Week 10 2006

[Ground Fighter]

Shogun, did I miss something? Who's the new troll? There have been so many in the past few weeks, I can't keep up.

oh, just this one guy called Ground Fighter or something like that...

lol ok guys, ya got me. I'm going to go back to my underground lair now, or under a bridge where us trolls live.

 

[Ground Fighter]

I don't think Dallas Clark is a poor player, but I think the ad implies a
few things. First, blacks get off on the humiliation of whites. Look
how much fun it is to cream the white guy. The laughter of a group
of blacks would be less likely if Clark made a "move" to escape from
the defenders. Second, The laughter it's self implies an inferiority to
the victors of the play. Having played other versions of the game my
self, I can say that the "hit" on the ad was not very spectacular. The
enjoyment of the players came completely from the racial dynamic of
the play.

The display of dominance and the humiliation of whites in this ad is
pretty clear. I believe the ad was made for blacks, I think that they
probably buy more NFL videogames than whites. Why not give them
what they want?

Heres an ad that we'll, unfortunately, never see...

Mike Alstott running clean over black defenders who try and tackle him.

. I love watching that whenever they give him carries. What makes it especially funny, is when idiotic black defensive backs think that they are going to tackle him around his shoulders. He just ends up running for five or ten more yards with them hanging from his limbs.

Put that one the cover of Madden 2007, and see how well it is recived by blacks. I can hear Al Sharpton crying racism already.

 

[emt1]

or how about an ad where mike(mexico)vick is scrambling for a first down and then having him get decapitated by 2 or 3 white defenders?

 

[Guest]

I don't think Dallas Clark is a poor player, but I think the ad implies a
few things. First, blacks get off on the humiliation of whites. Look
how much fun it is to cream the white guy. The laughter of a group
of blacks would be less likely if Clark made a "move" to escape from
the defenders.

You didn't pay enough attention to the ad. There was a black guy laughing in the background, but there was also most definitely a white guy or two, most notably tha one who said "I can't stand this, I'm gonna go get a sandwich".

Thus, I believe that you are incorrect in this assumption, at least in this case. I do know for a fact, however, that there are a lot of blacks who do laugh at whites who they consider "corny" or whatever, but I don't think that was the intention of this ad.

Second, The laughter it's self implies an inferiority to
the victors of the play. Having played other versions of the game my
self, I can say that the "hit" on the ad was not very spectacular. The
enjoyment of the players came completely from the racial dynamic of
the play.

Surely, you're joking. It was a big hit duyring a football game, and the entire point of the ad was to show off the new animations for big hits in madden. Tjat is why there was so much excitement. People were not laughing simply because the player getting hit was white.
Such an assumption is just ridiculous. You're saying that if there was a black person getting hit, or maybe a white person doing the hitting, that nobody would have gawked at the big hit and the new animation?

The display of dominance and the humiliation of whites in this ad is
pretty clear. I believe the ad was made for blacks, I think that they
probably buy more NFL videogames than whites. Why not give them
what they want?

No, that's doubtful given the typical american racial economic demographic. Whites are overall bigger consumers of electronic equipment than anyone else.

The ad is offensive to me for two reasons. The first is because I
acknowledge the caste system and I am sick of the message that
whites are undeserving of the "skill positions". I believe this ad
reinforces this message. Second, you could NEVER put a black in a
loosing situation if it were a matter of intelligence. The double
standard makes me puke.

You're right, double standards do exist in some areas. I simply don't believe this to be one of them.

The Tomlenson ad was meant to be cute. If it were a black boy and
Tom Brady, I would see it the same way.

I have to say that, given what I've seen from this site over the years, that I would doubt that claim. But in any case, I digress with that one.

The black guy in the
Snickers commercial only looks goofy if you believe that all blacks
are "cool".

Imagine that, a well-groomed black with the ability
to interact civilly and show an understanding of something other
than hip-hop. What a goof!

I sense a little hypocrisy here.

You're saying that a well groomed black is a-ok, and that I should never believe him to be a goof for being so. You believe, therefore,that this ad would be in no way negative to whites. Fair enough.

However, I hear things on this site regularly that talk about how the caste system shows whites to be weak when it puts these same well groomed blacks into ads and makes the whites look less well groomed. You guys tend to scream blue murder whenever such an ad is aired.
And yet, now you're telling me that the well groomed black in this ad is in fact a good thing.

So, basically, a well groomed black in an ad is ok, but NOT when it involves whites who are not as well groomed. Or, in other words, a well groomed black is ok ONLY if the whites are not portrayed as any less well groomed.

Am I right? Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[C Darwin]

FG30
I can certainly see your point, except on the snickgger, I don't understand what your trying to get at. Whatever. I guess two different people can look at the same thing and have two entirely different interpretations of what they are watching. All I can say is that I have been paying attention to the racial dynamics of theatrical situations for the past few years and I have been taking mental notes. I pay close attention to trends (I have literally watched TV and tallied the adjectives as they pertained to race). I'm not being anecdotal. In the MSM, it is forbidden that the black be portrayed as a delta member of an interracial clan. My whole beef is that the Dallas Clark videogame ad is an example of the double standard of soft affirmative action. And since it is a double standard that has a negative affect on the way people that look like me are portrayed, I don't have to accept it. I don't feel guilty for slavery, I am quite sure that "white privilege" did very little for me in obtaining my position in society, so I'm not going to overlook the obvious. I don't have to drink the kool-aid. If you pay close enough attention, over time, you will begin to see what I/(we) see.

 

[PitBull]

It is a logical fallacy use one example and examine it in isolation when it
was used to point out a general trend. In other words, you cannot
examine this example while neglecting the overall environment of anti-
white sentiment in many commercials. Using one commercial doesn't
indicate a trend, either anti-black or anti-white.

This seems to be an argumentative tactic used often when someone
makes a general observation. An opponent will always look for an
exception to the generalization, thinking that argues against the
genralization. But that's not true--a generalization is just that; a
generalization. Arguments can be generally true and yet have exceptions.
If you can't make generalizations, you have no hope of ever obtaining
any really extensive knowledge or wisdom.

For instance, one could say that murderers are bad people. Then a
bleeding heart will say, oh, look at this one guy--he's not a bad guy. And
they may be right. But that doesn't invalidate the generalization.

If anyone wants to argue with FG30, a better tactic is to look at how
whites are protrayed in multi-racial commericals, and post on all the ones
that DO show an anti-white bias, like the NIKE commericial.

Since I don't watch much TV, I am not familiar with all the commercials
out there. On the rare occasions I do watch TV, I absolutely note an anti-
white bias. So post all the obvious examples for FG30, while he thinks
people who lose a video game are being humiliated and stereotyped.