|
Post by robeiae on Aug 4, 2018 9:15:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Aug 4, 2018 13:31:48 GMT -5
Yep, that Vox article is total garbage. Not surprising, though, as Vox has steadily been inching toward becoming the "new Salon" for the past two years.
Part of the problem is the new, bullshit definition that the far-left has invented for racism, i.e., the neo-Marxist view that it is only the result of some sort of "power structure" and that the actual definition of racism no longer means racism if the person has no power.
This was their cute way of avoiding the fact that non-whites can be racist too (and often are throughout the world, just like a lot of whites). If you just redefine the word, then you can claim that it no longer applies to you, it only applies to someone you hate, and viola! Problem of being a hypocrite solved.
But, yeah, replace the word "white" in any of those posts (Jeong's posts or the stupid ones cited in the Vox piece) with "black" or "Asian" or "Middle Eastern" or "insert racial or ethnic characteristic here" and they'd be up in arms about how racist it is.
One a related note, I saw a journalist vlogging about this yesterday and mentioning that alt-right white identitarians and white supremacists are loving the fact that the NYT and leftist media are defending her racist tweets, because they think it's going to be great for "red-pilling normies," i.e., recruiting more whites to their gross cause.
Like I said, this woman seems like a hateful, bigoted garbage person. Can't tell if that means she'll fit in at the NYT or stick out like a sore thumb.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 5, 2018 1:09:20 GMT -5
My, but The aggrievement is strong in this one. Let’s cue up some Drake “In My Feelings.”
This shit got me in my feelings/ I just gotta be real with it, yup
There are few things simultaneously funny and pitiful than a gaggle of White people who know little to nothing about racism having a lopsided "discussion" on racism. It's like hearing a priest who has never had sex offer advice on a topic he has zero expertise in. All this expertise on a topic none of you have any experience in.
What's the worst thing a Black person has ever called you Optimus? Or you, robeiae? Or you, Amadan? A redneck? White trash? Honky? White boy? Peckerwood? Well, golly gee willikers and holy fuck, I bet that sure did sting. I bet it really chapped your ass to be called such a mean, hurtful, derogatory and nasty word like that.
As much as being called a nigger? Welllllllll....maybe not THAT much.
What we have here is why the phrase " White Tears" was born. This bashing of an Asian woman for having the elephant balls to be anything less than cordial, deferential and admirable of the Great White World she is allowed live in. What a fucking ingrate she is.
Well, here's a bet. I'm gonna bet Sarah Jeong has experienced more disrespect, more disdain, more anger, more hatred and more good ol' American racism in one year of her life than any of the good, fine White folk bitching and pissing and moaning about what an absolutely awful person she is because of a few lousy Twitter posts which had ZERO effect on anyone.
What Sarah Jeong did wasn’t “racism.” Not even close, and calling it racism only demonstrates how poorly your collective understanding of the term truly is. Point of fact is American White people are not victims of racism and historically never have been. Not in the way Blacks, Latinos, Hispanics, Asians, gays, lesbians, Jews and other groups have been. Did the Irish and the Italians and the Germans catch hell when they came to the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave? Sure they did, but were they put in chains? Were they exterminated in large masses like the Native Americans and forced off their lands as their culture and history was erased as if it had never been? Were they placed in internment camps?
No, no, and hell fucking no. So cry me a fucking river of White tears about right-wing trolls and limp ass “liberals” wringing their dirty hands over an Asian woman’s tweets hurting their widdle feelings. I’ll collect those tears and water my lawn. Oh, I’m aware a majority of White Americans Say They Believe Whites Face Discrimination and at your next family gathering as you smash your teeth together over burnt wieners and Granny’s Homemade Watery-Ass Potato Salad with Raisins and wash it down with copious amounts of shitty beers like Bud Light, you can converse with other like-minded souls over how unfair it is that those unqualified minorities are taking good jobs away from other hard-working White folk and thank God and Galactus you finally have a POTUS protecting the country from a brown invasion of Mexican rapists.
Well, here's the funny thing about this. The Vox article wasn't total garbage. At least it wasn't to anyone in possession of an open and critically thinking mind instead of fast typing fingers. That fact-free review by Optimus is just the latest example of his railing at the "far-left" since his failed and repudiated brand of White Liberalism is deader than LBJ and the Great Society. That sort of thang was a big hit in the 60's but that was then and this is now and nobody's interesting in hearing what Alan Dershowitz Lite "liberals" have to say anymore which is why Dershowitz's biggest audience is on Fox News and he spends all his time sucking up to right-wingers who hated his guts when he was relevant and flatter him by pretending to listen to him now that he's not.
It wasn't "total garbage" when Beauchamp wrote about Andrew Sullivan, "I have a lot of respect for Andrew — he gave me my first job in journalism, and I’ve been over to his DC condo more times than I can count — but I think he has a serious blind spot when it comes to race..." because Sullivan does have a serious blind spot when it comes to race as others have noted.
To take Sullivan's supposition to its logical ends, if I were called a nigger by a White woman, because she has victimized ME, I may take it as a green light to victimize HER through verbal or physical assault, robbery, rape or murder. If a cop gives me shit on the way home and stops me simply because it's the cop's prerogative to do so, I might be so "desperate" as to express my unhappiness over a b.s. traffic stop in a violent manner. This is a crock of shit from a guy who has a troublesome history with race matters from his promotion of The Bell Curve to his denouncement of Jeong and the NY Times. Both Beauchamp and I are familiar with Sullivan's beknighted views, but Optimus and robeiae? Meh, not so much.
Optimus has an ideological antipathy against the "far-left" because they ain't checking for him, aren't listening to him and don't really care how much trash he talks about them. That's because while he's railing against James Gunn, Lena Dunham, Justin Trudeau and Rian Johnson for making a fucking Star Wars movie he didn't like, what he isn't doing because he NEVER does it is considering the source. All Opty/Optimus does is troll the interwebs in search of a perspective--any perspective--that reflects the same contempt he has for a political philosophy that left him behind a long time ago.
Nowhere in this thread has the name Mike Cernovich popped up like the turd that keep bobbing back up after flushing, but the absence of the name of man who scared Disney in pulling the trigger on Gunn (sorry, couldn't resist) shoots tunnel-sized holes big enough to park a fleet of 18-wheelers in this thread. You cannot get all huffy and puffy over what Gunn and Jeong said if you're going to pointedly ignore all of the evil shit Cernovich has said before he took down Gunn for criticizing Vladimir Putin's asset asshole in the Oval Office. Optimus won't like the source of this information, but as Ben Shapiro says, " Facts don't care about your feelings."
Wow. Who knew? Slap 'em, smack 'em, choke 'em and make them beg for more! Treat 'em rough and make 'em like it! What a fuckin' STUD!
That's your boy, Optimus. A far-right Gamergate/Pizzagate wanker who advocates raping non-compliant women, buddies up with douchebags like Alex Jones, preaches about "White genocide" and how to choke the wimmen and have them begging for more. The biggest threat to reasoned discourse, rational arguments and thoughtful political discussion isn't snarky Times contributors and Hollywood directors trying to be edgy. The biggest threat is Alpha White Males with "Gorilla Mindsets" where women are inferior human beings that exist only for the carnal pleasure of men bold enough to take them and discard them like soiled Kleenex.
Or to put it another way, what James Gunn tweeted was a sad, sick attempt at being edgy and face-planting instead. What Sarah Jeong tweeted was trying to swat back at trolls and smacking herself in the face years later when those remarks came back to bite her on the tush. What Mike Cernovich tweeted is far more repugnant, far more vicious, far more vulgar, far more detestable and far, far more dangerous than anything Gunn and Jeong ever did.
But you aren't talking about that Optimus, and neither is anyone else in this thread. Maybe because you didn't bother to check the source of the dirt on Gunn and maybe because you were too lazy to bother with that sort of heavy lifting. All you did was bring a professional troll's kneecapping of a film director to a board and while you provided hotlinks to sharpen your little axe against Gunn, Dunham and Trudeau, you didn't go nearly that deep in proving a critical eye on Cernovich.
Wonder why that is? Wait. Actually, no I don't. It's kind of your thing, Optimus (see James Damore) where you hitch your wagon to morons who don't deserve your support but get it anyway because their views mirror yours so much. This must be where the alt-right phrase " owning the libs" came from.
Here's the thing, Optimus. I know you're not going to read the links. I know you don't believe anything I've said because I'm the one who said it. I know you're gonna believe whatever it is you want to believe and far be it from me to get between you and your beliefs. That's all good in the neighborhood.
What's NOT good and it is one of the two reasons I bothered in posting in a thread I don't really care about on a board where I know I'm not welcome. Mike Cernovich calls himself a "citizen journalist" and that term makes me a little cray-cray. He's no more a journalist than he is a "citizen doctor" or a "citizen attorney" or a "citizen law enforcement officer." A journalist is someone who is trained in/or works in journalism. Having a blog/vlog/1000 Twitter followers and a dedicated 4chan following does not Cernovich a fucking journalist. Journalists have editors and fact checkers. Cernovich has neither and is not a journalist. Cernovich is a misogynist, a racist, a troll and an Alt-Right superstar who is in the business of trying to take down his enemies on the Left.
Make no mistake here. Gunn and Jeong may not be good guys, but Cernovich is definitely the true bad guy here and he's never apologized for a single fucking word he's vomited out and you're the carrier of his particular sickness and spreading Cernovich's sick crap all the better to make others just as sick. You're a real smart guy, Optimus, but you won't put in the work to check if you're being informed by someone who honestly wants to inform you or manipulated by a punk who wants to divert you from their real agenda. It's like I said: consider the source and your source is straight-up bullshit. The ball is in your court to prove otherwise.
Calling Jeong a "hateful, bigoted garbage person" may make you feel better about the troll whose fetid droppings you've spread here like so much manure. Or maybe it will make you feel like you're morally and intellectually superior to Jeong. Newsflash: Being the carrier of a hateful, bigoted garbage person like Cernovich's disgusting filth won't make you either of those things.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 5, 2018 10:41:33 GMT -5
My, but The aggrievement is strong in this one. Let’s cue up some Drake “In My Feelings.”
This shit got me in my feelings/ I just gotta be real with it, yup There are few things simultaneously funny and pitiful than a gaggle of White people who know little to nothing about racism having a lopsided "discussion" on racism. It's like hearing a priest who has never had sex offer advice on a topic he has zero expertise in. All this expertise on a topic none of you have any experience in.
What's the worst thing a Black person has ever called you Optimus? Or you, robeiae? Or you, Amadan? A redneck? White trash? Honky? White boy? Peckerwood? Well, golly gee willikers and holy fuck, I bet that sure did sting. I bet it really chapped your ass to be called such a mean, hurtful, derogatory and nasty word like that.
As much as being called a nigger? Welllllllll....maybe not THAT much. Can't speak for anyone else, but I don't feel aggrieved, at all. No one's done anything to me. And I don't get bent out of shape because of comments about my supposed "race." My issue here is with the silliness of the various defenses of Jeong. They'e idiotic, even when couched in apparent thoughtful analysis. The NYT wants to hire her? Fine. But she's said what she's said, she's written what she's written. As to this: I agree with everything after "point of fact." But none of that actually supports the first claim--"What Sarah Jeong did wasn’t "racism""--at all. I think there is valid argument in this regard, to be sure, ala "Jeong's comments weren't so much racist as they were bigoted." Of course, the problem is that accepting such an argument would mean accepting it in other places, as well, that would impinge on the ability of those who define themselves through victimization to play the racism card as often as they would like to. Also, it's amusing how Asians are victims who need support for much of the Left in one moment--like here--but are roundly ignored when they seem to be getting in the way of a particular cause, like in the realm of education. For instance, there is currently a lawsuit against Harvard for discrimination against Asian applicants, where it seems like Harvard admissions people consistently rated Asians lower on "personality," thus reducing the number of acceptances, had the decisions only been based on grades, extracurricular activities, and the like.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 5, 2018 12:04:12 GMT -5
My, but The aggrievement is strong in this one. Let’s cue up some Drake “In My Feelings.”
This shit got me in my feelings/ I just gotta be real with it, yup
There are few things simultaneously funny and pitiful than a gaggle of White people who know little to nothing about racism having a lopsided "discussion" on racism. It's like hearing a priest who has never had sex offer advice on a topic he has zero expertise in. All this expertise on a topic none of you have any experience in.
What's the worst thing a Black person has ever called you Optimus? Or you, robeiae? Or you, Amadan? A redneck? White trash? Honky? White boy? Peckerwood? Well, golly gee willikers and holy fuck, I bet that sure did sting. I bet it really chapped your ass to be called such a mean, hurtful, derogatory and nasty word like that.
And here I was worried that you'd finally taken your ball and gone home...
Okay, I read through your entire post, but I admit I haven't hit your links yet. (I have yardwork calling to me, and it's a close call whether I'd rather spend the afternoon mowing the lawn in the heat and humidity or writing a long response to you just so you can find creative new circumlocutions to call me a racist).
Let me ask you this: did you even take notice of the fact that most of us recognized that Jeong writing shit about white people is not the same, and does not have the same impact, as a white person writing shit about Asians? Or did you ignore it so you could launch the polemic already boiling out of you about white tears and whataboutism demanding why there hasn't been an equal reaction to every other white person in recent history writing shitty things in the media? I mean, if you're going to call us clueless and say we don't understand anything about racism, at least acknowledge that there is a difference between "OMG she said bad things about white people she so racist!!!" (which is how much of the Internet and the Alt-Right is reacting) and "Wow, she says a lot of nasty, uninformed things that sound like a mean girl venting on LiveJournal, not a professional journalist, and figuring it's okay as long as it's about white people" (which is how I read my own response).
I won't speak for rob or Opty, but I am not hurt, aggrieved, or crying white tears because Sarah Jeong evidently hates white people and isn't afraid to show it. (Yes, I know she has a white boyfriend, and how often has a white man used the defense of having a non-white girlfriend/wife/kids only to be told that doesn't mean a thing in disproving his racism?) Yes, I am sure she does not personally hate every single white person, she probably likes and loves and respects a few, and a lot of what she wrote was meant to be read in a satiric way. I know she was parodying some of the crap she's been handed, and much of it is being read in a deliberately disingenuous way by bad-faith actors.
So, granted, Jeong is arguably expressing legitimate frustration and pain at being dumped on by racist white dudes.
Does that make her rhetoric legitimate and beyond criticism? I mean, is it ever okay to say "Hey, that's unfair and pretty derogatory?" (or "racist" - but that invites the argument about whether or not it's possible for non-white people to be racist or if racism should only be used under the modern SJ construction that requires there be institutional power and history behind it). Or does the fact that she's suffered racism from white men mean she has carte blanch to say whatever she wants and anyone who blinks and calls her on it is showing "white fragility"?
I mean you, NT, for all your rhetoric, are usually pretty careful in your statements directed at white people (us). You'll insinuate that me or rob or Opty personally are horrible people and racists, and you'll complain about white people in general being clueless and fragile. But I don't recall you ever posting something as broad as "White people suck" or "Fuck white people" or any of the more general sentiments that Jeong has, ironically or not. The fact that she says those things and has done so even after embarking upon her professional life (I've read some of her more recent tweets, and she's toned it down a bit since the ones that are circulating from 2014 but not stopped entirely) suggests a level of animosity and resentment that I think would make me, if I were working with her, legitimately question whether she was secretly harboring hatred and a desire to destroy me professionally just because I'm a white guy who might not always agree with her.
I'm not sure if you believe that as a white guy, it would just be my obligation to suck that up and live with it because of privilege and how badly the field has been tilted in the other direction historically, but I think demanding that people accept abuse, hatred, and dismantling of their lives as reparations for past injustice is a tough expectation that only the wokest of white people are going to be down with. Most of us (most people) selfishly want to improve our lives and the lives of our families and friends and at best, would like to do so not at the expense of others, but aren't willing to sacrifice ourselves on the altar of racial reparations and white guilt.
So here is Sarah Jeong, spouting racist (yeah, I'll use that word) jokes about white people, practically a caricature of a SJW, now an editor at the NYT, and no one is supposed have a problem with that because of institutional racism and she was just being ironic and responding to bad people, and because it was Mike Cernovich and his ilk digging up this sort of past history on her and James Gunn, et al.
Everything is contextual, but context doesn't erase the fact of things. If ideologically motivated actors like Cernovich are the ones digging up Gunn's pedophile jokes because he just wanted to collect leftist scalps, you can have qualms about giving him what he wants (Gunn's scalp), but I don't think you can just ignore the fact that Gunn was making pedophile jokes because it's inconvenient that it was his (and your) enemy who dug this up it flung it out there. Not when the left has been so adamant that that sort of speech is a disqualifying offense in every other circumstance.
So Jeong wrote a lot of stuff that should at least raise eyebrows about her professionalism, if not her racial attitudes, and rather than examining it for its merit or lack thereof, your argument seems primarily motivated by the fact that it's primarily right-wingers who want her head, and on that basis alone you'd like to deny it to them. And accuse non-right wingers (like us) who also think she's pretty bad, of being in league with right-wingers and (implicitly) racists as well.
In fact, I do not think Jeong should be fired. I don't think James Gunn should have been fired. I think people who make "edgy"/offensive comments and spout off intemperate things on social media should have to own their words, but what someone says when being harassed by racist trolls, or joking between friends back before we entered the era of years-old jokes between friends becoming public (though really, "everything you write on the Internet is permanent" has been true for a long, long time) is not the totality of their person and they should not be judged accordingly.
But I reject your premise that Jeong saying shit about white people and a white person saying shit about Asians or blacks is day and night, that the one is excusable and the other isn't, that racial animosity isn't offensive if directed at white people. We can acknowledge that the two things do not have equal weight, that a racist white person is potentially more of a threat than a racist Asian. But to just ignore a racist Asian because institutional racism means there's no such thing? If animosity is always so contextualized that it only "counts" when directed by a more privileged person against a less privileged person, we continue what's already seen in the most vicious infighting among leftists, of oppression Olympics and playing "Who is the least privileged today?" I can spew venom at you if you are more privileged than me, but if I am more privileged than you, you can spew venom at me and my role is to roll over and show my belly or else I'm a True Racist. Nah, bro. This how former leftists like me get radicalized.
(No, I am not actually radicalized. I am not joining the Alt-Right. But in all seriousness, I used to be a SJW or close to it myself. And the inability to embrace cognitive dissonance is what made me realize how full of shit the SJ movement is. But your version, I suppose, is that white fragility made me cry white tears when my privilege was threatened.)
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Aug 5, 2018 15:52:28 GMT -5
No idea what nightynight said because "ignore" is working as intended, but I don't think I'd be going too far out on a limb to assume it involved a beautiful mishmash of logical fallacies, deflection, and personal attacks where he insinuated or outright called me or others here racist, and was overall a full-throated defense of the far-left's hypocrisy on race, wrapped up in a whole lot of "but...but...but...white people!"
I thought this report was interesting. Btw, Tim Pool is mixed race (half-asian) which, according to the far-left, automatically makes his opinion on all of this more valid and accurate than any non-Asian in this thread:
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 5, 2018 18:34:39 GMT -5
No idea what nightynight said because "ignore" is working as intended, but I don't think I'd be going too far out on a limb to assume it involved a beautiful mishmash of logical fallacies, deflection, and personal attacks where he insinuated or outright called me or others here racist, and was overall a full-throated defense of the far-left's hypocrisy on race, wrapped up in a whole lot of "but...but...but...white people!"
Ugh, can we please not do the "Neener, neener I have you on ignoooooore!" routine? No offense, but it strikes me as so passive-aggresively bitchy whenever I see it, and most boards prohibit publicly announcing you've blocked someone for that reason.
Your summary of NT's argument isn't entirely inaccurate, but I tried to engage with it in good faith (he will, I'm sure, disagree). In particular, I think it behooves us not to ignore the fact that a strict one-for-one comparison of Jeong's statements with the mirror equivalent statements from a white person is not strictly equivalent. On a purely moral level, it should be just as bad for NT to use a racial slur against me as it is for me to use a racial slur against him. On a pragmatic level, we all know that the former would be obnoxious and insulting, but nothing he can say to me would have the same impact as me dropping an n-bomb.
This does not validates his overall argument that all complaints about Jeong are just white folks whining, but history is not a blank slate. Complaints about Jeong that point out her hypocrisy, immaturity, and unprofessionalism and the left's willingness to accept any level of racial animosity if directed at white people are legit - complainants that just want her head in retribution for various white people who've lost their jobs for being racist (notably Roseanne Barr as the tit-for-tat example the right is using right now) aren't really being made in good faith. Those people don't really see racism as a universally bad thing, they just see it as a situationally good or bad thing depending on which tribe it's being deployed against.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Aug 5, 2018 18:54:41 GMT -5
We can acknowledge that the two things do not have equal weight, that a racist white person is potentially more of a threat than a racist Asian. Thanks for saying this. I think your post was very good (as was nighttimer's). At the end of the day, there is offense, there are hurt feelings, there are opportunities to cry "hypocrisy!!!11!!!, and there are threats. Threats are what matter to me when it comes to getting up in arms about racism. It's all I've got time for. I have a black son and I'm not worried about his being offended or getting his feelings hurt. Outside of my kid, I'm white and I'm pretty sure I'd feel zero need to call someone an OMG RACIST for calling me a cracker or otherwise being a dick toward me because of my race (though, shockingly enough, this has never happened). The good news is that one does not need to be an SJW to be pro-social justice. I think the hard part for some people these days is not getting overly worked up over ultimately inconsequential rhetoric, wherever it may occur.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Aug 5, 2018 19:02:10 GMT -5
Ugh, can we please not do the "Neener, neener I have you on ignoooooore!" routine? No offense, but it strikes me as so passive-aggresively bitchy whenever I see it, and most boards prohibit publicly announcing you've blocked someone for that reason. You're free to lament and whine about it all you want. Pearls are made for clutching, I suppose. But, it was intended more to let NT know that directing responses (i.e., insults) at me is pointless and it might benefit him to focus more on having an actual coherent argument than attacking me. I agree. And, I don't necessarily think Jeong should lose her job over years-old tweets and I didn't think Gunn should lose his either (though I did think his tweets were quite egregious). But, I also think that a journalist's racial bigotry diminishes the level of objectivity she/he can have in the way they report on world events. I don't think it will have much of an impact on a tech reporter, but if the journalist's beat was on important sociocultural/political issues, I might have to reconsider because it would be very unlikely that their coverage would not be incredibly biased (which, if they're working for Salon, HuffPo, or the like is kind of a job requirement). I also understand why businesses make decisions to terminate people over things like this. Honestly, I think it's stupid for people to tweet garbage like that as if it will never come back to haunt them. But I fully support the right of stupid people to say stupid things just as I generally support a private organization's right to fire people whom they feel do not uphold/reflect their values. My main bone of contention is and always has been the extreme, intellectually dishonest hypocrisy of the far-left on issues like this, and the laughable wagon-circling they do to protect their own from the fallout of doing things they would publicly crucify people not in their tribe for doing. This is true of the the alt-right and the regressive left, unfortunately.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2018 19:10:00 GMT -5
MOD NOTE:
A reminder to all to address the argument, not the person.
While our rules don't prohibit announcing you've blocked someone, I agree with Amadan's take on such announcements -- they don't add anything to the substance of a discussion, and they do serve to provoke.
Ditto on characterizations of a post one hasn't read. That toes right up to the line of attacking the person rather than the argument. Read the argument and address it, or ignore it and don't.
Please and thank you.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 5, 2018 20:38:22 GMT -5
No idea what nightynight said because "ignore" is working as intended, but I don't think I'd be going too far out on a limb to assume it involved a beautiful mishmash of logical fallacies, deflection, and personal attacks where he insinuated or outright called me or others here racist, and was overall a full-throated defense of the far-left's hypocrisy on race, wrapped up in a whole lot of "but...but...but...white people!" I have a name here and it's not "nightynight," Optimus. If that's your idea of a put-down it's weak and if you don't know how to read it or spell it, keep it out of your mouth. If you have me on Ignore then just go ahead and ignore me.
Ugh, can we please not do the "Neener, neener I have you on ignoooooore!" routine? No offense, but it strikes me as so passive-aggresively bitchy whenever I see it, and most boards prohibit publicly announcing you've blocked someone for that reason. You're free to lament and whine about it all you want. Pearls are made for clutching, I suppose. But, it was intended more to let NT know that directing responses (i.e., insults) at me is pointless and it might benefit him to focus more on having an actual coherent argument than attacking me. All you've demonstrated in two posts where you claim not to have read a post by the poster you have on Ignore is how right George Carlin was when he observed, "People who say they don't care what people think are usually desperate to have people think they don't care what people think."
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 5, 2018 20:45:03 GMT -5
My, but The aggrievement is strong in this one. Let’s cue up some Drake “In My Feelings.”
This shit got me in my feelings/ I just gotta be real with it, yup
There are few things simultaneously funny and pitiful than a gaggle of White people who know little to nothing about racism having a lopsided "discussion" on racism. It's like hearing a priest who has never had sex offer advice on a topic he has zero expertise in. All this expertise on a topic none of you have any experience in.
What's the worst thing a Black person has ever called you Optimus? Or you, robeiae? Or you, Amadan? A redneck? White trash? Honky? White boy? Peckerwood? Well, golly gee willikers and holy fuck, I bet that sure did sting. I bet it really chapped your ass to be called such a mean, hurtful, derogatory and nasty word like that.
And here I was worried that you'd finally taken your ball and gone home... Yeah. I had, but a little birdie brought this thread to my attention and after reading it over and considering how one-sided it was, I was compelled to offer something that remotely resembled the other side of the story.
As for the rest of your post, tomorrow is another day because it's night here and I have an early morning wake-up. Later.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 5, 2018 21:17:48 GMT -5
The good news is that one does not need to be an SJW to be pro-social justice.
No, but SJWs don't recognize anyone who's not on board with their program as being pro-social justice. I mean, "social justice" has become a term like "feminism" with a meaning that very much depends on who's using it. So when people ask in horrified tones, "How can you be against social justice?" they're either being ignorant or disingenuous, because being in favor of social justice is not the same as buying all the premises of privilege theory or socialism, just like being pro-feminism in the sense of believing women should have equal legal rights and opportunities does not mean being pro- Jezebel-style feminism and believing in things like "toxic masculinity" and "rape culture." It's a motte-and-bailey argument that the Left uses, where feminists have to buy all the premises of modern SJW-aligned intersectional third-wave feminism, and if you say, "Well, no, I don't agree with all that" then you're accused of being "anti-feminist" which means you think women literally shouldn't be allowed to vote.
Which brings us to -
The problem is that it's not inconsequential. It's this rhetoric that has us debating under what circumstances people should lose their jobs. Or when people should or shouldn't call the police (one woke white lady at a conference I attended recently was describing witnessing a fight on the metro between two black men, and as if declaring something she expected to be praised for, explained that she wasn't sure what to do because "I don't call the police on black people." Well, fortunately a black woman stepped in and broke it up. Good thing you didn't have to put your own ass in danger, nice woke white lady!) Or who should be charged for alleged sexual assault. Yeah, I get that you think it's all just a bunch of college students and Internet keyboard warriors competing for SJ cred, but the culture wars are a real thing and they are bending dialog, political engagement, and ultimately the law.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Aug 5, 2018 22:36:34 GMT -5
The good news is that one does not need to be an SJW to be pro-social justice. No, but SJWs don't recognize anyone who's not on board with their program as being pro-social justice. So... you want to be recognized by SJWs? This whole spiel makes it sound like you're more concerned with what people think of you than you are with, you know, social justice. Yeah, I'm not at all convinced it's as dire as you make it sound. But I'll continue to keep an eye out, and I appreciate the reporting from the front lines.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 6, 2018 7:33:24 GMT -5
This whole spiel makes it sound like you're more concerned with what people think of you than you are with, you know, social justice. Only to the degree that they can affect me, which right now is very little, but it's increasing even in my boring, unimportant position. But "what people think of me" certainly affects my willingness to interact and work with them.
|
|