Just as a further note on my last post, I'm going to toss this up. I imagine no one cares, but hey, for the sake of completion:

SOURCE

Why, because I have a bunch of fucking idiots who can't realize that when I say that the current emphasis on subject A isn't called for, I don't mean that we shouldn't learn about it at all?

Because I'm realistic enough to realize that men played a larger role in history in women? That isn't being a bigot, that's admitting to the truth, and not being a bitch because I'm pissed about how little women are mentioned in a stupid textbook.

Way to take what I say out of fucking context. That seems to be the rule of thumb on this forum.

if (braincellcount < 100 )
makeupbullshit(rand(5));
if (braincellcount < 200 )
putwordsinmouth(rand(5));

It isn't that difficult to remember that I learned a fair bit about women's suffrage.

Maybe you shouldn't try to pull a bunch of bullshit out of people's posts that was never there in the first place.

Why the fuck is everything black and white with you? If one culture worships cars, the other CAN'T. Saying something shouldn't have AS MUCH importance means I'm saying that it shouldn't be taught at all.

My point was the hispanic culture in general takes much better care of their cars, and puts a lot more money into them than white people do. Notice the key word "in general" there. There's obvious exceptions to every rule.

It means you think we should learn less of it, and more (I guess) of your favourite European countries and dudes. Do you honestly think you're convincing anyone of anything other than your inability to read context? Look, that is a trait most folks have; if you don't, I guess you can't help it, but that doesn't mean you ought to be dictating curricula when you barely know the history yourself.

http://www.blackstonelimo.com/images/h2/tunnelh2.jpg

I bet there's a lot of hispanics in this car.

I have a Dodge Stealth and a 99 Benz that would argue with your statment. I think that mexican culture puts emphasis on a different kind of car usage. It's comparing apples and oranges and expecting to classify them as pomegranates. Blanket statements are as bad as polarizing everything into two categories.

How is that a cultural thing? I thought some people just take good care of thier cars. Especially when you live in the south west that you have to drive everywhere.

I've explained myself as much as I would need to to anyone of normal intelligence. You are just too fucking stupid to understand what I've been saying, despite me repeating it numerous times over the past hour, very clearly. All you care about is latching on to a single sentence that I post, trying to make it look like THAT is my primary emphasis, and PMSing all over it.


Which I've already said and agreed to. Way to completely turn my words around in a different direction.

When I realize that people aren't getting what I'm saying, I KNOW it isn't something that needs changing on my end. I'm sick and tired of you and others putting words in my mouth, bringing in random subjects, turning my words around in another direction, etc. Who knows, maybe I do need to be more clear. Reading back over it, it doesn't seem to be too hard to comprehend.

You used it as an example of the differences between those two races, though. One can only assume that if you feel hispanics worship cars, then whites do not, or to not nearly a severe degree; if you did not feel this way you would not have said it.

Am I explaining contextual clues to you.

http://www.drivenbyboredom.com/bling/dumbasses1.jpg

If you would stop repeating the same thing over and over ("The empathesis of this minority group in history class is way over-represented, I feel that we should learn more about the whites because they had the biggest impact on America") maybe we would too. But since that's your only point, well.

Double Post:
Are you Simply Majestic. Serious question.

Goddamit you are a fucking retard.

Why is so hard for you to realize that there is no point in spending an insanely large amount of time learning about the entire history of the slave trade in an AMERICAN HISTORY COURSE, which includes hundreds of other subjects.

I am NOT saying people should learn less of it, I am NOT saying people should learn more of Europeans, race has NOTHING TO FUCKING DO WITH THIS.

Relevance to American History is what is important. Slave trade is a big part of American History. But not such a big part that we need to start learning the entire history of West Africa instead of other, more relevant parts of American History.

I didn't say that, I said that there are still entites around that benefited directly from slavery.

Double Post:
So you feel the amount of time spent learning about slavery in America is unjustified (a week is unjustified? Two weeks?) but you don't think the amount of time should be lessened any.

Well then.

How about you stop putting lies in my mouth directly contradicting that exact point, so I don't have to repeat myself to some fucking braindead prick who can't seem to grasp a very simple concept ->

"The emphasis of this minority group in history class is over-represented, I feel that we should learn more about European immigrants because they had a bigger impact on American society & politics."

Fixed.

Such as the crusades and the King James' book.

Hmm.... no, that's exactly what we got from what you said. No lies there sir.

Time != Content.

There you go again. I never SAID this, nor do I think we should learn about this in AMERICAN HISTORY. No wonder you don't fucking understand a word of what I'm saying, you are to hung up on some apparant misconception of white superiority in what I've been saying.

Realizing that European immigrants played a larger role in the forming of American society isn't white superiority, its the fucking truth.

i'm not gonna do much arguuing or flaming, but here's my scoop on racism.

since yall seem to think history has everything to do with modern racism, so here's what's up with blacks and whites in history and why whites rightly get more attention:

-whites moved from white europe to a big chunk of land known today as the U.S.

-more whites moved over here from europe and helped build the US

-white king george taxed the white colonies so they had the whites vs. whites revolutionary war.

-white thomas jefferson and his white buddies founded the US.

-later on, the white spanish brought over blacks from africa

-the blacks were enslaved and the whites from the north didn't like that so they had the whites vs. whites civil war (union vs. white confederates)

-black martian luther king did his stuff

-US got in a war with japanese and white germans and white italians

-US got in a power struggle with white russions

-all that communism stuff happened with US vs. orientals (not africans)

so you can plainly see why whites get more attention than blacks in history; they were simply more involved.

And on a more practical note, blacks have a higher crime rate than whites. that's a plain a simple fact. nobody is enslaving them or any of that BS so they have no valid excuse for their crime rate. i'm not saying all blacks are criminls (far from it), but some of them (enough to give their race a generally bad reputation) do abuse their rough history just to try to get what they want instead of actually working for it.

It's really more of a contextual thing. A Just Sayin' sort of thing. Why?

No, you & others have been REPEATEDLY stating my opinions as though I think we shouldn't learn jack shit about Black history.

Well, okay, I'll grant that you probably want children to learn an amount less than zero about blacks, but you want them to learn less than they're learning now and right now that's not a whole hell of a lot.

I'm saying that you base your arguments on ignorance of very simple things, and somehow feel qualified to keep going about it.

http://www.sauder.com/images/site/misc/intro_garage.gif

This man does not care about the quality of his car.