Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Time to give Trump Presidency it's own Thread.Follow

#1377 May 31 2018 at 8:30 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,674 posts
gbaji wrote:
She didn't call anyone an ape.
Ah, you didn't even see the tweet but jumped to the defense because ... I don't know, Roseanne is white? Nice.
gbaji wrote:
I'd assume you were referring to their social ideology and how it compared to that of the book.
So someone says "Planet of the Apes = Black Woman" and your assumption is that they're talking about the social ideology of the books? That someone being Roseanne Barr, of all people. I mean, that's not the least believable thing you've ever said, but it's definitely top ten. Now tell us how you were literally just talking to the author of the book and he agrees with you. That'll push it over the top.
gbaji wrote:
It could just as easily have been "Planet of the Wombats",
Then black people were historically referred to as wombats so it's still racially offensive. Lovely how a hypothetical works.

Edited, May 31st 2018 10:32am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1378 May 31 2018 at 8:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Barr also retweeted a photo basically saying that people have compared Trump to an orangutan so it's totally cool to compare Jarrett to an ape.

The only person on this bizarre and desperate "No, it's REALLY about the sociological context of dystopian films!" train is Gbaji.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1379 May 31 2018 at 10:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Really the best part of all this is we have someone by the name of professor supidmonkey arguing against calling people apes. It's made the last couple of days all the more enjoyable.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#1380 Jun 01 2018 at 9:18 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,454 posts
Jobs. Lots of jobs. And breaks in protocols allowing others to potentially ***** with markets. Good start to a Friday morning.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#1381 Jun 01 2018 at 9:29 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Any Republicans screaming that the jobs reports are all fake and we need to REALLY be looking at the yadda-yadda unemplyment numbers which show 96% unemployment?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1382 Jun 01 2018 at 9:33 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,454 posts
No, oddly I haven't seen any of that yet...
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#1383 Jun 02 2018 at 12:39 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,761 posts
Is gbaji going to tell us how this isn't racism in the republican party?

____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#1384 Jun 02 2018 at 1:54 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,004 posts
Quote:
Nazis are a lot like cats: If they like you, it’s probably because you’re feeding them.


Edited, Jun 2nd 2018 2:54pm by Allegory
#1385 Jun 03 2018 at 3:25 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,761 posts
I am sure we will have need of this in the future, so I will leave it here, until further notice.

____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#1386 Jun 03 2018 at 8:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Well, her story checks out.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1387 Jun 04 2018 at 7:39 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,674 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Is gbaji going to tell us how this isn't racism in the republican party?
I like California's "Counter-Semitic" candidate. I'd be remiss if I didn't say I hate Illinois Nazis.

Edited, Jun 4th 2018 9:41am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1388 Jun 04 2018 at 8:18 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,761 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Is gbaji going to tell us how this isn't racism in the republican party?
I like California's "Counter-Semitic" candidate. I'd be remiss if I didn't say I hate Illinois Nazis.


Me too, ever since Blues Brothers!
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#1389 Jun 04 2018 at 7:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,384 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Barr said that she shouldn't have made a jab at Jarrett regarding her looks.


"about her politics and her looks", was the actual statement. But ok. Point taken. I suppose we can assume that the "politics" side was the Muslim Brotherhood reference and the "looks" side was the Planet of the Ape's reference. Well, except that her response when told it was racist was to say that "Muslims r not a race". Which suggests that she was somewhat oblivious to the idea that people were criticizing her for the comparison of "ape" to "black", and thought it was about calling VJ a Muslim because of her Iranian heritage.

Or she's just a terribly confused person in general.

Quote:
This desperate spinning to say "She really, uh, was talking about, you know, the social caste hierarchies in dystopian films! Not apes at all!" is a noble attempt to eat whatever conservative shit is served on that day's platter and circle the wagons above all else but, you know, not even Barr is on board with it. Stop embarrassing yourself.


Again though, she clearly thought this was about politics, and only seemed to consider race/appearance thing *after* people said that her tweet was racist. Which does seem to support my theory that she intended the tweet to be about VJ's politics, while being completely oblivious to the racial angle. Her apology seemed more of the kind where you apologize for the result of something, regardless of the intent. If I accidentally hit you in the face while trying to wave to a friend of mine while you're standing next to me, it doesn't really matter that I didn't intend that result. I'll apologize for hitting you in the face anyway.

Which puts this into the category of "really dumb thing to say because she didn't consider how other people might interpret what she said" rather than "she's a terrible racist who thinks black people are subhuman and that leaked out in her tweet".
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1390 Jun 04 2018 at 7:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smiley: laugh Whatever you need to tell yourself
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1391 Jun 04 2018 at 7:59 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,384 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I am, however, responding to a whole bunch of other people who are doing exactly that, and pointing out that this isn't the only interpretation and maybe it's wrong to just assume that one must be the 100% truth.
All truth is 100%. Everything else is conjecture, lies or foolishness. If one is forced to guess about an event, Occams razor tells us that the most obvious answer is statistically the right one.


We disagree on what the "obvious answer" is though. Conservatives don't criticize VJ because she's black. They criticize her for her ideology and politics. The "obvious answer" to us is that the "Planet of the Apes" reference is to the very clear political and ideological themes in the story and how they correlate to VJ's own political ideology.

The alternative is an almost tortured mental process of ignoring the story itself, ignoring that VJ is a prominent figure of a specific recent political/ideological movement which aligns with that story's themes, and instead obsessing purely on VJ's race, and making a leap to correlate that to the setting of the story (and one particular part of that setting) rather than the theme. I'll repeat again that folks on the right don't actually spend a lot of time thinking about or considering what a person's skin color is. We tend to look at what the person does and says and judge them on that instead. Shocking, I know.

Quote:
So, yeah; if someone uses language that has been considered racist for a few centuries, "guessing" that the comment is, in fact, racist is most likely the right answer.


Given that "Planet of the Apes" hasn't been around for centuries, that's blatantly false. Again, this falls to an assessment of intent. And that assessment can be very circular in this case.

Quote:
I'm truly sorry for you. You've spent so much of your life bonding to a political ideology that includes clear and consistent racist overtones...


Again though, that's circular. My ideology does *not* include those things. The problem is that I live in a world where other's ideology *does*, and thus I have to make sure that anything I say doesn't trigger those other people's racial assumptions. I don't make any assumption that "ape" and "black" are connected. At all. In fact, the only way you find offense in the comment is if you are making that correlation, and project that correlation on the other person.

And again, that goes double when you realize that her reference was not to an ape, but to a work which just happened to have apes (and chimps and orangutangs) in it. So the connection is tenuous at best, and completely subjective. That's certainly enough to generate offense, but the offense is primarily her not realizing that others would find the remark, not just offensive (cause it was intended to be), but specifically racist.

Quote:
... that you must defend it (despite the racism you're "blind" to) because you've invested to much of who you are into it and fear to change because it would destroy the *perfect* self-image you've made for yourself.


I think there's some disagreement on the point at which one side is "blind" to something or the other side is "overly sensitive" to something. I'll point out again that the last thing I think about when I think about VJ is her race. Obviously, for others, that's not the case.

Edited, Jun 4th 2018 7:01pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1392 Jun 04 2018 at 8:27 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,384 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
She didn't call anyone an ape.
Ah, you didn't even see the tweet but jumped to the defense because ... I don't know, Roseanne is white? Nice.


Huh? Interesting that you predictably assume it's about skin color. No. I read the tweet and realized that she didn't actually call VJ an ape, and that a more reasonable assumption about the intent of the tweet was a reference to VJ's politics and ideology. Which is precisely what I posted.

What about that process is confusing to you? I'd have made the same assessment of the tweet regardless of who made it. This is another case where I'm judging people based on what they do and say, and others are judging based on the skin colors of those involved. One of those approaches is far more likely to result in racial bias than the others. It's not hard to guess which.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
I'd assume you were referring to their social ideology and how it compared to that of the book.
So someone says "Planet of the Apes = Black Woman" and your assumption is that they're talking about the social ideology of the books?


Except no one said "black woman". Do you see how it's your own assessment of the qualities of VJ that make this association work (in your own head anyway). You see "VJ" and the first thing you think is "black woman". I see "VJ" and think "far left liberal activist".

Do you see why you interpret the statement in the context of race, and I interpret it in the context of political ideology?

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
It could just as easily have been "Planet of the Wombats",
Then black people were historically referred to as wombats so it's still racially offensive. Lovely how a hypothetical works.


Except your hypothetical is based on the assumption that Roseanne chose "Planet of the Apes" as a reference specifically because of the racist "black == ape" correlation, and not because of the ideological themes contained within. Thus, you'd assume that she'd only have made a reference to the hypothetical "Planet of the Wombats" if a similar historical "black == wombats" correlation existed.

My argument is that she'd have made that reference if that's what the book's title was, regardless of whether there was any historical racist correlation at all. Obviously, there's no way for us to know for sure, but the point I raised earlier does seem relevant. She did not appear to realize that the claims of racism in her tweet were about "`Planet of the Apes" but thought it was about the reference to VJ and the "Muslim Brotherhood". Which suggests strongly that she did not intend to make such a correlation at all, but simply failed to realize that others would.

Which leads us back to the point I made earlier about how those of us who don't make race the first thing we think about have to be extra careful to consider how anything we might say will be interpreted by those who do. That certainly appears to be the pit that Roseanne fell into. And yeah, she should have known better. That was her mistake. But I really don't think she was motivated by racism at all.

But in today's world, intent doesn't matter. Does it?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1393 Jun 04 2018 at 8:50 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,384 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Smiley: laugh Whatever you need to tell yourself


It's not about me telling myself anything. It's about me reading what she actually said. You're the one who conveniently stripped out her reference to politics when paraphrasing her. I put it back in. I also included her response, which clearly indicates she thought that people were criticizing her for comparing VJ to the Muslim Brotherhood.

You're the one who made a point of going back to her own statements and using them to determine her intent. All I did was include more of what she said, and not just the one part you cherry picked. What a coincidence that when we do that, it supports my position and not yours. Perhaps the next time you attempt this form of argument, you take a bit of time to read the entire tweet progression first? Just a thought.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1394 Jun 04 2018 at 8:53 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,612 posts
gbaji wrote:
Conservatives don't criticize VJ because she's black.
It's true to you because you think it's true.

Which takes us back to my statement about your self-image.

QED
____________________________
Smash wrote:
My next mixed metaphor will include chocolate cake.

#1395 Jun 04 2018 at 9:19 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,384 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Conservatives don't criticize VJ because she's black.
It's true to you because you think it's true.


I think it's true because I've read, watched, and listened to probably hundreds of hours of conservatives talking about VJ and not once has a reference to her skin color come up. The only people who mention her skin color are liberals, usually in some variation of criticizing a conservative for "attacking a woman of color".

And yeah, I suppose you could insist that conservatives are really all secretly motivated by race, and just pretend otherwise, and we're all speaking in code to each other and "far left activist" really means "black person", or something. But that's just freaking silly, and requires yet more mental wrangling to accomplish.

What happened to Occam's razor? We can assume this vast conservative conspiracy to base our entire ideology on race but not ever mention it (even to and among ourselves, which makes one wonder how we pass along the primer for our secret code in the first place). Or we can make the far easier and straightforward assumption that maybe conservatives really just don't place much weight on the skin color of people and instead focus on what they do and say? That's certainly a simpler explanation for both the absence of skin color references in our discussion *and* the occasional case where we accidentally say something that others who are skin color obsessed interpret as racist. Right? Yeah.

Quote:
Which takes us back to my statement about your self-image.


Or. At the risk of repeating myself, you're trying too hard to project your own race obsessed methodology onto me. I'm not blind to racism. But I also don't leap to a racism assumption at the first opportunity. Silly me. I try to spend a bit of time looking at the facts first. And yes, at least some of this is my devil's advocate aspect coming out. When everyone else is assuming that something is X, I tend to look to see if it's possible it could be Y instead.

Hey. If it wasn't for contrary opinions, we'd have very little to discuss. We'd all be sitting around agreeing with each other. And that would be a disaster! ;)
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1396 Jun 04 2018 at 9:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Smiley: laugh Whatever you need to tell yourself
It's not about me telling myself anything. It's about me reading what she actually said.

Dude, she came back and retweeted a defense saying (in meme image form) "People said Trump looks like an orangutan so it's totally cool to say Jarrett looks like an ape".

I get it. The conservatives are all worked up about this and you need to try to find the spin, no matter how ridiculous. Whatever. You're pretty much a one man show trying to insist that it wasn't about her looks and "Planet of the Apes" was some reference to dystopian whatever-the-fucks but you gotta do you.

Edited, Jun 4th 2018 10:54pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1397 Jun 04 2018 at 11:42 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,612 posts
gbaji wrote:
I suppose you could insist that conservatives are really all secretly motivated by race
Many are.

You choose not to notice.


QED
____________________________
Smash wrote:
My next mixed metaphor will include chocolate cake.

#1398 Jun 05 2018 at 8:09 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,674 posts
gbaji wrote:
What about that process is confusing to you?
Not a damn thing.
gbaji wrote:
Do you see why you interpret the statement in the context of race, and I interpret it in the context of political ideology?
We all see your spin, sunshine.
gbaji wrote:
Except your hypothetical is based on the assumption that Roseanne chose "Planet of the Apes" as a reference specifically because of the racist "black == ape" correlation,
Because it was.
gbaji wrote:
But in today's world, intent doesn't matter. Does it?
Not when white people have you defending them.
Jophiel wrote:
The conservatives are all worked up about this and you need to try to find the spin, no matter how ridiculous.
It's not like he can defend the "Counter-Semites" running until after they take office.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1399 Jun 05 2018 at 8:38 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
And yes, at least some of this is my devil's advocate aspect coming out. When everyone else is assuming that something is X, I tend to look to see if it's possible it could be Y instead.

I know you like to pretend you're a special snowflake who's blessed with unique individualism and doesn't follow the herd but most people are saying "X" because they also looked at the situation and quickly realized that "X" far and away made the most sense. There's no virtue in saying "But... Y!" when "Y" makes no sense.

You come across like someone trying to be the smartest and most innovative thinker in the room by saying that a cat might really be a tiny elephant. It obviously isn't and everyone is sort of embarrassed for you as you come up with increasingly strained rationales for why your elephant theory is plausible but you just keep at it because you can't be special if you're agreeing with the crowd.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1400 Jun 05 2018 at 12:27 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,626 posts
It's not much of a secret that most conservatives have been conditioned to reject any stance or action, political or otherwise, based on skin color.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#1401 Jun 05 2018 at 7:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
3,761 posts
Jophiel wrote:

You come across like someone trying to be the smartest and most innovative thinker in the room by saying that a cat might really be a tiny elephant. It obviously isn't and everyone is sort of embarrassed for you as you come up with increasingly strained rationales for why your elephant theory is plausible but you just keep at it because you can't be special if you're agreeing with the crowd.


Funny enough, I was talking to several veterinarian friends of mine last night, and they all agreed that casts are tiny elephants. It's totes obvs, if you just look at the facts. Not all the facts. Just the ones that I posted here that I didn't cite for source. Trust me.
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 75 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (75)