Good on you for not being stupid about it.
Wait a fucking minute! Is it Bobble or Bubble?
The former.
And it’s not
either.
Well I’m certainly not getting involved in your juevenile little pranks so the only thing I’ll say in response is the same as I always do.
Quote me what I said. Seriously. If I expressed “opinions that are racist as fuck” Then it would be simple to quote them and simple for me to correct them.
I didn’t and you can’t.
What I do do is not immediately agree with the consensus, try to see explore both sides and challenge what is said if I think it is unclear or misleading. That’s it. I’m sure that comes across as a challenge to those who are completely certain in their positions and beliefs.
And of course the biggest mistake people make is to assume that a refusal to accept one part of an argument fully must mean that I
a) disagree with everything they say and
b) that everything else I say should also be filtered through a lens of assumed opposition.
You can see that right the way through that thread, You can see the knee-jerk assumptions being made initially and then hardening as the thread progresses with clairifcations barely mattering at all.
All of that can be remedied by reading what I actually wrote rather than what it is assumed I mean because I purposefully say what I mean.
As for “I’m not touching you”? is that where you heavily imply you think something but stop short of using the words and claim plausible deniability.?
If so then LHOD might be able to eleborate as clearly in that thread they seem to be something of an expert by heavily hinting that they think I am racist, homophobic and misogynistic without any evidence and without the conviction to state it clearly.
So have fun. I’ll leave you to it and if there are any other comments on the thread in question I’ll be responding there.
You’ve given plenty of evidence of racism, but we can’t call you a racist there without drawing a warning. So I’m calling you a racist here. If you then say that you are no more racist, than you are misogynistic and homophobic (this is what YOU said) then logically you must be both of those as well.
And I think we are 100+ posts beyond any expectation that you are actually arguing in good faith. Either that or you are genuinely so lacking in self awareness as to be beyond hope. People can read your shitty posts in that thread and draw their own conclusions.
I always thought he was more transphobic than racist, but most of all, he’s impossible to have a conversation with on this board.
And that demonstrates the problem. You didn’t in any way “explore both sides.” Despite multiple people using multiple methods and giving multiple reasons that something was racist, you did not give any counterargument. You just came in and asserted that “of course it was okay.” You made no attempt to deconstruct the arguments given.
You had some people pointing out how the action in question fit the definition of racism. You had people pointing out how it was othering, how a white person wouldn’t be treated the same way. You had actual minorities explaining why they get annoyed by it. You had people pointing out that society considers it racist, to the point it shows up in diversity training. You even have people who thought the word “racism” might be too loaded and tried to get at the issue without using that word.
And you didn’t address any of that. You just came in and claimed that “it sounds like a good idea” to do the very thing that everyone else said was wrong. No actual argument for why. No attempt to address why it was okay to assume that someone who looked Indian would know about Indian culture, and no attempt at all to see things from the point of view of the Indian person in question. You had no argument for why it wasn’t a form of tokenism, or why all the diversity training people were wrong. You ignored the recommendation that you ask everyone at once. And you assumed that, just because someone didn’t let you know they were offended, they weren’t.
And, of course, when people pointed out these flaws, you got mad about it. At no point did you go back and try to remedy any of this, actually countering the arguments that were made.
You aren’t providing two different sides. See my previous comment for what you actually come across as if you are doing. You think you know more than everyone else. You said it yourself that you know you aren’t racist:
Because I’m a human I have the potential to be bigoted or prejudicial in a million different ways, but I take care not to be, so I’m not.
That somehow you know it all on how to not be bigoted or prejudicial. You know all your biases. You reject the most basic lesson underlying all studies of bigotry—that all of us are bigoted in some ways, and that we can only avoid it by learning.
You don’t. When it comes to racism and bigotry, you only look inside you own head. And, well, you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. Why would you? You don’t experience racism day-in and day-out, and you don’t study how it affects those who do. And you don’t think you need to listen to others to find out.
(And, no matter how many times I try, I can’t get this any shorter.)
Gee, thanks. Did you even take 2 seconds to see that he posted the link after I complained?
Is there any indication that NellieBly was responding to your post rather than mine?
This is a genuine question. I don’t see any reply indicator nor any quoted material.
I read her post as indicating:
[I] Read* the linked thread and [I] understand the pitting.
- Pronounced red, as in past tense or read, pronounced reed.
I’m loathed to post on this but I’ll defend what I actually said and I don’t appreciated fabrications. Pit or not, if you can’t find examples of what I’m accused of you have no business making them up.
I did not. at no point did I say that what the OP did was “OK”. My words are there and available to everyone.
Again, No I did not.
I specifically said that it was obnoxious (my word) to assume that such a person would know about Indian culture. I said nothing to about someone “looking Indian” and specifically said it was wrong to assume knowledge or expertise.
I specifically said that if it were me, and it were a group that I would ask the whole group.
I really have to question your comprehension about what I wrote.
It is telling that where you want to put words in my mouth you make up something that I’m supposed to have said but actually didn’t.
The only real quote you use is my very own admission of my imperfection and the potential to be bigoted and prejudical which of course blows the rest of your unfounded accusations out of the water. Straight after my own words that you quoted (correctly, well done. have a gold star) you go on to say that I reject the very concept that I just referred to and admitted on my own behalf.
Your post is a perfect example of the real problem.
A lazy assumption of a position not held and statements not made because of a prejudiced interpretation.
You start with assumption that I’m not on your side and then filter everything I write with that in mind. That’s not an honest way to approach a debate.
It may shock you to know that someone can disagree with some of the points you make and yet still not actually be opposed to what you say in general.
You actually don’t engage on the words I used (because if you did you wouldn’t be making them up and getting it so wrong when what I actually said doesn’t suit your preconception) but rather on what you imagine I must really believe.
NB, you useless twit, when you insist without evidence that you’re not racist, that’s as fantastical as insisting that you don’t get sick. When you respond to that analogy by explaining that you follow proper hygiene, it’s like you’re continuing the analogy, not refuting it. When you say that you’re just as racist as you are misogynist and homophobic–well, you’ve demonstrated zero self-awareness, so sure, I’ll agree with you on that further self-own, why not?
You’re just a terrible person to have around the board. “WHAT IS BAIT?” you ask, as if you can’t stop satirizing yourself.
Christ almighty. What is bait.
Note this isn’t remotely the first time NB has had difficulty figuring out that maybe, just maybe they don’t have a good handle on what it is like to be black, or trans, or some other marginalized group.
Stuff like suggesting that telling racists that they are being like racists is going to get Donald Trump re-elected and maybe we shouldn’t do things like that. Somebody who doesn’t see the point of a Black History Month in the US. That the propensity to call people racist is a serious problem and counterproductive. Who didn’t see much racism at all in the treatment of Meaghan Markle.
NB has plenty of good posts and is not at all a detriment to the board but we all have our blind spots. Just how pervasive racism actually is in the US (and the UK!) happens to be one for NB.
I really was responding to Mighty_Mouse’s post, not yours. I know how snarky people can get here in the Pit and certainly understand why you might think my comment was snark, but honestly, it wasn’t.
I have no doubt at all about the pervasiveness of racism and other bigotries in the UK (can’t speak for the USA at all). It isn’t a blind spot, it is just an unwillingness to accept the consensus approach and interpretation where I don’t agree with it. There would of course be no anti-pit-thread for the myriad times where I have accepted and agreed with the consensus.
The theme from the threads that you link to shows a consistency in my opinions and my thoughts.
Anyone who thinks they know what I think just from the titles you created, well I suggest they read what I wrote in those threads.
Because again, we see a continuation of a pattern. You yourself have choosen to title my views in a purposefully uncharitable way.
e.g. looking at your words, Anyone would think I was a Trump sympathist when nothing could be further from the truth.
Ultimately I dislike knee-jerk reactions, one-dimensional, polarised thinking and have a deep antipathy for identity politics. I’ll continue to speak out against those and pull people up on it when I see it happening.
I know it annoys people if I refuse to merely step into line, pay lip service to the accepted view take the path of least resistance but it isn’t done out of sheer contrariness for the hell of it. The pushback I get is probably down to what Freud called “the narcissism of small differences” that people you share 99% of a worldview with will be apopectic over that 1% in which you differ.
The Trump thread is a case in point. I can despise Trump and dispair of his supporters, hate his politics, wish he’d never been elected and hope for his incarceration (all of which I am on record for,including the very thread you link to) but the moment I suggest pouring scorn on all those who voted for him is not a helpful way to ensure he gets booted out? Knives are sharpened and, regardless of the wide areas of agreement, people assume that I don’t mean what I say.
Hey ho, it is disappointing but not unexpected and you just have to ride it out in the knowledge that you yourself are being as honest and consistent as possible. It is why I put huge stock on being quoted honestly and accurately because I either mean exactly what I write, no more, no less, or where I miss-spoke or I’m ambiguous, I have to withdraw it or put it right. Others are less swift to do so or fail to do so at all.
I make my living out of questioning the orthodox positions and assumptions of brutally smart people and it can be massively uncomfortable for all concerned but I do it really well.
I’m not smarter than them but I do get paid to consider alternative views, to challenge logical chains, to weed out woolly thinking and unsubstantiated claims, to push people into doing the same, to elaborate exactly why pretty much every conclusion that seems obvious is not as simple or as clear-cut as it seems.
They never are and it is precisely that fact that leads me to engage in the way I do.
Why don’t people believe me when I tell them how great I am, instead of drawing their conclusions from things I say and do?
It must be because they are intellectually inferior to me.
That must be it.
Whatever you do for a living, your posts here are insanely terrible. You consistently misunderstand what other folks are posting, and then do your damnedest to devolve the thread into “WHAT IS BAIT” and similar nonsense.
I’d say Aaron Rodgers does it better - he made sure to get his millions of dollars and fame first. For whatever reason, we tend to listen to such people when they claim they’re questioning orthodoxy rather than the more realistic description of narcissists burying their fingers in their ears and saying “lalala I’m not listening to you”.
But, as I noted, everybody has their blind spots. I think I’m not far off in guessing NB is closer in age to 100 than a newborn, so I’m still chalking this up to that generation of English who think that not actively occupying other nations is quite sufficient and am quite glad the younger set are generally not like that.
I’ve known too many older racists who thought that not putting on white hoods and being on speaking terms with black people meant they were in the clear on matters of race.
ETA: Also, to warrant that kind of response, I must have struck a nerve! I think that deserves a drink!
N-B:
Also N_B:
Seeing as I don’t value your judgement, your assessment is irrelevant to me.
The misunderstanding is only coming from you, as can be seen by your deliberate choice to either not quote what I did write, or simply making up a quote or assuming a position and claiming “victory”
Have you ever known anyone that you judge to be “not a racist”?