I draw the line at racial epithets being used to troll people.
But that’s just it. It’s perfectly clear to me that it’s just a hoax. And perfectly clear to a lot of people. The only people who don’t think it’s perfectly clear are the ones who think it is a white supremacist symbol. And THOSE people are the ones being trolled.
Not sure I see much difference between using racial epithets and just pretending to be a white supremacist without racial epithets, tbh. And sure, as I said, Sacha Baron Cohen doesn’t get let off the immoral-asshole hook for that kind of behavior, either. But at least he is arguably doing it for what is ultimately a less immoral purpose (i.e., getting people to laugh at bigotry) than mere malicious trolling (i.e., laughing at people getting upset about bigotry).
Once again, slowly: the fact that the immoral assholes are (perhaps) saying nasty bigoted things because they enjoy making (some) people think that they’re nasty bigots, rather than because they are nasty bigots, does not make what they’re doing okay.
Stop trying to put the blame for this deliberate assholish fostering of misunderstanding on the people who fall for the hoax rather than the ones who are perpetrating it.
Laughing at people getting upset over imagined bigotry is not malicious. It’s just funny. Plus, I can’t believe you think SBC is an immoral asshole for making bigots look like the morons they are. Strange.
Once again, slowly: It is not a nasty bigoted thing. Only morons think that. I’m fine with trolling them, because it’s funny, and they are morons.
I’m not putting “blame” on anyone. I am just laughing at them. Comedy doesn’t require “blame”
Deliberately trying to fool people into thinking an instance of bigotry is real rather than imagined, so that you can laugh at them for it, is definitely malicious. That’s independent of whether you or anyone else happens to think that malicious trolling is funny.
The immoral assholishness is much clearer when he’s pretending to be a bigot in order to fool people who are not bigots, so that the audience can laugh at them for being uncomfortable with his apparent bigotry.
I agree that fooling bigots instead, so that the audience can laugh at their bigotry, comes across as less immoral and assholish. But fooling bigots is not the sum total of what SBC does.
Uh, yeah, white-power symbols are nasty bigoted things. Innocently using an OK sign to mean “OK” is not a nasty bigoted thing. But using an OK sign as a white-power symbol is a nasty bigoted thing, and deliberately trying to confuse people about what the sign means is malicious trolling.
That’s tantamount to giving malicious assholes a free pass to try to troll people, on the grounds that anybody who isn’t a moron should be able to tell that they’re just trolling.
Which is awfully convenient for the malicious assholes, as it puts their victims in the uncomfortable position of having to choose between the possibility of condoning/tolerating actual nasty bigotry and the possibility of “being a moron” by getting upset about apparent nasty bigotry that is actually just trolling.
Yup, what our society needs right now is more people being intimidated into silence when confronted with nasty bigotry, because they’re afraid of “looking like a moron” if it turns out they’re being trolled. That’ll be a big help.
Again, you seem to be arguing that being deceived by a malicious asshole is more contempible than actually being the malicious asshole trying to deceive people. I disagree with you on that.
I don’t think anyone laughs at the people who are uncomfortable with his fake bigotry. I know I don’t. I commend them.
That’s right.
Or, perhaps people could do a little reading or something before crying about someone flashing the “OK” sign. People reading more IS what our society needs.
Not really. It’s more along the lines of “If you think the OK symbol is a white supremacist symbol, then you are a moron who deserves to get laughed at”
:dubious: Even though they’re morons? Because according to you, anyone who isn’t a moron should be able to tell that the troll is just trolling. And according to you, when morons fall for the trolling, that’s funny.
And now you’re telling us that you don’t laugh at the “morons” who fall for SBC’s trolling, as long as they’re uncomfortable with his fake bigotry instead of endorsing it? Not very useful for a comedy show, I’d think.
Oh, now you’re fine again with laughing at the well-meaning folks (excuse me, “morons”) who fall for the deliberate malicious trolling and get upset about what they believe to be nasty bigotry? Kind of hard to keep up with your flip-flopping here.
Like I said, your endorsement of malicious trolling seems awfully convenient for the alt-right assholes who are deliberately trying to confuse people about whether the OK sign is in fact used nowadays as a white supremacist symbol.
Hmmmmm…I’m actually going to have to think about this.
(10 minutes later).
Ok. Here’s my answer. When SBC interviews a person, they don’t have the time to research what he is saying or advocating. They can only agree or disagree. Those that agree are morons. Those that disagree and are uncomfortable, they are to be applauded.
When a person sees an OK sign on Twitter or Facebook or whatever, no immediate reactions are necessary. There is time to research what it means and doesn’t mean. If a person doesn’t do that, and immediately takes offense, they are a moron. Because a simple Google search can tell them that it’s a person trolling.
Lots of real-life white supremacists are morons, too (there’s an argument to be made that they all are).
I don’t find it plausible that a significant percentage of them (anywhere from a sizable minority to a plurality), unaware that the OK gesture-as-WP-sign is to be used solely for trolling the libs, have not enthusiastically adopted it as an official “seekrit sign” of solidarity.
I think SBC is somewhat of a jerk even for trolling bigots, but to be fair, in the cases where the people do not agree with his views, you’re supposed to be laughing at SBC (I think, I haven’t seen any of his stuff. It seems cringeworthy from what I’ve heard of it.) In addition, those who are uncomfortable might be thinking that SBC is not being entirely sincere but are not impolite enough to say it. Calling every joke out all the time in real life I would imagine would be only somewhat less tiring and shrill than jumping in every time someone is wrong on the Internet.
Now, bigots deserve to be trolled. They deserve to have jerkish behavior thrown at them. But that doesn’t make it not-jerkish. Similarly, I applaud punching Nazis while at the same time think it should be illegal.
One of Brett Kavanaugh’s buddies has suggested that maybe it was another guy at his school that tried to rape Christine Ford, and she has them confused because they have similar-looking yearbook photos.
He proceeded to name and dox this “evil twin”.
Now I’m no big city Supreme Court nominee or nothin’, but it seems to me that publishing a knowingly-false and defamatory statement about an individual ought to be some sort of civil tort.
I hope Mr. Whelan knows a good lawyer.
The “evil twin” should be able to sue Whelan to oblivion, provided he doesn’t retain Stormy Daniels’ lawyer.
He is a lawyer.
But he’s not a good one.
I’m thinking a lawyer that isn’t smart enough not to do what he did isn’t smart enough to hire a lawyer that is smart enough not to do what he did, otherwise he would already be smart enough not to do what he did.
Why can’t it be both? White supremacists certainly could adopt that finger gesture as an unironic white-power symbol. Nothing stops them from doing so. And given the amount of discussion of the fact that some of them have adopted it as an ironic white-power symbol, maybe, kinda, or maybe they’re just trolling, but maybe others are now using it seriously, and who knows, it’s the fucking internet so it’s impossible to keep track, I don’t know if anyone can really define what it does or does not mean now.
Similarly, I’m not sure I’ve ever actually seen that (((Jew))) thing being used, but I’ve read enough about it now that I might encounter a context where, given what I did or did not know about the poster or the subject of the parens, I wasn’t quite sure what it meant. Hugs or Jews? Could be either. Does that make me a moron?
To more clearly state my position: I don’t think either of the following is absolutely true:
(1) Someone making the “ok” sign in a photo is clearly making a white supremacist gesture, or at least a gesture that they should know is white supremacist, and should be shamed for bigotry
or
(2) The “ok” sign is as pure as it ever has been, and it’s ludicrous hysteria to even suspect that someone making it could mean it, either ironically or non-ironically, as a white-power symbol.
The truth lies somewhere in the middle.
But maybe he’s not smart enough to know that he’s not smart enough to oh dear I’ve gone crosseyed.
The middle,
(3) They aren’t actually the same gesture.
From the little I’ve seen the WP ‘ok’ is palm in and not conspicuously displayed, while the actual ‘ok’ is palm out and ‘in your face’ so to speak.
Up Next: When a ‘peace sign’ might get your nose broken.
CMC fnord!
Please diagram that sentence and have it on my desk in an hour. Thank you.