I don’t think there’s any risk of that at all. Slacker is in the company of Shagnasty and GG Allin, that the best way he knows of to get attention is to stand up in public and slather himself in his own shit. Embarrassment isn’t really in his repertoire.
You keep referencing Shagnasty, but never link to their posts. In a vacuum, I’d be unsure if the comparison was a crude insult, or a sign of a possible kindred spirit. The inartful SN, however, strongly suggests the former.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You just aren’t that bright, are you? I mean, you’ve mastered spelling and sentences and paragraphs, and because a lot of other people who can actually think have the same skills you assume you must be clever too, but you’ve never actually thought about anything, have you?
Not surprising, and it accentuates the deficit the average white guy faces due to genetic factors.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No I don’t.
Yeah, you do. But I’m too lazy to go find the posts, so w/e
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why, he could grow up to be president!
I’d be pleased if he just grew up.
I’m instinctively wary of any explanation for complex phenomena which says, “Well, that’s just the natural order of things so there’s no need for me to do anything different”: apart from being unsatisfying on an intellectual level, it’s been used to justify so many terrible things. I mean, don’t people like you ever look at history, at all of the things that have been justified in the name of common-sense - things like owning other people as farm animals, forbidding women to study or vote, or persecuting homosexuals - and just think, “You know, maybe I’m on the wrong side of history”?. Of course, it’s much less mental effort to decide that blacks are basically too dumb to make proper movies, so maybe that’s the appeal.
In other words, he doesn’t, since all it would take is a basic search for the word Shagnasty in his posts.
**Shagnasty **is a poster who admitted that he thrives on negative attention, and can’t look away. You very much seem similar.
You know your views on race are disliked here, but you put this in the Pit. You know it would piss people off, but you said it anyways. And, when people did get pissed off, you used that as excuse to attack them.
It very much seems you post here because you want the negative attention. Saying that is not an attack.
It is, however, negative attention. I suggest that we point this out once per thread, and then stop giving him what he wants. If he then starts pulling this shit outside the Pit, he’ll get a topic ban. If not, then he already has an effective topic ban. Either way works.
The ironic thing about him putting this in the Pit is that he has just provided a handy example of how minority directors are often scrutinized and judged more harshly than non-minorities.
When is the last time an artist, athlete, businessman, or politician was Pitted for the offense of being less than perfectly successful at something? When on this board has such a flub been used to argue that a whole demographic group is inherently less capable than others? Funny that the OP decided to establish precedence with this director (a black female), and then look at him go on to regale us with enlightened opinions about race and genetics! It’s like he’s not even trying to look objective. It’s like he actively trying to help people argue that sexism and racism are still major barriers in Hollywood and elsewhere. Genius.
Exactly:
Unite all ye “liberal white intellectual straight cismen”! You have nothing to lose but your [del]chains![/del] cheap tan leather shoes that you wear with everything! You think that’s a good look? Seriously, what’s up with the shoes, guys??
That might be a good argument if I hadn’t pointed out that “Do the Right Thing” and “Moonlight” are two of my all time favorite films.
As for the rest of that, it’s also off base. I am interested in evolutionary psychology, which is also something the SSSM crowd tends to hate. They always use this argument, that by explaining gendered behavior including rape and other violence through evolution, we are excusing it. This is nonsense, as Steven Pinker and Richard Dawkins have written about extensively. It is precisely because of the darker aspects of our inborn nature that we need laws and social organization to “tame” them! The fact that civilization evolves faster than our genes do is a good thing; but it also means that we need to be cognizant that one has got ahead of the other, and this can lead to friction.
And I have specifically said that I am in favor of reparations for slavery as well as robust spending on social programs that benefit minorities. But since I’m against affirmative action, you ignore the rest of it and make a strawman of my position: “Well, that’s just the natural order of things so there’s no need for me to do anything different”. Someone who actually believed that really would be deserving of having abuse heaped upon him.
ETA:
This was funny! Well played. I assume you know that site “Stuff White People Like”?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When you outright assert that you don’t think black people, in general, are as capable of making good movies as other groups, having a few tokens doesn’t excuse you. That you think black people have high musical intelligence (or whatever) doesn’t excuse that you think they’re inferior, on average, in intellectual and other creative abilities. That you don’t dislike or otherwise bear any ill will towards black people does not excuse believing that they’re inferior in so many ways, on average, to white and Asian people.
White supremacism (and related philosophies) don’t require malice or malevolence or hatred or even dislike. Just pretty common (unfortunately) beliefs like yours about lesser ability based on non-biological groupings like sociological race.
A new acronym! What’s “SSSM”?
Evolutionary psychology gets attacked frequently because it’s filled with “just so” stories that are unfalsifiable. We can find almost any possible behavior somewhere in the animal kingdom; that doesn’t mean that every similar human behavior can be explained the same way. Saying “orangutans do this in this scenario, and therefore this human behavior is entirely natural and reasonable from an evolutionary POV” (or similar) is, at most, a wild hypothesis. It’s not fact or theory or anything close to that. Similarly, making some assertion about conditions in Africa being somehow less conducive to higher intelligence than Europe and Asia is essentially meaningless when terms like “intelligence” are so vaguely defined. Such a statement is not a scientific assertion in any way. It’s not testable; it’s not falsifiable with such vague terminology; etc.
SSSM is not new. I got it from Steven Pinker’s book The Blank Slate, where he uses it to describe the “standard social science model”, which is essentially to put everything on nurture and nothing on nature. (BTW, such people—which included my anthropologist father and includes my sociologist mother—tend to think of, or at least strawman, their opponents as being the polar opposites and putting everything on nature/genes, but this is false.)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That doesn’t apply to me (based on my understanding of the science, nature is probably involved in variations in most, if not every, human characteristic). I’m not even sure who it could possibly apply to. In addition to the fact that race groupings like white, black, and Asian are overwhelmingly based on sociology and history rather than biology and genetics, the main point I make about the issue (and that Klein in the other thread and the scientists he referenced) is that when society is so profoundly unequal, things like test scores don’t and can’t tell one anything about group genetic differences, since the environment of those groups is so massively different, even for wealthy members of those groups.
this guy who thought that gender could be socially assigned?
Nope. I commute to DC on the Metro every day, and I don’t stare at my phone. That’s how I know how not to dress myself in the morning.
Not entirely, but in large part due to moronic racist misinterpretations of ev psych like your own. PLenty of leftists who take the time to read Pinker et al realize that your bullshit paraphrases completely miss the point of what he’s saying, and I encourage folks here and elsewhere not to blame Pinker for what racist idiots think he says.