• Now LEGO BLOCKS Can Discriminate Over Their Parts?!

    From Ubiquitous@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 9 04:30:45 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti- LGBT because they have �male and female parts that mate together�.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Blueshirt@21:1/5 to Ubiquitous on Sun Feb 9 14:18:44 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    Ubiquitous wrote:

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego
    bricks are anti-LGBT because they have "male and female parts
    that mate together".

    I saw that mentioned in the news on Friday, but I just thought
    the person that had created that tour for the Science Museum had
    mixed up their months and thought it was April 1st.

    All publicity is good publicity I suppose...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From the dog from that film you saw@21:1/5 to Ubiquitous on Sun Feb 9 15:55:26 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    On 09/02/2025 09:30, Ubiquitous wrote:
    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti- LGBT because they have ‘male and female parts that mate together’.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa



    fun story but totally untrue.
    what the guide actually points out is that people refer to bricks as
    male and female, an example of how language reinforces the normality of hetereosexuality (which i agree is the norm)
    it doesnt criticise lego in any way but why spoil a fun story with facts?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BTR1701@21:1/5 to Ubiquitous on Sun Feb 9 15:22:46 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:30:45 AM PST, "Ubiquitous" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti- LGBT because they have ‘male and female parts that mate together’.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    Do these people have no self-awareness whatsoever?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From moviePig@21:1/5 to the dog from that film you saw on Sun Feb 9 11:23:08 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    On 2/9/2025 10:55 AM, the dog from that film you saw wrote:
    On 09/02/2025 09:30, Ubiquitous wrote:
    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are
    anti-
    LGBT because they have ‘male and female parts that mate together’.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa



    fun story but totally untrue.
    what the guide actually points out is that people refer to bricks as
    male and female, an example of how language reinforces the normality of hetereosexuality (which i agree is the norm)
    it doesnt criticise lego in any way but why spoil a fun story with facts?

    Well, *somebody* has to hang. I've already made the potato salad...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adam H. Kerman@21:1/5 to the dog from that film you saw on Sun Feb 9 16:34:17 2025
    Ubi's crosspost to newsgroups he doesn't read cut

    the dog from that film you saw <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 09/02/2025 09:30, Ubiquitous wrote:

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti- >>LGBT because they have 'male and female parts that mate together'.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    fun story but totally untrue.
    what the guide actually points out is that people refer to bricks as
    male and female, an example of how language reinforces the normality of >hetereosexuality (which i agree is the norm)
    it doesnt criticise lego in any way but why spoil a fun story with facts?

    She's literally reacting to a headline from The Telegraph.

    Here's the article, although it's been updated since Loesch commented on
    it.

    Science Museum in 'bonkers' LGBT Lego warning
    Institution's Seeing Things Queerly tour claims people think the toy
    bricks are 'gendered' and reinforces idea 'heterosexuality is the norm'
    by Craig Simpson
    Arts Editor
    The Telegraph
    06 February 2025 12:20pm GMT https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/06/lego-can-be-anti-lgbt-says-science-museum/

    The first line of the article

    Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.

    Yeah, that's LITERALLY criticizing Lego.

    Here's paragraph 2.

    A self-guided museum tour on "stories of queer communities,
    experiences and identities" includes a display of Lego bricks
    alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the
    idea that heterosexuality "is the norm".

    That's literally a criticism of how the pieces are designed to fit
    together, therefore normalizing heterosexuality.

    In a later paragraph,

    No source is provided for the alleged view that people consider
    Lego to be gendered, or that sticking bricks together is called
    "mating".

    None of this is about the use of gendered words in language. It's
    literally about the design of the toy and the action of fitting them
    together, and that the curator made shit up.

    You got this very wrong. Your criticism is off base, and you ruined my
    day by making me defend Ubi.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adam H. Kerman@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Feb 9 17:29:21 2025
    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
    Feb 9, 2025 at 8:34:17 AM PST, Adam H. Kerman <[email protected]> wrote:
    the dog from that film you saw <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 09/02/2025 09:30, Ubiquitous wrote:

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks
    are anti-LGBT because they have 'male and female parts that mate >>>>together'.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    fun story but totally untrue.
    what the guide actually points out is that people refer to bricks as
    male and female, an example of how language reinforces the normality of >>>hetereosexuality (which i agree is the norm)
    it doesnt criticise lego in any way but why spoil a fun story with facts?

    She's literally reacting to a headline from The Telegraph.

    Science Museum in 'bonkers' LGBT Lego warning
    Institution's Seeing Things Queerly tour claims people think the toy
    bricks are 'gendered' and reinforces idea 'heterosexuality is the norm'

    It literally is the norm. The norm is the position or status of 51% or more of >the population on any given issue.

    Heterosexuality is undeniably the norm in the human species (or any species >that reproduces sexually, for that matter). No amount of virtue-signaling or >rainbow flags will change that.

    Ole Christiansen's Lego plastic heterosexual-normalizing precursor
    interlocking bricks building block toys were first produced in 1949.

    You didn't believe that heterosexual was normal prior to the first
    prodcution of the toy. It's an evil conspiracy worthy of a Bond villain.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BTR1701@21:1/5 to Adam H. Kerman on Sun Feb 9 17:16:49 2025
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 8:34:17 AM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Ubi's crosspost to newsgroups he doesn't read cut

    the dog from that film you saw <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 09/02/2025 09:30, Ubiquitous wrote:

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti-
    LGBT because they have 'male and female parts that mate together'.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    fun story but totally untrue.
    what the guide actually points out is that people refer to bricks as
    male and female, an example of how language reinforces the normality of
    hetereosexuality (which i agree is the norm)
    it doesnt criticise lego in any way but why spoil a fun story with facts?

    She's literally reacting to a headline from The Telegraph.

    Science Museum in 'bonkers' LGBT Lego warning
    Institution's Seeing Things Queerly tour claims people think the toy
    bricks are 'gendered' and reinforces idea 'heterosexuality is the norm'

    It literally is the norm. The norm is the position or status of 51% or more of the population on any given issue.

    Heterosexuality is undeniably the norm in the human species (or any species that reproduces sexually, for that matter). No amount of virtue-signaling or rainbow flags will change that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From anim8rfsk@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Feb 9 10:40:34 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:30:45 AM PST, "Ubiquitous" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti- >> LGBT because they have ‘male and female parts that mate together’.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    Do these people have no self-awareness whatsoever?


    I stopped going to our science Museum when they had some sort of exhibit opening party and they dressed a black woman in a Santa Claus wig to greet people at the door as da Vinci. The head of the museum told the local fish
    wrap that the museum felt it was important to teach visitors that science wasn’t done by white men.



    --
    The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BTR1701@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Feb 9 17:55:11 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    On Feb 9, 2025 at 9:40:34 AM PST, "anim8rfsk" <[email protected]> wrote:

    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:30:45 AM PST, "Ubiquitous" <[email protected]> wrote: >>
    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti-
    LGBT because they have ‘male and female parts that mate together’.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    Do these people have no self-awareness whatsoever?

    I stopped going to our science Museum when they had some sort of exhibit opening party and they dressed a black woman in a Santa Claus wig to greet people at the door as da Vinci. The head of the museum told the local fish wrap that the museum felt it was important to teach visitors that science wasn’t done by white men.

    LOL! It's important that we lie about who did science.

    I also wonder when it was exactly that Italians (i.e., DaVinci) stopped being considered ethnic minorities in America and started being "white men".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From moviePig@21:1/5 to Adam H. Kerman on Sun Feb 9 13:37:20 2025
    On 2/9/2025 11:34 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
    Ubi's crosspost to newsgroups he doesn't read cut

    the dog from that film you saw <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 09/02/2025 09:30, Ubiquitous wrote:

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti-
    LGBT because they have 'male and female parts that mate together'.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    fun story but totally untrue.
    what the guide actually points out is that people refer to bricks as
    male and female, an example of how language reinforces the normality of
    hetereosexuality (which i agree is the norm)
    it doesnt criticise lego in any way but why spoil a fun story with facts?

    She's literally reacting to a headline from The Telegraph.

    Here's the article, although it's been updated since Loesch commented on
    it.

    Science Museum in 'bonkers' LGBT Lego warning
    Institution's Seeing Things Queerly tour claims people think the toy
    bricks are 'gendered' and reinforces idea 'heterosexuality is the norm'
    by Craig Simpson
    Arts Editor
    The Telegraph
    06 February 2025 12:20pm GMT https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/06/lego-can-be-anti-lgbt-says-science-museum/

    The first line of the article

    Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.

    Yeah, that's LITERALLY criticizing Lego.

    Here's paragraph 2.

    A self-guided museum tour on "stories of queer communities,
    experiences and identities" includes a display of Lego bricks
    alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the
    idea that heterosexuality "is the norm".

    That's literally a criticism of how the pieces are designed to fit
    together, therefore normalizing heterosexuality.

    In a later paragraph,

    No source is provided for the alleged view that people consider
    Lego to be gendered, or that sticking bricks together is called
    "mating".

    None of this is about the use of gendered words in language. It's
    literally about the design of the toy and the action of fitting them together, and that the curator made shit up.

    You got this very wrong. Your criticism is off base, and you ruined my
    day by making me defend Ubi.

    What the Science Museum actually said:

    “Like other connectors and fasteners, Lego bricks are often
    described in a gendered way. The top of the brick with sticking out pins
    is male, the bottom of the brick with holes to receive the pins is
    female, and the process of the two sides being put together is called
    mating.
    This is an example of applying heteronormative language to topics
    unrelated to gender, sex and reproduction. It illustrates how
    heteronormativity (the idea that heterosexuality and the male/female
    gender binary are the norm and everything that falls outside is unusual)
    shapes the way we speak about science, technology, and the world in
    general.”

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BTR1701@21:1/5 to moviePig on Sun Feb 9 19:45:43 2025
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:37:20 AM PST, "moviePig" <[email protected]> wrote:

    This is an example of applying heteronormative language to topics
    unrelated to gender, sex and reproduction. It illustrates how heteronormativity (the idea that heterosexuality and the male/female
    gender binary are the norm and everything that falls outside is unusual)

    That's literally true. Heterosexuality *is* the norm. They're arguing here
    that something that's true shouldn't be true.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adam H. Kerman@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Feb 9 19:31:18 2025
    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:

    . . .

    I also wonder when it was exactly that Italians (i.e., DaVinci) stopped being >considered ethnic minorities in America and started being "white men".

    Swarthy Mediterranean types?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adam H. Kerman@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Feb 9 20:21:26 2025
    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:37:20 AM PST, moviePig <[email protected]> wrote:

    This is an example of applying heteronormative language to topics
    unrelated to gender, sex and reproduction. It illustrates how >>heteronormativity (the idea that heterosexuality and the male/female
    gender binary are the norm and everything that falls outside is unusual)

    That's literally true. Heterosexuality *is* the norm. They're arguing here >that something that's true shouldn't be true.

    How is moviePig, self-proclaimed language expert, unaware that "gender"
    refers to a hell of a lot more than sexual characteristics and
    reproduction? Plumbing terms are all gendered. Those four holes in the
    top-back of the kitchen sink that plumbing fixtures fit through are
    called "cockholes". Access to a sewer or an underground vault is through
    a "manhole". Electrical connections are male -- plug -- and female --
    jack or port.

    If Lego was intended to impose hetero-normative beliefs upon children
    (not a concept at the time), then donn't tell moviePig that most pieces
    are hermaphroditic: Plug on one side, jack on the other.

    What does that teach the young'uns about sexuality?

    Also, if Lego pieces aren't allowed to couple, where does moviePig
    believe that replacement Lego pieces come from?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From moviePig@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 9 15:37:01 2025
    On 2/9/2025 2:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:37:20 AM PST, "moviePig" <[email protected]> wrote:

    This is an example of applying heteronormative language to topics
    unrelated to gender, sex and reproduction. It illustrates how
    heteronormativity (the idea that heterosexuality and the male/female
    gender binary are the norm and everything that falls outside is unusual)

    That's literally true. Heterosexuality *is* the norm. They're arguing here that something that's true shouldn't be true.

    It's the "norm" in the sense of "usual, typical, or standard" -- and,
    afaics, what's being demonstrated here is how pervasive that 'norm' is.
    What *isn't* explicitly addressed is how 'norm' often becomes "normal".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From moviePig@21:1/5 to Adam H. Kerman on Sun Feb 9 15:54:45 2025
    On 2/9/2025 3:21 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:37:20 AM PST, moviePig <[email protected]> wrote:

    This is an example of applying heteronormative language to topics
    unrelated to gender, sex and reproduction. It illustrates how
    heteronormativity (the idea that heterosexuality and the male/female
    gender binary are the norm and everything that falls outside is unusual)

    That's literally true. Heterosexuality *is* the norm. They're arguing here >> that something that's true shouldn't be true.

    How is moviePig, self-proclaimed language expert, unaware that "gender" refers to a hell of a lot more than sexual characteristics and
    reproduction? Plumbing terms are all gendered. Those four holes in the top-back of the kitchen sink that plumbing fixtures fit through are
    called "cockholes". Access to a sewer or an underground vault is through
    a "manhole". Electrical connections are male -- plug -- and female --
    jack or port.

    If Lego was intended to impose hetero-normative beliefs upon children
    (not a concept at the time), then donn't tell moviePig that most pieces
    are hermaphroditic: Plug on one side, jack on the other.

    What does that teach the young'uns about sexuality?

    Also, if Lego pieces aren't allowed to couple, where does moviePig
    believe that replacement Lego pieces come from?

    As I can't easily find a definition of "cockhole", I must rely on Adam's expertise (and can only hope he hasn't been manipulated for the
    amusement of others). Meanwhile, though, we're all familiar enough with "manhole" to suspect it actually refers to "a hole large enough to admit
    a man" (...usually descending backwards, iirc, so perhaps "asshole"?)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to moviePig on Mon Feb 10 10:48:02 2025
    On 2025-02-09 20:37:01 +0000, moviePig said:
    On 2/9/2025 2:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:37:20 AM PST, "moviePig" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>
    This is an example of applying heteronormative language to topics
    unrelated to gender, sex and reproduction. It illustrates how
    heteronormativity (the idea that heterosexuality and the male/female
    gender binary are the norm and everything that falls outside is unusual)

    That's literally true. Heterosexuality *is* the norm. They're arguing here >> that something that's true shouldn't be true.

    It's the "norm" in the sense of "usual, typical, or standard" -- and,
    afaics, what's being demonstrated here is how pervasive that 'norm' is.
    What *isn't* explicitly addressed is how 'norm' often becomes "normal".

    It doesn't really matter what is said or what is meant, there will
    always be some fool who takes offence, largely because they have
    nothing better to do.

    For example, the sentence
    "the idea that heterosexuality and the male/female
    gender binary are the norm and everything that
    falls outside is unusual"
    will get complaints because it says that being non-male and non-female
    is "unsual", which some people will read as a synonym for "weird".

    The reality is that people simply need to grow up and ignore all this Politically Correct garbage.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From suzeeq@21:1/5 to Adam H. Kerman on Sun Feb 9 13:53:58 2025
    On 2/9/2025 11:31 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:

    . . .

    I also wonder when it was exactly that Italians (i.e., DaVinci) stopped being
    considered ethnic minorities in America and started being "white men".

    Swarthy Mediterranean types?


    Thati's only Sicilians. Many Northern Italians are blonde and blue-eyed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 10 10:54:24 2025
    XPost: rec.toys.lego, alt.radio.talk

    On 2025-02-09 17:40:34 +0000, anim8rfsk said:
    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:30:45 AM PST, "Ubiquitous" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>
    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are
    anti-LGBT because they have ‘male and female parts that mate together’. >>>
    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    Do these people have no self-awareness whatsoever?

    I stopped going to our science Museum when they had some sort of exhibit opening party and they dressed a black woman in a Santa Claus wig to greet people at the door as da Vinci. The head of the museum told the local fish wrap that the museum felt it was important to teach visitors that science wasn’t done by white men.

    Typical gender/ethniticy swapping idiocy. :-(

    That idiot "head of museum" should fired.

    A. A lot of "science" was done by white men.
    B. There are black women that have done "science" as well.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From anim8rfsk@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Feb 9 14:54:34 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 9:40:34 AM PST, "anim8rfsk" <[email protected]> wrote:

    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:30:45 AM PST, "Ubiquitous" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>
    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti-
    LGBT because they have ‘male and female parts that mate together’. >>>>
    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

    Do these people have no self-awareness whatsoever?

    I stopped going to our science Museum when they had some sort of exhibit
    opening party and they dressed a black woman in a Santa Claus wig

    Oops, I meant beard, but it was probably both

    to greet
    people at the door as da Vinci. The head of the museum told the local fish >> wrap that the museum felt it was important to teach visitors that science
    wasn’t done by white men.

    LOL! It's important that we lie about who did science.

    I also wonder when it was exactly that Italians (i.e., DaVinci) stopped being considered ethnic minorities in America and started being "white men".


    Excellent point



    --
    The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adam H. Kerman@21:1/5 to suzeeq on Sun Feb 9 22:08:43 2025
    suzeeq <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 2/9/2025 11:31 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:

    . . .

    I also wonder when it was exactly that Italians (i.e., DaVinci)
    stopped being considered ethnic minorities in America and started being >>>"white men".

    Swarthy Mediterranean types?

    Thati's only Sicilians. Many Northern Italians are blonde and blue-eyed.

    I know. Neopolitans are pale.

    But BTR1701 is correct that Italians were looked down upon for decades.
    Hell, even the Irish looked down upon them.

    The idea that ALL white people ever were the American elite has always
    been absurd.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Doctor Fill@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 10 02:11:48 2025
    XPost: alt.radio.talk, rec.toys.lego

    Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are
    anti-
    LGBT because they have �male and female parts that mate together�.

    https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa



    It's that negroe DEI thing Trump's been talking about.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From anim8rfsk@21:1/5 to Adam H. Kerman on Sun Feb 9 19:18:04 2025
    Adam H. Kerman <[email protected]> wrote:
    suzeeq <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 2/9/2025 11:31 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
    BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:

    . . .

    I also wonder when it was exactly that Italians (i.e., DaVinci)
    stopped being considered ethnic minorities in America and started being >>>> "white men".

    Swarthy Mediterranean types?

    Thati's only Sicilians. Many Northern Italians are blonde and blue-eyed.

    I know. Neopolitans are pale.

    I thought they were brown and white and pink.


    But BTR1701 is correct that Italians were looked down upon for decades.
    Hell, even the Irish looked down upon them.

    The idea that ALL white people ever were the American elite has always
    been absurd.




    --
    The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)