If she had called the people attacking her trash I would have absolutely no problem with her. Note I didn’t come in here and start spewing degenerative things about an entire race, as she did. I think there is QUITE a difference there.
Point is, you said something in the heat of anger that you should regret. (Maybe you’re not there yet because you’re still angry or lack decency.)
I stand by the statement I made that racists are trash. I’m not angry, just giving my opinion. If that’s not other people’s opinion so be it. I will never stand with racists.
C’mon. You said people defending her are trash.
Correct. Racists that defend racists are trash. See Donald Trump and his “good people on both sides” comments. Pure trash.
Okay, then I will once again kindly invite you to look past your simplistic, emotionally-loaded analysis of the debate to see that BOTH SIDES OF THIS DISCUSSION ARE STAUNCHLY ANTI-RACIST. Plus a lot of us are kinda your friends since we hang out here together so don’t call us trash, fucking duh.
You shouldn’t settle for being simple-minded when a subject is this complex.
What about the racists that brought up the original complaint? Note, I’m not saying that complaining about her makes you a racist. I think @Rod_Humble made some great arguments, and I don’t think either of them are racist, but at least on Twitter, most of the people upset about this have a history of being racists. Are they trash?
I think in this case it’s a capacity problem.
Maybe not financially or socially, but how about emotionally? I get the whole privilege thing and how us white guys have it good and so nothing a minority says or do can, in the big picture, do anything to us in the macro. But how about in the micro, not all white guys are doing good in the country either.
By the way, as stated above, I am on the side that agrees that she was just trolling the trolls and as she said in her apology, she got carried away.
I think white racism would have a much smaller impact on my in the USA, or in Europe, than say South Africa. I think the problem with white racism is that it’s hard to be individual targeted by it, because you are a face in the crowd.
Now, white racism in a predominately black neighborhood might be a different story.
Forgive me, but I disagree. The predominant view of racism in this country is zero tolerance, because the thought is that being racist and spewing racists things leads to the normalization of racism. Dismissing someone as being “joking” while lambasting another who was “joking” is the height of hypocracy and shows that there are indeed people that are allowed to be racist, if it’s against a certain group. We have established she spewed racist things. Now we are talking intent and handwaving away a huge list of racist thoughts, because of the target. I don’t find that compelling.
I imagine, in the famous words of another poster, you wouldn’t find Blazing Saddles very funny.
Well considering who is president, it seems that racism is only zero tolerance if you aren’t a republican. If you are, you can be as racists as you like. Not saying all Republicans are racists, just saying you get a free get out racism card if you are a GOP member in a GOP leaning area of the country.
I can easily forgive you for disagreeing. No apology required. It’s the trash comment you should be apologizing for. Fucking duh.
Sharpe articulated it well over in the gman thread… racism isn’t just on or off like a light switch. There’s a spectrum of offenses and historical context to be factored in, not to mention one’s own race, country of origin, and personal experience. Add online sarcasm to the mix and look the fuck out!
Nuanced thinking followed by a proportional response should be the objective. Unfortunately, our outrage has been monetized, so… wheee?
👏
I’ve stopped myself from asking that question about ten times. Thanks!
We should have a stickied post of great thread posts. Just, hanging there.
We must have watched different versions of “Blazing Saddles”. The one I watched was an overt attack on the thinking of small town, provencial racists. It used the very words and phrases they used to lambast them. In fact, if you do a little research, you will find that the Southern gentleman Slim Pickens, the most “racist” one in the whole movie, was very upset by his lines and the use of the “N” word. Brooks, being a comedic genius, convinced him it fit into the big picture.
This Jeong character is not Mel Brooks. Anyway if we are explaining away racist tweets as jokes… how do you define intent? It’s pretty obvious what Brooks was producing a comedy. He didn’t make the movie as a response to attacks on him. Jeomg is unhinged, immature, a scumbag… Or a racist. You take your pick. Neither of those people belong on the editorial board of what WAS the most respected paper in the US. Another NYT writer called her out for not deserving this honor and was quickly silenced and apologized profusely. To a dumb kid tech writer. And an idiot… Or a racist.
And she was trolling people who had attacked and were trolling her. She also apologized for probably taking it too far.
Few people are capable of producing comedy the quality of Mel Brook’s. At least in his early years. :)
But, I think we can both agree that Blazing Saddles could never be made now. Both the left and right would scream about how offensive it was.
And we are all be terrible people because of it. But as Jay Leno said on Marc Maron this week, comedy changes.
Agreed, but I don’t think it has to be remade. It did that it did in the context of it’s time.
For another modern movie that paints an entire town as racist, I would point to “Get Out”. Very different story and plot (and even tone) but similar subject matter. That’s probably more what Blazing Saddles would look like today.