Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Straight Talk Blues (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=1846)

Bloggingheads 05-28-2008 08:45 PM

Straight Talk Blues
 

razib 05-28-2008 09:51 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
should have been titled "All Bald Edition."

matt contineti & will wilkinson should be paired up in the "Luxuriant Haired Gen-X Edition"

razib 05-28-2008 09:55 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
pedantic point: people on oreg-O-n pronounce it oreg-Y-n.

graz 05-28-2008 10:13 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by razib (Post 78872)
should have been titled "All Bald Edition."

matt contineti & will wilkinson should be paired up in the "Luxuriant Haired Gen-X Edition"

Re: Bloggingheads 911: Miami
Quote:
Originally Posted by razib:
"am i the only one who wasn't amused by dan's reference to megan as an "ignorant s**t"...some things shouldn't even be said in jest!"
Am I the only one who wasn't amused by razib's dis of the follicular challenged?

razib 05-28-2008 10:27 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
in our genderist society your comparison doesn't hold. we live in a patriarchy, that's a background condition, analyzing male appearance is not problematic because men are not measured by their appearance.

bkjazfan 05-28-2008 10:37 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
The Yul Brenner Edition.

John

graz 05-28-2008 10:39 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by razib (Post 78875)
in our genderist society your comparison doesn't hold. we live in a patriarchy, that's a background condition, analyzing male appearance is not problematic because men are not measured by their appearance.

Thanks for following up on the original question. I would not try to argue that the examples are equal. But they are relative and to my original point subjective.

"men are not measured by their appearance."
Of course they are: Baldy's vs Sampson's for instance.
Tall vs. short in executive positions etc...
What I was really hoping to get you to address was the question about taboo vs. free speech. If you notice most of the respondents recognized the Drezner remark as a joke. I appreciate that your sensibilities were offended and would respect your wishes for instance, if we were in a social situation. But I was attempting to ask you how far you would go to disallow such a comment?

graz 05-28-2008 10:40 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 78876)
The Yul Brenner Edition.

John

A powerful fellow indeed.

razib 05-28-2008 10:45 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
i think that we need to create a society which respects the rights and value of those who are oppressed. i *respect* free speech, but i do not worship it. the right of white men to speak and express their opinions must be judged in the background of their history of oppression and the reality of white skin privilege and male patriarchal domination of women. i haven't done a survey of bloggingheads.tv viewers, but i would not be surprised if they were mostly white men, and so of course their own perception of dan drezner's joke would be different than mine as a man of Color.

so let me ask a question of you: where do you want this forum to move? do you want it to diversify and expand outward and include *everyone* into the conversation? then i submit that the bounds of discourse need to be firmly delineated so that those who are traditionally the Other do not feel marginalized.....

graz 05-28-2008 10:57 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by razib (Post 78879)
i think that we need to create a society which respects the rights and value of those who are oppressed. i *respect* free speech, but i do not worship it. the right of white men to speak and express their opinions must be judged in the background of their history of oppression and the reality of white skin privilege and male patriarchal domination of women. i haven't done a survey of bloggingheads.tv viewers, but i would not be surprised if they were mostly white men, and so of course their own perception of dan drezner's joke would be different than mine as a man of Color.

so let me ask a question of you: where do you want this forum to move? do you want it to diversify and expand outward and include *everyone* into the conversation? then i submit that the bounds of discourse need to be firmly delineated so that those who are traditionally the Other do not feel marginalized.....

I don't expect the forum to move anywhere. But I wish to be clear that I do welcome challenges to my speech or supposed privilege. I guess that the forum is a near ideal evironment to work some of these apparent differences out. I am much more inclined to define the bounds of discourse as we go, rather than set-up rules or a charter. For instance, Some colleges have their students sign waivers before engaging in sex, or similarly have established speech codes. This is not an ideal that I would encourage in the larger society or this forum.

As for you being the "other," that seems trickier to address.
Does my own sense of being a stranger in a strange world offset your perceived power imbalance.
Or, what could I do to grant you equal footing?
Mind you, I think you already have it.

razib 05-28-2008 11:03 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
unfortunately equality will not be achieved one person at a time. rather, we need to systematically shift our institutions. to some extent the fact that White Males tend to assume that there is an equal playing field is a signal that they just don't Get It.

graz 05-28-2008 11:10 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by razib (Post 78882)
unfortunately equality will not be achieved one person at a time. rather, we need to systematically shift our institutions. to some extent the fact that White Males tend to assume that there is an equal playing field is a signal that they just don't Get It.

Well I can only offer this as one person, not even conceding my sex or race. I don't think that my characterization of you and I sharing equal footing is a statement that denies the inequalities in our less immediate world at large and institutions.
So we "get it" differently perhaps? But I hear a charge that doesn't pose an obvious, or possible solution.

jh in sd 05-28-2008 11:18 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Matthew and Will, the Babyfaced Bloggingheads!

graz 05-28-2008 11:26 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jh in sd (Post 78884)
Matthew and Will, the Babyfaced Bloggingheads!

I think Bob should check Matthew's ID.
Or maybe apply a curfew.

David Thomson 05-29-2008 12:02 AM

"The secret to winning elections: the white working class"
 
I own and have read Ruy Teixeira's book dealing with white voters. He is a guy who is trying to teach the Democrats how to con the non-Ivy League white person. Teixeira knows very well that white people---especially males are second class citizens. The Democrats have every intention of sticking it to them real good. Obama is an affirmative action Harvard yuppie. He is going to make sure to "expand the rights" of minorities at the expense of whites. Every white person thinking of voting for Obama should read about the busing scandals of some forty years ago. It would also behoove them to study the disgraceful 1971 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Griggs vs. Duke Power.

graz 05-29-2008 12:10 AM

Re: "The secret to winning elections: the white working class"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by David Thomson (Post 78887)
Teixeira knows very well that white people---especially males are second class citizens.

Quote:razib:
"rather, we need to systematically shift our institutions. to some extent the fact that White Males tend to assume that there is an equal playing field is a signal that they just don't Get It."

You two could effectively cancel each other out. So the playing field is level after all.

ogieogie 05-29-2008 09:47 AM

Re: "The secret to winning elections: the white working class"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by graz (Post 78888)

You two could effectively cancel each other out. So the playing field is level after all.

Except that Razib is a reasonable person who is dealing with reality, whereas Dave is a paranoid racist fool. Not quite of equal weight here.

bjkeefe 05-29-2008 10:04 AM

Re: "The secret to winning elections: the white working class"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by David Thomson (Post 78887)
Every white person thinking of voting for Obama should read about the busing scandals of some forty years ago.

Because it is well known that every liberal secretly still believes forced busing was a good idea, despite their universal public protestations to the contrary.

And let us not forget how instrumental Obama was in pushing through these measures -- as a six-year old, while living in Indonesia. His deviousness knows no bounds!

Bobby G 05-29-2008 11:30 AM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Well in fairness to David Thompson--and why oh why am I being fair to David Thompson??--surely what he's getting at is that the same kind of unpopular policies pushed through by elites forty years ago will be pushed through by an elite today <Thompson>especially if he's a race hustler like Barack "Barry" Obama</Thompson>.

I should say, though, that Thompson's link today was much better than yesterday's.

Thus Spoke Elvis 05-29-2008 11:55 AM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by razib (Post 78879)

so let me ask a question of you: where do you want this forum to move? do you want it to diversify and expand outward and include *everyone* into the conversation? then i submit that the bounds of discourse need to be firmly delineated so that those who are traditionally the Other do not feel marginalized.....

I'm sorry, I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

Joel_Cairo 05-29-2008 12:22 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by razib (Post 78872)
should have been titled "All Bald Edition."

matt contineti & will wilkinson should be paired up in the "Luxuriant Haired Gen-X Edition"

I'm down. In the past, I've suggested a Jon Chait/Mark Schmitt match-up unflatteringly entitled "The Pear-Shaped Pair."

graz 05-29-2008 03:18 PM

Re: "The secret to winning elections: the white working class"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ogieogie (Post 78910)
Except that Razib is a reasonable person who is dealing with reality, whereas Dave is a paranoid racist fool. Not quite of equal weight here.

They may both be equally reasonable, if extreme.
I don't know how to disabuse David of his myopia.
But if razib's take is reality, then how or in what way is he "dealing?"

bkjazfan 05-29-2008 06:51 PM

Re: "The secret to winning elections: the white working class"
 
Barak Obama will not win the presidency as long as he belongs to Trinity Church. The democrats should win but by putting up a candidate who for 20 years drank the kool aid served up by pastor Jeremiah Wright and his equally ridiculous successor Otis Moss will not fly.

John

handle 05-30-2008 01:14 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
think you mean oryGUN

razib 05-30-2008 01:20 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
such are the wages of complacent acceptance of the White Male Patriarchy!

handle 05-30-2008 01:34 PM

Re: "The secret to winning elections: the white working class"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 78913)
Because it is well known that every liberal secretly still believes forced busing was a good idea, despite their universal public protestations to the contrary.

And let us not forget how instrumental Obama was in pushing through these measures -- as a six-year old, while living in Indonesia. His deviousness knows no bounds!

They must have been training him to "con" the AWG (average white guy). He's going to destroy the working class by sending them to Harvard! Wait, wasn't Bush too dumb to get into Harvard, but he got affirmative action in the form of the legacy program? Thank god, 'cause he went on to support working families by sending their college bound kids in the military to Iraq. And crashed the economy. And helped his corporate cronies export most of the working class jobs.
Good upstanding racists should thank the minorities for giving them a scapegoat to blame instead of the affirmative action Harvard Bush who's really "sticking it to them", 'cause that would be un-American.

graz 05-30-2008 01:45 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by razib (Post 79051)
such are the wages of complacent acceptance of the White Male Patriarchy!

You are "King for a Day," what's your prescription for toppling the menace?

handle 05-30-2008 01:46 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby G (Post 78932)
Well in fairness to David Thompson--and why oh why am I being fair to David Thompson??--surely what he's getting at is that the same kind of unpopular policies pushed through by elites forty years ago will be pushed through by an elite today <Thompson>especially if he's a race hustler like Barack "Barry" Obama</Thompson>.

I should say, though, that Thompson's link today was much better than yesterday's.

You are right, and maybe he'd have more room to expound on his viewpoint if "blackie" wasn't keeping him down.... I'm sure they sooo enjoyed the "busin" after all.

bkjazfan 05-30-2008 02:09 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
As one black commentator said "if they are going to bus me do it to Chinatown not some mediocre white school."

John

Thus Spoke Elvis 05-30-2008 02:10 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by razib (Post 79051)
such are the wages of complacent acceptance of the White Male Patriarchy!

Save it for Women's Studies class. I'm sure there's a wonderful term paper waiting to be written that applies Kate Millett's theories on sexual discourse to internet message boards. Your time would be better served writing that paper instead of urging internet posters to rise up against patriarchy.

Know your audience!

graz 05-30-2008 02:18 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Thus Spoke Elvis (Post 79062)
Save it for Womens Studies class. I'm sure there's a wonderful term paper waiting to be written that applies Kate Millet's theories on sexual discourse to internet message boards. Your time would be better served writing that paper instead of urging internet posters to rise up against patriarchy.

Know your audience!

I'm glad to see that you recovered from the "bile incident." (see above).
I have made my best effort to draw razib out on these bromides and victim statements. He is still hiding behind his complaints. So the challenge remains.
He is "free" to have at it.

handle 05-30-2008 02:22 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by graz (Post 79057)
You are "King for a Day," what's your prescription for toppling the menace?

I know this one is for Razib but this open forum affords me the ability to stick my
cyber-proboscis in anywhere. "King for a Day" wouldn't help much, but if there was a way to put someone like, say DT, in a position where if he goes even ten miles out of a major city and stops for gas he gets stared at like a flea infested rat, or every time he gets a prescription filled he's leered at and sexually taunted walking down the street, every single day for say, five years, or his entire lifetime, maybe he might be a little less inclined to act like a victim and lash out at those who know what abuse is really all about, many of whom, in spite of my poor examples, and having endured much, much worse, have transcended victim hood, and done as much to break the cycle of abuse as he's probably done to promote it.

graz 05-30-2008 02:49 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by handle (Post 79064)
I know this one is for Razib but this open forum affords me the ability to stick my
cyber-proboscis in anywhere. "King for a Day" wouldn't help much, but if there was a way to put someone like, say DT, in a position where if he goes even ten miles out of a major city and stops for gas he gets stared at like a flea infested rat, or every time he gets a prescription filled he's leered at and sexually taunted walking down the street, every single day for say, five years, or his entire lifetime, maybe he might be a little less inclined to act like a victim and lash out at those who know what abuse is really all about, many of whom, in spite of my poor examples, and having endured much, much worse, have transcended victim hood, and done as much to break the cycle of abuse as he's probably done to promote it.

I think it was jh in sd who asked a similar question, but highlighting the opposite side of the coin: How constructive is it to hold on to and perpetuate the resentment? You grant the victims saintly status by suggesting that they have endured and persevered. Well where does it end, particularly on a message board.
I see your slight and raise you an indiscretion. Only to be trumped by a miscarriage of justice. You may very well open the eyes of a naif, but as TSE stated, know your audience. Should every post regarding sensitive subjects -and which aren't for that matter - offer a disclaimer?
Warning: Before posting I wish to recognize the sensibilities off all who might be offended by my remarks. And furthermore grant special victim status to any who believe that they are lower than me on the societal ladder.
DT might be a comedian honing his insult joke skills. razib might be a high powered female executive. My inclination is to credit your request for recognition that the world is not fair and to cut victims some slack.
But, I am just not feelin' it in this case.

graz 05-30-2008 03:04 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
This is too good not to throw into the mix.
It is a macro view vs. my mini view.

Thread: Class of 2008 Commencement Edition View Single Post
#90
Today, 11:52 AM
pod2


Re: Whiteness
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard from Amherst
pod2, your synopsis of the issue of "whiteness" is really quite excellent.



Could you expand thoughts on the subject with a discussion of how "class" it relates to power, privilege, gender and race?

There are a many people who are included in the "whiteness" category who though they are "white" are quite powerless and destitute of privilege.

Please consider further discussing Glen's point about the rightness or wrongness of a feeling of racial solidarity among that unhappy subset of "white" people.

I really think this is a quite important subject if we stand any chance of moving to move toward a post racial and equitable society.




Quote: pod2:

"Richard,
Thanks for the compliment, if you weren't being facetious.

Of course conversations about class have to include power as an important, if not determinative element. In discussions of class warfare, to the extent that it's mentioned in polite company in the US, it's often framed as if it's a battle between equally matched factions. Those who are used to planning the economy resent it when all the rest of us try to have a say in what decisions are made and how these plans are carried out. I find that cries of 'class warfare,' when they come as part of an objection to pro-working class activity or rhetoric, roughly mirror those who loudly decry the 'racism' of Jeremiah Wright.

As for how class intersects with race vis a vis privilege and power, there are obviously, within a society as complex as the US, a whole bunch of ways that any individual or group may be privileged, empowered, or not. An upper middle class black heterosexual male has obvious advantages in power, influence, and status over an unemployed, destitute gay white man. And yet, this destitute white individual does have the luxury of turning on the tv and finding incredibly diverse representations of people who look like him. He doesn't have to worry about "representing" his race in a job interview. He does not get shot to death by the police as he tries to go home from work. If he shaves and puts on a nice shirt, he does not get followed around by store security in the mall. You get the idea, and I'm sure this isn't news to anyone. The advantage of white skin extends broadly into the criminal justice system. If you're white and someone in your family is kidnapped, raped, or murdered, there is a better chance of the perp catching serious jail time. If someone in your family does drugs, there is less chance that they will be doing a 20 year prison term for a nonviolent crime. Etc. etc. into education, housing, mortality, health.

Being female or working/lower class or homosexual or undocumented have a different array of disadvantages for each, ranging from abstract stereotype threat-like cultural representation ones (see the Fatal Attraction debate within the Gratuitous Disrespect Edition diavlog comments section) to health and economic ones. I don't see that one kind of disadvantage (or oppression, dare I say) trumps the other, but they do have different attributes and characteristics, and they intersect in complicated and ever changing ways. Racism and sexism are somewhat unique in that it is more difficult to 'pass' as a member of the dominant culture-- gay men can come out of the closet, but black men don't have a closet where they can pretend they're white. Physical, melanin-based characteristics that are the catalyst for activating racist stereotypes are unavoidable and unambiguous markers of otherness. To tip the scales a little bit more, consider that most Americans have a woman somewhere in their immediate family, and that this serves to mitigate the power of the Other-based prejudices or misconceptions of sexism. Most Americans do not have an African American in their immediate family, however.

As for racial solidarity among white Appalachians, it comes out of a proud lineage that has crippled possible progress in the labor movement for nearly 100 years. The efforts of many to use or develop racist tropes to refocus economic and class-based gripes about the existing order have been a recurring and successful aspect of union busting for a while. Focusing working people on untrustworthy brown skinned people (works just as well with the immigration issue) instead of letting them focus on the people and institutions that actually control their workplaces and their economic well being is quite sensible, even though it's disgusting. And Obama kind of combines the two targets of this working class ire-- the brown skinned other, and the elitist manager who goes off to Harvard and then comes back ready to downsize, outsource, and get more 'efficient.' Just because these tropes are completely pernicious and untrue in this case doesn't mean they aren't powerful.

I'm not sure whether this is what you were asking, but that's part of my answer anyway."

handle 05-30-2008 03:04 PM

Re: "The secret to winning elections: the white working class"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by graz (Post 78956)
They may both be equally reasonable, if extreme.
I don't know how to disabuse David of his myopia.
But if razib's take is reality, then how or in what way is he "dealing?"

He's trying to make it clear that there is a big difference between being the oppressed and the oppressor. And saying that both are equal fair game is to trivialize the oppression. Which is what us white guys do because we don't have first hand experience. Except DT, of course, in his mind, anyway.

handle 05-30-2008 03:36 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
I will concede you are right by way of recognizing my over simplification and countering with the real and extreme reality of the complexity of the issue, but getting back to the original thread:
Quote:

Originally Posted by graz (Post 78874)
Re: Bloggingheads 911: Miami
Quote:
Originally Posted by razib:
"am i the only one who wasn't amused by dan's reference to megan as an "ignorant s**t"...some things shouldn't even be said in jest!"
Am I the only one who wasn't amused by razib's dis of the follicular challenged?

I will reserve the right to call your wife an ignorant s**t, and you can make fun of my bald head and we will call it "even". Fair enough?
Of course it still makes me look like an ass, and that was one of the things I was trying to help with, without pointing directly to the appearance.
If you are comfortable with that, then who am I?
Not an insult jokester honing my non-existent skills anyway....

graz 05-30-2008 03:51 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by handle (Post 79075)
I will concede you are right by way of recognizing my over simplification and countering with the real and extreme reality of the complexity of the issue, but getting back to the original thread:

I will reserve the right to call your wife an ignorant s**t, and you can make fun of my bald head and we will call it "even". Fair enough?
Of course it still makes me look like an ass, and that was one of the things I was trying to help with, without pointing directly to the appearance.
If you are comfortable with that, then who am I?
Not an insult jokester honing my non-existent skills anyway....

I'm not sure what we are arguing about at this point, but I will try again from a different angle.
Every other poster on 911:Miami commented on the Dan Akroyd/Jane Curtin skit as the basis for Drezner's remark.
I still don't know if Razib is aware of this point or wants to contend that regardless of the impetus, some things are sacred. In other words: Never joke about a woman like that - it's sexist.
Well, that's actually what he said.
And I say: Free country, free speech, complain if you like about Patriarchy etc... But do you respect my right to say it?
I hear him suggesting that if he were "King for a Day," free speech would be curtailed and I might have to do penance for exercising my privilege for so long.
And I say: I have never victimized you, do not wish to offend you, but respectfully disagree with your assessment of the crime in expressing the "ignorant slut" comment.

handle 05-30-2008 04:10 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by graz (Post 79077)
I'm not sure what we are arguing about at this point, but I will try again from a different angle.
Every other poster on 911:Miami commented on the Dan Akroyd/Jane Curtin skit as the basis for Drezner's remark.
I still don't know if Razib is aware of this point or wants to contend that regardless of the impetus, some things are sacred. In other words: Never joke about a woman like that - it's sexist.
Well, that's actually what he said.
And I say: Free country, free speech, complain if you like about Patriarchy etc... But do you respect my right to say it?
I hear him suggesting that if he were "King for a Day," free speech would be curtailed and I might have to do penance for exercising my privilege for so long.
And I say: I have never victimized you, do not wish to offend you, but respectfully disagree with your assessment of the crime in expressing the "ignorant slut" comment.

The SNL skit was a parody of a real wingnut on the tube back then as a perfect example of a sexist and asinine remark even for the '70's. I will see your "free speech argument" and raise you a "right to appear to be a clueless white guy in a bubble even when you are not" because I think you are not and forgive me for sort of caring for a minute. But I'm over it.
Cheers, and have a nice weekend!

graz 05-30-2008 04:13 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by handle (Post 79082)
Cheers, and have a nice weekend!

Thanks,
You too.

handle 05-30-2008 04:23 PM

Re: Straight Talk Blues
 
I know I just sorta signed off there, but something just occurred to me, what about somebody posting that they are sexually attracted to a blogging head? I get the point about free speech, but does that mean we can't argue decorum, or respect for the venue?
Just curious...


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:58 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.