IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags new york times , racism charges , Sarah Jeong , Twitter incidents

Reply
Old 7th August 2018, 02:44 PM   #161
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Honest answer. Because there's been an effort (one which I understand but do not agree with) by some to use "racist" more narrowly to only refer to "institutional racism" or more broadly to mean things like unintentional use of privilege.

This, while perhaps well intentioned in some aspects, has done nothing but make an already loaded term loaded and confusing.
In this case, it's more about objecting to mockery of racism being treated as inherently racist, rather than inherently mockery that does not necessarily reflect one's actual views and position.

That's not to say that Jeong's not a racist, but is saying that the evidence presented as "proof" is really bad evidence for it, given the actual situation... with the added note that the people pushing the "evidence" have a history of demonstrably doing thoroughly dishonest smear jobs using similar tactics.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

Last edited by Aridas; 7th August 2018 at 02:46 PM.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 02:56 PM   #162
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
There's actually no evidence that Jeong was mocking racism, as opposed to just being flagrantly racist herself.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 03:01 PM   #163
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,090
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There's actually no evidence that Jeong was mocking racism, as opposed to just being flagrantly racist herself.
What would you accept as evidence that it was mockery?
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 03:18 PM   #164
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
What would you accept as evidence that it was mockery?
A tweet that replies to a specific attack, twisting the words of the attack back on their author in a passable attempt at wit.

Something like this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post12385499

The display of "conductive logic" in the middle of that post might give you the impression that I'm slinging woo, but it's clear from the context that I'm responding to and mocking a specific instance of woo-slinging by another author.

No such connection or evidence of satirical wit is evident in any of Jeong's tweets that I've seen. And given the sheer volume of hate speech in her body of work, even if one or two tweets were found that did make such a connection, it wouldn't do much to rehabilitate the rest of them. In fact, the preponderance of evidence would be in the other direction: The few apparently mocking tweets, when seen in the context of the entire ouvre, would appear to be more of the same heartfelt hate speech, served once or twice with a side of mockery.

The body of work is out there. We've seen it and can judge for ourselves whether her excuse is plausible. We're already past the point of asking, "what evidence would you accept?"

"The security footage shows you robbing the bank at gunpoint."

"What evidence would you accept that I was just passing by?"
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 03:30 PM   #165
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
A tweet that replies to a specific attack, twisting the words of the attack back on their author in a passable attempt at wit.
Like, say, Post 60 in this thread shows, with the addition of showing the current response to it?
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

Last edited by Aridas; 7th August 2018 at 03:32 PM.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 06:41 PM   #166
Scopedog
Muse
 
Scopedog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 836
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
I'm totally open to someone catching her in an interview actually exhibiting racist behavior. I haven't seen it. It doesn't have to be people who attacked her personally, but a general type will do.
Does this count?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUSctMLLNUE

The question that leads to the answer below starts at 1:01:36

"Everything is implicitly organized around, um, how men see the world, and not just men, how white men see the world, um, and this is, this is a problem- this is why so many things suck, and, and this, this should absolutely be addressed and it should be addressed for more reasons than just, um, oh, like, we're not able to expand to this market, out, because it turns out this product doesn't understand a user base beyond white men who are not exactly a majority in the world."

She seems very intelligent and reasonable in the rest of the presentation, for what it's worth.
Scopedog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 07:26 PM   #167
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,428
Okay, I get it: #notallracists




Seems like I get the right religious neo-fascists, jackbooting all over the place while the left consists of delusional, self-entitled piranhas in a blind frenzy, devouring anything and anyone which wanders too close, even their own.

The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 08:00 PM   #168
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by Scopedog View Post
Does this count?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUSctMLLNUE

The question that leads to the answer below starts at 1:01:36

"Everything is implicitly organized around, um, how men see the world, and not just men, how white men see the world, um, and this is, this is a problem- this is why so many things suck, and, and this, this should absolutely be addressed and it should be addressed for more reasons than just, um, oh, like, we're not able to expand to this market, out, because it turns out this product doesn't understand a user base beyond white men who are not exactly a majority in the world."

She seems very intelligent and reasonable in the rest of the presentation, for what it's worth.
It's racist to point out systemic bias?
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 08:04 PM   #169
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by The Norseman View Post
Okay, I get it: #notallracists




Seems like I get the right religious neo-fascists, jackbooting all over the place while the left consists of delusional, self-entitled piranhas in a blind frenzy, devouring anything and anyone which wanders too close, even their own.

Sounds like you don't get it, though?

Here, I'll repeat myself, for the fun of it.

Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
In this case, it's more about objecting to mockery of racism being treated as inherently racist, rather than inherently mockery that does not necessarily reflect one's actual views and position.

That's not to say that Jeong's not a racist, but is saying that the evidence presented as "proof" is really bad evidence for it, given the actual situation... with the added note that the people pushing the "evidence" have a history of demonstrably doing thoroughly dishonest smear jobs using similar tactics.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 08:13 PM   #170
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
I like it how suddenly there are all of these rules that are to be followed before calling people racists.
Suddenly? There's only one rule: Make Sure it's Accurate.


And as I always like to remind everyone. There's a big difference between racism and bigotry. I think we all (well to a certain very high percentage) have varying degrees of racism. That's not bigotry. Bigotry is Jeff Sessions, Donald Trump, David Duke, Louis Farrakhan, that guy with the "There's a Reason It's Called the WHITE House" sign. That's bigotry - it's thought out, planned and orchestrated.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 08:17 PM   #171
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by Scopedog View Post
Does this count?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUSctMLLNUE

The question that leads to the answer below starts at 1:01:36

"Everything is implicitly organized around, um, how men see the world, and not just men, how white men see the world, um, and this is, this is a problem- this is why so many things suck, and, and this, this should absolutely be addressed and it should be addressed for more reasons than just, um, oh, like, we're not able to expand to this market, out, because it turns out this product doesn't understand a user base beyond white men who are not exactly a majority in the world."

She seems very intelligent and reasonable in the rest of the presentation, for what it's worth.
And.... for the big prize.... That's not racist.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 08:21 PM   #172
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
A tweet that replies to a specific attack, twisting the words of the attack back on their author in a passable attempt at wit.

Something like this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post12385499

The display of "conductive logic" in the middle of that post might give you the impression that I'm slinging woo, but it's clear from the context that I'm responding to and mocking a specific instance of woo-slinging by another author.

No such connection or evidence of satirical wit is evident in any of Jeong's tweets that I've seen. And given the sheer volume of hate speech in her body of work, even if one or two tweets were found that did make such a connection, it wouldn't do much to rehabilitate the rest of them. In fact, the preponderance of evidence would be in the other direction: The few apparently mocking tweets, when seen in the context of the entire ouvre, would appear to be more of the same heartfelt hate speech, served once or twice with a side of mockery.

The body of work is out there. We've seen it and can judge for ourselves whether her excuse is plausible. We're already past the point of asking, "what evidence would you accept?"

"The security footage shows you robbing the bank at gunpoint."

"What evidence would you accept that I was just passing by?"
Swift's body of work is also out there. I can't find a specific letter to him from an English bigot, so Swift must've actually thought that eating the Irish was a good idea.

Great argument. I'm sold.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 08:45 PM   #173
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
It's racist to point out systemic bias?
I mean...
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Stuff like the above is just bad test procedures - as opposed to the nazi fetishists still on Twitter.

Or, you know, the ones due in DC soon.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 09:28 PM   #174
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Suddenly? There's only one rule: Make Sure it's Accurate.


And as I always like to remind everyone. There's a big difference between racism and bigotry. I think we all (well to a certain very high percentage) have varying degrees of racism. That's not bigotry. Bigotry is Jeff Sessions, Donald Trump, David Duke, Louis Farrakhan, that guy with the "There's a Reason It's Called the WHITE House" sign. That's bigotry - it's thought out, planned and orchestrated.
It's likely also well worth recognizing that there's also a big difference between racism and recognizing that there are differences in different populations. A person accepting the results of a study that finds that, on average and after comparing meaningfully comparable populations, "black" people are just barely less intelligent than white people is not automatically a racist. Facts are facts, after all. A person who then tries to claim that the very slight difference on average is evidence that "black" people are only fit to live in poverty, on the other hand, fairly certainly is a racist.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 09:28 PM   #175
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,428
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
Sounds like you don't get it, though?
Nope, I got it.



Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Suddenly? There's only one rule: Make Sure it's Accurate.

And as I always like to remind everyone. There's a big difference between racism and bigotry.
Yes. Racism is a form of bigotry but bigotry is not limited to racism.



Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
And.... for the big prize.... That's not racist.
Perhaps you should include "in my opinion" on some of your pronunciations?
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2018, 11:09 PM   #176
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,681
Originally Posted by Scopedog View Post
Does this count?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUSctMLLNUE

The question that leads to the answer below starts at 1:01:36

"Everything is implicitly organized around, um, how men see the world, and not just men, how white men see the world, um, and this is, this is a problem- this is why so many things suck, and, and this, this should absolutely be addressed and it should be addressed for more reasons than just, um, oh, like, we're not able to expand to this market, out, because it turns out this product doesn't understand a user base beyond white men who are not exactly a majority in the world."

She seems very intelligent and reasonable in the rest of the presentation, for what it's worth.
How is everything 'organized around how white men see the world'?

Why does she shift to the largest possible scale, 'the world', to make this point? because white people are a minority in 'the world'? Is being a successful minority bad? Does she also want less Jews practicing law, or less Asians in tech?

Does she think it a bad thing that a minority would be so influential? I mean, South Korean women aren't exactly a majority in the world, or in the US, or among NYT readers?

Shouldn't she give her job to a black person? Asian people earn the most money of all ethnic groups in the US.

Is this line of reasoning actually an Orwellian hell with no end in sight?

Questions, questions.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 04:10 AM   #177
Scopedog
Muse
 
Scopedog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 836
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
How is everything 'organized around how white men see the world'?

Why does she shift to the largest possible scale, 'the world', to make this point? because white people are a minority in 'the world'? Is being a successful minority bad? Does she also want less Jews practicing law, or less Asians in tech?

Does she think it a bad thing that a minority would be so influential? I mean, South Korean women aren't exactly a majority in the world, or in the US, or among NYT readers?

Shouldn't she give her job to a black person? Asian people earn the most money of all ethnic groups in the US.

Is this line of reasoning actually an Orwellian hell with no end in sight?

Questions, questions.
She's specifically talking about how the "architecture" of the internet is potentially less welcoming or accessible to minorities and women because it was designed by white men. Mumbles example of a racist HP computer is a valid one, I suppose. But how is Sarah Jeong's statement different from saying "the reason so many things suck in Chicago is because of black men" or "the reason so many things suck in the entertainment industry is because of Jewish men"? I don't agree with either of the posited statements, but I wonder what mental contortions are necessary to distinguish them from "the reason so many things suck in internet architecture is because of white men".

I think Sarah Jeong is just a stereotypical college-indoctrinated, casually anti-white SJW who just took for granted that her tweets would be taken in the college liberal context and primarily consumed by other SJWs in her echo chamber. Instead her tweets were consumed by 4chan /pol/, who proceeded to defecate them, consume them again, and then regurgitate the mess back into her mouth. /pol/ isn't snowflakes or disingenuous or hypocrites, they are following Saul Aulinsky's Rules for Radicals #4. The left would do well to recognize that /pol/ is employing many of the Rules for Radicals and the left isn't quite as good at it anymore. Skeptic Tank is correct, the best of all possible outcomes for /pol/ is the retention of Sarah Jeong by the New York Times.

Last edited by Scopedog; 8th August 2018 at 04:27 AM.
Scopedog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 07:46 AM   #178
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
Originally Posted by Scopedog View Post
She's specifically talking about how the "architecture" of the internet is potentially less welcoming or accessible to minorities and women because it was designed by white men. Mumbles example of a racist HP computer is a valid one, I suppose. But how is Sarah Jeong's statement different from saying "the reason so many things suck in Chicago is because of black men" or "the reason so many things suck in the entertainment industry is because of Jewish men"? I don't agree with either of the posited statements, but I wonder what mental contortions are necessary to distinguish them from "the reason so many things suck in internet architecture is because of white men".
On the other hand, how is it different than "the internet is designed around the interests of rich liberals in Silicon Valley". Or actually, strike out the term "liberals". Seem like standard complaints then.

Let's be honest, given the number of outright Nazi wannabes on social media, it's kind of tough to suggest that it's jews, of all groups, that allow this. But I've heard a lot of complaints from Google/Apple/MS ex-employees who saw gross racial/gender discrimination, startups run by nonwhite/nonAsian people that couldn't get any sort of venture capital funding, only to see a white guy with the exact same idea easily get funding years later, and even just watching history videos on autoplay on Youtube will often end up with a bunch of people ranting about how "the jews" are pushing for mass immigration into Europe and the US to destroy the white race.

You have to start well down a rabbit hole in order to run into someone like Tariq Nasheed in my experience - and I'd prefer if the nazi fetishists, white supremacists, and so forth were also sidelined, rather than that racist conman be boosted like his white equivalents, just to be clear.

The most recent example would be Twitter CEO @jack explaining why they decided not to ban Alex Jones - only for people to point out the times they were banned for responding to Nazis dogpiling them, erroneously suspended for making a "Ugh, I could die" joke , and in one odd case, being banned for describing the magic tattoos used to enslave elves.

Quote:
I think Sarah Jeong is just a stereotypical college-indoctrinated, casually anti-white SJW who just took for granted that her tweets would be taken in the college liberal context and primarily consumed by other SJWs in her echo chamber. Instead her tweets were consumed by 4chan /pol/, who proceeded to defecate them, consume them again, and then regurgitate the mess back into her mouth. /pol/ isn't snowflakes or disingenuous or hypocrites, they are following Saul Aulinsky's Rules for Radicals #4. The left would do well to recognize that /pol/ is employing many of the Rules for Radicals and the left isn't quite as good at it anymore. Skeptic Tank is correct, the best of all possible outcomes for /pol/ is the retention of Sarah Jeong by the New York Times.
First, Skeptic Tank says that about everything, in reality the vast majority of people don't care about this and remain disgusted by nazi fetishists, and are still confused about why anyone considers Cheeto Benito to be racist.

Second, while I dislike the term "SJW" which I still consider to be an undefined attempt to insult, yeah, responding to twitter racists with this sort of humor was pretty common around then - and still is to a large degree. I also question the use of asking someone who was, at the time, 24-25, to consider politics, internet mobs, etc. five years down the line. It's worth pointing out that many people in these hate mobs are, themselves, in their teens and early 20s. Guys like Cernovich and Spencer might be employing Alinski's rules, but the average nazi fetishist is really just some fanatic.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 08:07 AM   #179
Disbelief
Illuminator
 
Disbelief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,306
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
First, Skeptic Tank says that about everything, in reality the vast majority of people don't care about this and remain disgusted by nazi fetishists, and are still confused about why anyone considers Cheeto Benito to be racist.

Second, while I dislike the term "SJW" which I still consider to be an undefined attempt to insult, yeah, responding to twitter racists with this sort of humor was pretty common around then - and still is to a large degree. I also question the use of asking someone who was, at the time, 24-25, to consider politics, internet mobs, etc. five years down the line. It's worth pointing out that many people in these hate mobs are, themselves, in their teens and early 20s. Guys like Cernovich and Spencer might be employing Alinski's rules, but the average nazi fetishist is really just some fanatic.
Yet we have numerous athletes getting grilled for years old tweets concerning racism and homophobia that occurred when they were 16, 17, 18. We allow no room for personal growth and assume that they feel the same or would express the same ideology.
__________________
Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same?

Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman
Disbelief is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 08:24 AM   #180
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,681
Originally Posted by Disbelief View Post
Yet we have numerous athletes getting grilled for years old tweets concerning racism and homophobia that occurred when they were 16, 17, 18. We allow no room for personal growth and assume that they feel the same or would express the same ideology.
Plus, these people kick a ball over a field, they are not editors for a prominent news outlet.

On the plus side; this may spell the end for the constant outrage culture and targeted campaigns to get people fired over old Tweets. Maybe companies will now learn not to give in to drummed-up social media storms.

Disney gave up 100 million dollars over one Rosanne Tweet, the NYT just said they were aware of the hundred or so racist Tweets and are keeping their editor on.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 08:54 AM   #181
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
On the plus side; this may spell the end for the constant outrage culture and targeted campaigns to get people fired over old Tweets. Maybe companies will now learn not to give in to drummed-up social media storms.
That would be nice, but it's unlikely.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 09:10 AM   #182
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,428
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That would be nice, but it's unlikely.
You're absolutely right. It will keep happening as long as there are enough people to excuse racist, sexist, bigoted behavior as long as it's from the correct person aimed at the correct person. This, we are to believe, is okay based on a history which never can change brought into the present and future hoping that they will never change either as this is the basis of the ongoing victim narration.

This self-entitled, narcissistic woman is in the top ten percent of the United States earning bracket, the richest country in the world; she's in one of the most privileged jobs, trained at one of the most privileged schools and already beyond roughly 90% of the rest of the planet, and is given pass after pass to be as virulently racist as any other racist bigot and it's okay because she supposedly gets some racist tweets that no one can produce (not even her).



But just take her word for it, besides it's not racist because I know racism (though she admitted they were racist) and she's not racist no wait she was just race-baiting because she's sick and tired of being victimized because of her race no wait she is making hundreds of racist tweets over many years because she's using edgy comedy and/or satire to make a point that she's a victim and white people can never be victims no white men can never be victims no according to her all white people especially white women especially white liberals especially white liberal women can never be victims so it's okay to be racist against them sit down shut up you can't complain because it's not racism you have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt it's actually racism...

...yeah. That's what it sounds like to me.
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 09:10 AM   #183
Scopedog
Muse
 
Scopedog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 836
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
On the other hand, how is it different than "the internet is designed around the interests of rich liberals in Silicon Valley". Or actually, strike out the term "liberals". Seem like standard complaints then.
Sarah Jeong didn't say that, though. She casually, off-handedly, said "white men" (I'm hispanic, by the way). Her liberal-indoctrinated, white-guilt laden audience didn't even blink. She was intending to broadcast to that same type of audience with her "counter-trolling" twitter vitriol. In her mind it was probably alot like locker room talk except locker room talk usually stays in the locker and isn't intended to be publically documented.

I listened to the whole talk and found her intelligent, articulate, and otherwise reasonable, however I think she is at least a casually anti-white racist, like the stereotype of SJW college students. Her aposematic hair is also a characteristic of this stereotype.
Scopedog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 09:57 AM   #184
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Scopedog View Post
Sarah Jeong didn't say that, though. She casually, off-handedly, said "white men" (I'm hispanic, by the way). Her liberal-indoctrinated, white-guilt laden audience didn't even blink. She was intending to broadcast to that same type of audience with her "counter-trolling" twitter vitriol. In her mind it was probably alot like locker room talk except locker room talk usually stays in the locker and isn't intended to be publically documented.
In her book about the Clinton 2016 campaign, New York Times reporter Amy Chozick proposes a new category of gaffe: Ideas that play well in private among friends, but are absolute clunkers when uttered aloud in public.

Chozick gives a few examples of politicians committing this kind of gaffe. She attributes the error to people taking for granted that the positive feedback they've received in private will carry over to the public audience. That seems to be the kind of mistake Jeong has made in that particular instance. The strategy the NYT seems to have chosen is to insist that the positive response Jeong had gotten from a friendly audience is the response she should get from the public at large. "Once you agree with our politics, you'll agree that Jeong is actually a good hire. You're welcome."
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 10:11 AM   #185
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 46,649
Basically we're at some level of:

1. It's impossible for a minority to be racist against a white person on a literal level. I hope that very few people are literally arguing from this position.

2. It's impossible for a minority to be racist against a white person on a practical level, as in they can be racist but they lack the social or political power for it to matter (i.e. the "Institutional Racism") argument. Sometimes made more confusing by people using this as the only definition of "racism" they accept. This is a complicated nightmare web of semantics and categorization and definitions.

3. It's possible for a minority to be racist against a white person but white people shouldn't say anything or complain about because white people have had it so much better for X amount of time there is just some amount of racism that white people should be happy to put up with to make up for racism they put out or something and white people just shouldn't get angry at people being racism towards them because... either they deserve or have earned it or it's taking... being angry about racism away from minorities or something.

4. All racism against white people obviously isn't racist but mocking racism, mocking racist white people, parody racism, making a point, or some other variation thereof.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 8th August 2018 at 10:15 AM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 10:24 AM   #186
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 27,292
Blazing Saddles is irrefutable proof that Mel Brooks is and always has been a fanatical racist.



ETA: And let's not even get started on The Producers.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."

Last edited by quadraginta; 8th August 2018 at 10:25 AM.
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 10:33 AM   #187
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Blazing Saddles is irrefutable proof that Mel Brooks is and always has been a fanatical racist.

: rolleyes :

ETA: And let's not even get started on The Producers.
If the New York Times thought they were hiring the next Mel Brooks, they're sorely mistaken.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 10:56 AM   #188
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
Originally Posted by Scopedog View Post
Sarah Jeong didn't say that, though.
And she didn't say anything about "the jews", either. That's how analogies work.

Quote:
She casually, off-handedly, said "white men" (I'm hispanic, by the way). Her liberal-indoctrinated, white-guilt laden audience didn't even blink. She was intending to broadcast to that same type of audience with her "counter-trolling" twitter vitriol. In her mind it was probably alot like locker room talk except locker room talk usually stays in the locker and isn't intended to be publically documented.
That's pretty questionable. From what I see, her twitter material are actually direct swipes at obnoxious racist trolls. Her presentation is discussing an issue that does, in fact, seem to exist among many newer tech companies. It's all well and good to have Tim Cook or whoever is CEO at Google talk about how committed they are to diversity, but if the lower-tier managers are calling black hair "dirty" and outright refusing to listen to advise from black women, only to accept the exact same advise from white guys, you have a problem.

(To be fair, I haven't heard of any such stories in the past few years about these companies, at least).

And the video I posted is hardly the only example I can think of where bad testing led to similar issues - seen it for soap dispensers, Apple had a similar issue, and on and on.

Quote:
I listened to the whole talk and found her intelligent, articulate, and otherwise reasonable, however I think she is at least a casually anti-white racist, like the stereotype of SJW college students. Her aposematic hair is also a characteristic of this stereotype.
And that's one reason why I tend to steer clear of the term "SJW" - it's a bundle of pointless and often contradictory stereotypes, used as many other stereotypes to dismiss people regardless of what they're doing.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 10:59 AM   #189
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Basically we're at some level of:

1. It's impossible for a minority to be racist against a white person on a literal level. I hope that very few people are literally arguing from this position.

2. It's impossible for a minority to be racist against a white person on a practical level, as in they can be racist but they lack the social or political power for it to matter (i.e. the "Institutional Racism") argument. Sometimes made more confusing by people using this as the only definition of "racism" they accept. This is a complicated nightmare web of semantics and categorization and definitions.

3. It's possible for a minority to be racist against a white person but white people shouldn't say anything or complain about because white people have had it so much better for X amount of time there is just some amount of racism that white people should be happy to put up with to make up for racism they put out or something and white people just shouldn't get angry at people being racism towards them because... either they deserve or have earned it or it's taking... being angry about racism away from minorities or something.

4. All racism against white people obviously isn't racist but mocking racism, mocking racist white people, parody racism, making a point, or some other variation thereof.
Or, more likely for the "defenders" here.

5. Some mockery looks like racism, but really isn't, and trying to claim that such mockery is automatically racism is counterproductive. When any accuser is demonstrably trying to claim that cases of mockery are clear proof of racism, they immediately lose a fair amount of trust. That generally also goes along with the recognition that there certainly is actual racism against white people out there, of course. As foolmewunz said, the actual rule in play here is "Keep it accurate." Not everyone is especially loose with who they determine to be racist, after all.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 11:13 AM   #190
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 20,570
I think it's time to recognize that liberals have been kidding us with all this talk about racism. It's just a convenient club to bash whites with. That's why they can't accept that Jeong's tweets were racist; she was just using the club a little more directly.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 11:28 AM   #191
xjx388
Moderator
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,360
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
Or, more likely for the "defenders" here.

5. Some mockery looks like racism, but really isn't, and trying to claim that such mockery is automatically racism is counterproductive. When any accuser is demonstrably trying to claim that cases of mockery are clear proof of racism, they immediately lose a fair amount of trust. That generally also goes along with the recognition that there certainly is actual racism against white people out there, of course. As foolmewunz said, the actual rule in play here is "Keep it accurate." Not everyone is especially loose with who they determine to be racist, after all.
How about not trying to make any such distinctions? I mean, a white person could NEVER get away with using the n-word as mockery or satire. So why not just draw a line in the sand: racism is not an acceptable tool in the toolbox for public discourse.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 11:30 AM   #192
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 46,649
No because suggesting that maybe we shouldn't have a double standard for what we call racist will be called racist and the universe will implode.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 11:54 AM   #193
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
I think it's time to recognize that liberals have been kidding us with all this talk about racism. It's just a convenient club to bash whites with. That's why they can't accept that Jeong's tweets were racist; she was just using the club a little more directly.
You like your wishful thinking, eh?

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
How about not trying to make any such distinctions? I mean, a white person could NEVER get away with using the n-word as mockery or satire. So why not just draw a line in the sand: racism is not an acceptable tool in the toolbox for public discourse.
Why not try looking at more appropriate analogues?

Anyways, as much as I'd like to agree with you, ignoring problems doesn't make the problems go away... and racism by whites is a very real problem in the US and has been for a long time, with numerous very real and very nasty effects. In other countries, racism by blacks, Asians, etc. is a much more omnipresent thing and so I would expect more focus by the free people there on that for much the same reason that racism by whites is being pointedly singled out in the US.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
No because suggesting that maybe we shouldn't have a double standard for what we call racist will be called racist and the universe will implode.
What double standard is being displayed by those here? I've seen a lot of attempts to complain, but no substance to the complaints, at all.

Anyways, time to spend time with family for a few days. Enjoy!
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 11:56 AM   #194
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 25,863
I think all racists should see this as a signal that Liberals calling you racist will just be ignored in the future if you can make some flimsy excuse. Go ahead and speak your mind. Stop holding back.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 12:03 PM   #195
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 46,649
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
What double standard is being displayed by those here? I've seen a lot of attempts to complain, but no substance to the complaints, at all.
And at this point (I believe I hate playing this card) if you don't see the bending over backwards to make excuse why the statements made by Ms. Jeong aren't racist, I don't have a middle ground to meet you on.

A minority making racist statements against white people should not be given the automatic benefit of the doubt that obviously her statements weren't be taken literally while a white person making exactly equivalent statements about a minority would by no means get anything resembling this benefit of the doubt.

I'm not even saying there's no room for any nuance or benefit of the doubt but if you see a white person using the N-word or saying "Kill all blacks" the possibility that he might be being ironic or parodying or "making a statement" or involved in some kind of performance art doesn't cross your mind at all assuming at the default when you see a minority person doing something equivalent is a double standard.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 04:11 PM   #196
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,090
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
A tweet that replies to a specific attack, twisting the words of the attack back on their author in a passable attempt at wit.

Something like this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post12385499

The display of "conductive logic" in the middle of that post might give you the impression that I'm slinging woo, but it's clear from the context that I'm responding to and mocking a specific instance of woo-slinging by another author.

No such connection or evidence of satirical wit is evident in any of Jeong's tweets that I've seen. And given the sheer volume of hate speech in her body of work, even if one or two tweets were found that did make such a connection, it wouldn't do much to rehabilitate the rest of them. In fact, the preponderance of evidence would be in the other direction: The few apparently mocking tweets, when seen in the context of the entire ouvre, would appear to be more of the same heartfelt hate speech, served once or twice with a side of mockery.

The body of work is out there. We've seen it and can judge for ourselves whether her excuse is plausible. We're already past the point of asking, "what evidence would you accept?"

"The security footage shows you robbing the bank at gunpoint."

"What evidence would you accept that I was just passing by?"
Well I was looking for some way to tell if a Poe is a Poe or earnest, but going by this your standard is applied extremely selectively.

Going with your analogy, in this case we have people saying that they were extras in a youtube movie parodying the horribly botched robbery of a man who, as it turns out, is exactly the same person who started the complaint. This gives you no pause at all based on your 'past evidence' stance. Others have already pointed out the 'locker room talk' thing.

It could turn out she is an over the top anti-white racist, somehow only while on Twitter, or her claim that she was mocking the people now complaining (people who, it has to be noted, do indeed make the inverse claims she says she was mocking) is true.

It is very entertaining to watch the people make hasty generalizations about what 'the left' and 'the liberals' say in all such cases, even though many of us have spoken out of how some of the very examples cited of calling people racists because of out of context comments are bad.

The best part is that, as noted by others, there are very much examples of racism against white people, but so many are over eager to make their equivalency claims they keep jumping on every single possible one and never letting go. Yes, some do this for claims of racism against black people beyond what is reasonable, but many more will actually drop claims of racism when it's not strongly supportable. (On a darker note, this rate of sticking by false racism claims on 'the left' is dwarfed by the rate of those on 'the right' defending against all claims of racism, even when it doesn't really matter in the 'that murderer wasn't a racist murderer how DARE you' way.)

I'll stick with the people who stand by the 'is it true?' standard for when to accept excuses and not. I haven't made a conclusion on this case yet.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 05:52 PM   #197
AlaskaBushPilot
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,314
It's important for divide-and-conquer propaganda tacticians to create class warfare.

I've been seeing it my entire lifetime.

When you have unity among races, among genders, among religions, etc. then they start looking at things like drug and weapons ratlines back and forth between the USA and the very Wahhabi extremists that perpetrated 9/11.

Keep those eyes off Yemen. Twenty million starving to death so that Raytheon, Boeing, et. al. can keep paying out handsome dividends.

Keep those eyes off the Federal Reserve. Anyone who tells you it isn't Federal and that there's nothing on reserve - that's a crackpot conspiracy theorist. In the meantime it is the one thing most responsible for the richest 1% to accumulate more of the nation's wealth than at any time in history.

Just keep them squabbling. All you have to do is treat a group unfairly. That's how easy it is. White males gets you a two-for-one: both racial and gender warfare.

So the Fed can print away, the bombs can continue to drop, and big Pharma can make the Medelin Cartel look like a lemonaide stand.
AlaskaBushPilot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 07:05 PM   #198
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
How about not trying to make any such distinctions? I mean, a white person could NEVER get away with using the n-word as mockery or satire. So why not just draw a line in the sand: racism is not an acceptable tool in the toolbox for public discourse.
*A* white person? Well, that's not exactly true, now is it? Louis CK did, after all. As I recall, so did Chevy Chase. Charlie used it on It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia, in their first episode

Now, the average guy, in an office or on a street corner? Probably not. Can you get away with a lot of obviously racist crap? From what I've seen along the east coast...yes, vey easily. And I mean things like posting photoshops of Obama shining Sarah Palin's shoes, on lab walls. Which leads to our next problem - most people aren't funny enough, or in the proper environment, to pull it off without either quoting someone else, or without sounding like a potentially murderous bigot.

But even if you want to draw some sort of clear line now - applying it retroactively still seems pretty cheap, particularly when you're discussing responses to actual bigots on social media, and *especially* when listening to people who are well known for manufacturing fake tweets, taking things out of context, and so forth.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2018, 07:09 PM   #199
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot View Post
Keep those eyes off Yemen. Twenty million starving to death so that Raytheon, Boeing, et. al. can keep paying out handsome dividends.
Yeah, no. Yemen is a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and that is an ethnic and religious conflict which stretches back centuries. Raytheon and Boeing have nothing to do with it.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 12:22 AM   #200
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
I think it's time to recognize that liberals have been kidding us with all this talk about racism. It's just a convenient club to bash whites with. That's why they can't accept that Jeong's tweets were racist; she was just using the club a little more directly.
Yeah, you tell 'em bruh! Anti-racism = anti-white!
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:23 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.