3 ms·

I just read the Wikipedia entry on the term cakewalk, I didn't see anything horrible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cakewalk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cake

I just read the Wikipedia entry on the term cakewalk, I didn't see anything horrible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cakewalk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cakewalk

carapace 8y ago
You didn't have to "go there". But since you did... Well, it's been whitewashed there, as you might expect for an information source so prominent in the public eye. I'll be damned if I'm going to try to unpack the enormities contained in the idea of masters awarding slaves cake for the best performances of their own mockery, here on HN, on a thread about FB. I'll point out that the wikipedia section on "Fancy ladies" opens with a warning that "This section's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia." These details have only recently escaped the Grey File. I didn't suspect about "Fancy ladies" until I read certain passages in Sam Clemens' uncensored autobiography when it was finally published in 2010. They sure don't teach this stuff in school. My meta-point stands: should I feed you more details until you see the horrible truth, like some deviant that gets off on violating innocence? Should I keep my mouth shut and look forward to a day when all the nightmares have been forgotten?
- marak830 8y ago
  Jesus go have a cup of tea or so mething. As for being shocked so deeply by this, perhaps it's time to grow up a little and realise history isn't clean sections with adverts in-between and censoring of the violence, it's full of arseholes doing the most rotten shit they can get away with either for pleasure or gain, and then realise the shocker: those arseholes still exist.
  - carapace 8y ago
    The thing I find most amusing about your response is that it could cut-and-paste replace my own response to the OP. You're reiterating my point. And also, perhaps, missing it at the same time?

I just read the Wikipedia entry on the term cakewalk, I didn't see anything horrible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cakewalk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cakewalk

carapace 8y ago

You didn't have to "go there". But since you did... Well, it's been whitewashed there, as you might expect for an information source so prominent in the public eye. I'll be damned if I'm going to try to unpack the enormities contained in the idea of masters awarding slaves cake for the best performances of their own mockery, here on HN, on a thread about FB. I'll point out that the wikipedia section on "Fancy ladies" opens with a warning that "This section's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia." These details have only recently escaped the Grey File. I didn't suspect about "Fancy ladies" until I read certain passages in Sam Clemens' uncensored autobiography when it was finally published in 2010. They sure don't teach this stuff in school. My meta-point stands: should I feed you more details until you see the horrible truth, like some deviant that gets off on violating innocence? Should I keep my mouth shut and look forward to a day when all the nightmares have been forgotten?

marak830 8y ago
Jesus go have a cup of tea or so mething. As for being shocked so deeply by this, perhaps it's time to grow up a little and realise history isn't clean sections with adverts in-between and censoring of the violence, it's full of arseholes doing the most rotten shit they can get away with either for pleasure or gain, and then realise the shocker: those arseholes still exist.
- carapace 8y ago
  The thing I find most amusing about your response is that it could cut-and-paste replace my own response to the OP. You're reiterating my point. And also, perhaps, missing it at the same time?