One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
AFFAIRS OF THE HEART
Page 1 of 2 next>
Nov 10, 2016 14:10:38   #
Progressive One
 
Hollywood’s chaste depictions of interracial romance often omitted the physical aspects of love
BY LEWIS BEALE >>>
In 1967, the same year the Supreme Court case Loving vs. Virginia struck down laws banning miscegenation, Sidney Poitier starred in “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” as a black man romantically involved with blond Katharine Houghton. ¶ Yet in both real and reel life, black-white romantic relationships were problematic, fraught with legal and social taboos. In the case of Loving, that meant rural Virginia couple Richard and Mildred Loving, who married in Washington, D.C., in 1958, were arrested in their home state, forced to move away or be jailed and spent years fighting the racist law that affected them until the Supreme Court unanimously overturned it. ¶ “The fact any miscegenation laws even existed, these are vestiges of slavery,” says Jeff Nichols, director of “Loving,” a new film based on the famous case and starring Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga. “All of this speaks to the institutionalized racism in the South.” ¶ “Guess,” which was released six months after the Loving decision, was, in its own way, meant to be a liberal antidote to situations like this. In director Stanley Kramer’s film, parents and friends of the romantic couple discuss the pros and cons of their romance in a civilized manner until the woman’s father (played by Spencer Tracy) gives his blessing to the relationship.
But there are no big love scenes in the film, and it “shows Hollywood’s fear of a black man with a white woman,” says Donald Bogle, author of “Elizabeth and Michael: The Queen of Hollywood and the King of Pop,” as well as several books about African Americans in Hollywood.
“Poitier’s character in that film is so perfect — he’s a doctor — but the film still questions if he’s fit for this white woman,” Bogle adds. “It’s not dealing with the reality an interracial couple might have to face.”
This refusal to deal with the reality of interracial love and sex is nothing new; it’s pretty much how the movies have handled these relationships down through the years. Beginning with D.W. Griffith’s 1915 racist depiction, “The Birth of a Nation,” in which, as described by New York University film professor Sam Pollard, “the black man was this evil beast defiling white womanhood (in one scene, a white woman commits suicide rather than be ‘violated’ by a black man),” Hollywood has tiptoed around, or outright ignored, realistic depictions of interracial romance.
“During the classic Hollywood era, the industry was regulated by the Production Code, and it banned depictions of miscegenation,” says Ellen Scott, a UCLA professor and author of “Cinema Civil Rights.” Hollywood tastemakers of the era, she says, “thought these romances were disgusting and might offend audiences.”
One way the industry dealt with the issue was in a series of so-called tragic mulatto story lines in films such as “Show Boat” (1936), “Pinky” (1949) and “Imitation of Life” (1959), in which light-skinned blacks — always played by white actresses — cross the color line and pass as white until their “true” race is discovered and tragedy ensues. “The mulatto can pass, and infiltrate into the culture, and prove the lie in white culture because she can pass and be successful,” Bogle says. “But the mulatto is tormented and is a warning that the races shouldn’t mix.”
But if the races did mix — as in the 1957 “Band of Angels,” in which a white slave owner (Clark Gable) puts the moves on a mulatto woman (played, of course, by a white actress, Yvonne De Carlo) — it is almost always white man, black woman. Black man, white woman is the ultimate taboo. “White men who run Hollywood make these films,” Pollard says, “and these white male, black woman relationships are easier for them to digest.”
“This goes to gender politics,” adds Bogle. Black male sexuality “is so threatening , it calls into question white manhood and white power. And the idea that the white woman is on a pedestal and the black man will defile her, this becomes threatening.”
So threatening that even in a film like 1957’s “Island in the Sun,” which features several interracial couples, the romance between Harry Belafonte and Joan Fontaine is so chaste they don’t even touch.
So although there is a history of black men sleeping with white women in such blaxploitation films as “Super Fly,” and while Kevin Costner and Whitney Houston made for a very attractive, but unrealistic, couple in “The Bodyguard,” it was up to Spike Lee and his 1991 film, “Jungle Fever,” to really explore the issue of interracial romance in a contemporary setting, with Wesley Snipes and Annabella Sciorra playing star-crossed lovers.
“The film is fascinating because I don’t think Spike Lee reduces it to just a black man and white woman,” Scott says. “Part of the film is to suggest that not only is this a contemporary thing, it’s something that historically has been a factor in American life.”
Which is one reason why “Loving” works so well. Coming from an area where the races seemed to mix rather easily — Richard’s father even worked for a black man, and Mildred was part Native American — the film has a real feel for its environment and takes the Lovings’ relationship as perfectly normal.
“They came from such a unique place, I do believe they were allowed the room to fall in love,” Nichols says. “And what it says about race is this idea of love transcends racial barriers.”
Yet Bogle feels that filmmakers are still trying to come to grips with black-white romance. “Societal attitudes and opposition to interracial marriages, that’s one thing,” he says. But films still “don’t indicate that in interracial marriages there are cultural bridges people have to cross in order for the relationship to work. That’s something that can be enlightening; what we learn about one another in this kind of relationship.” calendar@latimes.com  

JUSTIN RENTERIA For The Times

Columbia Pictures
SIDNEY POITIER and Katharine Houghton starred in the movie “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” in 1967, the same year as the Loving case decision.

20th Century/Getty Images
HARRY BELAFONTE and Joan Fontaine in 1957’s “Island in the Sun.”

BEN GLASS Warner Bros.
KEVIN COSTNER and Whitney Houston starred in “The Bodyguard.”

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 14:25:10   #
cair k
 
Progressive One wrote:
Hollywood’s chaste depictions of interracial romance often omitted the physical aspects of love
BY LEWIS BEALE >>>
In 1967, the same year the Supreme Court case Loving vs. Virginia struck down laws banning miscegenation, Sidney Poitier starred in “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” as a black man romantically involved with blond Katharine Houghton. ¶ Yet in both real and reel life, black-white romantic relationships were problematic, fraught with legal and social taboos. In the case of Loving, that meant rural Virginia couple Richard and Mildred Loving, who married in Washington, D.C., in 1958, were arrested in their home state, forced to move away or be jailed and spent years fighting the racist law that affected them until the Supreme Court unanimously overturned it. ¶ “The fact any miscegenation laws even existed, these are vestiges of slavery,” says Jeff Nichols, director of “Loving,” a new film based on the famous case and starring Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga. “All of this speaks to the institutionalized racism in the South.” ¶ “Guess,” which was released six months after the Loving decision, was, in its own way, meant to be a liberal antidote to situations like this. In director Stanley Kramer’s film, parents and friends of the romantic couple discuss the pros and cons of their romance in a civilized manner until the woman’s father (played by Spencer Tracy) gives his blessing to the relationship.
But there are no big love scenes in the film, and it “shows Hollywood’s fear of a black man with a white woman,” says Donald Bogle, author of “Elizabeth and Michael: The Queen of Hollywood and the King of Pop,” as well as several books about African Americans in Hollywood.
“Poitier’s character in that film is so perfect — he’s a doctor — but the film still questions if he’s fit for this white woman,” Bogle adds. “It’s not dealing with the reality an interracial couple might have to face.”
This refusal to deal with the reality of interracial love and sex is nothing new; it’s pretty much how the movies have handled these relationships down through the years. Beginning with D.W. Griffith’s 1915 racist depiction, “The Birth of a Nation,” in which, as described by New York University film professor Sam Pollard, “the black man was this evil beast defiling white womanhood (in one scene, a white woman commits suicide rather than be ‘violated’ by a black man),” Hollywood has tiptoed around, or outright ignored, realistic depictions of interracial romance.
“During the classic Hollywood era, the industry was regulated by the Production Code, and it banned depictions of miscegenation,” says Ellen Scott, a UCLA professor and author of “Cinema Civil Rights.” Hollywood tastemakers of the era, she says, “thought these romances were disgusting and might offend audiences.”
One way the industry dealt with the issue was in a series of so-called tragic mulatto story lines in films such as “Show Boat” (1936), “Pinky” (1949) and “Imitation of Life” (1959), in which light-skinned blacks — always played by white actresses — cross the color line and pass as white until their “true” race is discovered and tragedy ensues. “The mulatto can pass, and infiltrate into the culture, and prove the lie in white culture because she can pass and be successful,” Bogle says. “But the mulatto is tormented and is a warning that the races shouldn’t mix.”
But if the races did mix — as in the 1957 “Band of Angels,” in which a white slave owner (Clark Gable) puts the moves on a mulatto woman (played, of course, by a white actress, Yvonne De Carlo) — it is almost always white man, black woman. Black man, white woman is the ultimate taboo. “White men whho run Hollywood make these films,” Pollard says, “and these white male, black woman relationships are easier for them to digest.”
“This goes to gender politics,” adds Bogle. Black male sexuality “is so threatening , it calls into question white manhood and white power. And the idea that the white woman is on a pedestal and the black man will defile her, this becomes threatening.”
So threatening that even in a film like 1957’s “Island in the Sun,” which features several interracial couples, the romance between Harry Belafonte and Joan Fontaine is so chaste they don’t even touch.
So although there is a history of black men sleeping with white women in such blaxploitation films as “Super Fly,” and while Kevin Costner and Whitney Houston made for a very attractive, but unrealistic, couple in “The Bodyguard,” it was up to Spike Lee and his 1991 film, “Jungle Fever,” to really explore the issue of interracial romance in a contemporary setting, with Wesley Snipes and Annabella Sciorra playing star-crossed lovers.
“The film is fascinating because I don’t think Spike Lee reduces it to just a black man and white woman,” Scott says. “Part of the film is to suggest that not only is this a contemporary thing, it’s something that historically has been a factor in American life.”
Which is one reason why “Loving” works so well. Coming from an area where the races seemed to mix rather easily — Richard’s father even worked for a black man, and Mildred was part Native American — the film has a real feel for its environment and takes the Lovings’ relationship as perfectly normal.
“They came from such a unique place, I do believe they were allowed the room to fall in love,” Nichols says. “And what it says about race is this idea of love transcends racial barriers.”
Yet Bogle feels that filmmakers are still trying to come to grips with black-white romance. “Societal attitudes and opposition to interracial marriages, that’s one thing,” he says. But films still “don’t indicate that in interracial marriages there are cultural bridges people have to cross in order for the relationship to work. That’s something that can be enlightening; what we learn about one another in this kind of relationship.” calendar@latimes.com  

JUSTIN RENTERIA For The Times

Columbia Pictures
SIDNEY POITIER and Katharine Houghton starred in the movie “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” in 1967, the same year as the Loving case decision.

20th Century/Getty Images
HARRY BELAFONTE and Joan Fontaine in 1957’s “Island in the Sun.”

BEN GLASS Warner Bros.
KEVIN COSTNER and Whitney Houston starred in “The Bodyguard.”
Hollywood’s chaste depictions of interracial roman... (show quote)


So in your opinion, this election was about blacks and whites creating a new human race.
Well, that's simplifying things. I see enough of that stuff when I go shopping. There's no need to pay good money to watch it on the silver screen.

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 14:31:48   #
mcmlx
 
Progressive One wrote:
Hollywood’s chaste depictions of interracial romance often omitted the physical aspects of love
BY LEWIS BEALE >>>
In 1967, the same year the Supreme Court case Loving vs. Virginia struck down laws banning miscegenation, Sidney Poitier starred in “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” as a black man romantically involved with blond Katharine Houghton. ¶ Yet in both real and reel life, black-white romantic relationships were problematic, fraught with legal and social taboos. In the case of Loving, that meant rural Virginia couple Richard and Mildred Loving, who married in Washington, D.C., in 1958, were arrested in their home state, forced to move away or be jailed and spent years fighting the racist law that affected them until the Supreme Court unanimously overturned it. ¶ “The fact any miscegenation laws even existed, these are vestiges of slavery,” says Jeff Nichols, director of “Loving,” a new film based on the famous case and starring Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga. “All of this speaks to the institutionalized racism in the South.” ¶ “Guess,” which was released six months after the Loving decision, was, in its own way, meant to be a liberal antidote to situations like this. In director Stanley Kramer’s film, parents and friends of the romantic couple discuss the pros and cons of their romance in a civilized manner until the woman’s father (played by Spencer Tracy) gives his blessing to the relationship.
But there are no big love scenes in the film, and it “shows Hollywood’s fear of a black man with a white woman,” says Donald Bogle, author of “Elizabeth and Michael: The Queen of Hollywood and the King of Pop,” as well as several books about African Americans in Hollywood.
“Poitier’s character in that film is so perfect — he’s a doctor — but the film still questions if he’s fit for this white woman,” Bogle adds. “It’s not dealing with the reality an interracial couple might have to face.”
This refusal to deal with the reality of interracial love and sex is nothing new; it’s pretty much how the movies have handled these relationships down through the years. Beginning with D.W. Griffith’s 1915 racist depiction, “The Birth of a Nation,” in which, as described by New York University film professor Sam Pollard, “the black man was this evil beast defiling white womanhood (in one scene, a white woman commits suicide rather than be ‘violated’ by a black man),” Hollywood has tiptoed around, or outright ignored, realistic depictions of interracial romance.
“During the classic Hollywood era, the industry was regulated by the Production Code, and it banned depictions of miscegenation,” says Ellen Scott, a UCLA professor and author of “Cinema Civil Rights.” Hollywood tastemakers of the era, she says, “thought these romances were disgusting and might offend audiences.”
One way the industry dealt with the issue was in a series of so-called tragic mulatto story lines in films such as “Show Boat” (1936), “Pinky” (1949) and “Imitation of Life” (1959), in which light-skinned blacks — always played by white actresses — cross the color line and pass as white until their “true” race is discovered and tragedy ensues. “The mulatto can pass, and infiltrate into the culture, and prove the lie in white culture because she can pass and be successful,” Bogle says. “But the mulatto is tormented and is a warning that the races shouldn’t mix.”
But if the races did mix — as in the 1957 “Band of Angels,” in which a white slave owner (Clark Gable) puts the moves on a mulatto woman (played, of course, by a white actress, Yvonne De Carlo) — it is almost always white man, black woman. Black man, white woman is the ultimate taboo. “White men who run Hollywood make these films,” Pollard says, “and these white male, black woman relationships are easier for them to digest.”
“This goes to gender politics,” adds Bogle. Black male sexuality “is so threatening , it calls into question white manhood and white power. And the idea that the white woman is on a pedestal and the black man will defile her, this becomes threatening.”
So threatening that even in a film like 1957’s “Island in the Sun,” which features several interracial couples, the romance between Harry Belafonte and Joan Fontaine is so chaste they don’t even touch.
So although there is a history of black men sleeping with white women in such blaxploitation films as “Super Fly,” and while Kevin Costner and Whitney Houston made for a very attractive, but unrealistic, couple in “The Bodyguard,” it was up to Spike Lee and his 1991 film, “Jungle Fever,” to really explore the issue of interracial romance in a contemporary setting, with Wesley Snipes and Annabella Sciorra playing star-crossed lovers.
“The film is fascinating because I don’t think Spike Lee reduces it to just a black man and white woman,” Scott says. “Part of the film is to suggest that not only is this a contemporary thing, it’s something that historically has been a factor in American life.”
Which is one reason why “Loving” works so well. Coming from an area where the races seemed to mix rather easily — Richard’s father even worked for a black man, and Mildred was part Native American — the film has a real feel for its environment and takes the Lovings’ relationship as perfectly normal.
“They came from such a unique place, I do believe they were allowed the room to fall in love,” Nichols says. “And what it says about race is this idea of love transcends racial barriers.”
Yet Bogle feels that filmmakers are still trying to come to grips with black-white romance. “Societal attitudes and opposition to interracial marriages, that’s one thing,” he says. But films still “don’t indicate that in interracial marriages there are cultural bridges people have to cross in order for the relationship to work. That’s something that can be enlightening; what we learn about one another in this kind of relationship.” calendar@latimes.com  

JUSTIN RENTERIA For The Times

Columbia Pictures
SIDNEY POITIER and Katharine Houghton starred in the movie “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” in 1967, the same year as the Loving case decision.

20th Century/Getty Images
HARRY BELAFONTE and Joan Fontaine in 1957’s “Island in the Sun.”

BEN GLASS Warner Bros.
KEVIN COSTNER and Whitney Houston starred in “The Bodyguard.”
Hollywood’s chaste depictions of interracial roman... (show quote)



Miscegenation originally came from the old Testament and was not about color.
It was about the belief or non-belief of the one true God.
Hollywood is the most repulsive, aggressive, hateful voice against the Word of God.
I maybe didn't get your point.
There is one race, the human race.
Ignorant people are influenced by Hollywood.
That's just the way it was back then.

Reply
 
 
Nov 10, 2016 14:32:22   #
Rivers
 
Progressive One wrote:
Hollywood’s chaste depictions of interracial romance often omitted the physical aspects of love
BY LEWIS BEALE >>>
In 1967, the same year the Supreme Court case Loving vs. Virginia struck down laws banning miscegenation, Sidney Poitier starred in “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” as a black man romantically involved with blond Katharine Houghton. ¶ Yet in both real and reel life, black-white romantic relationships were problematic, fraught with legal and social taboos. In the case of Loving, that meant rural Virginia couple Richard and Mildred Loving, who married in Washington, D.C., in 1958, were arrested in their home state, forced to move away or be jailed and spent years fighting the racist law that affected them until the Supreme Court unanimously overturned it. ¶ “The fact any miscegenation laws even existed, these are vestiges of slavery,” says Jeff Nichols, director of “Loving,” a new film based on the famous case and starring Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga. “All of this speaks to the institutionalized racism in the South.” ¶ “Guess,” which was released six months after the Loving decision, was, in its own way, meant to be a liberal antidote to situations like this. In director Stanley Kramer’s film, parents and friends of the romantic couple discuss the pros and cons of their romance in a civilized manner until the woman’s father (played by Spencer Tracy) gives his blessing to the relationship.
But there are no big love scenes in the film, and it “shows Hollywood’s fear of a black man with a white woman,” says Donald Bogle, author of “Elizabeth and Michael: The Queen of Hollywood and the King of Pop,” as well as several books about African Americans in Hollywood.
“Poitier’s character in that film is so perfect — he’s a doctor — but the film still questions if he’s fit for this white woman,” Bogle adds. “It’s not dealing with the reality an interracial couple might have to face.”
This refusal to deal with the reality of interracial love and sex is nothing new; it’s pretty much how the movies have handled these relationships down through the years. Beginning with D.W. Griffith’s 1915 racist depiction, “The Birth of a Nation,” in which, as described by New York University film professor Sam Pollard, “the black man was this evil beast defiling white womanhood (in one scene, a white woman commits suicide rather than be ‘violated’ by a black man),” Hollywood has tiptoed around, or outright ignored, realistic depictions of interracial romance.
“During the classic Hollywood era, the industry was regulated by the Production Code, and it banned depictions of miscegenation,” says Ellen Scott, a UCLA professor and author of “Cinema Civil Rights.” Hollywood tastemakers of the era, she says, “thought these romances were disgusting and might offend audiences.”
One way the industry dealt with the issue was in a series of so-called tragic mulatto story lines in films such as “Show Boat” (1936), “Pinky” (1949) and “Imitation of Life” (1959), in which light-skinned blacks — always played by white actresses — cross the color line and pass as white until their “true” race is discovered and tragedy ensues. “The mulatto can pass, and infiltrate into the culture, and prove the lie in white culture because she can pass and be successful,” Bogle says. “But the mulatto is tormented and is a warning that the races shouldn’t mix.”
But if the races did mix — as in the 1957 “Band of Angels,” in which a white slave owner (Clark Gable) puts the moves on a mulatto woman (played, of course, by a white actress, Yvonne De Carlo) — it is almost always white man, black woman. Black man, white woman is the ultimate taboo. “White men who run Hollywood make these films,” Pollard says, “and these white male, black woman relationships are easier for them to digest.”
“This goes to gender politics,” adds Bogle. Black male sexuality “is so threatening , it calls into question white manhood and white power. And the idea that the white woman is on a pedestal and the black man will defile her, this becomes threatening.”
So threatening that even in a film like 1957’s “Island in the Sun,” which features several interracial couples, the romance between Harry Belafonte and Joan Fontaine is so chaste they don’t even touch.
So although there is a history of black men sleeping with white women in such blaxploitation films as “Super Fly,” and while Kevin Costner and Whitney Houston made for a very attractive, but unrealistic, couple in “The Bodyguard,” it was up to Spike Lee and his 1991 film, “Jungle Fever,” to really explore the issue of interracial romance in a contemporary setting, with Wesley Snipes and Annabella Sciorra playing star-crossed lovers.
“The film is fascinating because I don’t think Spike Lee reduces it to just a black man and white woman,” Scott says. “Part of the film is to suggest that not only is this a contemporary thing, it’s something that historically has been a factor in American life.”
Which is one reason why “Loving” works so well. Coming from an area where the races seemed to mix rather easily — Richard’s father even worked for a black man, and Mildred was part Native American — the film has a real feel for its environment and takes the Lovings’ relationship as perfectly normal.
“They came from such a unique place, I do believe they were allowed the room to fall in love,” Nichols says. “And what it says about race is this idea of love transcends racial barriers.”
Yet Bogle feels that filmmakers are still trying to come to grips with black-white romance. “Societal attitudes and opposition to interracial marriages, that’s one thing,” he says. But films still “don’t indicate that in interracial marriages there are cultural bridges people have to cross in order for the relationship to work. That’s something that can be enlightening; what we learn about one another in this kind of relationship.” calendar@latimes.com  

JUSTIN RENTERIA For The Times

Columbia Pictures
SIDNEY POITIER and Katharine Houghton starred in the movie “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” in 1967, the same year as the Loving case decision.

20th Century/Getty Images
HARRY BELAFONTE and Joan Fontaine in 1957’s “Island in the Sun.”

BEN GLASS Warner Bros.
KEVIN COSTNER and Whitney Houston starred in “The Bodyguard.”
Hollywood’s chaste depictions of interracial roman... (show quote)


Hollywood crap!

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 14:33:05   #
Progressive One
 
cair k wrote:
So in your opinion, this election was about blacks and whites creating a new human race.
Well, that's simplifying things. I see enough of that stuff when I go shopping. There's no need to pay good money to watch it on the silver screen.


All I have to ask is how does your mind work to conclude the things you do? Where did you get that from?

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 14:43:17   #
Progressive One
 
mcmlx wrote:
Miscegenation originally came from the old Testament and was not about color.
It was about the belief or non-belief of the one true God.
Hollywood is the most repulsive, aggressive, hateful voice against the Word of God.
I maybe didn't get your point.
There is one race, the human race.
Ignorant people are influenced by Hollywood.
That's just the way it was back then.


The fact that the word miscegenation starts with the prefix "mis" implies that it is wrong....which is really ignorant....THAT I got long ago.......

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 15:09:42   #
oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)
 
Progressive One wrote:
The fact that the word miscegenation starts with the prefix "mis" implies that it is wrong....which is really ignorant....THAT I got long ago.......


Are you insisting on us changing the spelling of words so they fit your way of thinking? This isn't the place to do that since there are so few of us on OPP compared to what is needed to make changes like that.

Reply
 
 
Nov 10, 2016 15:16:09   #
Progressive One
 
oldroy wrote:
Are you insisting on us changing the spelling of words so they fit your way of thinking? This isn't the place to do that since there are so few of us on OPP compared to what is needed to make changes like that.


I say what the fk i mean, so don't fill in the blanks unless you are speaking for yourself. Refer back to what i said and do the math-mistake, mishap and any other word with the mis prefix denotes a mistake...I'm not insisting on shit...i just understand prefix meanings...........

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 15:16:30   #
mcmlx
 
Progressive One wrote:
The fact that the word miscegenation starts with the prefix "mis" implies that it is wrong....which is really ignorant....THAT I got long ago.......


Neither English or Latin has the word cegenation. The "mis" means mixing.
Look it up.
I'm still not getting your point.
Are you for or against? You seem to flip flop.
Again, what is your point?

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 15:19:12   #
Progressive One
 
mcmlx wrote:
Neither English or Latin has the word cegenation. The "mis" means mixing.
Look it up.
I'm still not getting your point.
Are you for or against? You seem to flip flop.
Again, what is your point?


so words such as mistake and mishap and mistook mean mixing something or denotes something wrong?

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 16:26:42   #
mcmlx
 
Progressive One wrote:
so words such as mistake and mishap and mistook mean mixing something or denotes something wrong?



Ok. So let me ask you one more time.
Are you FOR mixing the colors of the human race, or are you NOT?
Please stop dancing around the question.

Reply
 
 
Nov 10, 2016 16:48:47   #
Progressive One
 
mcmlx wrote:
Ok. So let me ask you one more time.
Are you FOR mixing the colors of the human race, or are you NOT?
Please stop dancing around the question.


I 'm for whatever people choose to do in that regard because it doesn't infringe on any rights of mine....i'm progressive, not colonial and antebellum......what about you? do you mind if your little white daughter chooses dark meat?

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 17:11:09   #
mcmlx
 
Progressive One wrote:
I 'm for whatever people choose to do in that regard because it doesn't infringe on any rights of mine....i'm progressive, not colonial and antebellum......what about you? do you mind if your little white daughter chooses dark meat?


I'm still not getting your point about the movies.
Leave my personal business out of it.
My grown daughter makes her own decisions. And I stand behind her all the way.

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 18:32:17   #
Progressive One
 
mcmlx wrote:
I'm still not getting your point about the movies.
Leave my personal business out of it.
My grown daughter makes her own decisions. And I stand behind her all the way.


Well the article was in the LA Times about Hollywood not emphasizing the sexual nature of interracial relationships....and in the future please don't ask questions if you do not want to be asked questions in return. That is fair enough and if i ask you questions initially without you asking me, feel free to tell me not to ask you any. I thought I would talk like trump...you know..instead of calling abortion a surgical procedure, he calls it ripping babies out of wombs....I wonder if he will talk that way (inflammatory rhetoric) as CIC.

Reply
Nov 10, 2016 18:47:09   #
cair k
 
Progressive One wrote:
All I have to ask is how does your mind work to conclude the things you do? Where did you get that from?


From what I read. Don't disparage. That's what you wrote. Hollywood is full of crap shoots. They deny God and always have. Freeze their assets and send them to Haiti never to return to America. Let them straighten out the Haitians (or try).

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.