I did not think you were calling the spic White in genetics,
We can agree to disagree, but it won't change the definition of "Whitest".
Subhumans who behave like Whites aren't to be compared as such. It's misleading and insulting to Whites.
This falls into the same jewed DEI and race-mixing multicultural "Not all [whatever sub-human race] are bad" narrative.
If I get a kike flair as well for merely stating how I read this user's initial statement, so be it.
AFAIK You haven't given me a valid reason to believe you are a jew.
Been dealing with a year and a half...
I know and empathize with you.
It would seem that, rather than saying "Whitest mexican", that being careful to be as descriptive as possible could be effective in preventing any potential misunderstandings of the intent of a statement.
Perhaps "most White-acting mexican", or "a mexican that behaved almost as if it was a White person" would have been clearer if that is the intent, rather than an amiguous "Whitest mexican", which I see can be read as saying several different things.
Regarding me not seeming to be a kike, so far - that's good to know! I don't think I ever will, but if I do, please be as diligent as you continue to be in detecting kike behavior and slam it into my face so that I can fix how I think and act to kill the kike thinking that wormed its way in.
And thank you for that.
Perhaps "most White-acting mexican", or "a mexican that behaved almost as if it was a White person" would have been clearer if that is the intent, rather than an amiguous "Whitest mexican", which I see can be read as saying several different things.
That what OP should have gone for.
Word choices always matter.
(post is archived)