L'Oreal sack trans model for racism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nitron

Evolution...Africa, cradle of us all.

I can only respond with this ,,,I'm sorry...

https://twitter.com/LONG_DRIVE/statu...07460570914816

---

Yes, there are scumbags among all races. What exactly is your point, and why is this relevant?

One ugly for another, hardly progress, like wild children running amuck.

Both lid to this.....

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=genocides+...ax=1&ia=images

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holzz

the Romans gave us shit we use today, and they never enslaved any black people.

---

Sometimes I wonder if you actually believe the ignorant bullshit you come out with or just post for comedic effect?...:dead-1::dead-1::dead-1:

Even watching Spartacus or Gladiator, despite their historical inaccuracies, would have told you that statement is utter nonsense.

I know, it really is scary, as scary as a Black man with a gun -Huey Newton- or a poem- Langston Hughes.

Munroe Bergdorf is Black, Transgendered, Intelligent, Clever and Articulate which is maybe why she was invited by L'Oreal to be part of a -get this- diversity project. But the project is all about the Brand and making money for the Brand, and nothing must upset the reputation of the Brand. Because they're worth it. But are you? Is she?

Hung Angels in its own way is also a Brand, not just on the commercial side, but in the solidarity we are asked to express for the women we love, without whom we would not be here. It is not asking us to admire everyone without complaint, we have preferences and tastes that diverge, but as a basic principle, Munroe is one of us, and worthy of respect; she has not robbed or lied, been nasty to children, or beaten someone up or murdered anyone. And we can respectfully challenge her views in detail, and I reckon she could give a good answer to any question.

Add Munroe Bergdorf to the list of women I would like to take to dinner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GroobySteven

Really?
No, it just makes you an incredibly ill-educated idiot - even more so for posting this.

---

the romans had slaves, certainly. but they never had racially-based slavery, like later Europeans did. unless you know some piece of Roman history/ancient-era history that most don't, it's not really me who is "an incredibly ill-educated idiot".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Laphroaig

Sometimes I wonder if you actually believe the ignorant bullshit you come out with or just post for comedic effect?...:dead-1::dead-1::dead-1:

Even watching Spartacus or Gladiator, despite their historical inaccuracies, would have told you that statement is utter nonsense.

---

so you're saying the Romans went to Africa, enslaved blacks on ships, took them to plantations, and invented an entire ideology on how to treat them as sub-humans? no. many Roman slaves were Germanics, who were white, incidentally.

I think you both need to brush up on reading comprehension, since it's patently clear that is not what I was referring to...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holzz

so you're saying the Romans went to Africa, enslaved blacks on ships, took them to plantations, and invented an entire ideology on how to treat them as sub-humans? no. many Roman slaves were Germanics, who were white, incidentally.

I think you both need to brush up on reading comprehension, since it's patently clear that is not what I was referring to...

---

Were you unaware that the Roman Empire extended to Africa? Romans brought back slaves from all parts of their empire, including Africa, so of course they had black slaves...:roll:

This is what you wrote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holzz

the Romans gave us shit we use today, and they never enslaved any black people.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holzz

the romans had slaves, certainly. but they never had racially-based slavery, like later Europeans did. unless you know some piece of Roman history/ancient-era history that most don't, it's not really me who is "an incredibly ill-educated idiot".

---

Yeah you are completely an idiot.
You've proved it once again.
Re-read what you wrote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holzz

the romans had slaves, certainly. but they never had racially-based slavery, like later Europeans did.

---

This may be true, but how is it relevant to Monroe Bergdorf's comments about the role of racial exploitation in Western development? Are you seriously suggesting that because the Romans contributed to Western development, and they did not practice systematic racism, then we can absolve ourselves and ignore anything that came later?

What is it with not using capitals at the start of sentences, by the way? Are you are trying to affect an ee cummings style? If so, you need to drop the punctuation as well.