Thursday 16 December 2010

Sunbathing

(2011)



whites trying their best to get skin cancer

Clearly the problem here lies with Whites' carnivalesque preoccupation - rooted in White supremacism - with their own skin color. Yet, this obsession is contradictory. No White ever asked whether he would wish to be born Black ever answered "Yes", yet they wish to darken their skins in a dangerous manner because they realize how anemically unattractive white skin is. However, they lack the necessary melanin to make this a safe practice and, eventually, Caucasian skin becomes leathery and even more distinctly ugly than before. This relates to the problem that White skin shows the ravages of aging far more clearly than anyone else's.

Sunbathing is pure narcissism and results from a culture that worships its own physical appearance to such an extent that it will risk contracting skin cancer for the sake of it. This is reminiscent of the practice of Italian ladies in the dark ages of using the poison belladonna to enhance their eyes for cosmetic effect. The differences being that today we also have such pointless inventions as potentially-dangerous breast implants to contend with.

Even though the article is clearly about skin color (a favorite topic of White supremacists) it never refers to the fact that the activity described is only of value to Whites - in their vain attempts to make their skin more attractive to look at. White women are obsessed with issues that barely register with Black women - laughter lines and wrinkles generally, for example - because these become less and less apparent the darker ones skin is.

This article is clearly only about Whites, yet this fact is nowhere mentioned. The fools who damage their skin by sunbathing are referred to as Britons, when Black Britons would not engage in such stupid behavior – as they do not engage in soccer hooliganism. The article implies that all British citizens are White - a delusion that the likes of the BNP share - and so proves the article itself racist. The article features no Black Britons because it could not - the very idea is ridiculous. When this is pointed out, Whites run for cover and blame the messenger for their own White supremacism. When Whites accept that they often do strange things that nobody else does, and which make them look rightly foolish, their limited culture will have moved on and gotten over it.

The truth is that Whites will always complain when their behavior is criticized on the basis of their skin color; while having no compunction, themselves, in criticizing others on the same basis when there is no evidence to so do. By not mentioning the existence of Black Britons in an article about skin color, you refuse to admit that there is something to learn from Blacks. Namely, do not waste time darkening your skin since there is no advantage whatsoever in doing so - unless the change is to be permanent and/or one wishes to migrate to a hotter country. (Both would be examples of creating a permanent, cosmetic, built-in personal sunscreen – cheaper in the long run than forking out for creams and lotions every year.)

For the above reasons I do not need to peruse the terms and conditions of the Website since your complaint reveals them: "No upsetting Whites because they have thin skins that cannot stand exposure to the revealing rays of the Sun" - both literally and figuratively. The question is: Why are Whites sensitive when they are criticized for doing something that only Whites ever do? The fact Whites do not want this pointed out to them (& that the relevant article never mentions that White strangeness is the result of individual choice as well as cultural mores) shows that Whites are happy to criticize the symptom - sun-bathing - but not the cause - White supremacist narcissism. This acontextualism is typical of a culture that refuses to give itself the honest self appraisal necessary to really solve any problems Whites possess. Whites loathe criticism of Whites - even when they have originated the cause of it.

All of the above is objectively factual but you resent the truth which, for a newspaper, is lamentable. It is your article that is offensive, not my comment. Have the humility to admit it.


Copyright © 2010 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://weirdwhites.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

No comments:

Post a Comment