What teacher? (calling Twilight to Hell because she wanted me to)

Over here Twilight asked me to call her to hell so she can attack me. Why she couldn't call me to hell, I don't know. Cowardice? Ineptitude? Perhaps she will explain.

Anyway I resent being called the "teacher's pet" when there's no teacher. I have worked really hard more than once to become the teacher's pet, always successfully, and once became the teacher's pet in spite of myself. My track record is really good in this area. So I want to know who the teacher is in this instance? Maybe I'll send them some choccies.

Oh, and Twilight is a racist idiot.
«13

Comments

  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    edited February 10
    Never saw you as a teacher's pet. Always thought you were that smart-arse kid with superb one-liners that I always wished I could come up with. Well done on your success.

    And very generous of you to write the call yourself.
  • That whole thing really has got out of hand. While I'm not surprised that the thread is still going I am surprised that you guys have more or less stuck to the topic. Congratulations.

    FWIW, I think 'teacher's pet' is an approach to life, and does not necessarily require a teacher. It does require another person, but they need not be a professional educator.

    When I was 16, I used to get myself into awkward social situations and not know how to get myself out of them other than shut up and glare. Actually, that still happens. I think it might be an Australian thing, judging by this clip of a former PM.

  • mousethief wrote: »
    Over here Twilight asked me to call her to hell so she can attack me. Why she couldn't call me to hell, I don't know. Cowardice? Ineptitude? Perhaps she will explain.

    Anyway I resent being called the "teacher's pet" when there's no teacher. I have worked really hard more than once to become the teacher's pet, always successfully, and once became the teacher's pet in spite of myself. My track record is really good in this area. So I want to know who the teacher is in this instance? Maybe I'll send them some choccies.

    I didn't particularly want to be called to Hell I just wanted you to confine your personal insults to Hell so that I might have a chance to respond. I've found that when I make personal insults outside of Hell, or respond in kind, I get in trouble for it. You don't. Make of that what you will.

    mousethief wrote: »
    Oh, and Twilight is a racist idiot.

    Fuck you, you self-important, petty little weasel. You think you're brilliant because you have a surface knowledge of a few subjects, but I've never once heard an original idea from you, nor an opinion that didn't follow slavishly behind the liberal group-think of the moment. I agree with Climacus that your "humor" is like that of the smart-arse kid in school with all the one liners. I just quit being impressed with that kid by about tenth grade when most of us realized how easy and predictable his cheap shots were.
  • Interesting. Twilight thinks I have never had a thought that didn't follow the liberal group-think, and MPaul thinks I have never had a thought that didn't follow the Orthodox Church's position. They can't both be right.

    But I'm glad you were able to call me a self-important, petty little weasel without getting in trouble from the hosts. That must feel really good, admit it. I'm so happy I could provide this service for you. Somebody has to look out for your best interests, as I did for some time, although I was repaid with treachery. But that's just you, I guess. You can't help it.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    FWIW, I think 'teacher's pet' is an approach to life, and does not necessarily require a teacher. It does require another person, but they need not be a professional educator.

    Well of course. But whom are we referring to here? Who is the "teacher" -- whether literal or metaphorical -- whose pet I am? RooK? Alan? It is to laugh. Or cry, depending on how seriously one takes these things.

    I am left to conclude it was just the first insult that Twilight had at the top of her head, for whatever reason. Maybe she was watching some TV show about school, in which a teacher's pet featured. Maybe it was a stray neural firing, like a dream only when you're awake. Who can say?
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    edited February 10
    Just to be open about my feelings here, the excuses for racism are just as unwelcome on any board regardless of the laxness of certain interpersonal rules on this one. 99.9% of MAGA hat wearers are racists, the other 0.1% being ironic idiots who should be treated as racists because that is what the fucking hat means. Even those who do not think of themselves as racist are, in fact, being racist by wearing a MAGA hat.

    It's not hard. Doing racist shit makes you as racist as your actions reflect. Don't want to be a racist? Don't do racist shit. Like wear Nazi uniforms, doing Nazi salutes, wave a confederate battle flag, or wear a fucking MAGA hat.

    Fucking smirkweasel kid was being a racist. He might not have been an intentional force for escalation in the way that he ended up being, but when you wear a MAGA hat in the national mall, that's one of the risks you take. Even if you're not wise enough to recognize it.

    Twilight has an inability to back down, even when she figures out she's wrong. Which is awkward, because she's wrong half the time, and figures it out a far smaller fraction of the time. Her natural response is to assume that people are picking on her, and that others get treated preferentially. Which is never true; people just get treated as a reflection of how they post. Refer to the topic sentence of this paragraph to close that particular loop.

    All of which is a pity, because I adore Twilight. She is earnest and only means to do what she feels is right.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    edited February 10
    If I were @mousethief ‘s teacher I would give him a consuming assignment to keep him interested and busy - in order to stop the one linervwise cracks.

    He’s no teacher’s pet.

    Twilight exposes her ignorance at every turn. Just like tRump. He opens his mouth and total ignorance spews out. He can’t even read a speech without fluffing the main line.

    Trump is a misogynist, narcissistic racist. His supporters are racists - many of whom are open about it and proud of it. Some of whom (like Twilight) don’t recognise their own racism as they hide it from themselves.

    People who wear maga hats may as well write ‘racist’ on the hat.

  • Just as an aside, I meant smart arse in a good way. I appreciate Twilight's use of my phrase, but I meant smart arse differently. Perhaps should've used smart *alec*.
  • Schroedingers CatSchroedingers Cat Shipmate, Waving not Drowning Host
    An interesting fight here.

    I think I agree with RooK, that Twilight is often wrong, and stubborn when wrong, but honest at least in her views.

    Mousethief is no teachers pet though. He is often a prick. He is the kid who works just hard enough. But he is still here.

    So one who is wrong and one who is a prick. Sigh.
  • I also like hearing from Twilight - she's fair dinkum.

    Mousethief wrote:
    Well of course. But whom are we referring to here? Who is the "teacher" -- whether literal or metaphorical -- whose pet I am? RooK? Alan? It is to laugh. Or cry, depending on how seriously one takes these things.

    I refer you to Bob Dylan's classic Christian anthem, You Gotta Serve Somebody. This one is Shirley Caesar's version, which I really like.
  • finelinefineline Purgatory Host
    Heh, I'm amused at the idea of Mousehief being a teacher's pet. Smart arses (or smart alecs) don't tend to be teacher's pets in my experience of schools. They are more likely to be popular with peers. Teachers keep a beady eye on them - they can be annoying, disruptive, liable to go too far and be mean. They can also be engaging and very funny, but the teacher has to keep a straight face when scolding them. And they do get scolded. And given projects, as Boogie suggests, to direct their wit and energies to.

    FWIW, I've seen Mousethief be hosted, but I can't recall ever seeing Twilight being hosted. Not suggesting she hasn't - just that I've not seen it, so personal observations are limited. I've seen Twilight get sent to Hell way more often than Mousethief. It seems more about peers than about 'teachers'. If this were a school, I'd say Twilight maybe has more difficulty getting on with peers than Mousethief.
  • Boogie wrote: »
    If I were @mousethief ‘s teacher I would give him a consuming assignment to keep him interested and busy - in order to stop the one linervwise cracks.

    He’s no teacher’s pet.

    Twilight exposes her ignorance at every turn. Just like tRump. He opens his mouth and total ignorance spews out. He can’t even read a speech without fluffing the main line.

    Trump is a misogynist, narcissistic racist. His supporters are racists - many of whom are open about it and proud of it. Some of whom (like Twilight) don’t recognise their own racism as they hide it from themselves.

    People who wear maga hats may as well write ‘racist’ on the hat.

    How did I turn into Trump? I think Trump is the worst president the U.S. has ever had. I do not own a MAGA hat.

    I voted for Hilary, I've voted Democrat in every election since I was old enough to vote and voted yes to all the liberal issues in my districts. I'm part of my local Democratic voters group, and have, all my life, worked for liberal issues. I was a charter member of my town's chapter of NOW. I have marched in anti-war marches and civil rights marches. I am Pro-choice.



    How dare you or anyone else call me a racist? Seriously, how dare you? You sit in your ivory tower telling us all how wonderful you are at every turn, and I wonder how much you even know about life for African Americans. My husband has worked as a volunteer for the past eight years, for an African American woman and her non-profit shelter for abused women. I go along to help when I can. I see things you probably only read about it your magazines. I am simply not a racist. I've always firmly believed that racism has to be taught and my parents were the least racist of any white people born in 1915 I've ever met. They had African American friends who came to our house for dinner back in the 1950's when doing so was enough to get you shunned by the neighbors. I dated African American's in college in 1964-67 when it got people kicked out of sororities. I once raised my hand in a college class to tell the teacher that I thought his racist "joke" was shocking and wrong and, yes, a few weeks later I was kicked out of said college. I made sure my son went to a school that had lots of diversity and I was pleased that his two best friends were African-American and Chinese-American. How many homes of black people have you actually been inside, Boogie? How many have you had as guests in your home? Have you, like me, dated a black man for long enough to become accepted as part of his extended family and invited to all their parties? You learn things in that capacity that you wont find out by reading your newspaper articles and saying tsk. From little things like how hard it is to find dark dolls for their little girls to incidents on the job, that have to be put up, with from racist bosses.

    Yet you dare to call me a racist based on a few times on this board where I have sided with a white person in a conflict between a white and a person of color. How simplistic and color-conscious you are to think every Native American is a wise peacemaker straight out of the movies, and every African American is an oppressed innocent. If you actually knew more than a handful of people of color you would know that, in reality, some are and some aren't . They come in all kinds just like white people.

    I've been trying to keep from saying it outright but Mousethief is "teacher's pet" on this board as in moderator's pet. He makes personal insults outside of Hell and never gets reprimanded for it. There was one time in particular, in Styx, in the middle of an ordinary thread, nothing argumentative at all, he posted to me a very insulting post that played "cleverly" with my username, I responded in kind using "mouse" in the same way. The host popped in to tell Mousethief to stop it and suspended me. So when he starts digging at me on other boards, I feel like I can't respond.

    Climacus wrote: »
    Just as an aside, I meant smart arse in a good way. I appreciate Twilight's use of my phrase, but I meant smart arse differently. Perhaps should've used smart *alec*.

    Yes, darling, never fear, we all know you were sucking up hard to Mousethief. Smart-arse and smart-alec mean the same thing. To people like me, the one-liners of smart-alecs are tiresome interruptions and to people like you they are hilarious words of wisdom. We're just different that way.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Feel better now?
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    edited February 10
    Twilight wrote: »
    How dare you or anyone else call me a racist? Seriously, how dare you?

    Well, you're certainly stupid and stubborn enough to be racist.

    Every time it's patiently pointed out that your hyperbole makes you sound utterly ridiculous, you double down on it. You're as bad as lilBuddha for digging yourself a pit and calling it the high ground.

    Just stop.

    And yes, people see someone wearing a MAGA hat, they think 'racist'. Because.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    @Twilight said -
    If you actually knew more than a handful of people of color you would know that, in reality, some are and some aren't . They come in all kinds just like white people.

    There’s you making assumptions - more than half of our neighbourhood plus our next door neighbours are people of colour. One of my best friends is a Pakistani origin Muslim. Yes, she eats in my home and I in hers. I was brought up in apartheid South Africa. My parents broke the (racist) law all the time. What do I know? Plenty. I spent much of my childhood in Black African homes and churches.

    I see you defending white boys who wear maga hats, face up to and mock a Native American man and protest against women’s reproductive rights. You must have a reason to be defending them.

    If your reasons are not racist, what are they?

  • Boogie wrote: »
    @Twilight said -
    If you actually knew more than a handful of people of color you would know that, in reality, some are and some aren't . They come in all kinds just like white people.

    There’s you making assumptions

    In response to your gigantic assumption that I'm a racist. Yes I made some wild guesses based on things you've said, but nobody has called you a racist have they Baby Boogie? You're the spoiled little gal who floats through Hell in her flame proof onesie every day making mean remarks about others, and never getting singed.


    Yes, I feel like a fool with my "some of my best friends are POC" examples, but how on earth else am I supposed to defend myself against a charge of racism on the internet by people who don't know me?

    Ohher wrote: »
    Feel better now?

    Yes, I do. I was getting tired of just ignoring all the insults in Purg.
  • finelinefineline Purgatory Host
    Twilight wrote: »
    Yes, I feel like a fool with my "some of my best friends are POC" examples, but how on earth else am I supposed to defend myself against a charge of racism on the internet by people who don't know me?

    You could answer Boogie's question about why you're defending these lads. I'm curious too. I find explanations of thought processes more revealing than claims about who one's best friends are. Especially online.

  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Twilight wrote: »
    Boogie wrote: »
    @Twilight said -
    If you actually knew more than a handful of people of color you would know that, in reality, some are and some aren't . They come in all kinds just like white people.

    There’s you making assumptions

    In response to your gigantic assumption that I'm a racist. Yes I made some wild guesses based on things you've said, but nobody has called you a racist have they Baby Boogie? You're the spoiled little gal who floats through Hell in her flame proof onesie every day making mean remarks about others, and never getting singed.


    Yes, I feel like a fool with my "some of my best friends are POC" examples, but how on earth else am I supposed to defend myself against a charge of racism on the internet by people who don't know me?

    Ohher wrote: »
    Feel better now?

    Yes, I do. I was getting tired of just ignoring all the insults in Purg.

    Well, for what it's worth, that may be a premature -- the 'feeling better' thing, that is.

    Twilight, I'm fully prepared to believe that you don't intend to be racist and don't want to to be racist. Like many, many whites (myself included), you have successfully assimilated the notion that being racist is a Bad Thing, so you reject racism, and want racism Out Of Your Life.

    It's a little like being ordered by the doctor to change our eating habits if we want to preserve our health. The way we've been eating is no good for us: too much fat, too much salt, too much sugar, not enough veg and fruit, etc. etc. So off we go home to embark on the new regime. Within days, we're falling apart. We're a mass of cravings, our schedules are a wreck because our go-to meals are now off-limits (or taste like crap because of what we must omit from them). We suddenly have to do far more cooking, of different kinds, and with different ingredients, and within about 10 days we're a simmering mass of resentments, confusions, and despair over the realization that the simple-sounding changes the doc demands are, in reality, enormously complicated with effects on our schedules, habits, free time, budgets, attitudes, and comfort zones.

    Uprooting racism is like this. It's relatively easy for most whites to reject the idea of racism, just like it's easy to reject, in theory, all those bad-for-us convenience foods. Carrying the program out, though, is much more complicated. We always have mac-and-cheese Thursday nights because we can get it on the table, eaten, and cleaned up after between work and choir practice -- only WHAM! Now we can't have mac-and-cheese at all. What do we have instead? The "instead" has to be afforded, and shopped for, and prepared, and cleaned up after, and all these little individual steps call for different behaviors from us, and that's just for ONE out of approximately 21 meals per week.

    For most whites, many of whom can chug along their accustomed routines without a nano-second's thought about race, and some of whom live (as I do) in places where there are relatively few people of color, rejecting the idea of racism is about as we get. Few of us really have to think much about this, so we don't. The result is that many of us really have very little understanding of what it is we're actually rejecting.

    Maybe we end up vaguely thinking something like, "Be nice to people of color." Well, that's easy enough. We know how to be nice to people, right? So we go a little out of our way to exchange pleasantries with the clerk at the corner store because she's black.

    Here's what we hardly ever think about, though: the fact that in that one simple little action, we continue to exercise our own white privilege -- the privilege of being able to choose (rather than being forced) to consider race every minute of every living day, the way that clerk may have to -- in our interaction with her as we go right on "othering" her, just we would if we were nasty to her because she's black. We're not being nice to her because we're nice; we're being nice to her because she's black.

    And that's only one tiny small piece of the work whites have to do on ourselves -- the work of discovering and dealing with privilege -- before we can even hope to start unraveling racism in the US society.

    I don't accuse you of doing the above. But I often see you engage in another aspect of racism which starts from the assumption that, when it comes to "othering," people of color start from the exact same position as white do. But that's a whole 'nother discussion, and I am out of time.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    edited February 10
    I think you protest too long and loud @Twilight - this has hit a chord with you.

    I’m glad to hear that you are anti tRump. That’s something at least.

    Or, I wonder, are you one of those people who will defend anti abortionists however inappropriate their behaviour - just because they are anti abortion.

    Maybe you ignored the racism because you were seeing the encounter through anti abortion lenses?

    (I wasn’t aware of why the boys were there at first, but it certainly compounded my outrage.)
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    edited February 10
    Just a couple of Hostly notes at this point.

    1./ If anyone has a problem with how Purg is hosted, a DM to the Purg hosts is the first port of call, and if satisfaction isn't obtained, Styx is the only option thereafter. Sniping in Hell as to how shipmate X or Y seems to get a free pass does not figure.

    2./ Abortion is a Dead Horse. If you want to discuss how it is that an all-male school sent several bus-loads of students to protest against female reproductive rights, then there is a thread for that in the knacker's yard.

    DT
    HH
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    Twilight wrote: »
    Yes, I feel like a fool with my "some of my best friends are POC" examples, but how on earth else am I supposed to defend myself against a charge of racism on the internet by people who don't know me?

    Racism is a cumulative reflection of actions. It is not like a tusk, or a blood type, or anything else that you can prove the absence of. And it's not binary - the racists and the non-racists - it's a spectrum of how you tend to behave.

    Defending anybody wearing a MAGA hat is going to have a whiff of racism about it, no matter who you think you are. Especially if that defense include suggesting that the somebody intentionally wearing a MAGA hat is not racist, because that just's just plain wrong. A person doing something racist, like wearing a MAGA hat, is functionally racist.

    Lots of things work that way. You're a "runner" to the degree that you run. You're "homosexual" to the degree that you have sex with the same gender. You're a "driver" to the degree that you drive. You're a "prick" to the degree that you drive an Audi. And so forth. Don't want to be seen as being a "runner"? Don't run.
  • Twilight wrote: »
    In response to your gigantic assumption that I'm a racist.

    We don't ASSUME you're a racist. We CONCLUDE it from the things you post. Big diff.
  • Actually, @RooK, not to pick nits, but one can be homosexual without having sex. I was heterosexual for many (kof) years before I ever had sex. One could be homosexual one'e entire life and die a virgin.
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    edited February 10
    I'm probably going to be exhibit A there.

    Wasn't sucking up, Twilight. Though reading back I can see how it came out that way. And I may as well continue in that theme... I've enjoyed many of your posts, Twilight -- so much so I've often thought I'd like to meet you. It is clear you have a wealth of experience and consider what you write and share. I cannot understand the posts that led to this, though. Anyway...
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    edited February 10
    mousethief wrote: »
    Actually, @RooK, not to pick nits, but one can be homosexual without having sex. I was heterosexual for many (kof) years before I ever had sex. One could be homosexual one'e entire life and die a virgin.

    I can understand why you think that. I've heard from a friend that the full realization of their sexuality didn't come until after experiencing the acts (first surprised disinclination hetero-, then relieved confirmation homo-). Perhaps it's just confirmation bias regarding experimental validation on my part, but I would tend to consider you to have been a 'theoretical heterosexual' until you confirmed experimentally. And, indeed, I suspect that sexuality is not binary, but a spectrum to be clarified. N'est-ce pas?
  • For me, this non-exchange with Twilight on the Purg thread was the most revealing. She posted very eloquently about imagining herself in George Zimmerman's shoes before murdering Trayvon Martin. She followed up by "trying to put myself in the shoes" of Nick Sandmann:
    Zimmerman was the one hated and charged with murder, and though he proved in the long run to be a jerk (or maybe became one in the aftermath ) at the time I was trying to figure out why a seemingly decent person might shoot someone. Trying to imagine myself in his shoes and how Trayvon might have looked in the dark after reports of a burglar, etc. Trayvon's size and demeanor was important in determining that case.

    Now, I've been trying to put myself in the shoes of the much hated Sandmann,

    Zimmerman may truly have feared for his life. Trayvon may truly have been about to give him a concussion. Sandmann may honestly have been trying to show respect to Nathan Phillips. We don't know. I defended Zimmerman and Sandmann because they were both accused of so much evil intention with so little evidence.

    Note that she puts herself in Zimmerman's and Sandmann's shoes, and every comment about Trayvon Martin's appearance and actions is based on Zimmerman's account. So I asked:
    Did you ever try putting yourself in Trayvon Martin's shoes?

    And:
    I want to hear Twilight's thoughts on putting herself in Nathan Phillips' shoes, since she has ignored my question about Trayvon Martin's shoes. Or alternatively, an explanation of whose shoes she's willing to consider in her thought experiments and whose shoes aren't worthy of that sort of consideration.

    I was kind of hoping that might lead Twilight to consider something along the lines of "Trayvon Martin was frightened because he was alone and a big white guy was following him and he didn't know anybody in the neighbourhood and he was trying to impress his girlfriend and he was afraid he was going to end up like Emmett Till, so he confronted Zimmerman and tried to seem really tough and intimidating and scare him off, which made Zimmerman panic and overreact."

    But no, instead I got this in response:
    You've lost me a little with the shoes, but I'll try to explain why I didn't want to talk about Trayvon, may he rest in peace.

    "You've lost me with the shoes"? WTF? Twilight started the shoe thing, FFS. So Twilight is capable of putting herself into Zimmerman's shoes, and into Sandmann's shoes, but bring up Trayvon Martin's shoes and all of a sudden she's utterly befuddled and he's dead so he doesn't matter anymore. The nicest explanation I can come up with is the quote I subsequently posted from the Guardian: "Empathy, according to psychological research, is most easily expressed among individuals of the same race."





  • Soror Magna, I really, really didn't want to start the entire Trayvon Martin thing over again but just let me explain why I didn't see any point in "putting myself in Travon martin's shoes." He was the victim of a crime. He was not on trial for murder or anything else. I have and had nothing but sympathy for a young boy, getting out of his father's house for awhile talking to his girl friend on the phone, no doubt missing his friends. he never should have been shot, Zimmerman should not have been playing cop and he should not have been carrying agun. It is tragic that Trayvon was shot and killed, -- but, I repeat he didn't need a defense because he was not on trial.

    The national debate and the question for the jurors in the Zimmerman trial was about self-defense laws and whether or not Zimmerman was shooting in self-defense or cold blooded murder. Your empathy for Trayvon or my empathy for him had no bearing on his guilt. Zimmerman's guilt was about whether or not he had legitimate reason to fear for his life. It's there that Trayvon's size and experience in fighting matters. Saying that he was a strong young teen does not mean less empathy for him, in my mind at least. I don't have to think of him as the pre-teen in the early photos to have sympathy for him. I feel just as sorry for his larger self as I would for the childish looking one, but that isn't what mattered. Saying that Trayvon was dead was not me saying he didn't matter but that he was the victim of a crime and only the perpetrators are put on trial. Victims should never have to depend on sympathy to get justice.

    It's easy for me to put myself in Trayvon's shoes, missing his friends, talking on the phone, followed by a strange man, suddenly caught up in a fight that turns deadly. When my son was sixteen, driving his car, he was followed for miles by a man making leering faces at him trying to get him to pull over. He thought the man was some kind of pedophile and was terrified enough to turn around from where he was going to drive home. It was in front of our apartment that the man jumped out and tried to perform a citizen's arrest on my son because he happened to look more like fourteen than sixteen. I thought of that wannabe cop when Trayvon got killed and all my sympathy was with Trayvon and against Zimmerman -- but if I had been on the trial I would have tried to put myself in Zimmerman's shoes to be fair to the law. Murder trials shouldn't be based on how much sympathy you have for the victim, but whether or not the crime was actually committed and in self-defense cases, whether or not it's plausible that the killer feared for his life.

    As for Nathan Phillips. I can't say I have a good grasp on what it would be like to be in his shoes. I can't really imagine myself marching up to a kid who is waiting for a bus, and pounding my drum in his ear while I chant in his face.
  • mousethiefmousethief Shipmate
    edited February 10
    RooK wrote: »
    mousethief wrote: »
    Actually, @RooK, not to pick nits, but one can be homosexual without having sex. I was heterosexual for many (kof) years before I ever had sex. One could be homosexual one'e entire life and die a virgin.

    I can understand why you think that. I've heard from a friend that the full realization of their sexuality didn't come until after experiencing the acts (first surprised disinclination hetero-, then relieved confirmation homo-). Perhaps it's just confirmation bias regarding experimental validation on my part, but I would tend to consider you to have been a 'theoretical heterosexual' until you confirmed experimentally. And, indeed, I suspect that sexuality is not binary, but a spectrum to be clarified. N'est-ce pas?

    I suppose it varies between people. I was going off what @orfeo has said repeatedly: he was homosexual decades before he ever had sex. Did he make it to the new ship? If he's still around it might be useful to get his own thoughts on this tangent.
  • balaambalaam Shipmate, 8th Day Host
    mousethief wrote: »
    I was going off what @orfeo has said repeatedly: he was homosexual decades before he ever had sex. Did he make it to the new ship?

    Victim Culture thread in Purg, orfeo posted last on Feb 7.
  • Ohher wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    Boogie wrote: »
    @Twilight said -
    If you actually knew more than a handful of people of color you would know that, in reality, some are and some aren't . They come in all kinds just like white people.

    There’s you making assumptions

    In response to your gigantic assumption that I'm a racist. Yes I made some wild guesses based on things you've said, but nobody has called you a racist have they Baby Boogie? You're the spoiled little gal who floats through Hell in her flame proof onesie every day making mean remarks about others, and never getting singed.


    Yes, I feel like a fool with my "some of my best friends are POC" examples, but how on earth else am I supposed to defend myself against a charge of racism on the internet by people who don't know me?

    Ohher wrote: »
    Feel better now?

    Yes, I do. I was getting tired of just ignoring all the insults in Purg.

    Well, for what it's worth, that may be a premature -- the 'feeling better' thing, that is.

    Twilight, I'm fully prepared to believe that you don't intend to be racist and don't want to to be racist. Like many, many whites (myself included), you have successfully assimilated the notion that being racist is a Bad Thing, so you reject racism, and want racism Out Of Your Life.

    It's a little like being ordered by the doctor to change our eating habits if we want to preserve our health. The way we've been eating is no good for us: too much fat, too much salt, too much sugar, not enough veg and fruit, etc. etc. So off we go home to embark on the new regime. Within days, we're falling apart. We're a mass of cravings, our schedules are a wreck because our go-to meals are now off-limits (or taste like crap because of what we must omit from them). We suddenly have to do far more cooking, of different kinds, and with different ingredients, and within about 10 days we're a simmering mass of resentments, confusions, and despair over the realization that the simple-sounding changes the doc demands are, in reality, enormously complicated with effects on our schedules, habits, free time, budgets, attitudes, and comfort zones.

    Uprooting racism is like this. It's relatively easy for most whites to reject the idea of racism, just like it's easy to reject, in theory, all those bad-for-us convenience foods. Carrying the program out, though, is much more complicated. We always have mac-and-cheese Thursday nights because we can get it on the table, eaten, and cleaned up after between work and choir practice -- only WHAM! Now we can't have mac-and-cheese at all. What do we have instead? The "instead" has to be afforded, and shopped for, and prepared, and cleaned up after, and all these little individual steps call for different behaviors from us, and that's just for ONE out of approximately 21 meals per week.

    For most whites, many of whom can chug along their accustomed routines without a nano-second's thought about race, and some of whom live (as I do) in places where there are relatively few people of color, rejecting the idea of racism is about as we get. Few of us really have to think much about this, so we don't. The result is that many of us really have very little understanding of what it is we're actually rejecting.

    Maybe we end up vaguely thinking something like, "Be nice to people of color." Well, that's easy enough. We know how to be nice to people, right? So we go a little out of our way to exchange pleasantries with the clerk at the corner store because she's black.

    Here's what we hardly ever think about, though: the fact that in that one simple little action, we continue to exercise our own white privilege -- the privilege of being able to choose (rather than being forced) to consider race every minute of every living day, the way that clerk may have to -- in our interaction with her as we go right on "othering" her, just we would if we were nasty to her because she's black. We're not being nice to her because we're nice; we're being nice to her because she's black.

    And that's only one tiny small piece of the work whites have to do on ourselves -- the work of discovering and dealing with privilege -- before we can even hope to start unraveling racism in the US society.

    I don't accuse you of doing the above. But I often see you engage in another aspect of racism which starts from the assumption that, when it comes to "othering," people of color start from the exact same position as white do. But that's a whole 'nother discussion, and I am out of time.

    You're contradicting yourself. On the one hand you're saying don't be extra nice to her because she's black and next you're saying, don't make her start from the exact same position as white people. See the trouble with working so hard at it? I think it's impossible to treat people like golfers and figure out a "handicap," for each person to level the playing field. I'm not talking about Affirmative Action in areas like university placements and government jobs where it is possible, to some extent, to make up for past disadvantages, but in everyday life where, as you have just inadvertently pointed out, it can backfire and make ordinary human interactions awkward and insincere.

    I hear what you're saying, it has all been said a lot in recent years, but I don't really agree with it. Rather than vigilantly searching for evidence of subtle racism at every turn, I think we should be working on giving up labeling people by race at all. There's no real scientific definition of race and most Americans are somewhere in between African and Scandinavian on the color scale. I think, as I always have, that the best we can do is try to treat everyone well and equally.
  • Twilight wrote: »
    Soror Magna, I really, really didn't want to start the entire Trayvon Martin thing over again but just let me explain why I didn't see any point in "putting myself in Travon martin's shoes." ... Murder trials shouldn't be based on how much sympathy you have for the victim, but whether or not the crime was actually committed and in self-defense cases, whether or not it's plausible that the killer feared for his life.

    Fair enough; however, presumption of innocence does not mean everything a defendant says should be automatically treated as credible or truthful.
    As for Nathan Phillips. I can't say I have a good grasp on what it would be like to be in his shoes. I can't really imagine myself marching up to a kid who is waiting for a bus, and pounding my drum in his ear while I chant in his face.

    He has now spoken out. The drum and the chant were a prayer for peace. He said he was trying to prevent a confrontation. Even if you can't imagine yourself praying in that manner, why don't you believe him?

  • Twilight wrote: »
    Soror Magna, I really, really didn't want to start the entire Trayvon Martin thing over again but just let me explain why I didn't see any point in "putting myself in Travon martin's shoes." ... Murder trials shouldn't be based on how much sympathy you have for the victim, but whether or not the crime was actually committed and in self-defense cases, whether or not it's plausible that the killer feared for his life.

    Fair enough; however, presumption of innocence does not mean everything a defendant says should be automatically treated as credible or truthful.
    As for Nathan Phillips. I can't say I have a good grasp on what it would be like to be in his shoes. I can't really imagine myself marching up to a kid who is waiting for a bus, and pounding my drum in his ear while I chant in his face.

    He has now spoken out. The drum and the chant were a prayer for peace. He said he was trying to prevent a confrontation. Even if you can't imagine yourself praying in that manner, why don't you believe him?

    But you said yourself you could imagine yourself joining in with a non-white group doing dancing in similar circumstances. Anyone who knew you would assume your goofy dancing is a well meaning attempt to defuse tension and introduce some much needed humor ...

    But, like many of us, you can't imagine what others who don't know you might think. To an outside observer your goofy dancing could appear disrespectful to that group. Or worse. Racist even.

    As a black friend pointed out to me once, there are times when you simply don't get it. Because you're white. The best I can do is acknowledge that and hope they'll be kind enough to tell me so when it counts.

    But I can't see how it takes a huge quantum leap of understanding to look at a picture of a Native American chanting and beating a drum surrounded by a bunch of boys making noises and gestures last seen in a 1950's B-Movie Western whilst another looks on grinning and wonder if those boys are just the slightest bit racist ...
  • Tubbs, first remember that what I might have done at sixteen is not what I actually did or would do now. My idea was to remind us all that how we think when we are sixteen is not how we think or act when we are older, better educated and with a less emotional brain. My post was not meant as fuel for someone like you to say, "See! See! You admitted it! Nyah nyah nyah!" But you took it there, thus proving me wrong about the emotional growth of our brains, I guess.

    As for Nathan Phillips, I find him very hard to believe, because his story of what happened and the video evidence do not match. I would think that if he was using his drum as a peace making instrument he and his fellow Native Americans would have pounded it as they walked up and down between the two other groups. 'In your face' drumming doesn't seem like peacemaking to me.

    Nathan Phillips's words vs video You wont like this because it's from Fox news but CNN, CBS, ABC, or NBC certainly wont be showing videos that demonstrate how wrong their earlier coverage was.

    I keep defending Sandmann because he's the one who got death threats, slandered across national news, vilified by late night pundits, and demonized by the entire left wing half of the country.

    Nothing like that happened to the other two groups. Nathan Phillips doesn't need a PR firm -- he got the attention he wanted and the love of the gullible masses. The BH group has been largely ignored, certainly not demonized or held accountable in any way. Will the coverage keep them out of Harvard? Will it harm their future careers or keep them from passing the bar?

    Sandemann's family was right to contact a PR firm because everyone was believing the slanted coverage the regular news outlets had put forth and it would effect the rest of their son's life.


  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    Twilight wrote: »
    and demonized by the entire left wing half of the country

    We need a new word that's the hyperbole of hyperbole.
  • Twilight wrote: »
    Sandemann's family was right to contact a PR firm because everyone was believing the slanted coverage the regular news outlets had put forth and it would effect the rest of their son's life.
    As will their recourse to a PR firm. Regardless of whether he was being treated fairly or not, they did him no favors by hiring a PR firm to represent him.

  • TubbsTubbs Admin
    edited February 11
    Twilight wrote: »
    Tubbs, first remember that what I might have done at sixteen is not what I actually did or would do now. My idea was to remind us all that how we think when we are sixteen is not how we think or act when we are older, better educated and with a less emotional brain. My post was not meant as fuel for someone like you to say, "See! See! You admitted it! Nyah nyah nyah!" But you took it there, thus proving me wrong about the emotional growth of our brains, I guess.
    ...

    How you got from my comment on an admission of empathy for that group of young men because at the same age you might have done similar to your post is a mystery to me ... I said pretty much the same thing on the thread - there but for the grace of God go most of us at that age. Fortunately I grew up before social media so my epic mistakes couldn't be shared with the whole world.

    What I'm saying is that you don't appear capable of understanding how this incident could appear to people outside your bubble.
    Twilight wrote: »
    Will the coverage keep them out of Harvard? Will it harm their future careers or keep them from passing the bar?

    I'm sick of being told that privileged young men who behave badly should get a free pass because holding them to the same standards as everyone else will ruin their lives.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    I'm sick of being told that privileged young men who behave badly should get a free pass because holding them to the same standards as everyone else will ruin their lives.

    Brett Kavanaugh, for example.

    :rage:
  • Boogie wrote: »
    I'm sick of being told that privileged young men who behave badly should get a free pass because holding them to the same standards as everyone else will ruin their lives.

    Brett Kavanaugh, for example.

    :rage:

    I'd forgotten about him and was thinking of Brock Turner.

    Because being a star athlete at a prestigious university obviously means you should be let off a sexual assault charge.
  • I'm sick of "privileged" being such a license to hate (or permission to withhold sympathy for the hyperbole sensitive among us.)

    Same standards as everyone else? Are you kidding? Talk about living in a bubble. Can you in all honesty, or any honesty at all, picture what would have happened if that group of kids had been black kids on a trip from their inner city school, and while standing in place waiting for their bus home, a group of white male adults had got up in their faces screaming racial slurs, telling them to go back where they came from, and later telling the press they had been frightened by the mean, angry looks on the kids' faces?


    This whole conversation about privilege is really getting out of hand. It was a beneficial means of self-check a few years ago, but now it's escalated to a point where it asks white people to spend their days like Ohher wants us all to do, self-flagellating at every turn, worried about things like, "Was I too nice?" Living in a constant state of shame and guilt for an accident of birth and sins committed hundreds of years ago by similarly pigmented others. And of course increased anger and resentment on the other side.

    Yes! Yes! Yes! Being born with white skin serves as an advantage in western society. So does being born rich, good looking, healthy, with a high IQ, and growing up with loving parents. Studies show that tall men are far more likely to get jobs they apply for than better qualified short men. Everyone, including babies, reacts more positively to the beautiful among us. In most cases, a college degree is a necessary step to a high income and people with a below normal IQ often find that step impossible, rendering them poor for life. Then of course there are gifts like talent with a basketball or great singing range that can cause such super-privileged people to amass more fame and fortune than the rest of us can imagine.

    Tell me who you think has the easiest life? A beautiful black woman or an ugly, low IQ white woman? A white person born with a serious disability or a black athlete? "White privilege" is just one tiny box to tick on the advantage side of all humans and not the huge, get out of jail free, card you seem to think it is.

    I grew up in the third whitest state in America and you never saw such misery. At that time the poorest city in America was Welch, West Virginia (all white.) One in three West Virginia girls were sexually abused as a child, usually through incest. Jobs get harder to find every year. When factories or coal mines close only about 50% of the workers ever work again.* Houses bought 10 years ago for 80,000 are now selling for 20,000. Suicide is on the rise and drug overdose in the area is now responsible for more deaths than car accidents. I'm heartedly sick of hearing about white privilege.

    * A greater percentage of West Virginians voted for Trump than any other state because they thought he would bring jobs back to the state. Just one more example of people who might wear a MAGA hat without being racist.
  • He has now spoken out. The drum and the chant were a prayer for peace. He said he was trying to prevent a confrontation. Even if you can't imagine yourself praying in that manner, why don't you believe him?

    Have you ever inserted yourself between two groups that are on the verge of violent confrontation in order to prevent said confrontation? I have, and I can tell you that it's not the sort of situation where you expect either group to smile gladly and thank you for averting their imminent fracas. More often than not you end up uniting the two groups in anger towards yourself.

    I can understand Phillips doing what he did, and believe his reasons for doing it. The bit that gets to me is when, having put himself in a situation where he must have known he would receive animosity, he then cries about the animosity he received.
  • Twilight wrote: »
    I'm sick of "privileged" being such a license to hate (or permission to withhold sympathy for the hyperbole sensitive among us.)

    Same standards as everyone else? Are you kidding? Talk about living in a bubble. Can you in all honesty, or any honesty at all, picture what would have happened if that group of kids had been black kids on a trip from their inner city school, and while standing in place waiting for their bus home, a group of white male adults had got up in their faces screaming racial slurs, telling them to go back where they came from, and later telling the press they had been frightened by the mean, angry looks on the kids' faces?

    What do you think would have happened to those black teenagers?
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    Based on past evidence and current practice, they would have been arrested and/or shot.
  • A pretty good indication that the white kids were and remain privileged.
  • Tubbs wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I'm sick of "privileged" being such a license to hate (or permission to withhold sympathy for the hyperbole sensitive among us.)

    Same standards as everyone else? Are you kidding? Talk about living in a bubble. Can you in all honesty, or any honesty at all, picture what would have happened if that group of kids had been black kids on a trip from their inner city school, and while standing in place waiting for their bus home, a group of white male adults had got up in their faces screaming racial slurs, telling them to go back where they came from, and later telling the press they had been frightened by the mean, angry looks on the kids' faces?

    What do you think would have happened to those black teenagers?

    I think the public sympathy would have been with the kids, and rightfully so.

    Most serious journalists, even on the liberal side are admitting they were wrong and too quick to judge. Only on the ship have the heels been dug in and the kids firmly charged with racism. Here.
    Doc Tor wrote: »
    Based on past evidence and current practice, they would have been arrested and/or shot.

    And you accuse me of hyperbole. Funny how the only time I can think of when a group of protesting kids were shot it was white kids at Kent state.

  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    No, I don't accuse you of hyperbole. I simply point to it, and say "that's hyperbole".

    And yes, black people protesting seem to provoke extreme reactions from white law enforcement. The UK's hands are not clean in this respect, but the US have form for it.

    (And to avoid the obvious rebuttal, it's you whose narrowed the focus to 'kids'. Something tells me the cops would see 'young black men' and not 'children'.)
  • Doc Tor wrote: »
    No, I don't accuse you of hyperbole. I simply point to it, and say "that's hyperbole".

    Now you've gone and made me laugh. I'll have to stop for the day.

  • Twilight wrote: »
    Tubbs wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I'm sick of "privileged" being such a license to hate (or permission to withhold sympathy for the hyperbole sensitive among us.)

    Same standards as everyone else? Are you kidding? Talk about living in a bubble. Can you in all honesty, or any honesty at all, picture what would have happened if that group of kids had been black kids on a trip from their inner city school, and while standing in place waiting for their bus home, a group of white male adults had got up in their faces screaming racial slurs, telling them to go back where they came from, and later telling the press they had been frightened by the mean, angry looks on the kids' faces?

    What do you think would have happened to those black teenagers?

    I think the public sympathy would have been with the kids, and rightfully so.

    Most serious journalists, even on the liberal side are admitting they were wrong and too quick to judge. Only on the ship have the heels been dug in and the kids firmly charged with racism. Here.
    Doc Tor wrote: »
    Based on past evidence and current practice, they would have been arrested and/or shot.

    And you accuse me of hyperbole. Funny how the only time I can think of when a group of protesting kids were shot it was white kids at Kent state.

    That Atlantic link is remarkable.
  • Doc Tor wrote: »
    (And to avoid the obvious rebuttal, it's you whose narrowed the focus to 'kids'. Something tells me the cops would see 'young black men' and not 'children'.)

    "Children" seem to become "young men" aged about 10 when they're black, and not until they've graduated from college when they're white.
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    Twilight wrote: »
    Most serious journalists, even on the liberal side are admitting they were wrong and too quick to judge. Only on the ship have the heels been dug in and the kids firmly charged with racism. Here.

    From your linked article:
    I have watched every bit of video I can find of the event, although more keep appearing. I have found several things that various of the boys did and said that are ugly, or rude, or racist. Some boys did a tomahawk chop when Phillips walked into their group. There is a short video of a group that seems to be from the high school verbally harassing two young women as the women walk past it. In terms of the school itself, Covington Catholic High School apparently has a game-day tradition of students painting their skin black for “black-out days,” but any attempt by the school to cast this as innocent fun is undercut by a photograph of a white kid in black body paint leering at a black player on an opposing team.

    I can only assume you didn't read to the end.
  • The author of the article tips his hand when he says Phillips was standing in front of Sandemann rather than Sandemann standing in front of Phillips, or the two standing close together. Also when he badmouths the P&G "toxic masculinity" commercial, implying that approving of it is equivalent to approving of P&G. Also when he mocks Rodney King. Also when he describes the smirking Sandemann as "the smiling boy" and disingenuously refers to his smirk as an "inscrutable" smile.

    In short, more gaslighting, seemingly from a liberal who is tripping all over himself to distance himself from "overreaction."
Sign In or Register to comment.