Politically, sure. But people don’t have a right to be offended by everything just because it resembles something that was offensive in another time and place and isn’t meant to offend now.
Why doesn’t it make him less racist too? He looked at a sign and didn’t see race in it.
Suppose a foreigner came here and didn’t know our history and made this mistake. Would you castigate him for it? Would you say he’s somehow more racist than an American who noticed the mistake?
I think they’re a perfect demonstration of my overall point - that ignorance of racist ideas can be a sign of less racism.
I would judge a visitor very differently and wouldn’t castigate them for not knowing about American history.
I strongly, strongly disagree with this point – ignorance or knowledge of racist ideas and the history of racism is a sign of absolutely nothing with regards to racism – plenty of racists know almost nothing about the history of racism, and plenty of non-racist people know tons about it. I see no reason whatsoever why they would be correlated. In fact, I think racist Americans probably know a lot less about the history of racism and discrimination, in general, than Americans who aren’t racist. Do you disagree with this?
Melania, I’ve watched Twilight Sparkle. I respect Twilight Sparkle. Twilight Sparkle is a friend of all ponies. Melania, you’re no Twilight Sparkle.
Gee, I leave for an hour and see that 80% of the new posts are from** lance** … and I bet over half the posts on this page are.
Start your own thread, or at least give others a turn, man. Or just go outside and rest your fingers.
Actually, that was RNC Chief Strategist Sean Spicer.
I really doubt Melania had anything to do with it.
pfffffffffffffffffffffft
If Trump were an MLP character, he’d be one of the big villains who appears in the two-part season opener, where he marches in, decrees himself “Emperor Trot”, and declares that Ponyville is going to be destroyed by Zecora’s people unless everypony lets him kick the others out.
The second part would be all about the Mane Six teaming up with Zecora to prove that they’re stronger together than they are divided and his apologizing to Princess Celestia for the error of his ways.
Does this mean that if Trump wins he will copy Mr. Obama’s policies the way his boopsie has copied Ms. Obama’s speech?
Boopsie! Where do I know that term from? Wasn’t there some rich guy TV character who referred to his SO by that? Thurston Howell? Michael from Newhart? Somebody like that.
Doonesbury.
Most as a character in Doonesbury. Married to B.D.
As to the lance vs. several argument, I concur with Boyo’s ‘tone deaf’ comment. I don’t think anybody on the RNC or doing the planning ever thought about it being a racial issue; the sections (IIRC) on the convention floor are Red, White, and Blue and the signs were to help people get to where they had to go.
But, that said, somebody should have looked at those signs, figured that people would take pictures of them and take them the wrong way (I knew what they were trying to do and wasn’t offended, but it did lead to a moment of eye-rolling).
I mean, how hard would it have been to Make it just a block of White, followed by “section elevators?” It might still have attracted pictures, but it would have been much clearer and less controversial. But nobody apparently imagined that someone would see it and take and post a picture of the sign, with all the history behind it.
So, tone deaf.
IMHO as always. YMMV.
If you’re 3 years old, maybe. But for adults, that doesn’t wash. Not in the least little bit.
Of course I’m not saying that. I don’t see how you can possibly manage to get that out of what I said.
I’m saying that your “didn’t know or didn’t think” speculation doesn’t actually make anybody involved look less foolish.
And I don’t think anybody’s seriously suggesting that this was a “deliberate racist act” or even a “reckless racist act”. What seems very likely is that somebody came up with some kind of cockamamie color scheme to distinguish elevator blocks and/or other parts of the convention center, and the people in charge of vetting signage, displaying the typical Republican tone-deafness concerning racial issues, didn’t notice or didn’t care that it would remind many people of the “good old days” of segregation.
Remember, the Republicans are not exactly in a position to laugh off oversensitivity about accidental connotations of racism as though nobody could possibly think that they meant it deliberately. Especially not this election cycle. We have seen a crapton of evidence that there are still plenty of Republicans who do mean racist insults and discrimination deliberately, and it behooves the presumably more enlighted GOPers at the national level to avoid inadvertently associating themselves with that attitude.
Close the thread; the stupidest Republican idea ever, which can never be equaled, has just occurred.
The Republican party has just nominated an egomaniacal con-man as their candidate for President of the United States.
So the GOP thinks talking about Benghazi is a jobs program?
Yes, it keeps the congresscritters busy investigating it over and over and over again!
It’s a pithy radfem observation that I’ve seen in various formulations around feminist circles for the better part of a decade, here’s an example from three years ago.
I don’t know its origin, but the sentiment is right out of the old sex wars from the '80s.
Liberals support the selling, commodification, and objectification of women’s bodies in porn, prostitution, mass media marketing (TV/movies/commercials), and beauty culture. They also generally encourage women to be as promiscuous as possible, whether it’s called free love or no strings attached. This is all called empowering, but it’s really just repackaged patriarchy.
You’re right. Religious conservatives want women barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen. Hence, they think women are private property, not public. So it’s not backwards.
There’s so much wrong going on there, I don’t even know where to start.