I haven't paid much attention to the Sarah Jeong thing but I dont really understand the defense being made of her comments. It seems pretty bad to me.
I haven't paid much attention to the Sarah Jeong thing but I dont really understand the defense being made of her comments. It seems pretty bad to me.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
I think the defense boils down to “are people genuinely upset by a young Asian woman engaging with online trolls in the vernacular of said trolls, or are they positing a bogus double-standard that ignores context and power dynamics?”
I, personally, am not bothered by seeing people of color posting salty **** about “white people” online. I understand the shorthand, which generally doesn’t apply to me, and in the cases where it does, it’s a valuable opportunity for reflection on my part. Same goes for feminists generalizing about “men.” I’ve got some laps to run on that score, and I recognize it.
Seeing Kevin Williamson propose death by hanging for people who have abortions, and knowing that, given the opportunity to clarify it, he stuck with it, is categorically different. He only tried to walk it back when it was going to cost him a gig, and he was afforded the opportunity to do so across multiple huge media platforms. Same thing with Quinn Norton, who at least has an interesting perspective, generally, supporting and legitimizing a genuine neo-Nazi.
Right-wing troll culture relies on hiding behind irony in order to say inflammatory and toxic ****. The very same people are now clutching pearls at the prospect of a historically marginalized person flipping the script. I don’t love it, but I’m not deeply bothered by it, either.
if it was irony, sarcasm, playing the trolls I wouldn't have a problem with it...but it doesnt seem that...maybe I'm missing somethingOriginally Posted by Julio3000
also I dont see her as coming from a marginalized group...not sure that matters...but suspect if I delved into her background I would find it to be a privileged one
Last edited by nsacpi; 08-04-2018 at 12:44 PM.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
I dunno. Maybe. All I know (courtesy of the internets) is that she’s a Berkeley and Harvard Law grad, which screams privilege, but also an immigrant who was naturalized only recently, which surely does not.
I think being a nonwhite, female immigrant probably qualifies for being historically marginalized. Honestly, any one of those three probably does the trick.
I’m just gonna say that she appears to be a meritocratic immigrant success story and ask my righty pals if they’ll co-sign that.
the highly educated marginalized immigrant card...that's as bad as the persecuted straight white male card... there is some irony there for everyone
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
Well, tbf, I’m the one playing the card, not her. But a bit of reading fleshes things out a bit. She came to the US at three with parents who were on student visas. She’s completed the naturalization process, but her parents have not. While she was in law school she was ineligible for certain scholarships and grants, as well as clerkships and internships with federal judges, because of her immigration status. I have to admit that my personal biases come into play a bit here, because my extended family includes a couple of 1st-gen American Asian immigrants. They’ve both experienced the dissonance of being held forth as the “model” immigrant group but also experiencing racism and othering based on their identity as immigrants, as Asians, and as women. They’re both massive ballers who’ve accomplished more (as a lawyer and an engineer, respectively) than I ever will. So I’ll cop to my biases in Sarah Jeong’s case.
I'm in the same boat. Immigrant. Part Asian. My ex wife is Chinese. Her parents came here as students. There is something about how this is being spun by Jeong and the Times that strikes a false note with me.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
Eh, I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong there.
There it is
Do tell.
Sure. Racism is fine if it's against white people.
I know you think this. Just own it
The left has already.
But yeah, I'm not sure why it's unacceptable for one person who says women who murder children (from the perspective of the author) should face an equal penalty (which appeared to be a joke btw), but we go out of our way to defend another woman who demands white people cease to exist for no other reason than they are white.
This is the world the left has built though. Embrace it. And prepare for the backlash it will bring (President Trump)
I think civil discourse has been eroded by people from all parts of the political spectrum...there was a time when I thought the problem was mainly on the left but I dont think that has been the case for the last 10 years or so
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
Looks like close to a 1:1 ratio in 2015, 1:1 in in 2016, and about 3:1 in 2017, with more on the left being fired. Considering left leaning professors outnumber right leaning by about a 12:1 ratio (according to a 2016 study in Econ Journal Watch, which is likely much greater in the academic departments where these firings took place), I can see why this left leaning organization prefers to deal in raw numbers.
Jaw (08-06-2018)
I find it adorable when White Males tell women and minorities what is and isnt acceptable criticisms of white males.
The word "uppity" comes to mind
For the record, I generally find jokes about killing people to be in poor taste, regardless of political bent.
But there’s a false equivalency here that goes to the heart of the bad faith in which this argument is usually made. Kevin Williamson was asked on a podcast to expand on his remarks, and he repeated them. It wasn’t a joke, or at least it certainly wasn’t a joke until it looked like he might lose a job over it. And while he has a right to their opinion, I understand why the Atlantic would not want that opinion under their masthead. On the other hand, I think we can be virtually certain that Sarah Jeong does not actually advocate killing whitey.
The hypocrisy argument cuts both ways, doesn’t it? The same folks who are clutching pearls over “the mob” are the mob in this case, no?
That’s a fair point, but I think the most meaningful number is the number of incidents catalogued versus the number of higher ed institutions in America.
But I'm not the one with the double standard. I don't believe the Atlantic should have fired KW... and I don't believe the NYT should fire SJ
But one was fired and the other wasn't. Because it's perfectly acceptable to be a racist asshole as long as it's against white people.
I don't know why y'all try to skate around that fact. Like I said, just own it and move on.
Meanwhile, Candace Owens just got banned from twitter from taking SJ's words and replacing "white" with "jew"
Jaw (08-06-2018)
Maybe we can get a government agency to tell us when to take racist rhetoric seriously
That seems to be the direction you are going.
The Atlantic made a business decision and NYT made a business decision.
_shrug_
We seem to agree, the only cure for speech we find offensive is more speech
Oh, I’ll own it. As often as you complain about what you perceive as baseless accusations of racism, I’ll get in on some of that, too. What you seem to perceive as anti-white racism is, IMO, neither racism nor particularly troublesome.
Meanwhile, Candace Owens just got banned from twitter from taking SJ's words and replacing "white" with "jew"
The difference is, I guess, that I’m not swimming in the toxic racist stew that includes actual eliminationist rhetoric against Jews, Muslims, immigrants, or POC, or otherwise going to bat for those who do.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote