Official Conor McGregor thread (part 4) *Updated Warning in 1st Post Re:Boxing match

Effects wrote: »

You need to dig a little deeper. Black men were historically described as sub-human, animalistic, and lust-driven. That feeds into the reasoning that black men were a sexual threat and prone to raping white women. This excuse was often used as a reason to lynch black men.
In McGregor's case it's perpetuation of a black male sexual stereotype, which is based on the notion of black male obsession with white females.

Just because you don't fully understand it doesn't mean it isn't racist.

Theres reaching, and then theres reaching

is this supposed to be a serious post?

Effects wrote: »

In McGregor's case it's perpetuation of a black male sexual stereotype, which is based on the notion of black male obsession with white females.

Absolute horse****. He was jokingly insinuating he has a large wang. That's all there is to it, no need for mass hysteria, no need for snowflakes to melt, no need for outcry. Racism, in it's true sense, suggests unfair treatment or directed aggression toward a person because of their colour, ethnicity, or race. This new age/snowflake reinterpretation of racism is eye rollingly stupid.

Just because you don't fully understand it doesn't mean it isn't racist.

I fully understand what racism is, there wasn't any. Conor McGregor, is not a racist. People need to get over themselves & stop being perpetually offended.

Effects wrote: »

You need to dig a little deeper. Black men were historically described as sub-human, animalistic, and lust-driven. That feeds into the reasoning that black men were a sexual threat and prone to raping white women. This excuse was often used as a reason to lynch black men.
In McGregor's case it's perpetuation of a black male sexual stereotype, which is based on the notion of black male obsession with white females.

Just because you don't fully understand it doesn't mean it isn't racist.

Everyone here seems to only be considering the "black from waist down" quip as the racist comment and glossing over the more obvious and disgusting "dancing monkeys" comment.

willowthewisp wrote: »

Everyone here seems to only be considering the "black from waist down" quip as the racist comment and glossing over the more obvious and disgusting "dancing monkeys" comment.

dave1982 wrote: »

https://www.thesun.ie/sport/boxing/1376217/conor-mcgregor-vs-floyd-mayweather-lads-pay-more-for-post-fight-party/?utm_source=FBPAGE&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=SprnklrSUNOrganic&UTMX=Editorial:TheIrishSun:FBLink:Statement:News

Absolute non story. Vegas has always been the same.

That's pretty much how it is in Vegas. If you're a guy and want in or to skip the line ups in clubs etc you better put your hand in your pocket.

It's why every woman I know loves going to Vegas as they don't have to put their hand in their pocket too often.

Gintonious wrote: »

A pretty level headed perspective from Stitch.

"Yeah, I wouldn't teach him how to box. He isn't going to learn how to box is 7-8 weeks... He's just gotta keep doing what he's doing, working on what he has, and keep moving your head brother."

That's exactly the correct logic. You ain't gonna rewrite the symphony now, just play to your strengths and see what happens.

Paulie was never going to teach him anything. Naive of him to think otherwise.

https://blog.betway.com/boxing/what-conor-mcgregors-instagram-tells-us-about-the-man/