- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 15,483
- Reaction score
- 8,227
- Location
- North Texas
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
see edit
It's only offensive if you're seeking to be offended. Unfortunately, we've literally trained black youth to be offended and insulted by everything. Sadly, it's a much bigger part of the curriculum in black schools than actual education.
I don't necessarily think it's a racist thing serving fried chicken. I think it's stupid that someone thought this would fly. Did we need to have a black history themed lunch? Could have made it peanut butter sandwiches to celebrate George Washington Carver if you REALLY needed to do that.
We should have Canadian heritage day. We can all say "EH," eat Tim Hortons, and talk about the Habs. :mrgreen: "Oh that Patrick Roy, eh? Give me Terry Sawchuk, now there was a goalie."
I don't necessarily think it's a racist thing serving fried chicken. I think it's stupid that someone thought this would fly. Did we need to have a black history themed lunch? Could have made it peanut butter sandwiches to celebrate George Washington Carver if you REALLY needed to do that.
We should have Canadian heritage day. We can all say "EH," eat Tim Hortons, and talk about the Habs. :mrgreen: "Oh that Patrick Roy, eh? Give me Terry Sawchuk, now there was a goalie."
With all the peanut allergies PB&Js are off the table in schools these days.
Eventually it does get back to Eurocentric. We had a whole chapter and unit about English and Scottish history and who Jethro Tull was (actual guy, not the band). Not that I remember or gave a **** about it then. The history of our dominant culture being an offshoot of European culture...
Example: Who discovered America? You usually hear either Christopher Columbus or the Vikings. But not the people who were already living there, which if it's true that they came over from Asia, wouldn't you think that's a "discovery?"
While the history of white folks here is important, we tend to pretend that it's all there was. History is written by the winners, but we sure know a lot about who lost WWI, right?
We could just followup every lesson about George Washington with watching "Ask a Slave" on youtube.
That really isn't a response to anything I said.
Thanks for that, and I appreciate that, but maybe people need to just get over themselves. I happen to love watermelon - I can't get enough of it in the summer and feel awful when the fall arrives and the prices skyrocket and the supply dwindles to almost nothing. I never look at a watermelon as being a symbol of racism. And I'll bet most young people wouldn't look at watermelon as a symbol of racism if self-important **** disturbers didn't insist on pointing it out and screaming racism every single time.
Non-Americans just don't get your constant need to rip open old wounds.
Well, History is certainly full of those who chose to determine how it should be viewed.
For example, European history writes about Christopher Columbus and America, because from their perspective, he did discover America. Of couse, he also reported on the natives who were already here. The fact he did so, which eliminates any chance of being absolute sole discoverer, somehow gets drowned out by those voices who claim his historic label of Discoverer of America is racist, because it seeks to ignore the natives who were already here. As far as Europe was concerned, America didn't exist. Only in this PC era, does this fact get convoluted into a story about racism and Eurocentric bias.
There really isn't anything to respond to.
It's food. Yummy food. That a lot of black people like (and other people, too).
This is the typical offended-for-the-sake-of-being-offended incident that pervades seemingly every news story nowdays.
We waste so much time debating nothing and ignoring important events. It's much easier that way, I understand.
With all the peanut allergies PB&Js are off the table in schools these days.
Well, History is certainly full of those who chose to determine how it should be viewed.
For example, European history writes about Christopher Columbus and America, because from their perspective, he did discover America. Of couse, he also reported on the natives who were already here. The fact he did so, which eliminates any chance of being absolute sole discoverer, somehow gets drowned out by those voices who claim his historic label of Discoverer of America is racist, because it seeks to ignore the natives who were already here. As far as Europe was concerned, America didn't exist. Only in this PC era, does this fact get convoluted into a story about racism and Eurocentric bias.
I'm offended and hurt, you dirty racist, that you would immediately associate me with Tim Horton's cuisine - oh, the inhumanity of it all - next you'll probably trot out the poutine slur.
Have you no shame??
:lamo
With all the peanut allergies PB&Js are off the table in schools these days.
I understand where you are coming from John, but this is how I look at it. If they would have served Fried chicken and watermelon any other day on the menu, there would not be any fallout concerning it. However, they chose black history to serve that combination which i do not understand because there are so many safer black cuisines to chose from.
Exactly. Those native Americans certainly didn't discover that there was a Europe. Nor did the natives save Columbus the trouble with a convenient e-mail or text.
Now, I think the Vikings, and possible several other groups made trips here, but from a modern European perspective, Columbus was the guy that found it.
But no, we have to find a vein of racism in everthing.
OK, then who discovered Europe? It's not like it wasn't there.
Nobody. Because back then it was just called land
Think about this last sentence for just a minute. You start with "As far as Europe was concerned" which is pretty Eurocentric, don't you think? Telling history "as far as Europe was concerned" is the definition of Eurocentric! Why does history revolve around "as far as Europe was concerned?"
OK, then who discovered Europe? It's not like it wasn't there.
Well, History is certainly full of those who chose to determine how it should be viewed.
For example, European history writes about Christopher Columbus and America, because from their perspective, he did discover America. Of couse, he also reported on the natives who were already here. The fact he did so, which eliminates any chance of being absolute sole discoverer, somehow gets drowned out by those voices who claim his historic label of Discoverer of America is racist, because it seeks to ignore the natives who were already here. As far as Europe was concerned, America didn't exist. Only in this PC era, does this fact get convoluted into a story about racism and Eurocentric bias.
It's so weird. I don't remember a single kid in the 70s or 80s at school that had a deadly reaction, or any reaction, to peanuts. Now, you take a peanut into a school, and they treat you like a terrorist.
Where did this come from?
Same thing with this side of the world from the point of view of the natives.
Stop for a minute and think about the story of Christopher Columbus. Indians didn't write his history, Europe did. They wrote it at the time it occured. As such, the discovery was from Europe's perspective. That's not Eurocentric, that's just fact.
Columbus reported on the native populations he discovered there. No account of Christopher Columbus suggests America was void of any humans. If someone tells you they discovered this cool new park, do you tell them "no you didn't, somebody else discovered it long before you"?
Just because history reported Columbus discovered America doesn't mean Indians were meaningless, and didn't exist, as the hand wringers would want people to believe. It simply means from what Europe knew about lands outside their region, he did discover America.
The rest is a continuation of the PC agenda run amok.
I remember in elementary school, some 50 years ago, a kid we used to nickname Sayko Bobby (Sayko was a brand of tuna back then) because every day he had tuna and peanut butter sandwiches and they were the most disgusting, vomit inducing, concoctions around - but nobody suffered deadly reactions, except seeing the peanut buttered tuna bits in his braces after lunch was heart-stopping at times.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?