Offended by a black Santa?[W:113]

[Excon]

Re: Offended by a black Santa?

ok but I wonder what you would feel

I do not care what you wonder about me.
Your wonderment, as well as any answer I would provide, is irrelevant.

 

[Medusa]

Re: Offended by a black Santa?

I do not care what you wonder about me.
Your wonderment, as well as any answer I would provide, is irrelevant.

Santa does not care either!!!!!!!

 

[Absentglare]

Re: Offended by a black Santa?

Your reply is nonsensical.
Again.

How does the age depicted change what is being argued?

You don't think that Micky could be shown as an earlier age?​

Your failure to answer just indicates that you know your question was silly.

Age is irrelevant to the argument.​

Apparently you do not understand that age is irrelevant to the argument.

There is no double standard or flip flop there.
It is hilarious you actually think that. Age and skin color issues are totally distinct.



iLOL
No. That is you imagining things and attempting to interject that which is irrelevant to what I said.
Which is you showing you have no valid argument.

Again.

Age is irrelevant to the argument.​

You clearly don't understand the argument. The argument is that skin color is not fixed, just as age is not fixed. If you are presuming a static expectation for mythical character appearance, you are applying a double standard where age is fluid but skin color is not.

It seems that you are fundamentally incapable of addressing this criticism which clearly destroys your poor argument.

 

[Excon]

Re: Offended by a black Santa?

Santa does not care either!!!!!!!

As usual, another irrelevant response from you. Figures.

 

[Excon]

Re: Offended by a black Santa?

You clearly don't understand the argument.

No Absentglare, clearly I do, which is I am able to point out it is irrelevant.

The argument is that skin color is not fixed, just as age is not fixed.

And yet it is.
Sinterklaas was created as a white man.

If you are presuming a static expectation for mythical character appearance, you are applying a double standard where age is fluid but skin color is not.

And that is where your argument is wrong.
Depicting Sinterklaas at a different age, would still be depicting the same white character.
Depicting Sinterklaas at a different height would still be depicting the same white character.
Depicting Sinterklaas with a leg blown off from a minefield would still be depicting the same white character.

It seems that you are fundamentally incapable of addressing this criticism which clearly destroys your poor argument.

:lamo

You haven't destroyed anything nor could you.
Age has nothing to do with the skin color argument.
Your failure to grasp that just speaks to your own irrationality.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: Offended by a black Santa?

No Absentglare, clearly I do, which is I am able to point out it is irrelevant.

And yet it is.
Sinterklaas was created as a white man.


And that is where your argument is wrong.
Depicting Sinterklaas at a different age, would still be depicting the same white character.
Depicting Sinterklaas at a different height would still be depicting the same white character.
Depicting Sinterklaas with a leg blown off from a minefield would still be depicting the same white character.


:lamo

You haven't destroyed anything nor could you.
Age has nothing to do with the skin color argument.
Your failure to grasp that just speaks to your own irrationality.

Depicting a Sinterklaas with a tan would still be depicting the same character.

That is why you fail: you are presuming that skin color is static. It has been both shown and explained to you that it is not.

 

[Excon]

Re: Offended by a black Santa?

Depicting a Sinterklaas with a tan would still be depicting the same character.

:lamo Hilarious.

Your arguments are becoming more and more stupid as you go along.

No ****. A white character with a tan is still a white character. Not black.
A white character covered in black soot is still a white character. Not black.

None of these things you have mentioned actually changes the skin color of the character, as it is still a white character.

That is why you fail: you are presuming that skin color is static. It has been both shown and explained to you that it is not.

No. iLOL
Your above reply is just an example as to why you fail.

 

[Absentglare]

:lamo Hilarious.

Your arguments are becoming more and more stupid as you go along.

No ****. A white character with a tan is still a white character. Not black.
A white character covered in black soot is still a white character. Not black.

None of these things you have mentioned actually changes the skin color of the character, as it is still a white character.

No. iLOL
Your above reply is just an example as to why you fail.

Oh, i see.

I thought your evaluation was on appearance, not on race. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that your reasoning was not purely racist. My mistake.

 

[Excon]

Oh, i see your confusion.

You don't understand the difference between appearance and race.

I thought your evaluation was on appearance. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that your reasoning was not purely racist. My mistake.

Oh look, another stupid reply from you. Figures.
You were wrong.
Get over it.