![]() |
|
#10
|
||||
|
Quote:
1) Dark doesn't need to be defined. It can be left mysterious, just like how certain texts rely on interpretation of the reader, part of that interpretation adds to the mystery and the fun of it. However -- 2) Let's hypothetically grant your point and say Dark is linked to skin color, and that is what it refers to (this is hypothetical, I will reiterate, this is not what I am claiming). My question is, what is your point if it is? That's not racist, that's a descriptor. It's not assigning character qualities neither positive or negative, it's a physical descriptor speaking to a demographic. There is nothing inheriently racist about this. It's the same thing as asking about a person's race on a population census. There is neither positive nor negative qualities about this, merely used as a tool in human languages as a descriptor. The problem is that it is YOU that are assigning some kind of nefarious meaning to a certain type of physical description. Your personal (and illogical) inference betrays exactly what you think about certain types of people, and that simply by mentioning a physical descriptor that it carries a negative connotation. The only logical justification to explain your interpretation is that you have some kind of inherent bias and racism you are applying to the term, and that you are projecting that interpretation on others. You're actually the problem here, assuming that's what you meant. I'll be charitable and assume you don't actually mean that however, do you? These sub 100 Int Antonicans man. Gotta spell out literally everything for them.
__________________
Ever /report a playa?
(nope) ![]() | |||
|
Last edited by ya.dingus; 07-30-2025 at 07:45 PM..
| ||||
|
|