Sarah Jeong, its okay to be racist to white people.

[Baruch]

Guess that means trump can say anything he likes on social media then without criticism?

Criticism?  Of course, that is what being a public figure is all about.  Every public figure should be pilloried at least once a day, to remind them what shits they are.

[Baruch]

and yet, they fired the director of guardians of the galaxy 3 for a tweet he said 10 years ago, despite him apologizing for it.

But was he a White male?  Then justified.

[Baruch]

Yes it would, yes it definitely would, and no it wouldn't... but only because it is just stupid.


Yes, it is.

None of those come close to using the N word as a derogatory term for African Americans.

That used to be THEIR preferred term.  In Spanish they are still called "negros".  Shall we nuke all Spanish speakers now?

[GSOgymrat]

the broader aspect of this is that we are currently in a time where, as example, people like james gunn will get fired for a tweet he made years ago, where as someone like this NY times editor will not despite still making offensive tweets, which can't be denied has to come down to identity, or identity politics. If this editor was a white person making such offensive tweets, they would have been fired on the spot, but because its an korean woman, she gets praised for being racist.

The current era has so much of this, this handwaving, where you can say whatever you like or not based purely on nothing more then your skin color or place of birth. To me thats a crock of shit, because its making very obvious derision and favoritism based on arbitrary things. I don't care if the others are a minority or majority, as said, it should be the same rules for all, either everyone can say whatever they like, or nobody can say anything out of place.

But we know we're not living in that time right now, like we weren't living in it back in the 1800s, with racial segregation.

(and here now comes certain individuals offended by that statement because they can't see's the comparisons)

Some people believe the expression of racist attitudes is so offensive that people who do so need to be punished and if the government won't curtail their speech they will organize online and try to have people fired. They are willing to suppress freedom of speech to fight what they perceive as immoral racist attitudes. I believe this goes too far and that suppressing racist attitudes rather than allowing them to be voiced and confronted causes more harm than good.

[Munch]

Some people believe the expression of racist attitudes is so offensive that people who do so need to be punished and if the government won't curtail their speech they will organize online and try to have people fired. They are willing to suppress freedom of speech to fight what they perceive as immoral racist attitudes. I believe this goes too far and that suppressing racist attitudes rather than allowing them to be voiced and confronted causes more harm than good.

Agreed. I will defend a person's right to say it, right before telling them their being racist cunt.

[Draconic Aiur]

Some people believe the expression of racist attitudes is so offensive that people who do so need to be punished and if the government won't curtail their speech they will organize online and try to have people fired. They are willing to suppress freedom of speech to fight what they perceive as immoral racist attitudes. I believe this goes too far and that suppressing racist attitudes rather than allowing them to be voiced and confronted causes more harm than good.

Oh so freedom of speech is to be protected when your an editor of the New York times? It isn't business ethical to have someone spreading messages of hate while being employed by a popular newspaper business. A news paper business that I read from from time to time. Freedom speech is great but not when you work for a news source or the fucking government like the homophobic Davis. It goes against social norm and business ethic when you tweets harmful shit and boss who rad that shit should fire the person automatically for being a retarded prick. I's bad for business this tweeting stupidity.

You can say what you like and won't be killed or exiled , but your actions will cause you to lose things like respect or your job. For saying outrageous things in the open where everyone can see. It's like if a man shows his dick in public would freedom of speech help him not go to jail? no.

[Munch]

You got a point to, in my last job they made it clear to everyone working for them that they would not tolerate anyone posting offensive stuff online for everyone to read like on facebook or twitter, and that if they do so they need to either be kept anonymous, or they would be fired due to what it might do to the companies image, which to me is perfectly fair.

Seems NY times has a different policy.

[GSOgymrat]

Oh so freedom of speech is to be protected when your an editor of the New York times? It isn't business ethical to have someone spreading messages of hate while being employed by a popular newspaper business. A news paper business that I read from from time to time. Freedom speech is great but not when you work for a news source or the fucking government like the homophobic Davis. It goes against social norm and business ethic when you tweets harmful shit and boss who rad that shit should fire the person automatically for being a retarded prick. I's bad for business this tweeting stupidity.

You can say what you like and won't be killed or exiled , but your actions will cause you to lose things like respect or your job. For saying outrageous things in the open where everyone can see. It's like if a man shows his dick in public would freedom of speech help him not go to jail? no.

Back in the 1980's I marched in gay pride and someone I didn't know recognized me from my job as a clerk in a convenience store. This person contacted the district manager to tell him he shouldn't be employing a known homosexual. Because publically expressing support for LGBT rights and illegal sex acts in a time and place that went against social norms should I have been fired? Fortunately, I was just subjected to an uncomfortable conversation and didn't lose my minimum wage job but I knew several gay men in different fields who were fired once their sexual orientation became known. Freedom of speech is not absolute, there needs to be nuanced consideration of all the factors, but mob rule and firing people because they express unpopular opinions or violate social norms is a dangerous strategy.

[Munch]

Back in the 1980's I marched in gay pride and someone I didn't know recognized me from my job as a clerk in a convenience store. This person contacted the district manager to tell him he shouldn't be employing a known homosexual. Because publically expressing support for LGBT rights and illegal sex acts in a time and place that went against social norms should I have been fired? Fortunately, I was just subjected to an uncomfortable conversation and didn't lose my minimum wage job but I knew several gay men in different fields who were fired once their sexual orientation became known. Freedom of speech is not absolute, there needs to be nuanced consideration of all the factors, but mob rule and firing people because they express unpopular opinions or violate social norms is a dangerous strategy.

of course it is, and I'm sorry you had to deal with that. Getting down to it, there needs to be a balance, people deserve the right to speak their minds, but there should also be rules in place to stop it becoming to overblown, like how a library would tell you the be quiet so people can read, or a cinema tells you to turn off your phone and remain quiet to people can enjoy the movie.

In your case, a workplace needs to uphold workers protection, the one who grassed on you for seeing you at pride had whatever right they thought they had to mouth off the fact, but a workplace today needs to uphold human rights and reserve the right to tell that person calling to go fuck themselves.

[Draconic Aiur]

Back in the 1980's I marched in gay pride and someone I didn't know recognized me from my job as a clerk in a convenience store. This person contacted the district manager to tell him he shouldn't be employing a known homosexual. Because publically expressing support for LGBT rights and illegal sex acts in a time and place that went against social norms should I have been fired? Fortunately, I was just subjected to an uncomfortable conversation and didn't lose my minimum wage job but I knew several gay men in different fields who were fired once their sexual orientation became known. Freedom of speech is not absolute, there needs to be nuanced consideration of all the factors, but mob rule and firing people because they express unpopular opinions or violate social norms is a dangerous strategy.

Caught protesting in a gay pride parade and saying racist shit on twitter while failing grammar as well while hired as editor are 2 different things. Business ethnic says you can protest just not in a demeaning way to the company displayed. This means because the New York times editor is racist and grammar incoherent are all the articles and company racist and grammatical incorrect despite promoting goodwill? False advertising is a ploy here and is simply bad for business. Like the CEO of chickfila's hate for gays.

You should know your're being emotional like Shiranu about this when you compare firing people in a field where for racists tweets looks bad  to firing people because they protest and are gay. Two different lvls totally.

[Shiranu]

Not my quote, but absolutely nails this whole idea of what type of "white" people are talking about when they insult white people, because I have a feeling if we asked every single poster here what "white" means... no one could actually come up with a definitive answer.

Many younger people hear statements directed at 'White People' and think the resentment is directed at all white people. A lot do know it's meant to describe the legally defined 'whites' that defined themselves as superior, by virtue of being white, and oppressed others, but the rise of the Alt-Right and other White National groups are, in part, built upon the idea that whites in general are hated, when most statements that feed those groups are just lazily worded statements aimed at the specific self-styled-whites that oppressed and maintained colonialism's benefits, and not aimed at white people as a whole, who are not the majority of whites, anyway.

[Draconic Aiur]

*Shiranuu likes to edit things so I edit too*


Oh, I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times there are not forgotten

Dixie land is greet but what do I know I'm a 'white male' obviously i'm a racist sexist pig.

[Shiranu]

Full of bullshit you are. Keep thinking you and your PC crowd can get away with saying racist shit to white people. Racist.

Mhmm. Like the Catholics preaching to me about chaste and homosexuality.

When it comes to women, comes to minorities, comes to "the left" (this nebulous term for anyone who disagrees with you), to the religious... it is perfectly acceptable to be as utterly offensive as you want; everyone has the right to be offensive, no one has the right not to be offended.

And yet suddenly, when faced with a fraction of the racism or the offensiveness you praise when it's being dished out against people you dislike, the moment it's turned back at you it's horrible to be offensive, people should be silenced if they are offensive, and how dare you say that?

I don't have any problem with people calling what she said racist. I have a problem when those same people are those who justify racist ideologies and occasional let slip their own racist remarks... and in response they just pat each other on the back and circle jerk each other for how offensive they managed to be.


I mean for fucks sake, you have a white guy in here acting like what she said was the same as a white guy calling a black guy the n-word, and people say I'm emotional? That is literally the epitome of white fragility.

So you want to talk about bullshit, THAT'S some bullshit.

[Draconic Aiur]

Mhmm. Like the Catholics preaching to me about chaste and homosexuality.

When it comes to women, comes to minorities, comes to "the left" (this nebulous term for anyone who disagrees with you), to the religious... it is perfectly acceptable to be as utterly offensive as you want; everyone has the right to be offensive, no one has the right not to be offended.

And yet suddenly, when faced with a fraction of the racism or the offensiveness you praise when it's being dished out against people you dislike, the moment it's turned back at you it's horrible to be offensive, people should be silenced if they are offensive, and how dare you say that?

I don't have any problem with people calling what she said racist. I have a problem when those same people are those who justify racist ideologies and occasional let slip their own racist remarks... and in response they just pat each other on the back and circle jerk each other for how offensive they managed to be.

So you want to talk about bullshit, THAT'S some bullshit.

Don't drag this thing around. This about a woman saying racist things about all white people. Stop putting your goddamn political agenda in my face for seeing shit as it is. Hypocrite.

[Shiranu]

I'm a hypocrite for agreeing with you that she is racist. Cool.


To actually address something being said, why the "n-word" comparison is complete bullshit.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HnDONDvJVE


I'm not the one who determines the severity of insults. Reality does that, and the reality is that acting like white people have suffered any where near the same amount at the hands of African Americans as African Americans have at the hands of white people, which is what you are doing when you say that any insult against whites is essentially calling them by that term. That is absolutely preposterous.



To clarify, I don't think that's a "white" person trait; the same can be seen in essentially any major social group, be it based on racial or other lines. Be offensive to men a fraction of what those same men do to women... well, suddenly you are a feminazi. Be offensive to atheists a fraction of how offensive you are to someone religious (regardless of their actual ideology), and by lord the gates of hell will be open upon you.

Those with social power think they can toss insults around left and right and they have every right to do so (and how dare ANYONE complain about it!)... but the moment someone insults them, then all hell breaks lose and they are in a corner crying oppression. That's just how things work, across cultures... but that doesn't make it any less bullshit.