Minneapolis PD Suffocate Unarmed Black Man Who Later Dies in Hospital

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

One thing to keep in mind is that Aunt and Uncle to refer to black elders can be considered problematic. In some cases, it was a way of getting away from calling them Sir or Ma'am and Mr. or Mrs. like their white counterparts. It's not unfair to say that it's called Aunt Jemima instead of Mrs. Jemima because the racists (read: pretty much all white people in the 1800s southern states) would have rioted over giving her that type of respect. While Mrs. Butterworth still has the same 'mammy' racial issues, her creation in the 1960s meant she wasn't called Aunt Butterworth. Think of it like the word "boy", on the surface it doesn't seem at all bad but if you hear a southern police officer call a black man a "boy" you know he's a racist ####head.

In other cases it's because slaves were seen as part of the family, as terrible as that sounds and was. And in other cases it was just a way of showing southern endearing traits.

Yeah the South is certainly a different deal than most places. I dont recall hearing "boy" directed at anyone other than a child when i resided there, but that certainly doesnt mean it didnt occur.

More often than not, and even directed at me by people of both white and black skin color was being called "son". Even younger people would use that term. I didnt think much of it other than it was just a Southern thing, (though a bit odd) and likely thats all it was meant as.

Other words down there though are entirely local and not derogatory per se, but still a bastardization of the english language.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by transplant99

So....have we gotten to the point where any depiction of a black person on a label is considered racist?

Genuinely asking after reading this piece on CBC.ca



Just looks like an old guy laughing to me. Just not sure how that depicts anyone in a poor or lesser light.

Now it is just a review at this point, but is that even warranted?


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfo...-nlc-1.5618690

Yes, any time you refer to a black person as 'Sam' you are being racist. maybe its just a british thing but 'Sam' is short for 'sam**' which in the UK will get you beaten to a bloody pulp and you will deserve the beating.

[afc wimbledon]

To put it in context I remember being pulled over with my black friend back in the late 70's and the cop would refer to my friend as 'Sammy or Sam' as in 'hey Sammy lets see your drivers licence, where are you going Sam', my mates name was Dave

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Yes, any time you refer to a black person as 'Sam' you are being racist. maybe its just a british thing but 'Sam' is short for 'sam**' which in the UK will get you beaten to a bloody pulp and you will deserve the beating.

I'm trying to figure out what the ** is, and I can't figure it out.

An interesting fact I was just recently learning about was how in both Canada and the US, every railway porter was typically called 'George' by customers, a reference to George Pullman, who developed the Pullman Sleeping Car, which were almost always staffed by black employees. The struggle to actually be able to display nametags in the car was a long-standing union labour dispute, only resolved in 1945 in Canada. There's definitely a history of avoiding using people's actual names as a way of enforcing ideas of social rank.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by octothorp

I'm trying to figure out what the ** is, and I can't figure it out.

An interesting fact I was just recently learning about was how in both Canada and the US, every railway porter was typically called 'George' by customers, a reference to George Pullman, who developed the Pullman Sleeping Car, which were almost always staffed by black employees. The struggle to actually be able to display nametags in the car was a long-standing union labour dispute, only resolved in 1945 in Canada. There's definitely a history of avoiding using people's actual names as a way of enforcing ideas of social rank.

** = bo. Old timey racist English stuff. Can’t say I’ve ever actually heard it in person or used by anyone but it exists for sure.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

** = bo. Old timey racist English stuff. Can’t say I’ve ever actually heard it in person or used by anyone but it exists for sure.

You hear it a lot at soccer matches still to this day, back when I was a kid it was (and still is) the British equivalent of the n word

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

You hear it a lot at soccer matches still to this day, back when I was a kid it was (and still is) the British equivalent of the n word

Interesting...had no idea.

I do remember a restaurant called Sambo way back when that was forced to shut down because of its imagery. Had no idea the name itself was also considered derogatory.

So Sam is short for Sambo in the case of this liquor? If so, then yeah, I get the reasoning....but i honestly looked at that label and just saw an old guy laughing.

Looking at the company website, it appears the original curator was a guy named Sam.

https://www.oldsamrum.com/about-old-sam-rum

But more importantly...anyone tried this stuff?

I like a good rum and hadnt even heard of this stuff til today.

[midniteowl]

I find it interesting that the differences between culture in calling someone aunt and uncle, even grandma and grandpa. In Chinese culture, calling elders aunts and uncle, grandma and grandpa are out of respect. Calling someone grandson though, is totally opposite.

[MarchHare]

My mother grew up as a white British colonist in Kenya in the 1950s and 60s. When she reached adulthood and had children of her own, she passed on some her favourite stories and toys from her youth to me and my sister. That included a popular British children's book titled "Little Black Sambo" and a Golliwog doll. I'm absolutely certain she wasn't trying to be deliberately racist or to teach her children to think less of black people, but it's shocking now to look at this imagery and realize that it was considered completely acceptable to share with children as recently as the 1980s.

Spoilered for shocking racist caricatures:

Spoiler!

[Cliche]

George Washington statue destroyed

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rs-Oregon.html

https://twitter.com/user/status/1273942316500353025


Stepmother of Atlanta cop charged with shooting dead Rayshard Brooks is fired from her job
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...fired-job.html

The company said Melissa, a HR director, had violated company policy and created an 'uncomfortable' and 'hostile' working environment.

employees no longer felt comfortable engaging with her.

Next we'll be burning copies of Blazing Saddles, Tropic Thunder as well as Magic the Gathering cards and Dungeons and Dragons books in great big bonfires.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Cliche

Next we'll be burning copies of Blazing Saddles, Tropic Thunder as well as Magic the Gathering cards and Dungeons and Dragons books in great big bonfires.

This is the slippery slope that we all saw coming.

There was a brief segment on CNN today that a dog named Spike was being married to a cat named Tom. The officiant was even a mouse named Jerry. Like wtf is this world coming to??

[FlamesAddiction]

Poor former slave owner and man who refused to even discuss the merits of emancipation, George Washington.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I don't know the solution, I don't know who gets to decide if Apu was problematically racist or not ,.

Anecdotally, my girlfriend is Indian, loves the Simpsons, but finds the Apu character (and many of the jokes about Indians in the show) incredibly racist and offensive.

[PepsiFree]

The reaction to the Melissa Rolfe thing is pretty funny too. Seems like the firing was due to the fact that she violated company policy, which, not knowing the exact violation, is maybe understandable (that she would act out) given that she is dealing with the realisation that her son is a murderer.

But right-wing twitter, from Tucker Carlson to the countless randoms: "She was FIRED for NO REASON because she was the MOTHER of a WRONGLY ACCUSED POLICE OFFICER and this is MOB JUSTICE from the LOONEY LEFT that is turning us into NORTH KOREA."

Like, alright, simmer down.

I'm not really sure why the left has a reputation for moral outrage, there is a constant and overwhelming cascade of it on the right as well. It's all very funny.

EDIT: I also have to say, I find it surreal that the same people outraged over a private business firing someone for violating company policy are very much the same people (same type, and in many instances, same actual people) who think companies should be able to deny service and employment to LGBTQ people. Just profound levels of ignorant outrage.

[FlamesAddiction]

nm - glitch in the matrix.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I'm not really sure why the left has a reputation for moral outrage, there is a constant and overwhelming cascade of it on the right as well. It's all very funny.

This doesn't tie into the substance of your post about Rolfe, which I actually fully agree with, but there are still plenty of examples to point to even in the course of events since Floyd's death that make it perfectly clear why the left has this reputation. I very much recommend this piece, which, if I were curating a list of "things to read if you want to understand how I see politics today", would have to be on it: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-ne...troying-itself

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This doesn't tie into the substance of your post about Rolfe, which I actually fully agree with, but there are still plenty of examples to point to even in the course of events since Floyd's death that make it perfectly clear why the left has this reputation. I very much recommend this piece, which, if I were curating a list of "things to read if you want to understand how I see politics today", would have to be on it: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-ne...troying-itself

I should have said, I'm not sure why the left is the only one with this reputation, as I'm fully aware of why it has the reputation it does, just that "the right" certainly has it's own influential share of the moral outrage space.

In regards to the article, it does very much read like it came out of your brain lol, but I'll offer this up to read in response (which touches on some of the same ideas, same examples, and even lightly addresses our social media conversation): https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily...wflake-defense

[Galakanokis]

This will help.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/19/u...imes&smtyp=cur

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I'll offer this up to read in response (which touches on some of the same ideas, same examples, and even lightly addresses our social media conversation): https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily...wflake-defense

Thanks. It's an interesting way to frame the dichotomy. What immediately jumped out at me was the reference to Haidt and Lukianoff, who I was thinking about specifically while I read the Taibbi article I posted above. Marantz comes to the conclusion that their analysis is fine as far as it goes in the college setting, but that once you get into the real world and the stakes raise, that it doesn't translate, i.e.:

There was a national uproar over the column, and a backlash to the backlash. Much of it took a familiar form. The free-speech stalwarts accused the contextualists of being coddled snowflakes who couldn’t handle the rough and tumble of debate. But things have gone too far in this country for an old script about campus culture wars to be of much use.

First, while I'm sure that was much of the backlash, it isn't really the center of what the criticism is from Taibbi, which is that effectively what the New York Times has done in responding to the Cotton op-ed in the way that it did was to tell its audience, "look, we understand that this is a viewpoint shared by millions of Americans and apparently the President. But we can't have someone express it here. For that, you need to go watch Tucker Carlson. If you're interested in our view of the world exclusively, feel free to stick around".

That response is, I think, fatal to what he calls a "contextualist" view that views like Cotton's are so odious as to be dangerous to be allowed to be given air. Leave aside the fact that I do not trust anyone, let alone New York Times staffers with twitter accounts, to decide what views are adequately odious to be placed in that category. The reality is that refusing to air the disagreement and respond to it substantively is not somehow going to prevent violence from occurring. Rather, it fans the flames, by radicalizing isolated ideological elements. At this point, it seems inevitable that at some point, the polarization in the United States is going to reach a point where the mob who stormed the Michigan state house in April comes face to face with the mob that set fire to a bunch of buildings in Atlanta in May, and no amount of editorial discretion by mainstream news outlets is going to stop that from happening. It can't possibly. That's just not how people work. If anything, it will simply ensure that any such clash (or the thousands of others that happen on a smaller scale) will be all the more bitter for the entrenching the certainty that the other is evil, stupid, full of liars, and so on and so forth.

But second, I think the issue in newsrooms is precisely what Lukianoff and Haidt were talking about, five years later. Those same students in liberal arts disciplines have graduated and have found their way into the newsrooms of the Times and the Intercept, and this is the obvious, predictable result. If you go back and read the original piece by Haidt and Lukianoff that Marantz is referencing, it's actually a short-form psychological profile about the way those people, like Akela Lacy, deal with conflict and with viewpoints that make them uncomfortable. This was all wholly predictable, years ago.

[PsYcNeT]

Anyone who honestly believes Blazing Saddles would be cancelled obviously doesn't understand Blazing Saddles or how true comedy punches up.