I find it ironic that the posters who seem to be criticizing the individual in question for being racist resorted to the same type of thinking they are condemning. In response to the original post, the poster Burning Sands asked the question, "Where is this dude from, the back woods?" The apparent implication of that response (to me, at least) is that people who are from the back woods are either a) "underexposed," B) ignorant, or c) racist. I hope that Burning Sands does not believe that the mere location of one's upbringing would be a significant determining factor in whether that person is tolerant and/or accepting of cultures, races, etc. other than his or her own. Being from the back woods does not help explain why a person is a) "underexposed," B) ignorant, or c) racist any more than the color of a one's skin determines whether they are likely to be a dentist.HIM8NC's apparently incredulous response ("That's the thing Sands...he's from a big city!!!!") to Big Sands' question appears to further the notion that unlike someone from the back woods, a person from the big city who being racist is somehow surprising.So which is it, you two? Are you a) "underexposed," B) ignorant, or c) discriminatory of people from the back woods?
who gives a @#!*? fuckum...