Who said anything about removing your constitutional rights?
The right you have had taken away is the social right to not be thought of as a dick.
Blame the generations of White racists preceding you, it’s they who ruined it for you.
Yes, that’s what I’m saying. You can’t call them a nigger, either.
He didn’t say those exact words, no. But words"like" that?
“There is a deep seeded problem of violence in the black community” and “savage violent animal fucks prey on white people” sure sounds like that.
It would certainly be racist if you were to use that incident to claim that black people, in general, are savage animals, the way Cumia did, based on the behavior of a woman who didn’t actually do any of those vicious things you’re talking about.
Not that anyone here is impressed by the delicate discernment of your “Is This Racist?” palate, but here you go, Anthony Cumia declaring that “some people” start out “more advanced”:
See here around the 15 minute mark -
From this Gawker article listing some of Cumia’s greatest racist hits -
http://gawker.com/anthony-cumia-has-a-long-history-of-public-awfulness-1599704541
That article also talks about Cumia’s involvement with a website called “Nigger Mania” - probably just a bunch of misunderstood fact lovers, right?
Speaking of Gawker, they have screen caps of some of the tweets that started this mess. Cumia, racist coward that he is, deleted them from twitter.
http://gawker.com/siriusxm-host-claims-cuntrag-assaulted-him-in-racist-1599491744
Right.
No, THIS is a dumb argument. It doesn’t matter what else someone might have available to get off. The fact is that people do use their cameras to take images of people do this reason. Anthony wasn’t taking up skirts, but this kind of this H&S the same motivation.
Reminds if the old “He’s rich and handsome and can have any beautiful women he wants; he doesn’t need to rape” type of argument.
It’s odd that none of the people involved have hit the news cycles yet- Anthony, the woman pictured or the 5 others.
Often, everyone gets to go on some morning show and tell their side individually or in groups. Maybe this hasn’t happened because it’s the weekend and everyone will make the news rounds on Monday, but usually everyone involved in something like this wants to get their side of the story told.
Anthony could explain what he was doing. The woman can explain what she saw and did. The group of 5 can offer their side.
From here, it looks like Anthony was taking creep shots and got called out for it. I saw two pictures he took- one of the woman from the incident and another he took of a similar appearing woman (alone, wearing a short dress) who was walking away from him, so the picture was taken from behind the woman. I guess that’s Anthony’s fetish.
Anthony also said he had his concealed carry weapon, and he thinks he’s awesome for not using it.
From a female point of view, it would not be fun to get creep shotted and the bullet shotted just for going to a club in a short dress.
Gah- I just read all his tweets.
He calls blacks violent, but hopes
she dies,
she gets shot in the face,
he thinks she’s lucky he didn’t just kill her (he says he was armed),
he hopes she gets killed,
he hopes some ‘home boys’ beat her to death,
he says he restrained himself from putting her to sleep,
he says he should have smashed her face,
And in his last Tweet called her a “cuntrag bitch fuck animal pig face worthless meat sack shit pile stink crotch ass stain rot bung”
Wow. Someone needs some therapy. And all because he was called out for taking creep shots of women.
He absolutely believes in genetic superiority/inferiority, eugenics, etc. He brings it up on his show. I’ve heard him.
I understand you’re defensive of the show. I’m a Ron and Fez guy (which is kind of a sister show), so I know how attached we sometimes get to these personalities. But you’ve gotta step back a bit and take a look. The guy’s a racist. If the show is ruined for Opie and Jim, it’s his fault. Blame him, not the people piling on him.
But he’s definitely not a misogynist either, because he didn’t say those things about all women.
I’m amazed this guy is 53, because the tweets sound like what I’d expect from an unexceptional 17-year-old.
Just to be clear - yes, we do get to do that. Your history does not mean that you have the authority to tell me/us anything.
It is entirely possible that this particular case was one of racism. But when it is not a case of racism - and such cases do exist - then it is just as appropriate to use terms like “animal” or whatever as for a white man. You can call that racist if you like. But I am not going to care if you do. I don’t give you that power over me.
Regards,
Shodan
Ha, ha. I read the tweets. It’s also entirely possible that the Earth orbits the Sun. Entirely possible.
It’s not about anyone’s authority. It’s entirely about the social consequences you’d face. I’m observing that you don’t get to do it, I’m not ordering you not to. I said “you don’t” not “you won’t”.
Nope. Just like White guys don’t get to call Black men “boy” any more, they don’t get to use animal or savagery metaphors on Black people, without getting called on it.
But you seem to really be … invested … in doing it without consequences. :dubious: Good luck with that.
Well let’s be fair. If a black guy brutally rapes and murders someone, i doubt I’d face accusations of racism if i called him an animal.
Oh won’t someone think about poor Jimmy in all this! We should ignore Anthony’s racist behavior because it impacts his coworkers.
How about Jimmy smartens up and stops attaching his livelihood to an asshole that has a long history of being fired for saying offensive shit.
I’m not so sure. Not if you did it in a public forum. Someone would call you on it (and they’d do so just assuming you were White, BTW, unless you clearly weren’t) That’s just the world we’ve made - reactionary and judgemental. But it was a natural response, I think. Same goes for using sexist language.
As I said before, twice, since there’s only Cumia’s side of the story no firm conclusion can be drawn at all who did what to whom.
But it seems the issue of taking pictures of people in public has just resulted in a fairly insistent talking past one another situation. Whatever Cumia was taking pictures of for whatever reason in public, if this woman assaulted him physically as a result, she committed a crime, not him.
I was simply answering the wrong points seeming to imply that photographing somebody in public without their permission would legally justify them to assault the photographer, if said photographer ‘didn’t work for National Geographic or the like’. That’s plainly factually wrong, at least in the US and New York where this happened.
That’s not refuted by saying it’s ‘rude’ to take pictures of a woman, by giving examples of people questioned by the authorities for photographing things (that often involves signs saying photography isn’t permitted), by saying Cumia lied about why he was taking the pictures, by citing cases of photographers found guilty of harassment, or any other argument given so far. If the lady actually did what Cumia said she did, she committed a crime, and he didn’t. However again we only have his word for any of what happened, and anyway it’s not directly relevant to Sirius sacking him for what he had to say about the incident.
And Cumia is free to have her charged. Shouldn’t be hard to identify her, after all…
You certainly would, unless it’s known or obvious from context that you are black yourself. If the murderer/rapist was white OTOH, you could call him an animal regardless of your own race and then I agree, I doubt you’d face accusations of racism.
It’s reasonable to discuss and explore the reasons for this difference, but any honest discussion must start by acknowledging it exists. The common kind of social convention from people of a certain political viewpoint is to first deny that this is true, but then move right on to arguing why it’s justified or ‘understandable’ in view of past history. I don’t reject out of hand any and all justifications or explanations, but first let’s agree (the obvious) that it’s true.
Sorry I don’t see that as a relevant response, taking one line out of context from my post. My point is simply that if his story is correct, she committed a crime. The point is not any defense of Cumia, since he wasn’t fired for taking a picture but for his rant about the incident. My point is only relevant to those who erroneously say, or seem to imply that if someone is taking a picture ‘for the wrong reasons’ and/or without permission, the object of the photograph can then assault the photographer.
You don’t “give him that power over you?” What is he, the fucking Goblin King?
I’m not disputing that. I agree with you, it would be a crime, and she should be charged. Has she been?