Not worthy of a thread News

[harmless]

amazing how not every fucking article on the internet that talks about #CancelColbert doesn't include mention of Ms Park.

it must be a conspiracy of the white racist agenda. because she is so obviously the only person worth listening to from your perspective. which, ok, enjoy that perspective?

fuck this. harmless, i love you but i'm so done talking to you anymore, i'm done reading your tweets, and i'm done trying to understand where you're really coming from, because as a white woman that is able bodied i obviously have no validity in your perspective and therefore am only talking to myself in anything of any value to you. my best wishes to you and whatever your future holds but i refuse to be ashamed and disrespected BY YOU anymore than you claim is being done TO you.

perhaps someday you'll find something to be happy with, i most certainly and sincerely hope so, but i never thought for one minute in the years you've posted here and that I've known you through your posts that this was something of such an offensive manner to you that you're willing to throw out the baby with the bathwater for the sake of your activist stance.
I do not disrespect your activism, i do however find your presentation and tenacity of how you interact based on that activism to be offensive TO ME, personally. and therefore have nothing else worth talking about with you.

best of life to you. i fear you're more reminiscent of little wing than yourself anymore and for that i truly mourn. should you ever decide to take into account points of view that differ from yours, please do let me know, otherwise.... i'm not going to be a party to this, whatever the hell it is, anymore.

You still can't just understand why I'm pissed off, can you?

[digster]

In all seriousness, though, it would take a single 'bullet point' to say "Suey Park's hashtag distracted the world from the Redskins issue, and this is a problem." But the article doesn't even say that; it bangs on about how the 'anti-Liberal Left' (of which I guess you'd call me one) is a problem for politics because of regular dissent. The dissent, funnily enough (unless I didn't get some other memo), comes from various minorities that cause a stir for upsetting the apple cart once in a while when some mainstream media source says something insulting about their people group. But we highlight the 'fact' that the 'anti-Liberal Left' is a huge problem for the Left, instead of trying to see why various minorities might have a problem with the Liberal stance? Why? I mean, I have my ideas. But primarily, what I've learned in all this is that as one of the 'anti-Liberal Left', if I ever have a complaint to make regarding ableism (prejudice towards disabled people) displayed by anything on the TV or in the mainstream media, I probably shouldn't bother bringing it here as a concern.

What exactly is the 'Liberal stance' in this scenario?

My issue with the coverage of this whole thing has little to do with Park or Colbert, but rather that obviously something like the controversy regarding CancelColbert is clickbait personified, so everyone and their mother contributes a thinkpiece attempting to contextualize something they doesn't really fit into any agenda or ideological viewpoint. I get the impression that the accessibility and sexiness of the story is driving the preponderance of conversation surrounding it more than anything else.

[Jorge]

amazing how not every fucking article on the internet that talks about #CancelColbert doesn't include mention of Ms Park.

it must be a conspiracy of the white racist agenda. because she is so obviously the only person worth listening to from your perspective. which, ok, enjoy that perspective?

fuck this. harmless, i love you but i'm so done talking to you anymore, i'm done reading your tweets, and i'm done trying to understand where you're really coming from, because as a white woman that is able bodied i obviously have no validity in your perspective and therefore am only talking to myself in anything of any value to you. my best wishes to you and whatever your future holds but i refuse to be ashamed and disrespected BY YOU anymore than you claim is being done TO you.

perhaps someday you'll find something to be happy with, i most certainly and sincerely hope so, but i never thought for one minute in the years you've posted here and that I've known you through your posts that this was something of such an offensive manner to you that you're willing to throw out the baby with the bathwater for the sake of your activist stance.
I do not disrespect your activism, i do however find your presentation and tenacity of how you interact based on that activism to be offensive TO ME, personally. and therefore have nothing else worth talking about with you.

best of life to you. i fear you're more reminiscent of little wing than yourself anymore and for that i truly mourn. should you ever decide to take into account points of view that differ from yours, please do let me know, otherwise.... i'm not going to be a party to this, whatever the hell it is, anymore.

[Dev]

so, in a nutshell, Suey Park would be against Borat, because even satire intended to lampoon racists might have racist connotations? My thesis remains the same. These types of righteous activists suck dong because they spend their time going after people who don't have prejudiced beliefs. What a gigantic waste of time. Partisan hackery at it's finest.

Anyway, maybe I summed up Park's argument to easily. "Even satire intended to lampoon racists might have racist connotations." Whatever, I don't have time to think about this right now. This all just amazes and enrages me. Honestly, feel like Park's answers to some of the questions she is asked are incoherent. Probably should have watched it again...

[Jorge]

Someone explained it to me as wanting to call out the arrogance of white liberals being okay with insulting one race to defend another. Like white liberals are fine with Asian Americans being collateral damage, only because it's in the name of satire, and that evinces privilege and a built-in systemic racism. While I disagree with that notion, I found that framing helpful to understand what exactly the hashtaggers were mad about. I found Britney Cooper's writing about this particularly insightful. In general, I am interested in anything that can help me be a better ally, but I am struggling to see past the reductiveness of Suey Park's arguments*.

*I am referring specifically to Suey Park and not "the Asian American community" because it has become clear that she does not speak for all of them. Not even for a majority of them. There is a lot of AsAm support for Colbert, which Suey Park has been handwaving away because it comes from men, or Korean-American men, or white-wannabe Japanese girls, or whatever other term she can think of to dismiss people who aren't 100% exactly like her.

[Dev]

Suey Park: That's Racist
Sacha Baron Cohen: I don't consider myself racist, my intention was to lampoon people with racist sensibilities. The intention is actually to fight racism with humour.
Suey Park: It's still racist
Devin: Hey, Suey Park, I have a novel idea, how about focusing your resources on people that are openly racist, what you're doing seems counterproductive, and not very pragmatic.
Suey Park: Hey, maybe you're right.
Devin: Why don't we get some coffee and try and work this out.
Suey Park: Sounds good.
Devin: But, you'll never get me to call myself an ally. It doesn't mean I don't stand against prejudice. It's just that giving myself a label would feel a bit fascist in my mind…
Borat: haha
Devin: haha
Suey Park: …haha

[darth_vedder]

So really, am I still allowed to root for the Redskins? Or do I need to find a new team? Trust me, I've thought of jumping ship many times, regardless of the name. Also, does it make me, and the millions of fans racist that we root for the Redskins and wear the team gear? I mean, I'm not a jersey guy, but I'll rock Redskins t-shirts or hoodies during football season. Does that mean I'm a racist white guy or something? What about black people who like the Washington Redskins? Or the players? Has DeSean Jackson become a racist now by signing with the team?

[broken iris]

You still can't just understand why I'm pissed off, can you?

There's a bit of poetic irony in this statement, no?

In general, I am interested in anything that can help me be a better ally, but I am struggling to see past the reductiveness of Suey Park's arguments*

That term is bullshit. It makes you subservient to someone else's whims because they are exploiting your guilt, and using guilt, especially guilt over something they are innocent of, to control another person is one of the most despicable things humans do to each other and as someone who has read you blog a few times, I know you are smart enough to realize you can be a supporter of social justice causes and ending societal privilege without cuckolding yourself to these bullies.

[Jorge]

I'm not sure what you're projecting onto me. I don't have guilt. I want to be able to support the struggling and marginalized in the best and least-harmful way that I can. I don't see "ally" as a loaded term, it just means you care. And, as I clearly laid out in my last post, I am discerning.

[Jorge]

Well, I have some guilt. But not race guilt. I'm a Middle-Eastern Hispanic, for God's sake.

[philpritchard]

Someone explained it to me as wanting to call out the arrogance of white liberals being okay with insulting one race to defend another. Like white liberals are fine with Asian Americans being collateral damage, only because it's in the name of satire, and that evinces privilege and a built-in systemic racism. While I disagree with that notion, I found that framing helpful to understand what exactly the hashtaggers were mad about.

That's pretty much how I feel about it: I understand where they're coming from, I just disagree.

I still fail to understand how Stephen Colbert is being lambasted for using satirical racism to draw attention to/make fun of an issue while the only results that come up in a Google search for "Washington Redskins" pertain to DeSean Jackson and offseason plans. Shouldn't people be more pissed off about the actual racism that's going on and being celebrated as opposed to pretend racism?

[Washed Away]

In retrospect, perhaps this was worthy of a thread.

[Rob]

also, i will be hugely disappointed in stephen colbert if he learns to be more careful with his words.

As a white hispanic male, I guess I have 1/2 (or 1/3?) the authority to speak on this issue, but the above is really what concerns me here. Stewart/Colbert is the best hour of TV there is.

[BurtReynolds]

This idea that I, as The Glorious White Liberal, must, voluntarily and for the good of the poor innocent "noble savages" of the world, suppress freedom of speech and make some hopelessly assbackward attempt to rig a rigged system for their benefit, is the height of destructive, condescending ignorance (regardless of which group(s) originated this idea), and fairly typical of the left. Its not taking prejudice and inequality out of the system, its piling more prejudice and inequality on to it, and creating more divisions and anger in the process.

I'm not about to "ally" with this group or that. I am going to act by a moral code of maximum freedom, agency, and justice for ALL people. This has been proven to work, and IS working (though for some reason one always has to add "but there is still a long way to go!" as if everyone already doesn't know it.) In comparison, this supposed intersectional divisiveness, and its related past ineffective extremist ideologies, can show little in the way of improvement at all. This particular iteration apparently doesn't even have a goal anymore other than to provide a support group for fatalists.

[BurtReynolds]

Motherfucker. I missed Captain America typing that bullshit. Now I have to wait 45 minutes. thanks a lot...

[CopperTom]

I think the thread did you a favor.

[Jorge]

This idea that I, as The Glorious White Liberal, must, voluntarily and for the good of the poor innocent "noble savages" of the world, suppress freedom of speech and make some hopelessly assbackward attempt to rig a rigged system for their benefit, is the height of destructive, condescending ignorance (regardless of which group(s) originated this idea), and fairly typical of the left. Its not taking prejudice and inequality out of the system, its piling more prejudice and inequality on to it, and creating more divisions and anger in the process.

I'm not about to "ally" with this group or that. I am going to act by a moral code of maximum freedom, agency, and justice for ALL people. This has been proven to work, and IS working (though for some reason one always has to add "but there is still a long way to go!" as if everyone already doesn't know it.) In comparison, this supposed intersectional divisiveness, and its related past ineffective extremist ideologies, can show little in the way of improvement at all. This particular iteration apparently doesn't even have a goal anymore other than to provide a support group for fatalists.

There's a lot of hurt in this post.

But I'm not arguing against these points. All I did was share with Dev, who seemed to be struggling to make sense of Suey Park's argument, the framing which helped me make some sense out of this whole kerfuffle. Which I still disagree with.

Also, I find the virulent pushback against the term "ally" kind of funny. "whoa whoa whoa WHOA, hey, I said I'm all for equality, but I'm not gonna be like, agitating for your cause, eh, let's not get crazy, geez".

[BurtReynolds]

Hey, its all good!

[BurtReynolds]

see you all back here Monday!

[McParadigm]

As always, N&D is so lost in undirected attitude and defensive behaviors that it has even less intellectual content than your average Ted Talk