And if he’d said that that was the only thing that made it racist, you’d have a point.
Happy Scrappy, I understand you, I think. I reject the argument that being an all-around offensive jerk immunizes one against charges of racism, however. Particularly in this case, wherein the abuse began after ascertaining the nationality of the victim, included a mock accent, and explicitly raised the issue of the victim’s ethnicity, I think the case for racism as well as assholism has been made well enough to require a better answer than the ability to be offensive in non-racist ways too.
Liberal has managed, predictably, to follow his original post with nothing approaching an actual argument. He’s still not willing to take the position that asian Indians cannot be victims of racism (although his courageous, completely irrelevant stand on Native Americans surely does him credit). He calls “racism” a liberal buzzword that the left is rendering meaningless, and the word “liberal” hopelessly tainted, without support or any attempt to connect it to the OP. In a lovely touch, he manages to cite Alterman as a source for his assertion while boldly disavowing Alterman’s actual thesis. Impugning one’s own sources is undeniably original. And still there’s no attempt to engage the OP. Does Liberal believe the DJs’ behavior was not racist? Does he believe there’s an anthropological defense to be made here? Does he think that the mythical “left” has somehow, through careless use of the term “racism,” provided an excuse for those who practice it? He’ll never tell.
I wouldn’t attempt to give Liberal lessons in chess. What would be the point? He’d never take the chance of moving a piece.
Is that you, Harry Binswanger? Love your tie. And love the third person soliloquy. Makes me feel like Mark Anthony’s Caesar. Tell me about actual arguments. Is yours an example? Do they consist of lordly patronage and supercilious contumely?
Hillary Clinton is a Native American, and white as the driven snow. Ashamedly, to be sure. What race did you say the Asian Indians are again?
Look down the long shank of your nose. (You may need spectacles if you’re near-sighted.) See those bipedal creatures moving about? Those are called “other people”. I’m one of them. See, what happens is that sometimes we see things in ways you do not. (I’ll pause while you recover from fainting…) My concern about the OP is not the same as yours. My concern is that the OP has trivialized the word “racism”. Inasmuch as there is a longstanding tendency for hand-wringers to fret endlessly over semantics and jargon, thereby hoping to replace old words with new, as though the new words magically will cause the whole world to hold hands and sing like a 1980s Coca-Cola commercial, it seems appropriate to me to join by conjunction one with another for purposes of illustration.
Boy, you don’t get out much, do you? Even in your own thread. (I call it yours because you have comandeered it.) The DJ’s surely deny that they are racist, and yet you cite their program as evidence that they are. You denied that “liberal” is a dirty word, and I showed you that other leftistas do not share your rather pathetic state of denial. Just because Alterman blames someone else for the dirtiness does not change the fact that it is dirty.
Unlike you, you mean? Have you been thinking all this time that I wrote the OP?
Which word did you not understand: meaningless or nonsense?
Defense of what? Certainly, races exist to forensic anthropologists, since they are critical in determining such things as height from bone length. So far as I can tell, it is only the political left that both denies that races exist and insists that there are racists.
Oh, it’s not just the mythical left that sucks the life from language. It’s the mythical right as well. What the hell does “freedom” mean anymore, now that George W. Bush has equated it with being bombed into submission?
Oh, I will if you’ll tickle my knee. I love having my knee tickled.
Thanks, but as the former champion of my state in my class, I don’t need your lessons.
The King of Soup: You are funny and smart. Cool.
Liberal: Taking a stance on whether or not the DJ’s were racist would not be a hijack. Defining the term ‘racism’ would not be a hijack. Talking about what ‘the left’ is doing is a hijack because it has ab-so-freaking-lutely nothing to do with the OP. (It also makes a group fallaciously fungible in order to demonize them, something that you yourself have gone down on record as hating. )
Everyone else: Filthy rat eater does strike me as a cultural/societal jab at the person on the other end of the line.
However, I also think it’s a pretty neat phrase, and the next chance I get I’m calling someone in the Pit a filthy rat eater 
To me, it’s racist because they ask a couple of times is she is from/in India, if memory serves. The link is running a bit slow right now.
They also as how a woman from India would know what an american girl would like in her hair. Then they go off on the whole rat eater thing.
I suppose that’s the crux of it. The insults themselves aren’t racist, though if they are feel free to correct me. It’s the intent that makes it racist. We know the intent because they state it pretty clearly.
Boy, five more seconds and I can have quotes for this. Aha!
And he goes on to say…
Now just insert them into their proper places above and ya’ll are set.
maleinblack is Indian, you douchebag. I know doing this hijack-nitpick shit confirms your belief that you’re extremely clever, but I don’t think anybody else is impressed. This time you appear to have .
Racist may very well be the wrong word as opposed to bigoted, or just stupid. It’s hard to tell and it’s hard to waste that kind of effort on shock jocks.
Yiy, that was like some kind of Gaudere’s law thing.
Liberal, you appear to have failed pretty miserably in your nitpick, since maleinblack is not some clueless liberal, and even if he’s on the left, it’s not a the American left you’re so fond of targeting.
Come now, how could Liberal not be intensely clever? He plays chess.
Making the crux of the joke the fact that your call is being outsourced to India is not racist. Making the crux of your joke that the call is being outsourced to Indians is racist, but that’s not what they did.
King, you do not understand where I’m coming from. In no way do I believe that being an all-around offensive jerk is a shield against racism. It’s very easy to be offensive without being racist; in fact, it’s more imaginative. With racism, most of the work has been done for you, with artistic offensiveness, you actually have to come up with your own reason why the object of your derision should be derided. But that’s an argument for another time. I believe that, in this case, Star and Buc Wild were offensive, but that insufficient evidence exists as to their motive and intent to brand this exchange with the call-center employee racist.
I’m not defending them, I’m taking issue with the rush to cry “racism” because a person of one color was offended by the actions of a person of another color.
To paraphrase (and maybe even, on some dark level, reinforce) Freud:
Sometimes an asshole is just an asshole.
Ehhh… who do you think lives in India?
Your link shows three “races”. Are they only three races now? What’s the basis of that determination? Geography? Skin Color? Skull Shape? American Indian, what race is that again? Ms. Clinton is a Native American? Okay. So if I look at her skull, it’ll be the same as these two other “Mongoloids” next to her right? Any forensic anthropologists would classify her as a Mongoloid, because that’s her ‘race’, according to you anyway. Even though she not longer shares the common physical features. They just know what race she ** really** is.
Ms Clinton
And here’s an explaination of forensic anthropologists and race. If you’re interested.
In other words “race” has being tainted to mean only skin color; when in actually should have meant GEOGRAPHICAL ancestry.
Once one wipes away the froth and foam generated by Liberal’s bubbling sense of superiority, this is what’s left:
All those in the “when will a Clinton get dragged into this” pool, check your markers. Otherwise, still irrelevant, with an unsupported “ashamed” tossed in as a gratuitous slur.
For the first time Liberal has something to say about the OP. Will he tell us how the OP trivializes racism? No. Too bad. We may guess that he thinks the incident wasn’t racism, or was but was unimportant, but he’s not crawling out on either of those limbs. Also missing is any reason why the trivialization of the term, even if it were demonstrated, should have any impact when we’re discussing a particular incident in which the facts are transcribed for all to see. Instead he returns to the familiar, generic indictment of the left, which he recites passably well and with which we’re all acquainted, possibly from threads wherein it actually meant something. Any link between the American political left and the OP still sold separately. And they’re on back order. This brings us to Mr. Alterman, who proudly calls himself a liberal. Liberal accuses me of doing the same thing he did because I took what the DJs said into account. Not the same. Had I selectively quoted the DJs to claim that they agreed they were racists, when they don’t, that would be the same thing. And persuasive, too. But not very honest. There are ways to legitimately quote someone adversely, but in general you don’t want to turn for support to a man who has spent most of his adult life contradicting what you’re saying. But the referee is signalling that the defamation of the term “liberal” is even less relevant than Hilary Clinton’s ancestry, so we’ll move on.
I had asked some questions. I asked if Liberal believed the DJs’ behavior was not racist. Liberal responds:
I’d have understood a “yes” or a “no.” I asked if he was making an anthropological argument that the DJs behavior wasn’t racist. Liberal answers:
Okay, so the word “answers” was overstating things a bit. I asked if he was arguing that the trivialization of the term “racism” somehow provided a defense for the DJs. Liberal replies:
So is Liberal going to take a position in this thread and defend it?
So, things are looking kind of grim. But wait…is that…LOOK!
Yes! Liberal has finally hit upon a topic he likes enough to make a simple declarative statement about it! And it’s a statement of fact! And it’s…it’s irrefutable! Ladies and gentlemen, friends and neighbors, **Liberal ** WINS!
I’m so happy I’m not even going to bring up the pie-eating contest I once won down at the Odd Fellows’ Hall.
Lots of people. Among them, ethnic South-Asian-Indians. But not exclusively.
And to rebut what I know is coming, if you spoke on the phone with Lennox Lewis or Danny Williams, what would you THINK they looked like?
Not so clear cut Liberal. Dueling arguments on the validity of race from two anthropologists:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/race.html
It really depends on how you define race and how you are looking at it.
Yeah, well, I call utter bullshit on that. I sincerely doubt that every one of the numerous geneticists, anthropologists, etc. who doesn’t buy into the standard concept of discrete biological races is doing so as part of some left-wing agenda.
One can refuse to recognize the concept of coherent and distinct genotypic races and yet still recognize the existence of phenotypic races and with it the attendant factor of racism.
- Tamerlane
Minor hijack, I think, but I just wanted to clarify something. I can’t speak for all East Asians but Koreans and Chinese do eat dogs, so I wouldn’t really call it a stereotype. It would be like saying, “it’s a stereotype that Americans eat turkey.” I live in Korea, am ethnically Korean, and I can definitely say that eating dog here is nothing unusual.
Returning to the OP, I really don’t see how this incident could be considered anything but a racial slur. Filthy rat-eater certainly sounds like a racist insult to me. If someone called me a filthy dog-eater, I would certainly take it as a racial slur, because they are insulting me based on the fact that many people from my country eat dog. They wouldn’t know or care whether I, as an individual, actually ate dog or not. (And then of course is the underlying assumption that eating dog is bad, but let’s not get into that.) Isn’t that what racism is?
I think they were “actively hurting” this Indian woman emotionally when they called her a filthy rat eating bitch. No-one grows up in happy huggy liberal land, that’s why we’re condemning racism. “Here in the real world, there are a hell of a lot of racists”…er…yeah! And here’s another two, and they’re assholes so I’m going to call them such.
Maybe I would. Isn’t this kind of avoiding the question of whether or not they were racist, anyway? Just because people have double standards doesn’t make the DJ’s acceptable. I don’t percieve Southern USA citizens to be as oppressed as Indians, so one could build a case for it not being so offensive, but I really do dislike class discrimination so I probably would think they were wankers.
I didn’t really notice them asking her salary in the transcript of the phone call. They assumed she was desparately poor because she was Indian. Even if they knew she was poor, it would be a horrible thing to say.
And fuck off with insinuations of polical correctness gone mad. This has little do with people who find the word ‘spade’ offensive in all contexts.
WHAT?
No they didn’t.
Now you’re projecting your need to make them racist onto their words.
Were you in the booth with them? Did they discuss this joke with you either before or after they made it? You’re going way too far afield with this.
Assholes, yes. Definite proof of racism? No.
I am not saying they aren’t wankers and perception IS everything. Racism is a specific act, being offensive and being a racist isn’t interchangable. Lord help me, but Liberal has a point, we’re gotten so knee-jerky; that any offensive comment directed a person of a different color is automatically racist…regardless of its context or content.
I have no doubt that this bit was going to a racial one, regardless of whom picked up the phone. So the question now is, if STAR who’s black, reached a black person and did the same act, would he still be a racist or just an unfunny arsehole? Would he have called a black person, a dirty watermelon-eater? I don’t know, I don’t know these guys and whether or not they’re arseholes to everyone or not.
If the answer is no, then yes the racist tag sticks, IMO if they constantly modify their act, based on the race of their unwilling victims. If they don’t, then they are just using gutter humour, offensive and untalented, uncreative…but not racist.
Christ, if these guys are racist, then what’s the Klan?
Lordy. If my superiority is bubbling, then yours is exploding like a bag of shit on Halloween. Or, to put it as you might write: it hasn’t even the decency to address us with the second person.
Well, you brought it up — Native American. Was the former First Bitch not born in America?
Hmm. One would think that now that your ship has come in, you would be done with your verbage. Alas…
Um, by making the term meaningless — as I said in my first post, and as I’ve repeated to you, oh, three times or so. Maybe four.
We? Do you have two heads or something? I mean, that would be kewl and all. I think y’all’s guess pretty much fits with what I’ve been saying. I suspect there has to be a race before there can be racism, and neither one of your heads has yet enlightened me as to what race the Asian-Indian woman is.
Oh, so the alleged racism is now a fact? Is it analytic or synthetic?
Why thank you. That’s the kindest thing you’ve said about, um, him so far.
Who but the left would wish upon a man who spoke his mind that he “roast in hell”? Perhaps you’ve been in a coma, and missed witnessing the left careen away from its position as champion of so-called free speech to its position as arbiter of so-called hate speech. Oops. Hang on. Our Italian occasional chairs have arrived. They’re for our parlor.
Um, no, your Heinyness. Alterman was pertinent to your hand-wringing because Alerman — unlike you — recognizes that “liberal” has become a dirty word. He — like you — merely blames someone else for his own dilemma.
Are you really the King of Soup? Be honest.
Wow. Now you’ve apparently redefined “move on” to mean “hover and stall”. If you don’t think you’ve made “liberal” into a suicide term for politics, then you are as blind as you are effete. But I think you do know it, and are just being, well, dishonest with yourself and your, um, audience or something.
I’ve asked some questions too, one of which is what race is the lady from India.
Ya think? I’m afraid that if you don’t understand that the term in your question is meaningless nonsense, you won’t understand words like “yes” and “no”. And here’s another shocker sure to spin both your heads: your demands do not constitute my obligations. If you ask a question, I am entitled to respond with something like, “Fuck you,” or, alternatively, to ignore them as you’ve ignored mine.
What race is the woman from India?
Now, don’t lie. Not after your heart rending appeal to honesty. What you asked was, “Does he believe there’s an anthropological defense to be made here?” (Object of sentence emphasized to assist comprehension.) You were asking about a defense, not an argument. Of course, for a man — even a two-headed one — who defines words any-ol’-way you please, it is not surprising that you’d be all mixed up. I asked you in return what it was I needed to defend, given the recognition of race by the particular anthropologists that I cited. You haven’t answered that one either.
I think one pair of your eyes has been crossing over the other. On that particular item, you did not ask about any defense, but about an “excuse”. And frankly, the DJs don’t concern me because they’re at least trying to be funny. You, on the other hand, have made a perfectly good word into a perfectly meaningless word. Racism, when it describes the hatred of people based on race, is something that can be fought, and that merits fighting against. But you have made it mean hatred of people from countries (other than Europe, given one of your posts). You have made it mean nothing. If a racist is someone who hates people from India, then he may as well be someone who hates people from Canada. But I said that already, so you can ignore it again.
Now why should I bother about defending positions when you’ve given me a reason to live? This is so much fun. It’s amusing to watch a man who fancies himself to be a distracted Neo swatting at a hundred Agent Smiths. And the weirdo puts-the-lotion-in-the-basket third person shtick is just an added bonus.
Now, don’t have a heart attack. I don’t want to lose you. You’re like Desmostylus, only smart.
Why, thank you! 
I’ll be here all week.
Oh, I believe that one. I believe you won a pie-eating contest. I picture you as a fat Buddha, sitting in your underwear, slumped over a pigsty desk, drippings from a nondescript and half-rotted vegetable tottering in a string of drool that dribbles from your chin and falls into the folds of your belly, where it mixes with sticky day-old sweat and the oozings from pustules.
[…shrug…]
Incidentally, if you care to have a debate, go to this forum and start a thread. I’ll watch for it.
And, what race is the woman in India?
:eek:
Has my wife been posting pix of me on the 'net somewhere?