How exactly in principle is this different from Chester the Molester flashing children in the park?
Should Janet Jackson or Justin Timberlake or anyone else actually be PUNISHED for the Superbowl Titty Massacre? My personal emotional gut reaction is not necessarily a reliable guide to best public policy, but my valve would instinctively suggest just forgetting it. Jeez, it's just a couple of seconds of tit. On the bad side, they might merit the modest punishment of a little public ridicule for their foolishness.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - David Yeagley
Diva, where can I see this "dossier" you have created? I think I should sue you. You say too many things that simly aren't true, and too many things that show your intent to defame and denigrate.
Yes, you indeed must be sued. You are simply too wrong, and too malcontent.
For those who do not know, the Lumbee are basically a white-black-Cherokee group, numbering around 33,000 now, and have never been granted federal recognition, or even recognition by the Cherokee tribe itself. They're all angry about that.
I think everyone would do well to ponder the meaning of the word "racism." It is one of the most subjective, volatile Leftist concoctions of our time.
27 - Eric Olsen
Okay, I read the gorilla post: I don't see how any human being wouldn't find it grotesquely insulting. The text next to the photo is a screed against black sexuality - the connection implied is not ambiguous. Does the writer really think Janet Jackson, a beautiful, successful AMERICAN really concocted this scheme to force "black sexuality" upon the nation? Or rather perhaps she thought it might generate publicity for her new album and teetering career. Do you really think this multi-millionaire thinks she speaks for the black masses? I think, rather, she was thinking of herself. This is in no way shape or form different from anything Madonna has been doing for years, what Britney and Xtina have done more recently. Janet may have "forced herself in everyone's face" - although I believe the extent of the exposure was inadvertent - but her "blackness" has nothing to do with it. It's called showbiz.
This line: "All the natural, psychologically negative associations with darkness, Freudian sexual aversion, and the sense of uncleanness, must be over come by studied, determined effort"
This is the most insanely racist shit I have read this side of the KKK or American Nazis. "Negative associations with darkness"? You mean like walking into a cave or forest? And this relates to the color of people's skin? Preposterous. Study after study on beauty has found many cross-cultural similarities regarding facial symmetry, eye-size, ratios between body parts, healthy teeth and hair - much of it relating to signs of fertility - the only consistent issue regarding skin is its health. Janet Jackson sure as shit meets all these requirements.
Don't try to turn your own racialist psychopathologies into the standards of a nation, or the "white race" or any other pathetic demagogic lunacy.
I have heard no "liberal," white or black, defend this stunt on racial equality terms - this is the hallucination of a feverish, Mandingo-fixated brain of the most pernicious, vile, irrelevant, vicious kind.
Shame on anyone who would defend it in any way.
I may feel Mac Diva sees racism behind incidents and frames of mind when other explanations seem to cover the facts equally well, but this is a case of the most screaming egregious, obvious racism this side of a lynch mob.
Gorilla=black woman? Mindless, spineless worm=the creator of such wretched filth.
28 - Ms. Tek
Look, I say that all women should cut off their right breast and follow me to my new nation of Amazons. I will teach you all how to fire arrows and fight with sheild and sword and well will GET the idiots in the world and make rule over them.
Yes we will... oh yes we will.
And we'll have the coolest outfits too!
29 - Tim Hall
Ugh. Following that link is like stepping in a dog turd on the street.
Why does Al not only proceed to walk across the carpet with dogshit on his shoe, but then invite the dog in to crap in the living room some more?
Someone will now accuse me of being doggist...
30 - Ms. Tek
Okay, I just read that link that Al posted.
Um. What a load of racist shit.
David Yeagerly, do the world a favor and drown yourself. You are a racist, stupid, waste of oxygen.
AL, why the HELL are you linking crap like that?
31 - BB
Eric pretty much summed it up. David Yeagley's link and surreptitious inference between a gorilla and Janet Jackson is outrageous and is certainly beneath the dignity of Blogcritics.
32 - Dawn
Al,
It is not lightly that I say the following:
HAVE YOU LOST YOUR FUCKING MIND?
I am so thoroughly disgusted by this Bald Eagle prick that I want to not just smack the shit out of him, but his mother also for allowing him to be born.
The fact that you aren't condemning his post and his vile proclamations for the racist pile of nonsense they are tells me one of two things, you are either totally insensitive to not just black women, but women in general and harbor deep racist views, or you are just fucking insane.
Please Al, tell me you are insane, or tell this Yeagley fucker to go kill himself before he poisons someone else's mind with this hateful nonsense.
I am so disgusted I could puke.
Al, how could you? Seriously Al, how could you?
33 - David Yeagley
Please, again, define RACIST. Anyone brave enough to even try? Can you elevate your consciousness for just a moment and try to think?
34 - David Yeagley
Al, your clientele are not showing a lot of objectivity here. Wonder what sunk them into their rage?
Also, threats of violence can be prosecuted. But, apparently they're used to this sort of thing. They show no signs of concern.
Well, there's hardly more to say, unless one of them ventures to define racism. But I expect they are incapable of that.
35 - Eric Olsen
Racist: anyone who presupposes characteristics in an individual - particularly of a negative kind - based solely upon the skin color of the individual.
36 - Ms. Tek
Yo, David... you keep talking about suing and libel and prosecution. Yet if anyone attacks the fecal matter that you spew, you'll hide underneath the first amendment. This is fine and good... I like it when degenerates open their mouth, it makes it that much easier to avoid them.
But in case anyone is really worried what David Yeager might do legally, I can at least verse you on what Illinois law states in this case:
Battery is to actually, physically touch someone without consent.
Assault is to threaten an intent to harm.
Therefore it perfectly legal to say.
David, I wish you would stick your cock in a meat grinder while inserting razor blades into your anus until you bleed from your genital or rectum to death.
David, why don't you sit in the tub, fill it with water and then drop a toaster in there.
David, why don't you go eat some raw pork that has been sitting in a pile of chicken blood for about 4 hours.
See... I have not said once here that I am going to hurt him... nor implied that I would. Sill, I am sure he gets the message that I think he is a racist twit and that if he would help the evolution of the the human species by offing himself, I wouldn't complain. This is free speech at its finest!
37 - Eric Olsen
And re racism: I neglected to mention that at the very core of racism is the assumption that some homo sapiens are somehow less "human" than others based upon the color of their skin.
38 - David Yeagley
Your comments speak for themselves. Your language and attitude display all the problems perfectly.
Your definition of racism is limited to a third grade level of comprehension. It is so incomplete that it is distorted. It is a dumbed-down piece of political rhetoric, and uttely outside the realm of psychology, as in Gestalt perception, for example.
So, this is why there is no progress with people who adhere to that simplistic, emotional-oriented piece of rhetoric.
The anal/oral obssessions exhibited in the vulgar language are as Freudian as the sun is hot.
Al, how did these non-thinking people get attached to your site?
39 - Eric Olsen
Al, I believe it is now time for you to step in and disabuse this condescending, solipsistic, amoral, brain-damaged, evasive, constipated, pseudo-Freudian, racialist of his delusions. He makes Kim du Toit look enlightened.
40 - bhw
Yes, I can see how the belief that white skin is "naturally" more attractive than black [or, that whiteness is in fact *the* natural standard of beauty, so that blackness could never actually achieve the status of beautiful or sexaully attractive] is far more sophisticated in thinking than the definition of racism as the belief that one group of people is superior to another by the simple virtue of their race.
Yes. Intellectual superiority. I see it now.
41 - Dawn
Yeagley, you are a cowardly, pussified, unmanly, un-evolved wussbag who deserves to have his ass kicked by a bunch of effeminate primates - and in my case I actual mean the species, not some unveiled racist rhetoric used to degrade persons of diverse racial backgrounds to that of whites.
OH, for your information, Yeagley, this is NOT Al Barger's site. It's everyone who participates at Blogcritics site, and you assbag, are welcome to get lost any time now.
42 - David Yeagley
No one but you said anything about superiority or inferiority. You are showing great insecurity here.
You are arguing with nature, but, locked in your political rhetoric, you can't see it.
43 - Ms. Tek
No, David Dumbass... Its not political rhetoric, its called being a human who uses the brain that god gave us.
You are swine.
44 - BB
I for one would be very interested to hear what is Mr. Yeagley's definition of racism. Rather than pontificate with vague and tired cliche, please Obe-Wan Kenobi endulge our curiosity and enlighten us with your wisdom!!!
45 - bhw
No one but you said anything about superiority or inferiority. You are showing great insecurity here.
How about this:
It is a dumbed-down piece of political rhetoric, and uttely outside the realm of psychology, as in Gestalt perception, for example.
So, this is why there is no progress with people who adhere to that simplistic, emotional-oriented piece of rhetoric.
Are you not alluding to your intellectual superiority over the people here who follow the "simplistic" belief?
You are arguing with nature
No. We are disagreeing with *your intepretation* of nature.
46 - BB
RE #44: Mr. Yeagley I'm still waiting. The gauntlet has been thrown and I'm calling you out. Please be kind enough to indulge us. I'm really looking forward to this!
47 - Tim Hall
BB, you're wasting perfecly good electrons trying to get a sensible response from him. Like all true wingnuts, he'll just flouce off accusing us of 'blind hate', for refusing to acknowedge his 'superior wisdom'. There's just no point arguing with these people. They inhabit a world completly orthogonal to the rest of the universe.
Time for Al Barger to clean all the dogshit Yeagley has left over the blogcritis living room carpet.
48 - BB
Tim, rather than fall into the trap of insults and innuendo I would prefer that he choke on his own words. Come on Mr. Yeagley. Impress us with your formidable intellect - PLEASE!!! That is if you've got the balls.
49 - Tim Hall
>>I would prefer that he choke on his own words. <<
I thought he'd pretty much done that already.
50 - Ms. Tek
BB, he's at soccer right now. He just wrote a email to his webhost complaining about me. Read my latest trackback to this post to get the oh-so-juicy details.
51 - BB
Tim I am reminded of the quote:
It is impossible to win an argument with an ignorant man.
..Anonymous
Perhaps your advice is well advised but I must say that I am disappointed. I am in just the mood for a weeny roast.
52 - BB
Ms. Tek, it appears that Mr. Yeagley can only muster the courage to pick on women.
53 - BB
BTW, nothing sexist is implied :-)
54 - Ms. Tek
No worries, BB. I understand. ;o)
55 - Mac Diva
Wait a minute. Just got back from being out. Left the PDA and the laptop at home for once. Didn't have time to go online anyway. When I last looked into the matter, Al Barger was claiming I 'made up' the information about David Yeagley and his post. So, I'm playing catch-up, here. I rarely express some emotions in public, but I am gratified (yes, gratified!) that people listened to what I said and took the time and energy to follow-up by reading Barger's entry and its sources. That is all I ask, that people consider persons like this for themselves instead of buying into the claim 'there are no racists.'
I don't believe anything logical will penetrate Yeagley's mind, such as it is. However, along with the other racists he cites, including the bloggers at Gene Expression and Richard Poe, he is monitored by civil rights groups as an advocate of racial hatred hatred and anti-Semiticism. In other words, he is a known quantity. Except for the far Right speaking circuit, which also seems to be losing interest in him, he has rendered himself unemployable. So, he is paying the price for epitomizing evil in a way. Furthermore, his blog has never caught on. The comments he has received by having 'Janet' in some headlines far outrank his usual silence or single digits. Only one new link to his blog appeared -- from Al Barger. The blogosphere is responding better than I had hoped in regard to this pathetic excuse for a human being.
56 - BB
MD, sometimes you really irk me with your tangents and racist conspiracies but this time I have to give you credit where credit's due. You were right on with respect to this character. Thanks for bringing it to my attention and if he should ever rear his ugly head again I will be waiting for him.
57 - BB
I too rarely show my feelings publicly but the ugly arrogance of this guy was certainly deserving.
58 - David Yeagley
TEK, I apologize for accidently pushing "reply" instead of "forward."
That message was not intended for you, but notice there was nothing hateful or vulgar in it. Do you notice things like that?
Now, here' my definition of racism: a desire to harm members of another race, because of their race.
I suppose the key word is harm. That is highly interpretable. So, let's make it "ill will," or "intent to harm or injure."
I don't really know what definition will satisfy "black" people, or "black" women specifically. The only people that have clearly shown ill will and intent to harm regarding this thread are apparently "black," but, then again we never know. Lots of pretenders on the internet, as noted by your host.
To express offense, to express defensiveness, to express resistance to invasion of privacy, to express disapproval of behavior or clear intent, is not racism.
Equality does not mean everyone's ideas must be the same, or that all people think on the same level of objectivity, or have the same capacity to, or have the same education.
I think some people here are not really used to being treated equally, but instead, think equality must mean they are to be thought of as faultless, respectable regardless of language or attitude, and honored irrespective of behavior.
That's not being treated equally. That's being indulged.
59 - David Yeagley
Macdiva, I don't know how you can live with the false information you continually contrive. I realize the internet is a free place, but people like you are jeopardizing that freedom for us all. You never substantiate any of your accusations. This is very unprofessional, and you should really stop it.
Opinion is one thing. Everyone can disagree with everone else. But to present falsities, as though they were fact, is denigrating to everyone.
Let's see the link to your posted dossier on me.
Let's see that list on which my name is included, watched by civil rights groups for racial hate and anti-semitism.
Provide this information. Then someone might take you seriously. Otherwise, you are a serious liar, and a liability to the internet.
60 - Mac Diva
I still refuse to address the refuse known as David Yeagley. However, anyone wanting additional information can Google for most of what I have said here. The information is online, including the firing as an adjunct instructor from the University of Oklahoma and his participation in a traveling minstrel show for the far Right. The most damning material you will find about Yeagley is written by, you guessed it, Yeagley. I'm not going to link to it, but if you seek it out, you will see that what he posted in those entries is typical.
Don't worry about Yeagley's threats. Even in very conservative Oklahoma he is a pariah. No lawyer would ever represent him, even if he had a case.
61 - BB
"Now, here' my definition of racism: a desire to harm members of another race, because of their race. I suppose the key word is harm. That is highly interpretable. So, let's make it "ill will," or "intent to harm or injure."
Dear Mr. Yeagley. Let me begin by saying I am not black, nor am I of the colored persuasion. In fact I'm as lily white as they come. So I gather from your response that is your definition of racism. From which unabridged dictionary did you pull that out of? Or can I presume that having used the word "suppose", that is something you just came up with off the top of your protruding brow? With all your intellectual superiority is that the best you can do? So what this all comes down to is you are just making it up as you go along. Well sir it doesn't work that way in the real world so please spare us your insincere prattle. We have seen your obscene website and racist inference of Janet Jackson and if anybody has a right to be offended it is her and I sincerely hope that she has excellent lawyers that will be visiting upon you forthwith. I would also add you should be so lucky that a female of any race that attractive would even give you a second look. Now I believe I speak for most when I say please do the human race a favour and crawl back under the hole from whence you came.
62 - Shark
Greetings,
I'm a Doctor who was once an adjunct Professor at a mail order college in Bumfuck, Oklahoma.
It is my professional opinion that there might be a medical explanation for all of this.
Bear with me:
"BAD EAGLE" might have had a BAD EXPERIENCE as a child--- and now thinks he's a BAD BOY who needs to be punished.
He was probably caught by his mother in the act of masturbating while looking at a National Geographic pictorial featuring large naked-breasted African women.
When embarrassed by his mother at the EXACT moment of his climax, he was not only humiliated, but saw his own mother as a sexual object, which not only furthered his humiliation, but created a psychological trigger mechanism whereby he made the following associations:
black = breast =
nipple = sexual excitement =
jack-off = sin =
mommy = humiliation =
self-loathing = punish me =
write really silly shit and post it in public = typographical suicide =
verbal/modem powered flagellation =
absolution/redemption =
christ-like sensation =
subsequent madonna imagery =
holy white mother tit he'll never be worthy of =
---a return to---
black = breast
ad infinitum.
In layman's terms, this simply means that when he sees the color black and/or a naked breast, his psyche immediately vomits forth a chaotic swirl of old negative associations from childhood that eventually ends with his abused and abusive sexual member rising like a starving Pavlovian Dog strapped to an out-of-control escalator.
And he doesn't like this feeling.
His body knows instinctually, (due to inherent bio-physical taboos that deactivate his little semi-flacid tool of sin in order to avoid mating with "his mommy"---thus preventing the conception of a brother who's also his son), that he is not worthy of mating with a woman, nor touching that sacred black breast, nor approaching anything that is meant to cause pleasure because, in the end, (literally and figuratively) those acts will eventually cause him more pain and humiliation. (Bruises sometimes turn black.)
It is the sum of these underlying psychological traumas that drive him to:
1) post his theories in public; (he hopes to be punished for his lust and his little evil pee-pee)
2) write things like: "All the natural, psychologically negative associations with darkness, Freudian sexual aversion, and the sense of uncleanness, must be over come by studied, determined effort"
NEXT!
Paper submitted 2/9/2004 by Dr. M. C. Sharkolian, Ph.d, Ob/Gyn, B.S.
63 - Mac Diva
ROFL!
This is the most apt analysis of Yeagley I've seen outside of Native American forums, where he ranks slightly above pond scum.
And oh, before I foget, Lumbees are Cheraw, not Cherokee. (Figures that he wouldn't know what he is talking about.) To be more specific, we are Cheraw, Scottish, British, West African and any strays that might have passed through the area and set eyes on lovely Lumbee maidens. Appearance can vary. The commonality of ancestry, place and segregation has resulted in an identifiable culture.
64 - Al Barger
Oy, vey. I wrote a small essay here having NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with race nor even intending to push people's buttons (I THOUGHT I was being pretty unobjectionable), yet here I am- Hitler again, at least through guilt by association [comment 32, for example].
For my part, I am not defending anything Yeagley says about race. I wasn't reading anything about race when I was originally there. [Ms. Tek, I only linked to that piece because Diva had already cited it at least twice, and I figured at that point on making it convenient for y'all to see what exactly she was complaining about.]
Look at what I quoted here, and the post that it was from. Nothing racial in it. I picked it out because he was the first person I saw who suggested what suddenly seemed like an interesting and perfectly reasonable question: Couldn't Jackson and/or Timberlake reasonably be prosecuted for indecent exposure? That seems like a fair question. Perhaps I'm wrong to ask.
As to dragging a bunch of racial stuff into this THANK MAC DIVA. She spends a big part of her time LOOKING for stuff to be offended by. It wasn't here, but she went over to HIS turf to find it and drag it back over here (starting with comment 10, and in another unrelated post). If anyone is dragging racial poopy onto our carpet, it's her.
She lives to play a big game of racial gotcha. Well, fine, she GOT ME! Two points for her. Somebody I quoted said other things that are objectionable.
I won't defend the gorilla post. That looks pretty crappy to me. I take rather a different view on women of color than Yeagley apparently does. On the other hand, how might I have felt about Diva's comment #6 HERE? How much nicer is that than Yeagley's gorilla? I don't recall any of you standing up for MY little bitty hurt feelings. [Note also there my response in comment 12 as a model of trying to make nice rather than taking offense.]
As to my outlook on the topic of black women, I would very much like to father Macy Gray's child. I would be quite pleased to stay at home raising what would doubtless be a beautiful brown daughter. In short, Macy would not need that AK she sang about in "Give Me All Your Lovin' or I Will Kill You" in order to get my attention- though she would of course be welcome to bring it along for foreplay as we conceive our offspring.
Having inserted a hopefully more positive interlude there into this rancorous discussion, let me address some of the rest of y'all:
Blogcritics: Have you all lost your minds?
Are you reading the incredible wicked hatefulness coming out of your own keyboards here? "Meat grinder"? "Kill himself?" Then you're shitty with Yeagley for his supposed bad attitudes? Even taken the worst way, nothing he's saying is even in a LEAGUE of ugliness with what all you "good" people are spouting here.
You all have double and triple and quadruple standards on race that you need to examine. Anything that any black person might conceivably be offended by apparently absolutely demands that all good people make a public display of great emotional outrage. Anyone who doesn't make the proper display of OUTRAGE is presumed to be wicked and evil by association. [Dawn, I must gently and lovingly reject your hysterical outrage in comment 32.]
As to being "racist," de-humanization of the individual seems to be the main bad defining point of racism, and you have all certainly de-humanized the heck out of this guy.
Perhaps the Bad Eagle has some racial hangups. He writes about a lot of things. I've only read him a little bit. He's had some interesting things to say on other topics in the past. Some of them I agree with. Some I don't.
Perhaps the Native American has some negative and unhealthy racial attitudes. Who would have thunk? Hey, I'm expected to show great tolerance for black racial pathologies on a daily basis. If there's one group in America that rates even more understanding for possibly negative racial attitudes than a black man, it would definitely be an Indian. At worst, he's not violent, or advocating violence- so cool your jets.
Hey, Jesus hung out with the worst sinners he could find. Perhaps a better approach than your wicked hatred would be to make nice. Try something more like, "Brother, that gorilla thing ain't cool. What the heck are you thinking?"
Some of y'all think that Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On" was a great philosophical statement, with that "only love can conquer hate" stuff. Why don't you consider trying some of that with Yeagley?
Going off like you have here may make you feel better, but it is not helpful nor morally superior nor intellectually superior. It may be cathartic for a black person. It may help the white folks assuage their white guilt. It does not, however, improve our understanding of each other, nor does it increase the peace.
Even if I find some of his views highly objectionable [I was particularly unimpressed with his "turd world" comments], I'm inclined to try to be nice to people who are not violent. Look how much direct personal abuse I absorb here on a regular basis. Look how many direct LIES and wild accusations I absorb from Mac Diva again and again- mostly with pretty fair humor.
Why exactly should I be so particularly outraged over Yeagley? To me, Mac Diva is FAR more offensive- and far less honest about it. Where was all this righteous outrage when she was going on about the "Jew Horowitz" a few days ago? Where is the outrage at her very wicked personal attacks on me, and for that matter everyone else whom she regards as conservative? Or is hating Jews or white guys cool?
I've been attacked by Diva on this site as supposedly supporting slavery. I'd have more good reason to be upset about that kind of LYING than over some guy at another website who seems to have some unfortunate personal aversion to black women.
I'd suggest you consider addressing the wickedness and DISHONESTY constantly being put into the world by Diva right here in our own Blogcritics house before going out looking for the splinter in someone else's website eye to get all up in arms about.
Racial and tribal hangups are a basic part of human psychology. They go all the way back into the reptilian brains of our early evolution. Insert image from 2001 of the bone turning into the space ship.
It is our job as evolved beings to try to use our higher brains to sort these things out. Having a similar counter-reaction from the reptilian brain center doesn't help.
Perhaps some of you should write David Yeagley an apology for your unspeakable rudeness, then try addressing your differences in a calm and respectful manner.
At a minimum, I would appreciate it if you would at least not use MY post as the spot to spew on about wanting to see this guy dead, or in a meat grinder. Thank you.
You might be surprised at what a little respectfulness gets you. Some of what he says seems pretty objectionable. Yet note the way that he writes. He's not cursing, nor sending out death wishes, nor anything like that.
Finally, I apologize if this response lacks the full measure of righteous indignation that some of you would like to see, but I mostly try to save actual outrage for people who are violent thugs (ie Arafat or Hussein) or people who are engaged in defending them.
Someone who simply writes a few mean words on a website, however, I generally don't get too mad.
Shark had perhaps a somewhat better approach in comment 62- the ever popular Rod of Ridicule. The height of my psychiatric credentials is a minor in psychology from Ball State University, so in proper humility I won't presume to make any grand appraisal of his Freudian analysis.
It's funny, though, which is a start.
Let us close here, then, with the classic words of reconciliation and benediction from Paul Simon:
I’ve reason to believe
We all will be received
In Graceland
65 - Mac Diva
As predicted (see other thread), Al Barger's habitual 'What racism? I ain't done nuthin' response. Who does he think he's foolin'?
And, no, I'm not about to change my mind about him. He has proved his credentials as a bigot too often. In fact, I withdraw my across the board offer of fetching a last drink of water for any dying human being in regard to Barger. May he choke on his own forked tongue.
66 - Al Barger
Again with the habitual malicious and unfounded accusations of racism. In what way have I spoken here ill in any way of black folk or any other race? Ah, but then actual FACTS should not be allowed to get in the way of your higher truths, right? I mean, why start now?
67 - Shark
Barger is the online equivalent of a guy who hurls a hand-grenade into a crowded room and then says, "Hey, I thought somebody asked for a light."
AND the following is so disengenuous that it's funny:
"I wrote a small essay here having NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with race nor even intending to push people's buttons... "
"...Couldn't Jackson reasonably be prosecuted for indecent exposure? That seems like a fair question. Perhaps I'm wrong to ask."
Oh. My. Gawd.
Picture Barger as a pre-Raphealite cherub sucking its thumb and blushing.
First of all, Barger, it's not like you and/or Bad Eagle Scout came up with some original, revolutionary thought: an easily offended fellow Puritan litigant in Knoxville named Terri Carlin filed a CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT almost a week ago.
And after a week of a few hundred thousand hits at Blogcritc and dozens of original entries on the subject of Janet's tit, pornography, and America's crudeness, your simple wittle post asking a simple wittle question that includes a link to Himmler Junior's site with a picture of a gorilla was obviously meant to stir up some 'liberal' shit.
Which it did, as usual.
At which point, you don your halo and play innocent victim at the hands of a hypocritical liberal horde who are poisoned by PC.
Man, I've only been here a few days, and I've already figured out your MO.
The only way to deal with people like you is to "NOT PICK UP THE HAND-GRENADE".
==================================
re: Shark's ever popular Rod of Ridicule - You ain't seen nuttin' yet, Big Owl.
68 - Dawn
Al, the only person worth apologizing to are the people who were so fundamentally damaged by reading that filthy tripe that they needed to resort to primal rage to purge themselves.
But, since in many ways I really like you and was only trying to force you to see what an lowly asshole that Yeagley fellow is, I will apologize for my attack on you. Al, I am truly sorry for harshing your mellow. I do NOT think that you are a racist, but guilt by association can often be a crime in itself.
Also, do yourself and those of us so deeply grossed out by the fact that a man who would call himself a human would compare a woman's reproductive organ to that of a primates, DON'T DEFEND HIM. HE IS A WORTHLESS RACIST PIECE OF CRAP.
I group him with all the other monsters in the world, you know, like child molesters and child killers.
Burn on Mr. Yeagley, burn on. Your racist filth has been found, and you have been discovered for the vile turd you are.
69 - Ms. Tek
"I would be quite pleased to stay at home raising what would doubtless be a beautiful brown daughter."
Excuse me? Mixed race kids are not brown. I am not BROWN.
*shakes head* I am an mixed race American. I am NOT a color.
70 - Eric Olsen
except for the tattoos, of course (smile)
71 - Ms. Tek
TAttoos are in Black and Grey.
72 - David Yeagley
Gentlemen(?),
I raised the issue, can taste be dictated? Can something as personal as sexual attraction be defined by law and coerced on others?
That's what this is about, but people were apparently too offended by an illustration of a gorilla to get the point.
Perhaps I should have used a different animal, a cow's udder, a horse's pap, or a leopard's nipples. Would that have been more effective?
I do not believe that all people have equal sexual attraction for each other. This is contrary to biology and psychology. That in America there are legalists who in the name of equality want to force everyone to be attracted to everyone else, is the zenith of ideological narcissism. It is outside the realm of common sense.
Barger SHOULD be defended. He took up only the issue of prosecution for indecent exposure.
That other people do not know how to live with being offended was perhaps a fact he overlooked. Everyone else is supposed to be free to offend, but somehow, some certain people are expected to take it, and never express themselves when THEY are offended.
This is called tyranny.
73 - Eric Olsen
Ah, at last some semblance of logic. If this were simply about your personal taste then we could disagree with your distaste for chocolate honeys, but not think you necessarily a deranged racist. But you have done exactly what you accuse us of: extrapolating out from your own taste to that of all "white people," AND trying to defend your own personal taste as something more than your own personal taste with psychobabble about an innate preference for light over dark, associating dark skin with uncleanliness (!?!), and extrapolating a personal stunt by a performer into some kind of collective subconscious assault by black people upon white.
This is all just preposterous, bizarre, and would apear to rflect some kind of psychosis.
And by the way, the Houston police have already said there was nothing remotely prosecutable about the halftime show, regardless of my own feelings regarding its tawdryness.
Would it have made a difference had you used another animal? Why would it ever occur to you to compare a human being - in neither a joking nor metaphorical manner - to an animal?
74 - David Yeagley
I don't know that the Houston Police have any reliable judgment in this matter at all. It is the state's attorney who would and should file. Or, the people should file a class action suit. The state files in their behalf, I believe.
Sexual preference, based on culture, gender, color, is the most obvious element of nature. Why would you deny this built in selection process? It is not intellectual superiority that dictates such a denial, it is a fabricated idealism.
Now, in an increasingly integrated world, people are attracted to whomever they please. However, they cannot escapte the politicalization of sex.
Too, there are races, few in number, who have to be concerned about preserving their own race. This kind of preference does not imply disdain for other races. That is a political lie. Love for one's own race is natural. Some individual people tend to step outside this realm, and pursue their own experimentations. No law against that, today, anyway.
75 - Joe
Wow, this is the most hate-filled, vile, vulgar, and offensive blog I have come across on the internet. The very thing you are accusing Mr. Yeagley of is so much more profound in yourselves, I guess that is what they call denial. In case you haven't noticed, he has been nothing but respectful in his replies to your hate-filled vile displays at disagreement. If you want to disagree with Mr. Yeagley, then please do so with some civility and semblance of intelligence. Your racist replies are more reprehensible than what he wrote. I hope he can prosecute you for them. Good riddance!