ivoryst

3 ms·

1.
by ivoryst 11y ago
You obviously have a good grasp of vocabulary, but use it to obfuscate rather than communicate. You could of-course speak plainly about what you really mean, but that would unmask your true prejudices, wouldn't it? And yes, from the n
2.
by ivoryst 11y ago
Its easy to be a keyboard warrior, and judge others from the safety of your home. Maybe one day you'll be given an opportunity to prove to the world just how brave and courageous you are facing up to "horrible, manovelent criminal
3.
by ivoryst 11y ago
So your friends have witnessed human sacrifice of children? Get real. If you dont want to be taken out of context, dont use colorful anectdotes straight out of a 1850s novel.
4.
by ivoryst 11y ago
Sorry, but what exactly is your point (in plain english)? And I used the term "outsider" to refer to any perceived differences, whether its race, gender, religion, beliefs etc. And yes, some people condone; while others actively p
5.
by ivoryst 11y ago
> That's still opposite the claim that they were good before colonization What does colonization mean to you? What value did colonization bring (lets talk factual specifics here) that weren't there before. > They might be be
6.
by ivoryst 11y ago
> I'm pointing out is that these societies were messed up well before colonization Using your metric of "messed up society" ie the public, condoned torture and murder of "outsiders", the point am making is that
7.
by ivoryst 11y ago
>This is Africa we are talking about. An entire continent that is filled with tribes and small villages that at least at one time, were ruled by witchdoctors. Got a plague among you? Sacrifice a few children they say. Your ideas about af
8.
by ivoryst 11y ago
Could the american south of 50 years back included as a "sick society". Just swap "evil witch" with "uppity negro" and exactly the same atrocities were being committed. Labeling whole groups of people as savage