Song of the South: Too Offensive to Release on DVD?

All topics relating to Disney-branded content.
Locked
User avatar
Flanger-Hanger
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3746
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Headquarters

Post by Flanger-Hanger »

Goliath wrote:Yes, the film is racist. But why can't we just take historical films for what they are: a product of its time. Pretending it doesn't exist doesn't make it go away.
In Fantasyland we could, but reality we can't and the banning of once (and in some cases still) highly regarded literature from schools so we can "protect" kids only proves that point. As people get more and more outrageously PC, history is being erased and as much as I would like ti to stop, it isn't going to and Disney is unfortunately catering to the masses in their ignoring the film.

Although you can ride an attraction based on the film, buy stuff with the charactres on it, view portions of it on other Disney DVDs, watch it on TV in the UK buy it on laserdisc in Japan, read about it in Disney books, the list goes on...
Image
User avatar
slave2moonlight
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: TX
Contact:

Post by slave2moonlight »

My stance on this remains unchanged. "Song of the South" may not portray history perfectly, but the story is a beautiful one about a powerful friendship between an elderly black man and a wealthy white child, full of beautiful Disney animation no-less, and it's foolish to see anything intentionally racist in it. And regardless, keeping any film locked away for fear of offending people is no different than book burning. I downright love the Walt Disney Company, though they piss me off at times, but keeping this film under lock and key is one thing they truly should be ashamed of. As for offending people, every film has something in it that will offend someone. You just can't cater to that. There are far more offensive films available on DVD too, that's for certain.

On a side note, I found it very ironic and funny to see new animation of Brer Bear (as a silhouette) in the end of Lion King 1 1/2 when I watched it a few days ago.
User avatar
Goliath
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4749
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 5:35 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by Goliath »

drfsupercenter wrote:Well, it most likely WASN'T thought of as racist at the time. In 1946, any black characters in a movie were usually played in "blackface"... and the theaters were segregated so James Baskett couldn't even go the premiere!
Actually, playing in 'blackface' was already abandoned by the 1930's, and it doesn't appear in SotS.
drfsupercenter wrote:And I honestly can't stand "affirmative action", or any of that. It's actually harder for me, a middle-class white person, to get into a university than it is for a minority... BECAUSE they're trying to accept more and more minorities. How messed up is that? (And that's why I'm glad I did get into my top choice, otherwise I'd be ranting about reverse racism constantly)
Oh please, don't start spouting crap like that. Middle class white people are the last group would should feel pity for theselves, and the very *idea* they have a hader time getting into college/a job etc. than any minority, is simply ludicrous.
User avatar
drfsupercenter
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1279
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:59 pm
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Post by drfsupercenter »

Have you heard of Affirmative Action? That's exactly what they're doing, they just don't call it that anymore.

Ideally, they should just not look at your ethnicity. I mean, don't fricking put it on the application. It should be based solely on your academic status, extracurricular activities, essays, etc. Why do they even care what race/religion you are? It's stupid.
Image

Howard Ashman:
He gave a mermaid her voice, a beast his soul, and Arabs something to complain about
Arabian Nights (Unedited)
Savages (Uncensored)
If it ain't OTV, it ain't worth anything!
User avatar
Sky Syndrome
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1187
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:07 am
Location: Maine

Post by Sky Syndrome »

Wish this movie was available through the Disney Movie Club or was one of the rewards in the Disney Movie Rewards program.
Image
Lazario

Post by Lazario »

Well, you know you guys - I wasn't trying to turn this into a competition. :D I was merely pointing out that the film is racist, it is offensive, and I personally think Disney is doing the right thing by not releasing it.

Not that I mind what you're all saying. I'm glad the discussion has opened up this much. I just wanted to share my views on the movie because I know we all think about it. But don't turn this into a huge thing on censorship. That isn't what this is about. It's about pointing out the fact that the film is absurd and clearly offensive.

As for the entertainment industry today - I was saying for years before I was banned that Hollywood is turning out nothing but crap. Nobody listened. Now, you all are trying to dump the same stuff I used to say on me as though I'm the one who isn't listening.

How does it feel to be in my position? Good, huh? Image
User avatar
blackcauldron85
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 16689
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:54 am
Gender: Female
Contact:

Post by blackcauldron85 »

drfsupercenter wrote: Ideally, they should just not look at your ethnicity. I mean, don't fricking put it on the application. It should be based solely on your academic status, extracurricular activities, essays, etc. Why do they even care what race/religion you are? It's stupid.
I pretty much agree. If ethnic groups want to be treated as equals, why bother segregating each group by mentioning it? Getting an education doesn't depend on race, so why do they need to know on the application? Just for statistical purposes?
slave2moonlight wrote:"Song of the South" may not portray history perfectly, but the story is a beautiful one about a powerful friendship between an elderly black man and a wealthy white child, full of beautiful Disney animation no-less, and it's foolish to see anything intentionally racist in it. And regardless, keeping any film locked away for fear of offending people is no different than book burning.
:clap: Very well said, Nathan. I agree. Walt Disney loved the stories that SOTS was based on...it's not like his purpose in making the film was to portray African Americans in a bad light.
Image
User avatar
totallyminnie86
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:15 pm
Contact:

Post by totallyminnie86 »

I'm hesitant to jump into such controversy, but...

A few weeks ago I finally had an opportunity to watch this film for the first time ever. While I do agree the the content is dated, and is no longer acceptable or appropriate in today's society, I thought it was a lovely movie.

I think a release is not out of the question, I'd rather they release it as part of the Treasures line, or put a disclaimer on it (as was once mentioned) than edit the hell out of it. Overall, the specific African American characters in the lead roles are portrayed in a positive light. You can't undo the past, and unfortunately this film is set during a very upsetting period of US history. I still think they could find a way to make this accessible instead of acting like its worth banning.
User avatar
drfsupercenter
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1279
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:59 pm
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Post by drfsupercenter »

I pretty much agree. If ethnic groups want to be treated as equals, why bother segregating each group by mentioning it? Getting an education doesn't depend on race, so why do they need to know on the application? Just for statistical purposes?
Well usually, yes. For a couple schools in this area in particular, though, they have a sort of "affirmative action" practice, and that's what I was complaining about. I guess someone sued them a couple years ago, so now they HAVE to admit a certain number of blacks, a certain number of Hispanics, etc. Which limits the number of caucasians such as myself. In effect, it's reverse discrimination.
Image

Howard Ashman:
He gave a mermaid her voice, a beast his soul, and Arabs something to complain about
Arabian Nights (Unedited)
Savages (Uncensored)
If it ain't OTV, it ain't worth anything!
User avatar
Escapay
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 12562
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
Contact:

Post by Escapay »

Given how many middle-class white males I know who take for granted the privileges they have and don't appreciate the finer points of higher education, perhaps affirmative action is a good thing as it can sometimes give deserving minorities opportunities they otherwise are denied because of their skin color and SES.

That's all I'm gonna say about the topic, we now return to our regularly-scheduled Song of the South discussion, already in progress...

I want the film on DVD. For historical purposes and because it's a damn good film regardless of its racism and offenses. After all, if we keep hiding godzilla-roaring lace collars from our youth and pretending they don't exist, what will happen when they encounter lace collars later in life? Children need to be aware of the offensive lace collar sooner rather than later, so they know how to approach the sensitive topic, rather than just point and laugh.

"Look at the little girly, wearin' the lace collar!"

albert
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion? :p

WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?
User avatar
a-net-fan
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 8:11 pm
Location: AMERICA

Post by a-net-fan »

drfsupercenter wrote:
I pretty much agree. If ethnic groups want to be treated as equals, why bother segregating each group by mentioning it? Getting an education doesn't depend on race, so why do they need to know on the application? Just for statistical purposes?
Well usually, yes. For a couple schools in this area in particular, though, they have a sort of "affirmative action" practice, and that's what I was complaining about. I guess someone sued them a couple years ago, so now they HAVE to admit a certain number of blacks, a certain number of Hispanics, etc. Which limits the number of caucasians such as myself. In effect, it's reverse discrimination.


AMEN. when a person is accepted due to the color of their skin or nationality .....that is absolutely no different then rejecting a person due to the color of their skin or their nationality!!!!!!!! Just because the outcome benefited that person doesnt make it right. This is def not a step in the right direction. A step in the right direction would be having the qualifications of each individual evident so that you could SHOW exactly how that PERSON (regardless of color or anything else) was accepted. Qualifications is all that should be a determining factor.

ANYWAY as far as SOTS...Am I correct that this film is controversial because the slave masters were shown to be friendly to the slaves??? Thats one thing I have heard. I saw this movies a few years ago and didnt see what the fuss was about at all.
JUST ANOTHER 27 YEAR OLD DISNEY BUFF.....
User avatar
slave2moonlight
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: TX
Contact:

Post by slave2moonlight »

a-net-fan wrote:
ANYWAY as far as SOTS...Am I correct that this film is controversial because the slave masters were shown to be friendly to the slaves??? Thats one thing I have heard. I saw this movies a few years ago and didnt see what the fuss was about at all.
If I recall correctly, the film takes place in the post-Civil War south, so one couldn't even refer to it as a film about slaves/slave-masters, only former slaves and former slave-owners at most. Granted, the people's lives wouldn't have changed much, but as I recall the only real complaints were about the former slaves represented as happy with their lives and possibly issues over the "Tar Baby", which is ridiculous since that, I believe, is one of the actual Uncle Remus stories.
User avatar
a-net-fan
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 8:11 pm
Location: AMERICA

Post by a-net-fan »

slave2moonlight wrote:
a-net-fan wrote:
ANYWAY as far as SOTS...Am I correct that this film is controversial because the slave masters were shown to be friendly to the slaves??? Thats one thing I have heard. I saw this movies a few years ago and didnt see what the fuss was about at all.
If I recall correctly, the film takes place in the post-Civil War south, so one couldn't even refer to it as a film about slaves/slave-masters, only former slaves and former slave-owners at most. Granted, the people's lives wouldn't have changed much, but as I recall the only real complaints were about the former slaves represented as happy with their lives and possibly issues over the "Tar Baby", which is ridiculous since that, I believe, is one of the actual Uncle Remus stories.


Thank you... just as I thought......there isnt anything to really be so upset about or to warrant this ban.

SONG OF THE SOUTH for Walt Disney Treasures Wave IX ....PLEASE :arrow:
JUST ANOTHER 27 YEAR OLD DISNEY BUFF.....
User avatar
Neal
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 10:40 am

Post by Neal »

On IMDb, there was a thread in the "Princess and the Frog" forum that argued there weren't any significant black Disney protagonists - at all - that Disney has avoided African American characters in their animated films. My response partially delved into the issue with "Song of the South" so I'm going to post it here fully - it's late and I'm too tired to edit it into being a response just for this thread but most of this relates.

>>>>

I won't deny Disney has largely avoided African Americans in its movies, but you must look a little deeper:

First off, Disney's been making movies since 1937. The black civil rights movement didn't really get big until the mid 50s and lasted until the late 60s. By that time, Disney had already made 15 classics - up through "Lady and the Tramp". That's one quarter of its total films today. No company was hiring black actors for big productions yet. By the time the movement was drawing to a close - four more films had been made - up through "The Jungle Book".

Disney tried making a movie featuring a black protagonist in 1946 - "Song of the South". It was based off a collection of stories written by a black slave.

It features two white children hearing these tales from Uncle Remus. Although its never stated outright, it's assumed he is a slave by many critics who say his happiness while telling these stories is wrong because no slave would be happy.

Which is true, they probably wouldn't be happy to tell two white kids stories. Nonetheless, it's never stated he's a slave. In fact, he says he'll be leaving the plantation soon. So it seems more like he's hired work, not a slave - and there was a major difference between the treatment of the two.

Critics say that the 'tar baby' character is like a black effigy. Well, if it was 'glue baby' no one would have said anything.

And since it was the 40s, the lead actor James Baskett who played Remus was barred from the films own release party. Disney treated their actor better than society at the time.

So Disney tried to make a film for African Americans and they played the race card so badly, it drove Disney to paranoia.

Sidney Poitier and Mayou Angelou threatened to boycott Disney if they let this film release in the U.S. So, it's never come out here.

Disney also erased and now denies what was once meant to be a social statement about the stereotypes of Blacks - Sunflower the slave centaurette in Fantasia. While vain white centaurettes got dolled up, the black centaurette served them. This wasn't racism - this was how blacks were really treated. Well, it has since been removed Fantasia and never showed again.

Here's her picture:

http://forum.bcdb.com/forum/_C1/_F1/Sun ... P64738/gfo rum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=4119;guest=15446447

Recently, Disney's gotten much better. Still afraid to release "Song of the South", but trying to improve. I mean, how can you blame them? When they announced this film [Princess and the Frog] - people freaked. Cinderella was a chambermaid and that's okay because she was white, but when Maddy was going to be one - that alluded to slavery.

I'm not a racist, but African Americans advocate for equality yet they then play the race card and when comparing a white vs. black situation - it's okay when the character is white, but racist when the character is black. This is why Disney's so nervous.

Nonetheless - here's some more examples of them improving by including black characters in their animated classics::

1997's "Hercules" - the muses who narrated the film were African American.

1999's "Fantasia 2000" - One of the main character's in 'Rhapsody in Blue' segment was a black steel worker.

2000's "John Henry" - A short that portrayed the life of the African American legend

2001's "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" - Audrey Rocio Ramirez was one of the crew who went to Atlantis. She was the chief mechanic.

2002's "Lilo and Stitch" - Cobra Bubbles was the C.I.A. agent who returned over and over throughout the film.

2003's "One by One" - a short that showed African children flying kites to traditional African music. Intended for a third Fantasia.

2004's "Home on the Rage" - Buck, the horse, and one of the main characters was voiced by Cuba Gooding Jr.

2007's "Meet the Robinsons" - the matron of the orphanage was African American.

2008's "BOLT" - the network executive was African American

2008's "Tinker Bell" - Iridessa, one of the main five fairies and friend to Tinker Bell, is black.


And don't forget such shows as "That's so Raven" and "Cory in the House", and "The Proud Family".

As for films, there's "Haunted Mansion", "College Road Trip", "Remember the Titans", the 'Pirates of the Caribbean' trilogy, and "High School Musical 3" - all of these star blacks in important roles.

As for films about blacks? "Selma, Lord Selma", "The Color of Friendship", and "Ruby Bridges".

No, Disney isn't perfect in their track record for featuring black characters - but it wasn't really "safe" so to say until the 70's when over a fourth of their current canon had already been made. With the scrutiny they get for "Song of the South" over 60 years later and the anger they are getting now for "The Princess and the Frog" - why shouldn't they be a little wary about how to portray African Americans?
<<<<

Someone said it sounded like I was saying blacks are more sensitive than other ethnic groups. He also said "Song of the South" wasn't a well enough known movie to count as Disney putting in an effort to portray blacks. Here was my response:

>>>>"Song of the South" was a major movie for its time, and it still has a theme park ride modeled after it - 'Splash Mountain'. In fact, it used to be considered part of the same line as "The Little Mermaid" and "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs". It was because of the threats from figures such as Maya Angelou that Disney quietly removed it from this list, hoping to quell the negativity.

So, if it was still a part of that line and if it had ever been released here, it would be a sibling to "Cinderella" and "BOLT" and all the other 'animated classics'. It would be as prominent as they are.

I do not pretend to know what it's like to be an African American or even pretend to really know African Americans, period. I am living and was raised in a white bread town. My 'town' has less then 800 citizens, and three are black (a mother, father, daughter). They didn't even move here until three years ago. Because of this, I'm 'inherently racist' - I'm ignorant about the affairs and issues of African Americans, but I do not hate them, hold and prejudice against them, or plan to/want to discriminate against them. The closest I've been 'inside their head' is through the book "Black Like Me" which we read for Sociology class.

There's no way to write this without sounding racist so I won't make exuses I'll just write it - yes, I feel that African Americans sometimes are more sensitive than those of other ethnicities. "Pocahontas" was scrutinized by Native Americans, as was "Brother Bear" - but not enough for changes to be demanded of the films. There were no major threats of boycotts against "Aladdin" or "Mulan". Yet, a year away from release, and people are already blogging to skip this film - already demanding changes from Disney. Maybe I am just an ignorant white boy, but it's what I'm seeing.

Like the examples I gave before - 'tar baby' was a racist character in "Song of the South" because tar is black so it's like an effigy. If that had been 'glue baby' with white glue, would anyone have even blinked an eye?

Cinderella was a chambermaid, but that was fine because she was white. Maddy being a chambermaid alluded to slavery. What if this film was about another white princess - named Maddy - would anyone have said anything at all?

And here's a personal example. When I was about 9 years old, I was at a mall where they had indoor rides and play areas. My sister and I were waiting our turn to go down a slide on a playground - it was a tube slide. There was a young, about 6 year old African American boy sitting in the tube. My sister kindly asked him to go down so we could have our turn. He wouldn't. She gave him a few minutes and asked again but he still refused. Finally, after a third refusal, she lightly pushed him so he'd go down. He told his mom and she went and got mall security and my sister and I were asked to leave the mall. The worst part was our parents had gone shopping and felt we'd be safe in the play area without them watching, so imagine their surprise when they found us sitting outside. We had tried to go find them but on request of the boy's mother, the security forbid us to. My parents tried to explain the situation to him and he kept accusing them of raising racist children.

If that had been a white boy in the slide that my sister pushed, would any of this had happened? At worst, he would have cried and been upset but we wouldn't have been forced to sit outside of a mall for two hours alone.

So no, I don't understand the affairs of African Americans and don't pretend to - but when it comes to Disney's classics and various real-world issues, I do believe they 'play the race card' and get more riled up about things than members of other ethnic groups.
<<<<
User avatar
Escapay
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 12562
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
Contact:

Post by Escapay »

Neal wrote:2001's "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" - Audrey Rocio Ramirez was one of the crew who went to Atlantis. She was the chief mechanic.
Um...I'm sure Audrey was meant to be portrayed as Spanish.

There is Dr. Sweet, however. ;)

albert
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion? :p

WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?
User avatar
Kram Nebuer
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1992
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2004 2:03 pm
Location: Happiest Place on Earth :)
Contact:

Post by Kram Nebuer »

Neal wrote:2001's "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" - Audrey Rocio Ramirez was one of the crew who went to Atlantis. She was the chief mechanic.
You forgot Dr. Sweet! He's African American and Native American. (ETA: Shucks, Escapay beat me to it!)

Also, every time I watch Dumbo, I've always wondered why the Roustabouts were never criticized for being happy, African-American workers of the circus. As a kid, I never really understood what they were saying and now that I'm older and DVDs have subtitle capabilities, I can certainly see how some of the lyrics in that song would surely cause critics to make criticisms towards Disney. (Oh man, I hope this doesn't cause a recall of all Dumbo DVDs to delete that scene!)


Song of the Roustabouts

Hike! Ugh! Hike! Ugh! Hike! Ugh! Hike!
We work all day, we work all night
We never learned to read or write
We’re happy-hearted roustabouts

Hike! Ugh! Hike! Ugh! Hike! Ugh! Hike!
When other folks have gone to bed
We slave until we’re almost dead
We’re happy-hearted roustabouts

Hike! Ugh! Hike! Ugh! Hike! Ugh! Hike!
We don’t know when we get our pay
And when we do, we throw our pay away
(When we get our pay, we throw our money all away)
We get our pay when children say
With happy hearts, "It’s circus day today"
(Then we get our pay, just watching kids on circus day)

Muscles achin’
Back near breaking
Eggs and bacon what we need (Yes, sir!)
Boss man houndin’
Keep on poundin’
For your bed and feed
There ain’t no let up
Must get set up
Pull that canvas! Drive that stake!
Want to doze off
Get them clothes off
But must keep awake
Hep! Heave! Hep! Heave! Hep! Heave!
Hep! Heave! Hep! Heave! Hep! Heave!
Hep! Heave! Hep!

Swing that sledge! Sing that song!
Work and laugh the whole night long
You happy-hearted roustabouts!
Pullin’, poundin’, tryin’, groundin’
Big top roundin’ into shape
Keep on working!
Stop that shirking!
Grab that rope, you hairy ape!
Poundin’! poundin’! poundin’! poundin’!
Oh...
Image
<a href=http://kramnebuer.dvdaf.com/>My ÂşoÂş DVDs </a>
Lazario

Post by Lazario »

Kram Nebuer wrote:Also, every time I watch Dumbo, I've always wondered why the Roustabouts were never criticized for being happy, African-American workers of the circus.
Can anyone tell they're specifically Black People? You barely see their faces at all.

See, now this is getting ridiculous. Everyone here is doing, well to be honest, what straight white people tend to do all the time- get silly and bring up tons of things that are completely irrelevent to the subject at hand in hopes to blindside the main point or draw attention away from something they don't want scrutiny placed on.

This has nothing to do with scenes in other movies where people can barely even tell who anyone is. Although, if anything it helps prove my point about Disney when they made Song of the South. And it has nothing to do with Affirmative Action - and I am damn offended someone decided to bring that up. It's a necessary evil in life (or- it was when it was first put into affect), it's there to right a wrong that happened long before it was set up, and I'm sick of hearing white people whine about it. They've been whining for over 20 years now. Like Escapay said, only in my style - just spend 2 seconds thinking how lucky you are for once.

Funny how when someone tells the dirty truth about something, certain people just squirt out of the cracks to start combatting it, defensive arguments all over the place. "It's a lovely film," yes, if you can ignore most of the dialogue, over 90% of the speaking parts, etc. In effect, it's lovely if you're not sitting in front of it- watching it. It's offensive, but most people don't want to admit it.


Anyway, I'm done with this discussion. Not because I'm disgusted or anything (I am a little bit, but then- I'm easy to disgust). But because there's no greater point to get to. There's a reason this movie will probably never be released by Disney and I'm glad for that. And I guess heterosexual white people need to vent more than anyone else, so let's be thankful they invented alcohol, drugs, and sex to keep the minorities from going insane over their problems.

Guess everything happens for a reason, after all.
User avatar
Flanger-Hanger
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3746
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Headquarters

Post by Flanger-Hanger »

Lace Collar: *Roars*

Just had to do that. I won't post anything more because I've listened enough about Affirmative Action (pros and cons) in law class enough already.
Image
User avatar
Neal
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 10:40 am

Post by Neal »

Lazario - If you don't want to be stereotyped, don't stereotype me, those who responded to you, or yourself. I may grow up in a strictly white city but that's NOT my fault. I hate this town and what it stands for. No one I know is truly racist. No one hates black, thinks they're dirty or inferior, or would ever want to discriminate against them - it's just between our size and location, no blacks have ever moved here. Travel seven minutes down the road, however, to a college town of 10,000 and there's a culturally diverse town with black teachers, police chiefs and doctors.

I'm not your rich, whiny, so comfortable he's jaded white kid.

I'm white, yes. But far from rich - my parents own our own business but we make very little money and find ourselves asking whether or not we can afford emergency room visits when someone has been hurt, etc.

I have a homosexual in my family, and a bi-polar/suicidal person in my family. The first has found life a cold, harsh place after coming out and the second has never had friends. No one cares to be around someone who switches moods in the blink of an eye and has made two attempts on their life.

So no, I may not be black, but I have felt pain and have seen loved ones deal with extreme prejudice and isolation. So don't stereotype us all as heterosexual white kids as if we're carefree and clueless. Everyone knows pain. And I don't think it's ever a safe or smart thing to begin ranking who's pains worse - but certainly I'm more than you're white straight kid who has no idea about pain.
User avatar
The_Iceflash
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1809
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:56 am
Location: USA

Post by The_Iceflash »

Lazario wrote:Everyone here is doing, well to be honest, what straight white people tend to do all the time- get silly and bring up tons of things that are completely irrelevent to the subject at hand in hopes to blindside the main point or draw attention away from something they don't want scrutiny placed on.
Excuse me? :o
Locked