Good to see a new face with an interesting viewpoint.

Latoya shows her own prejudice when she says that Precious "fits kind of neatly into a narrative of what white people want to see". I had no idea that white people as a collective audience had a preference of how they wished the black experience to be portrayed. Following this logic, blacks also have a preference on how they wish whites and other races to be portrayed. Sorry but I accept neither premise. If only the former and not the latter are true, then this logic argues that whites think as a herd and blacks as individuals, which however you slice it is a racist meme. She's actually arguing against herself in that she's already proclaimed that "It's a real story; it's part and parcel of a experience informed by race, informed by poverty, infromed by pathology." I say that no one should have a problem with any filmmaker wishing to tell a real story, no matter what color the characters are. Real stories in film are rare enough without some being frowned on because they deal with a storyline that some may find uncomfortable. It's the uncomfortable

After watching this I am not sorry I haven't seen any of the movies up for oscars. I may have missed something but it was my impression that they panned all of them. Better luck next year. About the racial angle I read an article blasting Woody Allen for having no minorites in his movies other than background music by Billie Holiday. I haven't seen all of his stuff but the ones I saw would fit this description. John

I wondered, why can't black people do something without white people horning in on it all the time? Sorry, we don't live in a color blind society and never have. I have no problem - as I white guy - with blacks doing their own thing. And why did this white sorority group win? From reading the comments it seems they weren't that good - they just won because of (a) novelty and (b) a weird kind of reverse affirmative action.

it seems that most African Americans on bloggingheads.tv talk about African American themes, complaining about various slights to African Americans. In attempts to portray African Americans positively, or have common issues with white Americans, these advocates focus on how such portrayals play into white America's need to patronize, simplify or stereotype their beleaguered race. A white focusing on how whites are treated are considered racist. I think a similar focus by African Americans is just as lame. That kind of equal treatment would be considered racist, of course.

I enjoyed this diavlog. I hope bhtv considers having these two back regularly as film and culture critics. Jacksonian, Latoya's point, as I read it, was that Bush's remark amounted to a back handed complement rooted in the tendency of many whites to see blacks as unidimensional beings.

Quoting eric: it seems that most African Americans on bloggingheads.tv talk about African American themes, complaining about various slights to African Americans. In attempts to portray African Americans positively, or have common issues with white Americans, these advocates focus on how such portrayals play into white America's need to patronize, simplify or stereotype their beleaguered race.

A white focusing on how whites are treated are considered racist. I think a similar focus by African Americans is just as lame. That kind of equal treatment would be considered racist, of course.

I don't know where to start with your post. I guess the wiser course of action is to hit the shutdown button and close my laptop.

Quoting eric: A white focusing on how whites are treated are considered racist. I think a similar focus by African Americans is just as lame. That kind of equal treatment would be considered racist, of course.

Your perception of symmetry between those two situations isn't accurate. Racism is defined as "a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others." This country has been racist for centuries, with white people being in power and controlling black people, first through slavery and later through unequal rights and discrimination. Although those racist behaviors are being phased out, we haven't reached a state of equality between races. It is desirable to avoid racial stereotypes, especially when they are directed towards minorities, because they tend to reinforce discrimination. I agree that it would be best to avoid all stereotyping, but it can be far more damaging when directed to underprivileged minorities.

Quoting eric: it seems that most African Americans on bloggingheads.tv talk about African American themes, complaining about various slights to African Americans. In attempts to portray African Americans positively, or have common issues with white Americans, these advocates focus on how such portrayals play into white America's need to patronize, simplify or stereotype their beleaguered race.

A white focusing on how whites are treated are considered racist. I think a similar focus by African Americans is just as lame. That kind of equal treatment would be considered racist, of course.

Ugh. I got tired of that comment 20 years ago.

I haven't listened to this yet, & will probably have more comments when I do, but first I want to say that I'm REALLY happy to see Latoya Peterson. She's awesome.

Are only english speaking movies submitted for nominations to the Oscars? I noticed they did not talk about any foreign films.

Quoting harkin: Latoya shows her own prejudice when she says that Precious "fits kind of neatly into a narrative of what white people want to see".

I wonder if it would be more accurate to say 'fits kind of neatly into a narrative of what black people think white people want to see'. geez! so many psychics and psychoanalysts running around fouling up the place.

Quoting badhatharry: I wonder if it would be more accurate to say 'fits kind of neatly into a narrative of what black people think white people want to see'.

geez! so many psychics and psychoanalysts running around fouling up the place.

Stereotype over stereotype over stereotype. What does psychoanalysis have to do with this? Stereotyping?

harkin, badhatharry, Have either of you ever seen a documentary film called Ethnic Notions?

Quoting Ocean: What does psychoanalysis have to do with this?

It has to do with the original statement, Ocean. The notion that there is such a thing as a narrative that white people want to see. That presumes that there is a person who is qualified to know what white people (all of them, mind you) want to see. It would seem that any intelligent person would be embarrassed to make such a broad and sweeping psychoanalytical statement. But one hears this kind of stuff all the time. I just find it ridiculous.

Quoting grits-n-gravy: harkin, badhatharry,

Have either of you ever seen a documentary film called Ethnic Notions?

No, but I do love documentaries. Maybe they have it on Netflix. PS. I thought you had closed up your laptop and gone home.

Quoting badhatharry: It has to do with the original statement, Ocean.

The notion that there is such a thing as a narrative that white people want to see. That presumes that there is a person who is qualified to know what white people (all of them, mind you) want to see. It would seem that any intelligent person would be embarrassed to make such a broad and sweeping psychoanalytical statement.

But one hears this kind of stuff all the time. I just find it ridiculous.

I do understand your argument and I agree that Latoya's claim constitutes a stereotype. Just, please know, that what you are criticizing has nothing to do with psychoanalysis. In a way, psychoanalysis is in fact about uncovering the individual narrative by eliminating the use of stereotypes.

Quoting badhatharry: No, but I do love documentaries. Maybe they have it on Netflix.

PS. I thought you had closed up your laptop and gone home.

Perhaps he got home and opened it again. Here is a link.

Quoting badhatharry: It has to do with the original statement, Ocean.

The notion that there is such a thing as a narrative that white people want to see. That presumes that there is a person who is qualified to know what white people (all of them, mind you) want to see. It would seem that any intelligent person would be embarrassed to make such a broad and sweeping psychoanalytical statement.

But one hears this kind of stuff all the time. I just find it ridiculous.

You're getting it backwards, I think. Most people share common ideas, because they get those ideas from a few common sources. You don't need to read minds to asseert that that's so. The common narratives regarding the lives of black people are rooted in white culture - that's true for the simple fact that very few black people had the reach to propagate such stories directly until the last twenty years or so, and many, probably most of our common narratives are older than that. Further, the actual details of the lives of black people are obviously known, in intimate detail, by black people in a way that blunts the

Quoting badhatharry: No, but I do love documentaries. Maybe they have it on Netflix.

Well, if you decide to watch it you may come to the realization that Latoya's "fits into a narrative of what white people want to see" statement has more credence and weight than you and harkin are willing to give it. Moreover, you both ignored the context of what she said. She's talking about a Hollywood narrative of what white people want to see. By the way, I would also recommend Robert Townsend brilliant satire of Hollywood called Hollywood Shuffle.

Re: Ethnic Notions...I will say this knowing that I will be criticized by some for what I say. I think it would be best if we stopped revisiting over and over, the terrible things which occurred in the past. I doubt anyone is unaware of the injustices which have happened in our country, but I say the time for healing has come. And when I say healing, I mean getting over it and stopping beating people over the head about the color of their skin...black or white. We can't change the past and I think it would be best to stop trying to drag it into the present. Then things might actually and truly change.

Quoting badhatharry: Re: Ethnic Notions...I will say this knowing that I will be criticized by some for what I say. I think it would be best if we stopped revisiting over and over, the terrible things which occurred in the past. I doubt anyone is unaware of the injustices which have happened in our country, but I say the time for healing has come.

And when I say healing, I mean getting over it and stopping beating people over the head about the color of their skin...black or white. We can't change the past and I think it would be best to stop trying to drag it into the present.

Then things might actually and truly change.

Doesn't it seem to you that when members of the group of people who were responsible for doing the terrible things that occurred (as opposed to those to whom those things were done) start to complain about the fuss, that it's really in pretty bad taste? The sons and daughters of slaveowners really oughtn't be the first to complain about making a fuss over slavery (and its aftermath.)

Quoting badhatharry: Re: Ethnic Notions...I will say this knowing that I will be criticized by some for what I say. I think it would be best if we stopped revisiting over and over, the terrible things which occurred in the past. I doubt anyone is unaware of the injustices which have happened in our country, but I say the time for healing has come.

And when I say healing, I mean getting over it and stopping beating people over the head about the color of their skin...black or white. We can't change the past and I think it would be best to stop trying to drag it into the present.

Then things might actually and truly change.

It's reasonable to say that we should stop "beating people over the head about the color of their skin" and that we need to move forward without getting stuck in the sorrows of the past. At the same time, we need to know why we are where we are and what happened before. And if there were mistakes (and particularly when there have been tragic mistakes over and over for centuries) we need to remember them well to make

Quoting grits-n-gravy: She's talking about a Hollywood narrative of what white people want to see.

So what does this mean exactly? Does it mean that Hollywood is the villain in this narrative or is it white people who are to blame? Or is some kind of alliance between the two? I agree that Hollywood had made some wicked and ugly films about blacks, but it has been an awfully long time since one was made. Can't we just agree that things have changed for the better? and be glad of it? Or do we have to continually and forever examine the darkness which some will assure us still exists....and we better believe them!

Quoting AemJeff: Doesn't it seem to you that when members of the group of people who were responsible for doing the terrible things that occurred (as opposed to those to whom those things were done) start to complain about the fuss, that it's really in pretty bad taste? The sons and daughters of slaveowners really oughtn't be the first to complain about making a fuss over slavery (and its aftermath.)

I'm not the daughter of a slave owner....not even close. If you want to feel responsible for what happened two hundred years ago, by all means go ahead. Will you be getting something in the mail when the debt has been paid?

Quoting Ocean: It's reasonable to say that we should stop "beating people over the head about the color of their skin" and that we need to move forward without getting stuck in the sorrows of the past.

At the same time, we need to know why we are where we are and what happened before. And if there were mistakes (and particularly when there have been tragic mistakes over and over for centuries) we need to remember them well to make sure we don't continue that path and that we do as much as we can to correct them. You can't just pretend that everything is fine when it is not.

And when will it be fine, Ocean? What will that look like? How will we know?

Quoting badhatharry: And when will it be fine, Ocean? What will that look like? How will we know?

When statements like the ones Latoya made don't bother you. And when Latoya doesn't even have to make those statements. Your assumption is that black people shouldn't complain because enough has been done. But you don't really know that. Wouldn't it make sense to listen to those who have been subjected to discrimination instead of making assumptions? Why would you think that you know better?

Quoting badhatharry: I'm not the daughter of a slave owner....not even close. If you want to feel responsible for what happened two hundred years ago, by all means go ahead.

Will you be getting something in the mail when the debt has been paid?

You're certainly not the daughter (or the great-granddaughter) of slaves. As long as there are people who refuse to take the past seriously (and I really don't think that the above reflects a particularly serious consideration of the issues involved here), there won't be the change you claim to want to see.

Quoting badhatharry: So what does this mean exactly? Does it mean that Hollywood is the villain in this narrative or is it white people who are to blame? Or is some kind of alliance between the two?

This conversation is not about black hats and white hats. The Hollywood narrative is what the real movers and shakers in the film industry believe white people want to see, since white people still represent the largest consumers of entertainment. Whether or not Hollywood's perception of what white people want is accurate is not really all that relevant to the larger issue of racial representations in film.

I agree that Hollywood had made some wicked and ugly films about blacks, but it has been an awfully long time since one was made. Can't we just agree that things have changed for the better? and be glad of it? Or do we have to continually and forever examine the darkness which some will assure us still exists....and we better believe them!

Ethnic Notions simply demonstrates that the difficulties and challenges racial minorities face in the film industry has a

2nd best movie of the year was Star Trek.
3rd, no one wants to go out en masse and see a downer movie about race issues, it's a life sucking endeavor, people want to be entertained, not guilt tripped and reminded ad nauseum how terrible their group has been and still is.
Look at the exception for black actors in hollywood and box office draw, Will Smith. He is neutral. You go see a film he is in, at least the ones that make more money, they are not heavy handed films about class and race, they are made to entertain, he does not come across as wanted to beat anyone over the head with and hold hostility against people for past wrongs. He is past it in most of his roles, and people just go to be entertained.
Same appeal an Obama had over a Jesse Jackson, get a clue, and stop force feeding people the race obsession, and people will look past it. People who decry it the most are the most obsessed with it. 4th - if you are trying to make a message movie - sci-fi is the best

Quoting JonIrenicus: 2nd best movie of the year was Star Trek.

3rd, no one wants to go out en masse and see a downer movie about race issues, it's a life sucking endeavor, people want to be entertained, not guilt tripped and reminded ad nauseum how terrible their group has been and still is.

Look at the exception for black actors in hollywood and box office draw, Will Smith.

Wonder how Angela Bassett, Halle Berry, Jim Brown, Don Cheadle, Ice Cube, Vin Diesel, Laurence Fishburne, Morgan Freeman, Danny Glover, Whoopi Goldberg, Cuba Gooding, Samuel Jackson, Pam Grier, Queen Latifah, Eddie Murphy, Sidney Poitier, Cicely Tyson, Denzel Washington, and Forest Whitaker, just to name a few, would feel about not being "the exception." And as a Star Wars fan, how could you forget James Earl Jones?

no one wants to go out en masse and see a downer movie about race issues, it's a life sucking endeavor, people want to be entertained, not guilt tripped and reminded ad nauseum how terrible their group has been and still is.

If only someone had told the financiers of: Crash, The Color Purple, Amistad, Glory, Roots, 12 Angry Men, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner...

Quoting badhatharry: I'm not the daughter of a slave owner....not even close. If you want to feel responsible for what happened two hundred years ago, by all means go ahead.

Note, too, the tendency to shoot "what happened" into the distant past. 200 years? The South invaded the North to start the Civil War in defense of slavery just 150 years ago. The losers of the Civil War started a terrorist group called the KKK in the immediate aftermath, and used it (with other methods) to subdue the newly freed blacks over the course of the following decades. Jim Crow existed during .... your life time. And a friend of mine, when she was hired to manage a large store, was trained how to reject black applications.

Quoting uncle ebeneezer: If only someone had told the financiers of: Crash, The Color Purple, Amistad, Glory, Roots, 12 Angry Men, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner...

Or Ali, starring .... wait for it .... Will Smith.

Quoting uncle ebeneezer: If only someone had told the financiers of: Crash, The Color Purple, Amistad, Glory, Roots, 12 Angry Men, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner...

Or Do The Right Thing, or Malcolm X, or many of Spike Lee's other films. Etc.

Quoting uncle ebeneezer: If only someone had told the financiers of: Crash, The Color Purple, Amistad, Glory, Roots, 12 Angry Men, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner...

I liked alot of those movies, but the movies with the most mass appeal do not tend to revolve around downer subjects. Amistad in particular was a really good movie, but did not make nearly as much money as lesser movies did that had wider appeal. And bringing up odd counters does not negate the trend overall.
http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=2008
http://www2.boxofficemojo.com/yearly...yr=2009&p=.htm
How many movies in this list are "message" movies? Or dwell on racial issues?
Paul Blart Mall cop did triple what Precious did, and that was a T E R R I B L E Movie
TERRIBLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bile forms in my mouth at the memory of that movie. Now precious was still a success, as were many other movies, but that is just not the bulk of revenue, sorry, it's not. People tend to go to movies to be entertained, not "informed" trot out as many cases of man bites dog as you like, that point still stands If I am paying in excess of 10 bucks for a big screen, the movie better be damn good, or involve giant robots knocking other giant robots to the ground.

Quoting bjkeefe: Wonder how Angela Bassett, Halle Berry, Jim Brown, Don Cheadle, Ice Cube, Vin Diesel, Laurence Fishburne, Morgan Freeman, Danny Glover, Whoopi Goldberg, Cuba Gooding, Samuel Jackson, Pam Grier, Queen Latifah, Eddie Murphy, Sidney Poitier, Cicely Tyson, Denzel Washington, and Forest Whitaker, just to name a few, would feel about not being "the exception."

And as a Star Wars fan, how could you forget James Earl Jones?

OK, of course he is not the only successful actor, but take some on your own list.
Eddie Murphy. Which movies broke the 100 million dollar barrier? http://boxofficemojo.com/people/char...ddiemurphy.htm Don Cheadle http://boxofficemojo.com/people/char...doncheadle.htm
Fishburne http://boxofficemojo.com/people/char...efishburne.htm See a trend guys? If you want to resist more you can go through and try and adjust for inflation, but the trend still stands.
I am not saying a movie is better if it makes more, just that message movies or race movies do not have the same general appeal as other more general entertainment movies do, which makes perfect sense.

Quoting JonIrenicus: I am not saying a movie is better if it makes more, just that message movies or race movies do not have the same general appeal as other more general entertainment movies do, which makes perfect sense.

So what? What's your point? The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal don't have the appeal of The National Enquirer. What does that tell you? In other news, here's a short video of Sarah Palin that illustrates in just over a minute how easy it is to manipulate the Republican Party base. You gotta pity 'em, you know?

Quoting badhatharry: So what does this mean exactly? Does it mean that Hollywood is the villain in this narrative or is it white people who are to blame? Or is some kind of alliance between the two?

I agree that Hollywood had made some wicked and ugly films about blacks, but it has been an awfully long time since one was made. Can't we just agree that things have changed for the better? and be glad of it?

Or do we have to continually and forever examine the darkness which some will assure us still exists....and we better believe them!

Psst.

Quoting Starwatcher162536: Are only english speaking movies submitted for nominations to the Oscars? I noticed they did not talk about any foreign films.

I am not much of a movie person but think there is an oscar for best foreign film. In recent years my favorites have been "Cache" and "The Lives of Others." John

Quoting rcocean: I wondered, why can't black people do something without white people horning in on it all the time? Sorry, we don't live in a color blind society and never have. I have no problem - as I white guy - with blacks doing their own thing.

I reject this utterly. I do not even agree that blacks have 'their own thing'. This is the same sort of reasoning that enables black kids to hassle another black student who reads alot for 'acting white'. It's the same thing when a step-off crowd starts booing a team awarded top prize because of the color of their skin. Do you really think excluding participants based on skin color promotes diversity? Really?

Quoting grits-n-gravy: harkin, badhatharry,

Have either of you ever seen a documentary film called Ethnic Notions?

Yes I've seen it. I was aware of severe racism before I saw it but then I grew up in the sixties/seventies and read a lot of history. I am also aware that these depictions have been mostly eradicated from the country. I'm also mixed race and grew up in an ethnically diverse community, I've seen racism from all sides, white, black, hispanic, asian. While there are degrees of hate I don't classify

Quoting TwinSwords: Note, too, the tendency to shoot "what happened" into the distant past.

200 years? The South invaded the North to start the Civil War in defense of slavery just 150 years ago.

The losers of the Civil War started a terrorist group called the KKK in the immediate aftermath, and used it (with other methods) to subdue the newly freed blacks over the course of the following decades.

Jim Crow existed during .... your life time.

And a friend of mine, when she was hired to manage a large store, was trained how to reject black applications.

Because Jeff mentioned slavery....I said over two hundred years. I am aware of the history. It is difficult in this situation where people are making sideways comments to address everything absolutely accurately but perhaps you should notice your tendency to assign nefarious motives...... I grew up in Chicago, so I never saw (nor was responsible for) Jim Crow laws. This whole thing started one place and has morphed. So back to the beginning as I see it. Latoya made a statement that white people want to see a certain narrative. I say that says more about her than about white people. Do all the white people

Quoting badhatharry: This whole thing started one place and has morphed. So back to the beginning as I see it. Latoya made a statement that white people want to see a certain narrative. I say that says more about her than about white people.

Do all the white people who have chimed in on this issue want to see a certain narrative? I doubt it.

But there is certainly a tendency to assign motives and attitudes to large groups of people. Just because that tendency exists does not make its observations at all accurate. And IMHO the tendency should be guarded against.

It's another day and we're still at it. Latoya referred to "white people" in her comment, mostly as in "non-black people". She watched a movie that depicts black people. She identified this depiction as incongruent or biased and not really reflecting how black people are. Therefore she infers that the movie must be reflecting a non-black person idea of how black people are. I don't think she meant every white or non-black person would share that view. Perhaps she meant those who made the movie, and those who endorse the general stereotype that

What!?! You mean it's not like House? Wow! My universe just got alot less cool. :/

Quoting Starwatcher162536: What!?! You mean it's not like House? Wow! My universe just got alot less cool.

:/

Sorry, I didn't intend to pop your bubble. Perhaps there is that one hospital that I've never visited.

I've been thinking a lot about the issue that's being discussed. It is certainly a serious one and I'm glad to see that it hasn't devolved into the accusations of racist that sometimes happens around these parts.... I have come up with what I think is a fairly good analogy which expresses my feelings and thoughts. Let's take the example of a wife who has found out that her husband is cheating. She weighs her options and decides to stay in the marriage. Her husband spends the ensuing years being as good a husband as he is capable of being. Despite that, she never lets him off the hook. At every opportunity she reminds him of how hurt she is and how horrible he was to her. She habitually assigns bad motives to everything he does. Their marriage is never going to be a good one. Similarly, I think the United States and its citizens have made very substantive attempts to rectify the mistakes which were made regarding the black population. If the mistakes of the past are constantly brought up and assigned to the present, we

Quoting badhatharry: And when will it be fine, Ocean? What will that look like? How will we know?

Quoting Ocean: When statements like the ones Latoya made don't bother you. And when Latoya doesn't even have to make those statements.

This premise is ridiculous. Latoya has the right to complain and expound on anything she wants, but who made her the arbiter of when we reach post-racism? Why not Ward Connerly or Thomas Sowell? I say no one should be taken as spokesperson for an entire race but if you're going by who has done more to preach true equality, then Connerly and Sowell are near the head of the line. As to blame for the problems in the black community, I say never forget history, but quit treating the community as if they are children, which seems to be the democratic party's policy of fomenting vote loyalty. We live in a day when Alan Keyes, Michael Steele and Clarence Thomas are compared to Robert Mugabi and Idi Amin because they promote color-blindness and have the audacity to tell blacks to think for themselves and not fall into the trap of depending on

Quoting Ocean: There isn't a whole lot more to it. In my opinion it isn't an unlikely possibility. I have seen many movies that depict a certain group in a way that is very incongruent with reality. You can immediately tell that those who made the movie are not only "outsiders" to the group they depict, but also pretty ignorant about important aspects of that culture. This unrelated example may illustrate what I mean. When I have watched movies about doctors and hospitals, many of them show health care providers having highly emotional discussions in the middle of a hospital ward, using "f" words every other sentence. I have been in the health care environment for over 25 years and I have never seen such scenes. Those movies are not realistic. The end result may have been intentional to create a certain effect, or unintentional due to ignorance. One way or the other, they do not reflect reality.

OK, that makes sense to me. But again if I may pick some nits here, there isn't any depiction which will entirely depict reality. What is generally being depicted in any form of art is some aspect of reality which the artist

Quoting harkin: This premise is ridiculous.

Latoya has the right to complain and expound on anything she wants, but who made her the arbiter of when we reach post-racism? Why not Ward Connerly or Thomas Sowell? I say no one should be taken as spokesperson for an entire race but if you're going by who has done more to preach true equality, then Connerly and Sowell are near the head of the line.

Yesterday I was checking out a Thomas Sowell interview and the first comment was "House ******". Classy!

Quoting badhatharry: I've been thinking a lot about the issue that's being discussed. It is certainly a serious one and I'm glad to see that it hasn't devolved into the accusations of racist that sometimes happens around these parts....

I have come up with what I think is a fairly good analogy which expresses my feelings and thoughts. Let's take the example of a wife who has found out that her husband is cheating. She weighs her options and decides to stay in the marriage. Her husband spends the ensuing years being as good a husband as he is capable of being.

Despite that, she never lets him off the hook. At every opportunity she reminds him of how hurt she is and how horrible he was to her. She habitually assigns bad motives to everything he does. Their marriage is never going to be a good one.

Similarly, I think the United States and its citizens have made very substantive attempts to rectify the mistakes which were made regarding the black population. If the mistakes of the past are constantly brought up and assigned to the present, we

Quoting AemJeff: The only times when accusations of "racism" have been made here have been in response to commenters quoting white supremacists or using well understood racist codes. These are things I've certainly never witnessed you doing, so I doubt anybody would even think of making that judgment in your case.

Your analogy can easily turned the other way. Imagine the cheating husband blaming his wife for the tension in their relationship because she's angry for the hurt he's caused her. He tells her she should just "get over it." It seems to me that it's her choice whether and when she decides to do that. If her hurt keeps the animosity and alienation alive, how is that her fault?

I'm not talking specifically about my case. And I do think there have been times on this forum that people have been accused of things unfairly, particularly when it comes to race. And as far as the marriage analogy, the point I am making is about the conditions which will allow the marriage to flourish. Certainly the wife is allowed to complain all she wants. She is in fact entirely justified

Quoting badhatharry: I think any intelligent person feels remorse at what their society has done and the advantages they may have enjoyed because of past inequalities. But there seems to be a tendency to keep looking for problems where there may no longer be any. That just keeps animosity and alienation alive.

The basic difference in opinion seems to be that you think that racism, inequality and discrimination belong to the past, while others think that there's still a lot of it left. If we were to accept that there is a lot of racism and discrimination left, then we could consider a far more interesting question which is what to do about it.

Quoting harkin: Yes I've seen [Ethnic Notions]. I was aware of severe racism before I saw it but then I grew up in the sixties/seventies and read a lot of history.

I am also aware that these depictions have been mostly eradicated from the country. . . .

As long as people keep staking out what is right or proper for one to do based on race and not on personal preference, we are still stuck in the same gutter as depicted in Ethnic Notions, not as deep and slimy (or obvious) but just as stuck.

The main bone of contention has been Latoya's statement about a narrative white people want to see. You and badhatharry describe her rather banal though accurate statement as racist or prejudicial. I think that description says more about you both rather the substance of her remark. As I already pointed out to badhat, Hollywood and other industries operate off of assumptions of what they think their targeted audience wants to see. That's basically all Latoya was saying. Hollywood prior to the 1950s cast blacks in roles they thought would be acceptable and entertaining to their white audience. While the most

Quoting Ocean: The basic difference in opinion seems to be that you think that racism, inequality and discrimination belong to the past, while others think that there's still a lot of it left.

If we were to accept that there is a lot of racism and discrimination left, then we could consider a far more interesting question which is what to do about it.

I think the analysis in your first sentence is correct. I love it when things can get boiled down to simple statements like that one is. However the second sentence gets muddier. You describe a situation which has only one action possible. I would say that it is also possible to accept that there is a lot of racism and discrimination and that the best course of action is to do nothing about it. In fact one could argue that all the efforts at doing something about it don't help and may cause actual harm. Of course then we get into defining what racism and discrimination are and what 'a lot' is. That conversation is endless.

Quoting grits-n-gravy: The main bone of contention has been Latoya's statement about a narrative white people want to see. You and badhatharry describe her rather banal though accurate statement as racist or prejudicial. I think that description says more about you both rather the substance of her remark. As I already pointed out to badhat, Hollywood and other industries operate off of assumptions of what they think their targeted audience wants to see. That's basically all Latoya was saying. Hollywood prior to the 1950s cast blacks in roles they thought would be acceptable and entertaining to their white audience. While the most denigrating images have largely been removed from film, the operating premise of Hollywood has not changed.

I don't remember describing her statement as racist, but never mind. But, this is good! We've finally identified the culprit. It's the Hollywood psychics who know what white people want to see. I never really liked them, anyway.

Quoting badhatharry: ...In fact one could argue that all the efforts at doing something about it don't help and may cause actual harm.
...

Do you think that the Civil Rights Act didn't help, and/or caused harm? Do you think it would have come about if there hadn't been a ongoing debate on the topic? And if you think it did achieve more good than harm, do you think that it effectively ended the discussion?

Quoting rcocean: Good to see a new face with an interesting viewpoint.

Second that. Latoya was impressive.

I find it interesting and perhaps instructive to see that no one commented on the fact that someone called Thomas Sowell a ******. Do you people think that person is a racist or just someone who doesn't like the thinking of people on the right?

Quoting AemJeff: Do you think that the Civil Rights Act didn't help, and/or caused harm? Do you think it would have come about if there hadn't been a ongoing debate on the topic? And if you think it did achieve more good than harm, do you think that it effectively ended the discussion?

I think that institutionalized discrimination should be eliminated.
Perhaps you can tell me if there is institutional discrimination still in existence (regarding race) which can't be or isn't being addressed by existing law. I'm sure you are aware that there are those who opposed the Civil Rights Act on the grounds that the federal government was not constitutionally able to tell states what to do. I am sort of agnostic about that. It is impossible to know if the proper changes could have occurred otherwise But, I don't think everything that came out of the Civil Rights movement was good. One of those things was enforced integration in the form of busing, although I imagine the intentions were good.

Quoting badhatharry: I find it interesting and perhaps instructive to see that no one commented on the fact that someone called Thomas Sowell a ******.

Do you people think that person is a racist or just someone who doesn't like the thinking of people on the right?

Might help if you provided a link, so that we could see context. Apart from that, someone being called a "house ******" is hardly shocking. It's been a standard criticism/putdown/insult since long before I was born, especially when uttered by one black person about another. Therefore, it does not seem to merit OUTRAGE!!!1!, especially since without context, I would lay long odds it was not a white person who said that about him. As for your finding this non-commentary "instructive," do you mean that you're starting to become aware that Teh Left is not quite as likely to instantaneously fly off the handle at one second-hand mention of one word as you might have previously thought?

Quoting badhatharry: I find it interesting and perhaps instructive to see that no one commented on the fact that someone called Thomas Sowell a ******.

Do you people think that person is a racist or just someone who doesn't like the thinking of people on the right?

It's just an appalling blog comment by some anonymous, self-righteous, condescendingly racist punk who believes they can dictate what everyone else should think. If you're going to get exercised about every nasty comment written anonymously on every blog in existence, you're gonna be be awfully busy.

Quoting bjkeefe: Might help if you provided a link, so that we could see context.

Apart from that, someone being called a "house ******" is hardly shocking. It's been a standard criticism/putdown/insult since long before I was born, especially when uttered by one black person about another. Therefore, it does not seem to merit OUTRAGE!!!1!, especially since without context, I would lay long odds it was not a white person who said that about him.

As for your finding this non-commentary "instructive," do you mean that you're starting to become aware that Teh Left is not quite as likely to instantaneously fly off the handle at one second-hand mention of one word as you might have previously thought?

I'm working on something else right now, but I will get the link if it's important to you. But what I find instructive is that it is somehow OK to call Thomas Sowell that, depending on context, ya know..... I could be wrong, however. I sometimes am.

Quoting badhatharry: I'm working on something else right now, but I will get the link if it's important to you.

But what I find instructive is that it is somehow OK to call Thomas Sowell that, depending on context, ya know.....

I could be wrong, however. I sometimes am.

I'd like to know how you justify the bolded sentence. Certainly not by anything said here.

I think more white people should move into minority communities, then become friends with people of color, and eventually blend into the surroundings. I did that a long time ago and much to my surprise race is not a hot button topic. Thinking back on my days in a liberal arts college I would have thought that like this diavlog we watched that it would be the main topic of conversation but it isn't, at least not in my experience. Instead people are concerned with everyday living issues, bills, jobs, their children, church, things like that. Of course, some of that may be due to me since I don't traffic in those types of conversations and happen to live in a lower income area. John

Quoting AemJeff: I'd like to know how you justify the bolded sentence. Certainly not by anything said here.

Perhaps you should reread Bjkeefe's post. You clearly admonished the poster while Brendan didn't. I wonder if he would have had the same reaction if Obama had been called that.

Quoting badhatharry: Perhaps you should reread Bjkeefe's post. You clearly admonished the poster while Brendan didn't.

I wonder if he would have had the same reaction if Obama had been called that.

But you're arguing from negative space, asserting concrete inferences from what hasn't been said. Anonymous, unattributed blog comments, on the whole, just aren't worth much consideration; and the lack of a substantive rebuttal isn't the same thing as an expression of approval, or even lack of disapproval.

Quoting AemJeff: But you're arguing from negative space, asserting concrete inferences from what hasn't been said. Anonymous, unattributed blog comments, on the whole, just aren't worth much consideration; and the lack of a substantive rebuttal isn't the same thing as an expression of approval, or even lack of disapproval.

Good point. As I said I could be wrong. Perhaps the same holds for people at tea party rallies who don't comment about the few racial posters which appear.

Quoting badhatharry: Good point. As I said I could be wrong.

Perhaps the same holds for people at tea party rallies who don't comment about the few racial posters which appear.

Participants of rallies are supposed to share the views being expressed in the rally. Commenters in a forum are not expected to share views. They usually express their own personal views as outrageous as they may be. Where do you see an equivalence?

Quoting bkjazfan: I think more white people should move into minority communities, then become friends with people of color, and eventually blend into the surroundings. I did that a long time ago and much to my surprise race is not a hot button topic. Thinking back on my days in a liberal arts college I would have thought that like this diavlog we watched that it would be the main topic of conversation but it isn't, at least not in my experience. Instead people are concerned with everyday living issues, bills, jobs, their children, church, things like that. Of course, some of that may be due to me since I don't traffic in those types of conversations and happen to live in a lower income area.

John

You make a very good point, John.

Quoting badhatharry: But what I find instructive is that it is somehow OK to call Thomas Sowell that, depending on context, ya know.....

Nice try, but I didn't say it's okay. I merely said this is an old insult, likely it came from another black person, and I therefore expect that we horrible liberals don't share your fauxtrage. Especially since you can't be bothered to provide a link. In other words: trolling fail. "I could be wrong, however. I sometimes am."

Quoting Ocean: Participants of rallies are supposed to share the views being expressed in the rally. Commenters in a forum are not expected to share views. They usually express their own personal views as outrageous as they may be. Where do you see an equivalence?

Well, I suppose that participants can be construed to share views, but since they don't actually sign some contract stating that, anyone can and does ostensibly attend. They can be just as anonymous as any commenter on any blog. In fact, and I know this is a stretch, someone who wants to subvert the message of the rally could appear at that rally holding an offensive sign. My point is that certain speech is more or less or not at all objectionable depending on who it is refering to and who is saying it. But I could be wrong.

Quoting bjkeefe: Nice try,

Thanks

I can't follow the debate here. What's the point again? Somebody doesn't like black people talking about things that interest them?

Quoting badhatharry: My point is that certain speech is more or less or not at all objectionable depending on who it is refering to and who is saying it.

Yes, the above, as a generality is true. That's why you need to look at context and use your judgment.

But I could be wrong.

Truly we are all fallible.

Quoting claymisher: I can't follow the debate here. What's the point again? Somebody doesn't like black people talking about things that interest them?

Yes. Also, blacks talking about their history is an affront to white conservatives.

Quoting AemJeff: ...

Your analogy can easily turned the other way. Imagine the cheating husband blaming his wife for the tension in their relationship because she's angry for the hurt he's caused her. He tells her she should just "get over it." It seems to me that it's her choice whether and when she decides to do that. If her hurt keeps the animosity and alienation alive, how is that her fault?

Her choice, and ultimately, her problem. At that point, the source of the strife, the engine of its renewal is HER attitude, not his. How far down the chain does the burden of first causes get passed down before one has to own up to the discord themselves? The answer from the full blown challengers is, never. And what does that give us? A legion of people in a crippled emotional state, static and stuck in a negative loop of resentment.
On whom do we place the burden to break that cycle? The ones who started the loop? Or the ones whos continued attitudes about the past maintain it?
Maybe the answer is it depends. For my part, I tend to grant greater respect and gratitude to those

Quoting TwinSwords: Yes. Also, blacks talking about their history is an affront to white conservatives.

And further, the only reason we still have racial problems in this country is because none of those dark-skinned people know when to STFU.

We keep getting back to this topic in reverberating loops. "Get on with it" is good. Reconciliation is good. Renouncing resentments is good. The problem is that the comparison to the marriage is not good. There is still racism and discrimination. Minority groups have been oppressed for so long that they need more time or better resources to be able to catch up. This is not about the conditions in the past, it's about the conditions in the present.

While I have no complaints about either of the heads in this diavlog it suffers from boring. Latoya had some interesting things to say that would have been more interesting if Mickey Kaus was her interlocutor. I don't always think diavlogs need to be contentious but this one seemed so in the standard academic ideology box (not that there is anything wrong with that--it is a kind of consensus), that anyone who graduated with a liberal arts degree in the last 20 years is likely to nod off. This diavlog raised interesting issues about race and culture but there was no real debate about either.

Quoting Ocean: We keep getting back to this topic in reverberating loops.

"Get on with it" is good. Reconciliation is good. Renouncing resentments is good. The problem is that the comparison to the marriage is not good. There is still racism and discrimination. Minority groups have been oppressed for so long that they need more time or better resources to be able to catch up. This is not about the conditions in the past, it's about the conditions in the present.

Yes, part of it is a disagreement about the state of things. I think all of that is closer to background than it used to be. Others don't. And if the goal post is the mere existence of racism, that is no different than carte blanche for all cries about opression/etc. till the end of time. As far as conditions in the present, the main point is there is no longer a blanket of oppression, and pretended anything close today is just wrong. And as far as films go, I think there is plenty of evidence that white audiences are perfectly fine with black leads, in non "struggle" related films. Absolute parity? maybe not, but what are people looking

Yeah, I got bored with it pretty quickly too, but wound up listening to most of it because I was out in the garden and my hands were too dirty to mess with my iphone and find something else to play. Anyway, anybody who takes the Oscars or any arts awards seriously is a chump. It's just a promotional tool to boost interest in the movies during winter. I'd say more, but my Oscar party is staring in 15 minutes and I like to have cocktails ready when my guests arrive.

Well, the Oscars are more about fun and distraction for most people. It is very serious for people in the industry though. I haven't watched them in years although for whatever reason I'm kind of interested this year. Not sure why since I didn't really love any of the nominee films I've seen. My favorite movie last year off the top of my head was Moon.

Quoting grits-n-gravy: You make a very good point, John.

grits-n-gravy, Thank you! It's always nice to receive a compliment. John

I enjoyed this conversation, even though I honestly don't care about the Oscars and haven't seen any of the movies nominated for Best Picture. Also: I would like to wonder aloud why it seems to bother so many people so deeply when the fact that racism, racial prejudice, and racial stereotypes exist in society and shape our perceptions and experiences. Why is it such a big deal for Latoya to suggest that white people might be more comfortable with one sort of narrative about black peoples' lives and not others? There is an awful lot of evidence that the dominant culture, which can be identified with white people to a certain extent, really, really, really likes stories about white people swooping in and rescuing poor black children.

I'm just glad that people are finally admitting what a terrible movie Crash was. I remember that year, all my Hollywood friends (alot of my friends are in "the industry" in various capacities) all said that I just didn't get it. I was frankly, sort of amazed that so many of them lauded that piece of shit afterschool special. But who's laughing now? WHO??!! (sorry it's probably the industrial strength codeine-fueled cough syrup talking...mmm...sweet cough syrup.)

Quoting grits-n-gravy: The Hollywood narrative is what the real movers and shakers in the film industry believe white people want to see, since white people still represent the largest consumers of entertainment. Whether or not Hollywood's perception of what white people want is accurate is not really all that relevant to the larger issue of racial representations in film.

i thought this was a novel by a black woman, adapted and then pushed by Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry (who are both black), so how is this criticism valid?

Quoting uncle ebeneezer: I'm just glad that people are finally admitting what a terrible movie Crash was. I remember that year, all my Hollywood friends (alot of my friends are in "the industry" in various capacities) all said that I just didn't get it. I was frankly, sort of amazed that so many of them lauded that piece of shit afterschool special. But who's laughing now? WHO??!! (sorry it's probably the industrial strength codeine-fueled cough syrup talking...mmm...sweet cough syrup.)

Crash was truly abysmal, a piece of shit as you say. And when you consider that it was competing against a much more original and moving though admittedly controversial film--Brokeback Mountain--you have to wonder if Hollywood differs so much from the rest of middle America in its preference for schlock.

Totally. Don't forget Crash also beat Good NIght & Good Luck and Capote which IMO, were far better films. And the screenplay beat GN&GL, Squid & the Whale, Match Point and Syriana (which again were all FAR better than Crash.) My friends in Hollywood definitely have a different perspective than most. But then again, most of them really loved Titanic, as much of Middle America (and the World) did. So it's hard to say that their taste for schlock is substantially greater than that of the US public.

Quoting popcorn_karate: i thought this was a novel by a black woman, adapted and then pushed by Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry (who are both black), so how is this criticism valid?

The black media "establishment" is every bit as capable of perpetuating black stereotypes as Hollywood. As Layota points out, Tyler Perry's work is not without its own problems. I hope Layota will return to discuss, for example, why The Cosby Show was so successful with white american audiences but a truly complex and pioneering depiction of black american life like Frank's Place was not.

Quoting JonIrenicus: .

Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

And for all the talk of continued issues today, Mandela had infinitely more reasons and cause for grievance, and he did not choose the path of retribution and a continued negative loop, he chose the path that favored getting on with it.

That will always be more noble and respectable attitude and take in my view.

Jon, you are very intelligent and had a pretty good up-bringing, I imagine. And I realize you understand the plight of black kids in the inner-city, where, if they are not taught certain values and strategies early in life, they are condemned to ride on

Quoting JonIrenicus: 2nd best movie of the year was Star Trek.

Sweet child of mine. Yes, Star Trek was an extremely pleasant surprise, but what's up with the complete disrespect of canon? Spock's mom dies? What the hell? Then again, the completely unexpected and sweet relationship between Spock and Uhura was completely forgiveable...but then, it's not even the same...it's adding, not changing. And think of all the sequels!

3rd, no one wants to go out en masse and see a downer movie about race issues, it's a life sucking endeavor, people want to be entertained, not guilt tripped and reminded ad nauseum how terrible their group has been and still is.

Oh, god, yes. I'm strictly a romantic comedy , tight action thriller, Jane Austen-type movie goer. I still haven't seen Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, etc. And Titanic? Who wants to see 1500 people die at the end of a glitzy glamorama?

Look at the exception for black actors in hollywood and box office draw, Will Smith. He is neutral. You go see a film he is in, at least the ones that make more money, they are not heavy handed films about class and race, they are made to entertain, he does not come across as wanted

Quoting claymisher: I can't follow the debate here. What's the point again? Somebody doesn't like black people talking about things that interest them?

Quoting twinswords: Yes. Also, blacks talking about their history is an affront to white conservatives.

Quoting bjkeefe: And further, the only reason we still have racial problems in this country is because none of those dark-skinned people know when to STFU.

Quoting AemJeff: The only times when accusations of "racism" have been made here have been in response to commenters quoting white supremacists or using well understood racist codes.

Better update that list Jeff! No one promoted censure on anyone. Nobody said anything about being offended by blacks talking about history. No one even came remotely near to telling anybody of any color to 'STFU'. On the contrary:

Quoting harkin: Latoya has the right to complain and expound on anything she wants......

and

Quoting harkin: As to blame for the problems in the black community, I say never forget history, but quit treating the community as if they are children, which seems to be the democratic party's policy of fomenting vote loyalty.

We have just been given examples by three of the worst offenders in here in their tired tactic of throwing

Quoting harkin: Better update that list Jeff!

No one promoted censure on anyone. Nobody said anything about being offended by blacks talking about history. No one even came remotely near to telling anybody of any color to 'STFU'.

On the contrary:

and

We have just been given examples by three of the worst offenders in here in their tired tactic of throwing accusations with no merit whatever in lieu of answering with substance.

I offered detailed evidence of real, current problems and providers of solutions and these are ignored to make implied references to censorship with racist motivation.

Truly pathetic.

Would you like to connect the dots for me for me harkin? Please, by all means, show me the accusation I "threw" in the bit you quoted, or how it's at all relevant to your complaint, such as it is; or even how it could be construed to have been said in reference to you.

Quoting harkin: Better update that list Jeff!

No one promoted censure on anyone. Nobody said anything about being offended by blacks talking about history. No one even came remotely near to telling anybody of any color to 'STFU'.

On the contrary:

and

We have just been given examples by three of the worst offenders in here in their tired tactic of throwing accusations with no merit whatever in lieu of answering with substance.

I offered detailed evidence of real, current problems and providers of solutions and these are ignored to make implied references to censorship with racist motivation.

Truly pathetic.

completely accurate take on it - Clay, Twin and BJ all implied "some here" are basically racist, with no evidence so they just use lazy innuendo. what a pathetic series of posts, basically just being complete trolls. good job calling them out on it, Harkin. and yes Jeff - it puts the lie to your post as well, at least as applied to this board - although not to you individually.

Quoting popcorn_karate: completely accurate take on it - Clay, Twin and BJ all implied "some here" are basically racist, with no evidence so they just use lazy innuendo.

what a pathetic series of posts, basically just being complete trolls.

good job calling them out on it, Harkin.

and yes Jeff - it puts the lie to your post as well, at least as applied to this board - although not to you individually.

What you asserted here is factually incorrect. "Some here" is your expression, nobody else's. The "no evidence" claim is simple to refute. Clay, for instance, takes approval (tacit or explicit) of Steve Sailer, for instance, as sufficient evidence of a claim of racism. You may or may not agree with him, but to claim he's making an evidence free assertion is plainly false. "Lazy innuendo" seems like a pretty good description of both the above and of harkin's post.

Quoting popcorn_karate: completely accurate take on it - Clay, Twin and BJ all implied "some here" are basically racist, with no evidence so they just use lazy innuendo.

what a pathetic series of posts, basically just being complete trolls.

good job calling them out on it, Harkin.

and yes Jeff - it puts the lie to your post as well, at least as applied to this board - although not to you individually.

I'll give rightwingers credit: they sure know how to shit on black people without resorting to blatant racism. It's always something about rhetorical approaches or deviations from perfect symmetry. But in the end the point is always that black people are wrong.

Quoting AemJeff: What you asserted here is factually incorrect. "Some here" is your expression, nobody else's. The "no evidence" claim is simple to refute. Clay, for instance, takes approval (tacit or explicit) of Steve Sailer, for instance, as sufficient evidence of a claim of racism. You may or may not agree with him, but to claim he's making an evidence free assertion is plainly false. "Lazy innuendo" seems like a pretty good description of both the above and of harkin's post.

I know conservatives hate anybody calling anything racist but if somebody says that black people are dumber due to their genetics that's pretty much the definition of racist. If people have a problem with that their priorities are messed up.

Quoting AemJeff: What you asserted here is factually incorrect. "Some here" is your expression, nobody else's. The "no evidence" claim is simple to refute. Clay, for instance, takes approval (tacit or explicit) of Steve Sailer, for instance, as sufficient evidence of a claim of racism. You may or may not agree with him, but to claim he's making an evidence free assertion is plainly false. "Lazy innuendo" seems like a pretty good description of both the above and of harkin's post.

considering that the posts in question were about the conversation on this board, and not about steve sailor, you fail again, Jeff. please point to anywhere in the discussion about this DV where any of these quotes are an accuarate depiction of the conversation:

"I can't follow the debate here. What's the point again? Somebody doesn't like black people talking about things that interest them?"

Yes. Also, blacks talking about their history is an affront to white conservatives.

And further, the only reason we still have racial problems in this country is because none of those dark-skinned people know when to STFU.

Quoting claymisher: I'll give rightwingers credit: they sure know how to shit on black people without resorting to blatant racism. It's always something about rhetorical approaches or deviations from perfect symmetry. But in the end the point is always that black people are wrong.

calling me a right winger? continued and epic failure.

Quoting claymisher: I know conservatives hate anybody calling anything racist but if somebody says that black people are dumber due to their genetics that's pretty much the definition of racist. If people have a problem with that their priorities are messed up.

you are the only person in this conversation to make those statements, clay.

Quoting popcorn_karate: considering that the posts in question were about the conversation on this board, and not about steve sailor, you fail again, Jeff.

please point to anywhere in the discussion about this DV where any of these quotes are an accuarate depiction of the conversation:

PK, feel free to post a coherent reply, and I'll respond.

Quoting popcorn_karate: calling me a right winger? continued and epic failure.

I wasn't talking about you.

Quoting popcorn_karate: you are the only person in this conversation to make those statements, clay.

Yeah, that's true in this conversation.

Quoting popcorn_karate: please point to anywhere in the discussion about this DV where any of these quotes are an accuarate depiction of the conversation:

How's this?

Quoting claymisher: Yeah, that's true in this conversation.

thanks for that agreement, clay. I just think it cuts down on the chance of having real conversations about a sensitive topic when those kind of comments get introduced without real provocation. you are right that there are a lot of idiots out there thinking about things in the way you were mocking, and I actually appreciate your passion on the issue. without the many people with that kind of passion we would still be living in a much more screwed up world than we have. peace, P_K

Quoting TwinSwords: How's this?

I thought your initial rebuttal of Badhat was excellent, calling her out on her whitewash (sorry about that word choice -eh never mind its probably perfect) of history. but, the later tarring of "conservatives" in general undoubtedly made some wonder whether you were targeting them, even if you were not. and its the kind of statement like "the left blah blah blah", or "liberals blah blah blah" that i think we all agree are pretty silly, right? thanks for your reasonable response.

Quoting AemJeff: PK, feel free to post a coherent reply, and I'll respond.

FYI, The whole "you are incoherent" , "connect the dots for me" line of b.s. you peddle when people disagree with you only makes you look stupid - everyone else is pretty capable of understanding whats going on, whether they agree or disagree with the perspective being presented.

Quoting popcorn_karate: FYI, The whole "you are incoherent" , "connect the dots for me" line of b.s. you peddle when people disagree with you only makes you look stupid - everyone else is pretty capable of understanding whats going on, whether they agree or disagree with the perspective being presented.

"Incoherent" was a perfectly good description of your prior post and its logic free line of attack. If you'd had a better understanding, you'd have posted something that made more sense in context. It's fairly easy to understand why: you can't seem to have a disagreement without taking it personally. Your posts have a tendency to read like you're pissed off and have something to prove. If you backed up slightly, tried to avoid namecalling and made an effort to parse what's said instead of looking for reasons to nurture pet peeves, it'd be easier to have a cogent conversation.

Quoting bjkeefe: And further, the only reason we still have racial problems in this country is because none of those dark-skinned people know when to STFU.

Also:

Obama's Justice Department hates white people.

Good thing we have Reasonable Conservatives like Patrick Ruffini winning on Twitter, though.

keep up the posturing, its pretty funny. but everyone else understood the point made by harkin without any additional "connecting the dots", so you might want to think about why it is that you couldn't figure it out. I guess if you want to argue that it really is your lack of intellectually ability, I should accept that. but I continue to think its just a particularly weak rhetorical device that really does not serve you very well.

Quoting popcorn_karate: keep up the posturing, its pretty funny.

but everyone else understood the point made by harkin without any additional "connecting the dots", so you might want to think about why it is that you couldn't figure it out.

I guess if you want to argue that it really is your lack of intellectually ability, I should accept that. but I continue to think its just a particularly weak rhetorical device that really does not serve you very well.

"Every one else understood...?" Are you a mind reader, pk? if you understood what harkin was saying, you had to be making some of the same assumptions as he was. I say the basis for his express point of view is unfounded, and makes no sense if you try to make reasonable assumptions. All I hear you saying is "Haha, Jeff. You dumb!" Frankly, I'll take my chances in regard to the tacit judgment of the peanut gallery on what I believe is the strength of what I have to say.

in contrast, in the Willkinson/Shenk dialog you actually made quite a good case of showing WHY harkin's argument in that thread was incoherent in your opinion, but you didn't pretend to simply not get what he was talking about. It was quite a lot more effective.

Quoting popcorn_karate: in contrast, in the Willkinson/Shenk dialog you actually made quite a good case of showing WHY harkin's argument in that thread was incoherent in your opinion, but you didn't pretend to simply not get what he was talking about.

It was quite a lot more effective.

There's no pretense involved. People ought to be able to back up what they say; and everybody deserves a chance to provide that backup. If they can't supply anything better than unsupported assertions, or if they can't stand up to the challenge, then the case is sufficiently made.

Quoting badhatharry: I'm not the daughter of a slave owner....not even close. If you want to feel responsible for what happened two hundred years ago, by all means go ahead.

[...]

I usually do not get involved in these arguments, but this time I cannot resist. The above line of thinking irritates the hell out of me. The civil rights act is less then 50 years old. Many minorities alive right now remember being under various jim crow laws. Keep that in mind as you look up the numbers attempting to quantify social mobility in the USA. Anyone who still thinks that the instutuitionilized racism of the past does not have a profound affect on the present is deluding themselves. Harry, your parents may not have set up slavery and instutuitionilized racism, but your goverment did. Just like today's goverment is financially responsible for past debts, today's goverment is morally responsibile for past atrocities. *None of the above means I support ethnic based social programs

more bitching. more bitching. more bitching. race. discrimination. your a racist. your a racist. sterotype. you owe me repartations. you owe me anti-white discrimination.