Moderator: Community Team
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Neoteny wrote:I never took you to be the SJW, safe-space, thought police, Greek.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Neoteny wrote:All perfectly normal and useful professions. But might I suggest that, if you don't even know who Mike Cernovich is, maybe Twitter-brand irony isn't in your jurisdiction Mr. Thought Police.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Neoteny wrote:In all seriousness, I can't get behind the idea that tweets like "white people think toothpaste is spicy" is the sort of statement that justifies concerns of racism within the context of current and historical racial inequality and repression that the US in particular, and the world at large more generally, have taken part in. To feel the need to call it out as hypocritical, much less racist demonstrates a myopia that would be mind-blowing were it not so prevalent. Are there people racist against white people? Of course. We've done enough that I would be surprised if there weren't. Is formulaic Twitter humor racist? To a pedant, maybe, but it's so often used within a context of commentary on white hegemony (because Twitter, second probably only to Tumblr, is the land of the woke), that only someone who deliberately misreads it or who has no context for it would take it seriously enough to put on a pig's nose and look down it at the joker and tut tut about the discourse.
Neoteny wrote:Ask Jeong, I guess. But, as a white person, I applaud your efforts to stave off the terrible racism and discrimination that white people have to endure. Nobody really ever considers our feelings. Also, I'm happy for your gig with The Spectator. Congrats.
In all seriousness, I can't get behind the idea that tweets like "white people think toothpaste is spicy" is the sort of statement that justifies concerns of racism within the context of current and historical racial inequality and repression that the US in particular, and the world at large more generally, have taken part in. To feel the need to call it out as hypocritical, much less racist demonstrates a myopia that would be mind-blowing were it not so prevalent. Are there people racist against white people? Of course. We've done enough that I would be surprised if there weren't. Is formulaic Twitter humor racist? To a pedant, maybe, but it's so often used within a context of commentary on white hegemony (because Twitter, second probably only to Tumblr, is the land of the woke), that only someone who deliberately misreads it or who has no context for it would take it seriously enough to put on a pig's nose and look down it at the joker and tut tut about the discourse.
White people. We should probably cancel them.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Neoteny wrote:I trust greek to be able to handle a couple of big, scary words. He's at least earned that.
Neoteny wrote:Trust me, black people know that they can make certain ethnic jokes, and white people can't. It doesn't actually harm you, and until it does, just laugh at the jokes. Because a lot of them are really funny.
thegreekdog wrote:What's The Spectator?
thegreekdog wrote:Seriously though... Do you understand that the vast majority of Americans whether they vote blue or red are largely unconcerned with Twitter and wokeness? And that these "normal" people would view some of things people throw about in the name of wokeness as racist? Whether or not people should be cognizant of the past crimes of their particular color is almost entirely irrelevant. People tend to view themselves based upon what they've done in their own lives. It takes a lot of mental gymnastics for, say, the grandson of an Irish immigrant, to say "Well, people that had the same color skin as me did [racist thing] so it's okay that someone with a different color skin as me said [racist thing] and not only should I not be offended, but I should support that person's viewpoint so that I may both woke and to not offend anyone else."
thegreekdog wrote:And let's talk about context. When has context ever mattered to the land of the woke (I mean, apart from whether the person doing the speaking or tweeting is on the woke team)? Seriously. Candace Owens (a black conservative) tweeted Sarah's tweets but changed "white" to "black" and she was banned from twitter (she is also the same woman who was unironically yelled at for being a Nazi and a racist by a bunch of white people here in my home town). I'm not defending Candace Owens; I don't know her and I don't follow her. But definitely tell me again how context matters.
thegreekdog wrote:And let's talk about white hegemony (the assumption being that it exists and is a thing). What do you think our effective ways to either end white hegemony or co-exist? Do effective ways include cancelling white people (or at least demonstrating wokeness on Twitter)? Does anyone seriously think that will work? Or is the idea not so much to kill or co-exist with white hegemony, but to just throw things at it?
thegreekdog wrote:Finally, I leave you with these...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/h ... cants.html
https://www.newsweek.com/ruby-rose-lesb ... sy-1071046
And yes, I've made the jump from Sarah Jeong doing her thing to Harvard's new affirmative action plan and the idea that someone is not Jewish or lesbian enough to be Catwoman. They are absolutely related. Don't @ me.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
spurgistan wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Neoteny wrote:Man, she got caught up back in '16 in some weird gamergate/left-Twitter hybrid monster that I can vaguely remember being really tangled and dramatic and nonsensical and some collateral from that was her celebrating a guy getting fired from somewhere for his own Twitter activity and now Twitter is doing it again and it's all entertaining but I feel like I'm still missing a lot. I'm not sure people's jobs should be at risk for Twitter activity, especially since the nature of the beast ensures that the context is nearly impossible to follow, especially when you start going deep.
Y'all remember gamergate before they eventually just came out as fascists?
I'm less concerned about individual scenarios; just replace "white" with "black" in her tweets and the blue team has a completely different view on this woman.
I'm more focused on the idea that a small but vocal superminority can effectively shout loud enough for Disney or the New York Times to listen. Companies can do what they want, but it's disappointing that these responses are rarely measured and seem a reaction to that vocal superminority. Also, there's the hypocrisy (which I can't abide, but I understand).
Replace white with black and you refer to a hell of a lot more experiences. Historically, "cancel black people" is a thing that happens, "cancel white people" isn't. When people say "kill blacks/Muslims/Jews/untermenschen" (it's such a long list) they do that enough of the time that you gotta take it seriously. "Kill/cancel white people" is just flipping a script in a way that never happens in real life so it's not taken seriously. Was anybody scared of this reporter stoking anti-white violence? In the same way that when somebody tweets "cancel black people," black people (and people racists think are black) can rightfully be scared for themselves and of this person?
Anyways, Mike Cernovich (the guy who "outs" these tweets from years ago) is just a dude who's pissed that he can't use the N word. That's like his whole thing.
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:spurgistan wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Neoteny wrote:Man, she got caught up back in '16 in some weird gamergate/left-Twitter hybrid monster that I can vaguely remember being really tangled and dramatic and nonsensical and some collateral from that was her celebrating a guy getting fired from somewhere for his own Twitter activity and now Twitter is doing it again and it's all entertaining but I feel like I'm still missing a lot. I'm not sure people's jobs should be at risk for Twitter activity, especially since the nature of the beast ensures that the context is nearly impossible to follow, especially when you start going deep.
Y'all remember gamergate before they eventually just came out as fascists?
I'm less concerned about individual scenarios; just replace "white" with "black" in her tweets and the blue team has a completely different view on this woman.
I'm more focused on the idea that a small but vocal superminority can effectively shout loud enough for Disney or the New York Times to listen. Companies can do what they want, but it's disappointing that these responses are rarely measured and seem a reaction to that vocal superminority. Also, there's the hypocrisy (which I can't abide, but I understand).
Replace white with black and you refer to a hell of a lot more experiences. Historically, "cancel black people" is a thing that happens, "cancel white people" isn't. When people say "kill blacks/Muslims/Jews/untermenschen" (it's such a long list) they do that enough of the time that you gotta take it seriously. "Kill/cancel white people" is just flipping a script in a way that never happens in real life so it's not taken seriously. Was anybody scared of this reporter stoking anti-white violence? In the same way that when somebody tweets "cancel black people," black people (and people racists think are black) can rightfully be scared for themselves and of this person?
Anyways, Mike Cernovich (the guy who "outs" these tweets from years ago) is just a dude who's pissed that he can't use the N word. That's like his whole thing.
Women are raped and sexually assaulted at rates many times greater than men, therefore rape and assault against men is fine because it almost never happens.
That's great. Excellent argument, slick.
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
spurgistan wrote: (can't call it racism cause of the power difference) is ok
Neoteny wrote: boomer cohort you identify with
Neoteny wrote:So tell me greek, does Twitter wokeness bother you? Why are white people so worried about being canceled?
Neoteny wrote:Jeong is your typical woke Twitter personality and I am definitely of the mind that social media activism is not real activism. I'm not really defending that her dumb Twitter jokes are accomplishing anything. Just that they're dumb Twitter jokes and that's ok.
Neoteny wrote:#cancel@thegreekdog
karel wrote:All the left is.....they are a bunch of racist bigots and the truth hurts, how does that make you left scum bags feel, bunch of losers.
thegreekdog wrote:Neoteny wrote: boomer cohort you identify with
Gross... I'm Gen X dude. X
I mean, all the wokeness just means Trump wins the presidency again. B
That's what bothers me. B
And the alternative (Bernie or Debbie or Elizabeth) is not much better. X
Give me a moderate Republican or Democrat and I'm good to go. X
Jeong is also now on the editorial board of the (perhaps) most distinguished newspaper in the United States. BBBBBBB
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Neoteny wrote:First, I'm going to mark statements as either boomer (b) or genx (x).thegreekdog wrote:Neoteny wrote: boomer cohort you identify with
Gross... I'm Gen X dude. X
I mean, all the wokeness just means Trump wins the presidency again. B
That's what bothers me. B
And the alternative (Bernie or Debbie or Elizabeth) is not much better. X
Give me a moderate Republican or Democrat and I'm good to go. X
Jeong is also now on the editorial board of the (perhaps) most distinguished newspaper in the United States. BBBBBBB
You are a boomer dude. I just did science on you. The evidence is incontrovertible.
It's particularly interesting that you choose to blame the Democratic base, which woke Twitter pretty much embodies (they're still yelling about Bernie bros costing them the election) for the Trump presidency, as opposed to, say, Trump voters for voting for him, the Trump campaign for winning the election, or the Hillary campaign for losing it. I labeled that sentiment as boomer but it's becoming pretty clear that its cross-generational to blame the base for the faults of the candidate. It's not really the wine moms' fault Hillary didn't campaign in Michigan (though it is their fault for defending that decision). You could maybe blame them for electing the party apparatus that has now become self-preserving and out of touch with their base, but that might better be blamed on the people who created that party as it is today. You know, boomers and Gen Xers.
Boomer or not, this is an example of why "THE DISCOURSE" is such a waste of time. People who didn't vote in the election didn't stay home because millenials need safe spaces or whatever. They stayed home because neither Hillary nor Trump represented them, and it's easy to see why. This is a two way street, because the NYT types whining about Trump disrespecting "THE NORMS" or "THE SANCTITY OF THE OFFICE" or whatever isn't going to prevent people from voting for Trump again (assuming he runs again, I actually believe he hates the job and won't want to do it again; the only reason he persists is his ego) or to vote for whatever limp-dicked Democrat the party trots out. Trump won because he paid lip service to normal people, and because the Clintons have such a damaged political image. And maybe don't fully understand how the electoral college works? It was a bad campaign.
And Greek, I know it's precious to you, but I have to pull a patches and note that, in a generation, nobody is going to care about the New York Times editorial board. They're going to keep printing Ross Douthat's dumb shit until people all blow their damn brains out.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users