upset
about that?



I don't see that a all male organization is necessarily
discriminatory, either. (snip)


If the goals of that male-only organization were to promote the
political
and/or social advancement of males, would you still hold that same
opinion?


Personally, I *hope* they *are* promoting the political and/or social
advancement of males. Seen the requirements of some finishing schools
lately?


What about a sports organization that won't allow women?


Based on physical strength, not racial, social, or ethnic,
considerations,
Kim. There is a huge difference.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/



Pah....there it is. Now, that is as discriminatory as you can get, Dwight.
And, I'm glad you walked right into what I was hoping I'd be able to
demonstrate. Based on your opinion of women as demure and refined (ok, I'm
going overboard there), you believe that sports organizations are keeping
women out for the reason of their weakness. That's crap. You don't think
there's women who could train and get pumped up enough to be on a male
basketball team? Football, etc.? Sorry, I've seen 'em in the Ladies' Room.

We are all people. I have every comfort in people feeling the need to
"separate" into their corners once in a while. It is when the separatism
becomes hateful that I have a problem...

Kim W5TIT