|
Post by CG Admin on Aug 6, 2018 7:40:03 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. Indeed. And Opti, you did more than just let NT know that you had him on ignore. So, we're done with all that, yes? Back to the topic(s). And in that regard, I'm going to adjust the title of the thread, since the Gunn story seems to have lost its legs right now. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 6, 2018 8:16:10 GMT -5
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. Agree. Well-stated. And again, it's not so much what Jeong wrote and said that is the problem for me, it's the arguments being offered to justify those things, to in effect try to excuse them. They're ridiculous imo. Her slurs may have a very different context and impact than, say, those from Barr, but they're still simple slurs, nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 6, 2018 9:40:08 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." That would make you part of a select group because apparently it really, really bugs White people when they are referred to as "White People." And? Jeong has acknowledged for what she's written and apologized for what she's written. She didn't even alibi that her tweets were written under the influence of too much Ambien. What more is she supposed to do? It's okay by me if you want to dismiss the various defenses of Jeong as "idiotic" but the attacks on Jeong are equally idiotic, and when it's coming from stalwarts of racial enlightenment like Tucker Carlson, Andrew Sullivan, and the National Review, it becomes hilariously hypocritical. The phrase "play the racism (or race) card" has become a go-to move by those to dismiss and demean a legitimate matter where race is a central facet of the matter. As Charles Blow wrote:It is one thing to debate the presence of racial motive in a circumstance, but it is quite another to suggest that people who suspect a racial component are exploiting some mythological, vaunted position and prerogative of aggrieved groups or exerting the exclusionary authority of the dominant group.
And furthermore, what other forms of discrimination are so routinely diminished and delegitimized in this way — cast as a game, a tactic or a stratagem?
The truth is that the people who accuse others — without a shred of evidence — of “playing the race card,” claiming that the accusations of racism are so exaggerated as to dull the meaning of the term, are themselves playing a card. It is a privileged attempt at dismissal.
They seek to do the very thing they condemn: shut down the debate with a scalding-hot charge.There are examples where some have been like the boy who cried "wolf" and utilized race as a crutch to support a wobbly claim of victimization. Equally, there are some who claim race plays no part in something which has racial ramifications because they want to get away with being victimizers. If what Sarah Jeong said was "racist," please go the extra mile and explain how it was racist and who was affected by her racism. Because she used "White" in a pejorative sense? Well, if "cancel White people" has got all the Righties all hot and bothered, please do yourself a favor and never walk into a Black barbershop on a Saturday morning because you will hear all sort of mad shit said about y'all. If what Sarah Jeong said was "racist" and the NY Times should fire her, then Roseanne Barr, who compared Valarie Jarrett and Susan Rice to apes, should appear at the next Unite the (White) Right rally to lead the Nazis, KKK and other supremacists in singing the national anthem. Then she doubled-down and claimed she should getting the benefit of the doubt because she thought the bitch was White. If the rantings of Rosy the Racist doesn't get the likes of Carlson, Sullivan or Optimus hot and bothered, they can miss me with taking offense over what Gunn and Jeong said. I don't have the time or interest in engaging with that kind of situational outrage and sanctimonious b.s. Okay. Not sure what that has to do with anything with support from the Left, but I guess because Jeong has Asian DNA, it must be relevant to you. To be fair and balanced, I haven't seen any support from much of the Right for an Asian who left the Republican Party due its discrimination against Mexicans and other immigrants. Everyone still has work to do when it comes to reconciling America's racial issues and nobody has a legitimate claim to totally clean hands .
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 6, 2018 11:05:39 GMT -5
It's okay by me if you want to dismiss the various defenses of Jeong as "idiotic" but the attacks on Jeong are equally idiotic, and when it's coming from stalwarts of racial enlightenment like Tucker Carlson, Andrew Sullivan, and the National Review, it becomes hilariously hypocritical. Great. Everybody wins. I agree with this. I don't think "racist" is the proper term, myself. Her comments were simple bigotry, imo, reflective of Jeong's prejudices against certain groups, prejudices that I'm she and others feel are justified. But then, that's how prejudice works, isn't it? However, I think what Barr said was absolutely racist; I think she lied afterwards when she said she thought Jarett was white. Barr knew exactly what she was saying and was purposefully employing a common racist trope.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Aug 6, 2018 19:26:08 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. Explain. They don't want to interact with you either, right? And you don't want to interact with them. A point of angst, I'm sure. So, get the fuck over it if you haven't already. Hold your views. Vote accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 6, 2018 20:59:49 GMT -5
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. Explain. They don't want to interact with you either, right? And you don't want to interact with them. A point of angst, I'm sure. So, get the fuck over it if you haven't already. Hold your views. Vote accordingly.
I am not sure why you're taking this on so belligerently. I've been explaining why SJWs annoy me, and you seem to think I'm living in fear of them or have hurt feelings because we can't be friends or something. I see them as very annoying and, if their views were to become more widespread and normalized, potentially a threat to civil liberty.
You think I expend disproportionate energy and word count complaining about SJWs. Okay, fine. Call them a pet peeve. You don't have to approve of my attitude towards them or how much weight I place on the level of aggravation they represent, or whether I spend an appropriate amount of time criticizing SJWs vs. criticizing the Alt-Right.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Aug 6, 2018 21:13:10 GMT -5
Explain. They don't want to interact with you either, right? And you don't want to interact with them. A point of angst, I'm sure. So, get the fuck over it if you haven't already. Hold your views. Vote accordingly. I am not sure why you're taking this on so belligerently. I've been explaining why SJWs annoy me, and you seem to think I'm living in fear of them or have hurt feelings because we can't be friends or something. I see them as very annoying and, if their views were to become more widespread and normalized, potentially a threat to civil liberty.
You think I expend disproportionate energy and word count complaining about SJWs. Okay, fine. Call them a pet peeve. You don't have to approve of my attitude towards them or how much weight I place on the level of aggravation they represent, or whether I spend an appropriate amount of time criticizing SJWs vs. criticizing the Alt-Right.
It's because you said this (bolded): [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.) So you get to be the stand-in for all the dipshits who actually DID radicalize over butt hurt by a handful of leftists, as well as for all the hand-wringers, pearl-clutchers, and serial whiners. Thank you for your service.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 6, 2018 21:39:26 GMT -5
So you get to be the stand-in for all the dipshits who actually DID radicalize over butt hurt by a handful of leftists, as well as for all the hand-wringers, pearl-clutchers, and serial whiners. Thank you for your service.
If you're actually trying to figure out why someone like me takes an anti-SJW position, I believe we've had threads about this before.
If you're just pissed off because we're complaining about SJWs and not the people you think we should be complaining about, then stew in it.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 7, 2018 7:21:06 GMT -5
On the James Gunn firing:
Jeeze Dave, tell us how you really feel...
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 7, 2018 9:58:44 GMT -5
Only tangentially related to firings and SJWs, but directly related to Sarah Jeong and her journalism: Shenzhen Tech Girl Naomi Wu: My experience with Sarah Jeong, Jason Koebler, and Vice MagazineThis is difficult to summarize, and I spent too much time going down this rabbithole. Short version is that Naomi Wu is some sort of mediagenic "tech girl" in China who made most of her money from Patreon and Youtube. She agreed to an interview with Vice magazine, which went badly. (Lots of back and forth that is difficult to parse or summarize about exactly what Vice did or did not do to wrong her.) The end result was that Vice got Wu kicked off of Patreon and Youtube for doxxing one of their journalists. I am not familiar with Naomi Wu, but she's apparently well known in nerdy tech circles with many fans and many detractors, considered to be something of a drama llama, and thus everything is to be taken a grain of salt. The Sarah Jeong connection is that Jeong was working for Vice when all this went down and sent a bunch of tweets that further destroyed Wu's credibility (allegedly) - among other things attacking Wu's claims that she was picked on by more powerful white men.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 7, 2018 14:56:02 GMT -5
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). Tough call. Personally, I just shoot a text to my son to come over and mow the lawn and he does, but usually early in the a.m. or later in the p.m. when the heat and humidity ain't that bad. If it is, I prefer to be inside where its nice and cool sipping a nice and cool drink and look out my window at all the poor schmoes mowing the lawn in the heat and humidity. Yeah. I did. It was buried under a mountain of egoistic reproach, but I was able to scope it out amidst the snark and scorn. No, I didn't and nobody has enough time to react to every other White person in recent history writing shitty things in the media. That would be a full-time gig. No, I don't think I can, or should acknowledge that difference, because my own response doesn't quite fit between your either/or examples. I have not read enough about how viciously Jeong's trolls have come at her on social media, but as a progressive, feminist, a woman of color AND the author of a book, The Internet of Garbage, about online harassment, trolling, and other online ugliness, she's got big enough targets on her back already. In the ongoing conversation about what to do about online harassment, the usual response is an exasperated shrug. Everyone wants to stop harassment, but it just so happens to be impossible. Here, Sarah Jeong calls bullshit on that predominant stance. Beginning by carefully documenting types of harassment, as well as existing methods for dealing with it, Jeong then makes a simple but extraordinarily powerful comparison: harassment is akin to spam, that age-old internet problem that, while far from being solved, has become dramatically less of a nuisance to the average internet user via more than a decade of sophisticated technological development. Why do we invest so much more effort and cash into stopping hoards of Viagra offers but wilt in the face of crowdsourced domestic violence campaigns that use many of the same tactics? Jeong doesn’t waste her time investigating the obvious misogyny, preferring instead to articulate clear, practical methods for undermining it. An excellent primer for anyone building communities on the web today.
In an interview, Jeong says, "When black women get harassed, either their stories never appear in the media, or their stories get retold, blaming the black woman for the ensuing harassment … This isn’t just an issue of equitable treatment in the media. It actually has serious policy ramifications. Some of the most prominent funded anti-harassment activism centers on carceral remedies — that is, resorting to police, prisons, and the criminal justice system. If you’re a person of color, trans, and/or a sex worker, you may be less willing to go to the police." Jeong may indeed as "nasty" as you say, Amadan, but "uninformed?" Can't go with you there. If she's nasty maybe it is a reasonable response to the shots fired at her online by (wait for it...) a predominantly White and male online lynch mob. First off, simply because someone is in an interracial relationship or marriage does not magically purify their dark soul of the mystical Racism gene. No one is born racist, but many are taught to be. Long before one becomes racist, one displays degrees of bias, prejudice and bigotry before morphing into total racial animus. The worst reason possible to be with someone of another race is the hope it will make you less racist.
Secondly, you're preceding from a false premise. What do you base your assertion that Sarah Jeong evidently hates White people? From a handful of out of context, cherry-picked tweets? That's not enough evidence to convict Jeong of being a White Person Hater, but even if she was, as long as she either kept that shit to herself or it only came spewing out when she was drunk and dancing around, why would it matter? If anyone wants to take the time and trouble to go through everything I've written, said, posted, blogged, tweeted or otherwise set free into the world, it's likely they will find something I may wish I had phrased differently or never said at all. But I'd own it.
She has too. Jeong didn't say she was misinterpreted or somone
Plenty of conservatives have had a long and lucrative career dumping on people who look like Jeung and me, but the Alt-Right Twitter Twits aren't combing through their old tweets looking for a "gotcha!" one. They tried to take down a 30-year-old lawyer/journalist because that's what these fucks do. I'm very glad this time they failed to.Agreed. See above. Nobody is above criticism. Even Jesus had shit talked about him. Sarah Jeong is not greater than Jesus, so by all means, roast her like a chestnut. However, before you do, know going in, however pointed or scalding the criticism you level at Jeong, it won't be as hateful as calling her a "dog-eating gook."
That's how Jeong apologized. Here's how Candace Owens, the conservative Kanye West Whisperer responded. That earned Owens a brief ban from Twitter. This is how Ijeoma Oluo, a blogger I follow responded. I concur with Oluo and disagree with Owens. Duh.I think if I were working with Jeong, I'd just go up to her and ask.
I'll finish my comment a bit later. To be continued...
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Aug 7, 2018 19:36:36 GMT -5
If you're actually trying to figure out why someone like me takes an anti-SJW position, I believe we've had threads about this before. Nah, I'm pretty sure I've got it figured out. I've taken your points (your and everyone else's, a d nauseam) and some of them I agree with. But it seems apparent that these sorts of discussions of the hypocrisy of the left basically provide some sort of psychological payoff. And really, I'm the same. Pointing out hypocrisy is gaining moral high ground. It's the equivalent of the would-be thread I've never started about fundamentalist Christians supporting Trump the adulterer. So yes, the hypocrisy is annoying, and we're all so much better than them. Beyond that... what? It's nothing new, on either side. And none of this is about politicians or policy...it's about people on Twitter, and you haven't provided any evidence that it's more than that. I'm neither pissed off nor stewing. I quoted the part of your post that prompted me to comment. Because it's one thing to be annoyed at hypocrisy, and to basically revel in outrage while pointing it out. It's quite another to turn that annoyance into a reason to radicalize oneself, even to the point of eschewing basic tenants previously held.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 7, 2018 22:05:17 GMT -5
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.
If you know anything about me from here and elsewhere, you already know I have no use for White guilt. Guilt is a concept that has its merit when applied to career criminals, serial killers, and politicians, but for most other folks, it's useless. At some point a young male or female realizes they actually can touch themselves in their naughty bits and it won't fall off or rot away, and it not feels good, it's natural.
Nor have I ever for reparations. Mostly, because I was never a slave and you were never a slave owner. What do I want from White people? Nothing. I don't even care if y'all are "woke" or not. The choice is between being a part of the solution or part of the problem and if you're a fucking racist shitbag, you've made your choice.
If you're not and you're a decent human being, go read some James Baldwin or The Autobiography of Malcolm X, Native Son, Why We Can't Wait, or Invisible Man, then get back to me with what options you've found beyond racial reparations and White guilt.
Well, obviously you don't have a problem with that and neither does robeiae and Opty/Optimus. Me? I gotta BIG problem with that. James Gunn made bad and sick jokes. They weren't funny in the same way dead baby jokes aren't funny. Sarah Jeong ridiculed and scorned old White men, White women, White men and cops in her Twitter feed and shame, shame, shame on her.
BUT...
Where's the action to back up the thought? Where's the power to oppress and make the lives of American White people a living hell? Who was actually harmed by Gunn's crude insensitivity and Jeong's sneering takedowns? Elaborate on how you or robeiae or Optimus were actually hurt by Gunn or Jeong?
Did Jeong advocate smothering White babies in their cribs? Did Jeong say all White people should be rounded up and forcibly deported back to whatever shithole European country they originated from? Did Jeong say old White people are useless and should be slaughtered, gutted, skinned, deboned and fed to horses, pigs and dogs? That's what a racist would do. That's what someone who hates White people would say. But Sarah Jeoung? SHE. DID. NOT.
What Jeong did was silly, sophomoric, and immature. But racist? Racist like Hitler or George Wallace or Strom Thurmond or Jesse Helms or David Duke or Richard Spencer or Donald Trump racist? Hell and no. Nothing Jeong said belongs on the same level as those bastards.
What you are engaged in Amadan is punching DOWN. You know Mike Cernovich is an asshole, but as long as he's tearing into a Social Justice Warrior, you're willing to overlook his repulsive rape advocacy, his White genocide rhetoric, and his viewpoint it was a goddamned public service when George Zimmerman hunted down and murdered Trayvon Martin.
Sorry, but you'll just have to understand my sympathies are more likely to gravitate towards an Asian woman who's being targeted and harassed by White male trolls than I am to rape advocacy shitbags like Mike Cernovich.
Your mileage may vary.
Oh, fuck all that. I absolutely CAN ignore an ideologically motivated little fuck like Cernovich because I know where he's coming from isn't about exposing the foibles of the rich and famous. It's all about exposing, embarrassing and destroying his ideological enemies. YOU can ignore the fact that the guy who exposed James Gunn's stupid pedophile jokes is a misogynist and racist White supremacist son of a bitch, but I cannot and I will not. I don't care what the Left does or says about free speech when a total shitstick like Cernovich dings the same people you, robeiae and Optimus despise.
Just because Satan could speak scripture doesn't mean he believed a word of it. Same goes for a fuck like Cernovich. He's not about Truth, Justice and the American Way. He's about changing the topic from his own racism and sexism toward a young woman who made some intemperate and intolerant remarks on fucking Twitter. Be as butthurt as you want about what Jeong tweeted, but PLEASE don't even think to try and tell me a White man who advocates choking out women has more journalism credibility than an Asian woman whose talents led the N.Y. Times to hire her. I'm gonna call "bullshit" on that six days a week and twice on Sunday.
Lie down with a dog and you wake up with fleas. If you're cool with aligning yourself with Cernovich, that's all on you and has nothing to do with me. If you want to keep company with a rape advocate, well , that's all on you, Amadan. But you can Include. Me. Out.
By that loose standard, I could absolve Hitler of guilt for exterminating six million Jews because he proved the anti-Semitic tract, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was in fact entirely accurate. I'd like to think you're far too savvy to align yourself with an unrepentant asshole like Mike Cernovich, Amadan, but I can't since you seem all too glad to park your principles and overlook Cernovich's poisonous and violent hatred of women. I would prefer to believe you're not willing to overlook Cernovich's vileness because you share a common enemy on the Left, but it seems that's not the case.
No shit, Sherlock. I'd like to hold out the vague and possibly mistaken hope that it is entirely possible to pull Sarah Jeong's head out of her butt and begin the process of turning her into an Honest-to-God-and-Sonny-Jesus journalist. I harbor NO such hopes for a Mike Cernovich. He's not a journalist. He's a shit-stirring agent provocateur who's all about the "Gotcha!" and nothing else. Now if you want to align yourself with Cernovich who is a lost cause over that of a Sarah Jeong who might---operative word there--might be still amenable and capable of learning and becoming a serious, objective and professional journalist, that's all on you and has nothing to do with me.
Between Jeong and Cernovich I know which side I'm coming down on. You may do as you please and get in where you fit in, but I'd NEVER align my beliefs to coincide with filth like Cernovich, but if I did my so-called "beliefs" were fucked in the first place.
I don't accept on blind faith the premise you or robeiae or Opty/Optimus aren't right-wingers. You're certainly not any sort of liberals, so I'm fine by pegging you and Optimus as disaffected classic liberals who long for a Democratic party and a political philosophy that is now as passe as hula hopes, platform shoes and Jeri-curls.
I agree with you. Well, I'm not even remotely concerned about how former Leftists get radicalized. Once upon a time David Horowitz was an avid leftist supporter of the Black Panthers. Then he turned around and saw them as criminal scumbags and Horowitz repudiated the Panthers and the Left and now has swung so far to the Right when he's driving home he goes out of his way to avoid making a left turn. For me, this always provokes a question of former Lefties who flip away from liberal/progressives and that's "We're you full of shit then or are you full of shit now?"
That's all on you, Amadan and if you're willing to flip on your previously held belief system because an Asian woman or a Latino transgender or a Black male speaks of White people in less than adulatory terms, that means their default setting is "Blame Whitey/Hate Whitey" then I submit you never really invested in that belief system in the first place.
Which would make this an Amadan Problem and certainly not an Sarah Jeong problem. Jeung's supposed "anti-White racism" means nothing without the power behind it to enforce it against Whites and that's a power she lacks. All the angst expressed in this thread is driven by the irrational urge to destroy an Asian woman who employed intemperate language against her employer and her colleagues instead of the far-right bigot who is dead set on destroying Jeung in order to bolster his own brand.
Thanks for playing along.
Well, if you think obnoxious SJW's on the Left are worse than Alt-Right racist shitheads whom drive cars into crowds of antifada protesters, I can't help you with that and I'm really not inclined to waste time trying to.
Yeah. Pretty much. I see Social Justice Warriors such as Heather Heyer perhaps a bit misguided and somewhat self-righteous zealots whom think their personal foibles, hypocrisy and failings don't matter as long as their targets are more reprehensible than they are, but when some neo-Nazi mows her down as he drives his car into a gaggle of protestors, all that flies out the window. An eye-for-an-eye only leaves everyone blind, but there is a time and a place for non-violent resistance and fact of the matter is, not every Black person or Latino person or Asian person or Jewish person believes they have to take shit in fear of offending Good White People.
Nobody's got time to wait on your or Optimus' approval before taking action against the Alt-Right and the Trump Administration that backhandedly supports them. Either keep up or catch up. Or step aside. It really doesn't matter to me, but you'd have a lot more influence to change the policies and tactics the Left gets behind as the wise and sage advisor instead of the reproaching old fart in the corner mumbling how kids used to protest back in YOUR day.
Nobody's got time for aging White liberals attempting to guide and direct young White liberals in how to conduct themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 7, 2018 23:13:34 GMT -5
Okay, where did I say I am aligned with Mike Cernovich? So much of your response was nonsense. Being sick of SJWs does not make me Alt Right.
I'm on my phone and terrible at writing long replies on a small screen. But that part of your rant was the stupidest.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 8, 2018 8:44:39 GMT -5
All right, so most of this rant was pretty typical - monochrome, either one is A or B, woke or racist, you totally don't care even the tiniest little bit about what white folks like me think except that you feel compelled to come back to a board you supposedly abandoned because a little bird told you white folks were wrong on the Internet, etc. Since I am also guilty of People Wrong on the Internet Syndrome, I'll go ahead and write a useless rebuttal you'll sneer at and rephrase in a more pleasingly (to you) racist way anyway. If you know anything about me from here and elsewhere, you already know I have no use for White guilt. Guilt is a concept that has its merit when applied to career criminals, serial killers, and politicians, but for most other folks, it's useless. At some point a young male or female realizes they actually can touch themselves in their naughty bits and it won't fall off or rot away, and it not feels good, it's natural.
Nor have I ever for reparations. Mostly, because I was never a slave and you were never a slave owner. What do I want from White people? Nothing. I don't even care if y'all are "woke" or not. The choice is between being a part of the solution or part of the problem and if you're a fucking racist shitbag, you've made your choice.
If you're not and you're a decent human being, go read some James Baldwin or The Autobiography of Malcolm X, Native Son, Why We Can't Wait, or Invisible Man, then get back to me with what options you've found beyond racial reparations and White guilt.
I plead guilty to only having read one of those books. But your last line is the central problem of your entire thesis - one is either "a decent human being" (and thus "part of the solution," and thus agrees with you about, say, Sarah Jeong and whether or not she's racist) or a racist shitbag. Maybe I am not part of your solution but also not a racist shitbag. Except you have defined anyone not part of your solution as a racist shitbag. Hence all your discussions with white people who don't bow and scrape and offer all the appropriate accolades to your "righteous anger" turn toxic, because you just can't help snarling imprecautions, and white people who haven't been conditioned to roll over belly-up before the rage of a POC bristle. And bristling is just more evidence of how racist and fragile our whiteness is. You say you don't want anything from white people, but that's obviously untrue, you're not a black separatist, so at the very least, you'd like us to coexist without the looming threat of violence or persecution. But you want to punch me in the face (verbally, maybe physically) and I'm supposed to take it as a learning experience. If I take it as a hostile act from someone using logical fallacies and deliberate provocations, it just cements your sense of righteousness. Except Opty, rob, and I all said we don't think Jeong should be fired. Call us disillusioned liberals or right-wingers or whatever, but nothing we suggested was disproportionate. I criticized Jeong and I think she's a nasty piece of work, because I've encountered people like her before (though rarely in such a prominent position). I don't think she should be fired, I don't think she should be harassed, and I don't wish ill upon her (except maybe to feel some heat for being an intemperate, bigoted Internet child). You never asked me what I think of Hitler or Jesse Helms or David Duke, et al, because they weren't the topic of the conversation. I mean, seriously, I can't say I think an Asian woman is a nasty bigot without also including my thoughts on how much worse Hitler was, or else I'm equivocating between them? Come on. Nobody here suggested she was on the same level as those people. False. Where did I ever express admiration or approval of Mike Cernovich? I mean, yeah, he might occasionally say something about SJWs that I agree with. I'm sure if I ever actually read Mein Kampf I'd find a sentence or two I agree with also. Malcolm X said some things I agree with as well - I guess that makes me an unqualified supporter of Malcolm X, right? We weren't talking about Mike Cernovich, but do feel free to start a thread about him and then we can talk about all the things he's said and whether or not anyone here agrees with them. As for your argument that Jeong's statements are of a different type because she was punching down, not up - yes, that is pretty much I said earlier and why I don't think what she said is the exact same thing as if a white person has said them about Asians, or as Candace Owens clumsily substituted "Jews" for "whites" in her tweets. I said that and you ignored it. But even though I agree that her "racism" isn't as egregious, I don't agree that it isn't racism or that she doesn't deserve to take some heat for it. ("Heat" meaning people calling out her statements as inappropriate, not meaning people calling her a "dog-eating gook" - Jesus.) And the idea that I am "punching down" by criticizing her is a ridiculous. Unless a white man criticizing a non-white man for anything is always punching down, in which case, exhibit A in why I think the SJ movement has become crap. It doesn't, in fact, but you know what they say about what happens when you assume. I can hold two thoughts in my head at once, though. I can believe Mike Cernovich is a pro-rape asshole and I can believe Sarah Jeong is an obnoxious SJW who was a questionable choice as NYT editor. Believing the one does not require me to forget the other. Incidentally, nice move linking Cernovich to Sarah Jeong - he was actually involved in James Gunn's firing, not the crap about Jeong, but here you are implicitly connecting anyone who criticizes anyone on the left with the entire Alt Right movement. And the only reason you give a shit about a rich movie director, who as far as I know was no scion of Social Justice activism before, being fired is because he's vaguely liberal in the way most Hollywood types are and a Bad Man is the one who got him fired. I said "I don't think you can just ignore the fact that Gunn was making pedophile jokes" You said " I absolutely CAN ignore an ideologically motivated little fuck like Cernovich" I didn't ask you to ignore Cernovich. I asked why you are ignoring the fact that Gunn actually did what he's accused of doing because you don't like the guy who dug it up? You can ignore that because you hate Cernovich (which is not "ignoring" him, btw), but you cannot ignore Gunn's tweets without admitting that it's only because you don't want to give aid and comfort to the enemy. If that's your position, just come out and say it, but it puts you (and implicitly, everyone else who takes that position, which seems to be most of the SJ movement) in an awkward position should a less-favored son be found guilty of tweeting rape and pedophilia jokes in the future. Also, another reminder: I actually don't think Gunn's tweets were that big a deal and he shouldn't have been fired for them. He should have just had to make the apology tour in which he talks about how inappropriate they were, he's grown and become a better man since those bygone years, etc. Really, you should be angry at Disney for rolling over so fast, not at me for rolling my eyes and pointing out that Gunn does seem kinda scummy here. I didn't ignore Cernovich, and I don't despise James Gunn. (At least, I don't think I do. Maybe he's worse than an entitled asshole who tweets pedophile jokes. I dunno.) So if Cernovich, or people like him, expose anyone else, for anything, I am obligated to defend that person, no matter what, or I am on Cernovich's side? That is bullshit reasoning. You keep saying charged things like "I want to keep company with a rape advocate," except nothing I have said suggests that, you are just putting your hack ideological slant on it. I know Cernovich is not a journalist and I never said anything about his journalistic credibility relative to Sarah Jeong's. Like I said, I can hold two thoughts in my head at once. They are both assholes, for different reasons. Not necessarily to the sae degree. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. There must be a term for such an impressive Gish Gallop straight into Godwin's Law. You don't have to accept anything on blind faith, but maybe our own statements about our positions should have some weight. If I am a "right-winger" then the term has no meaning. "Disaffected classic liberal" is perhaps not a terrible description, though I don't know about longing for a Democratic party out of the 1950s. Actually, I am more of a disaffected former SJW-leaning-liberal Democrat, now more of a classic liberal. Horowitz would say he was full of shit then, I'm sure. I haven't taken the Horowitz route, but there is nothing inherently wrong with deciding that what you once believed isn't true. People do fall away from their original ideologies, religion, and politics. I didn't "flip" my previously held belief system. I was against racism then, I am against racism now. And in fact, my opinion about privilege theory and whether or not racism is strictly limited to institutional racism hasn't changed either. (I was skeptical even when I was more sympathetic to the SJ argument.) The only thing that has actually changed is that I no longer believe most SJ activists are sincere or honest in what they claim to believe. I used to give them the benefit of the doubt even when I disagreed with them. Now, I do not believe the Sarah Jeongs of the world are genuinely trying to make the world a better place freer of oppression and that their occasionally intemperate words come from a place of pain and persecution. I believe Harvard-educated types like Sarah Jeong, privileged by any real measure except that sometimes people call her racist names on the Internet, are using SJ as a weapon for their own benefit. She probably doesn't even really care about white people that much, she just knows that the aggrieved WOC act will get her things like sympathy and NYT editorial positions. If becoming more cynical means I was never "invested" in SJ, you're right. If what you mean is I was never actually invested in the alleged principles behind it, you're wrong. You have expressed far more angst than anyone else. No one but you is talking about "destroying" Sarah Jeong. Wrong again. Two thoughts in my head at once, remember? Aging and old.... now that hurt my feelings!
|
|