• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Roseanne Reboot

I don't think Roseanne is mentally ill in the strict clinical sense, but she did have some aggravating factors that made her be in a mentally unhealthy state.

Conspiracy websites (not just politically radical, but ones with crazy unfactual information)
Social media boosting, dopamine rushes from the stimulation and uncertainty of responses (like a slot machine)
Addled brain hardware from medical drugs and maybe alcohol in addition to aging (damn life sucks)

The racism has probably been there since childhood, but the mental damage from all the above made the filtering processes garbage and she let it slip out.

What I really want to see are some brain scans of people playing the slots or making real edgy tweets on twitter and waiting for responses do see how their brains light up.

Roseanne was in a mental institution for 9 months when she was 17. She thought she had multiple personality disorder. Sine MPD actually isn't real, she must be out of her gourd. Now that doesn't what you have written has no value. I think it's mostly true. But I also think we ought to be a little compassionate because her ability to make rational decisions is also a little hindered by the mental illness. So I would just put it as a 4th factor.
 
Media, liberals, and conservatives are so full of hypocrisy I just do not give a shit. FIX, CNN, and MSNBC have lost any credulity and have reduces themselves to 24 hour tabloid gossip.

I was walking through a park yesterday. A group of teens, black and white, were listening to music that reduced to screaming nigger over and over. The culture has lost civility, Roseanne doesn't even register as remarkable.

Congress tosses around taunts and insults like grammar school kids. Trump vialled someone's wife ugly in a debate.

I've listened to black comedians on cable, they should be as offensive to other blacks as anyone else can be. The idea of the 1st Amendment is speech regardless if it makes somebody uncomfortable. Limited by calls to violence or harm.

What is next? Being fired by an employer for making remarks in private life the company does not like? It is already happening.

For shits and giggles, anybody remember the short lived Richard Pryor show? The Smothers Brothers Show, censorship, and cancelation? George Carlin on the radio vs the FCC? WBAI in NYC as I remember.

You really sound like the old man yelling at kids to get off your lawn. "In my day..."
 
Media, liberals, and conservatives are so full of hypocrisy I just do not give a shit. FIX, CNN, and MSNBC have lost any credulity and have reduces themselves to 24 hour tabloid gossip.

I was walking through a park yesterday. A group of teens, black and white, were listening to music that reduced to screaming nigger over and over. The culture has lost civility, Roseanne doesn't even register as remarkable.

Congress tosses around taunts and insults like grammar school kids. Trump vialled someone's wife ugly in a debate.

I've listened to black comedians on cable, they should be as offensive to other blacks as anyone else can be. The idea of the 1st Amendment is speech regardless if it makes somebody uncomfortable. Limited by calls to violence or harm.

What is next? Being fired by an employer for making remarks in private life the company does not like? It is already happening.

For shits and giggles, anybody remember the short lived Richard Pryor show? The Smothers Brothers Show, censorship, and cancelation? George Carlin on the radio vs the FCC? WBAI in NYC as I remember.

You really sound like the old man yelling at kids to get off your lawn. "In my day..."

Yep, sure does...
 
[sidetrack]MPD (or as it is now referred to, Dissociative Identity Disorder) is very real. No, it was not debunked; no it is not the result of therapist “suggestions”; no “Sybil’s” therapist did not “create” her alters and “Sybil” did not confess to making it all up. If anyone cares to get into it in another thread, I’d be more than happy to. I’ve actually known someone afflicted with it (ex-girlfriend, no less) and have studied it extensively.[/sidetrack]
 
The more I think about it I don't think she should have lost her show.
 
What is more interesting to me are cases like Joy Ann Reid who has been caught making some antigay (driven by latent gay orientation?) blog posts a little over a decade ago. but she is a pretty good shill for her employer. Actually, only her lame excuses really threatened her career. But now some posts that attacked the jew have come to light. Even more dangerous for a career.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/joy-reid-blog-post-attacked-wolf-blitzer-for-being-too-soft-on-jews/

She was totally based back then

 
What is more interesting to me are cases like Joy Ann Reid who has been caught making some antigay (driven by latent gay orientation?) blog posts a little over a decade ago. but she is a pretty good shill for her employer. Actually, only her lame excuses really threatened her career. But now some posts that attacked the jew have come to light. Even more dangerous for a career.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/joy-reid-blog-post-attacked-wolf-blitzer-for-being-too-soft-on-jews/

She was totally based back then



Aaaaaand, just like that, there are the predictable "whataboutism" as part of a desperate attempt to change the subject.

That's how you know the rightists have lost an argument and know they know they've lost the argument: when they suddenly feel the need to talk about something else. It's the same white flag that lets you know when a Christian or Muslim apologist has lost an argument.

Anyway, FOX News did some "creative editing" when reporting on this. Not surprisingly, they are painting Roseanne as the Noble Hero Standing up to Social Justice Warriors. How dare we accuse her of racism just because she said something racist?

 
Tucker Carlson was mimicing segregationist talking points, like, last month. Is he really the best person to pick a fight over a blog post from years ago? And how does this, in any way, get rid of what Barr wrote this week?
 
I agree with almost everything Reid wrote that long ago. Segregationism could have worked. Alas...
 
Tucker Carlson.... (Grrrrrrrr...) what a tool...who back in 2012 ran a clip of Obama addressing a largely black audience and using a broad down-South accent that Tucker implied was a racist caricature. He then declared that he deemed that speech to be "disqualifying"!!! Obama should leave in disgrace. I don't watch his show, or anything on Fox -- you're saying he's okay with Planet of the Apes metaphors?
 
Actually I really feel sorry for Sarah Gilbert. I heard that she is the one that got the show back together, and I really liked seeing her on screen. Yeah, she's showing her years, but she's still damn hot. Too bad she plays for the other team.
And why is that "too bad"?

Because even though I don't have a chance with her, I don't have a chance with her.
 
Adults don't handle morality by defining specific rules for every circumstance. They use universal ethical principles to navigate social situations, and these principles lead to highly nuanced behaviour (such as it being only a mild insult to call G W Bush a monkey, but completely unacceptable to use the same epithet for Michelle Obama).

Hence the calls to grow up.

That double standard sounds to me much more like applying "specific rules" (ok to call A an X but not to call B an X) rather than applying universal principles. Universal principles are kind of antithetical to having rules that only apply to certain subgroups of humanity.

And in general, if the goal is to achieve real racial equality, should we not work to reduce disparate outrage based on race, not work to perpetuate it or even to make it worse? Should the "monkey" insult be treated the same as it is now in 20 years? 50 years? 500 years? I do not see how it can ever change with the current attitude.
 
No, and this is precisely the problem that she, Derec, and many others simply do not understand, or refuse to accept. One does not have to be wearing a hood and burning crosses in some poor family's front yard to be a racist. We are all racist to some degree,
Except black people, who can't be racist by definition, according to the Left.

and put simply, some of us are more open-minded and introspective or possess more empathy in order to realize it.
That is the kind of self-flagellating attitude that is very common among very devout religious believers. Everybody is sinner (Christianity), everybody (at least all white people) are racist (left wing pseudoreligion).

Also, and I think this cannot be overstated, one doesn't have to feel a burning hatred in their heart for non-whites as a white person, in order to be identified as a racist.
You are right, to be identified as racist (as opposed to actually being racist), one merely has to hold non-PC opinions. There was a "study" a few years ago that purported to show that well-educated whites were just as "racist" as our less well educated brethren. How did they measure racism? By asking people what they thought about policies such as "affirmative action". If you disagreed with study authors, you were labeled as "racist", as simple as that.

On the other hand, if one is black, one can have burning hatred against whites and still not be identified as racist, because of the double standard.
Take F. Keith Slaughter. He is an overt and outspoken racist. He also has a radio show on a small black radio station (WAOK 1380) here owned by CBS. He regularly uses racist slurs against white people including one he invented himself ("refrigerators"). And yet, CBS has not fired him. Because it's ok to be racist as long as you are black.
Slaughter-and-Farrakhan-640x401.jpg

Here he is with well-known racist Louis Farrakhan, who largely gets away with his racism.

If you feel righteously indignant anger for being accused of racism to the degree that you are always busy defending your behavior you will not see your own racism or your own privilege.
If you are accused, you are automatically guilty, especially if you deny it...


<Personal reference to another board member removed--staff edit> Of course, various other people of color were raised in their society as a subsection of ours, and instead of acknowledging that, they expect people of color to think, act and behave as if they were raised in ours alone. They fail to understand that these expectations are the very definition of racism. It denies people of color their own experiences and invalidates that lived experience.
Huh? I am not invalidating anybody's experience. But why should my experience be invalidated? When a white person and black person have a different opinion about race and racial relations, why is the black person's experience automatically assumed to be the correct one? Why are white people accused of racism whenever we have an opinion of race that in any way deviates from self-flaggelation?
27545516_1897512880561872_7617738322699114814_n.jpg

I refuse to self-flagellate myself for something done centuries ago by people who kinda-sorta looked like me. Such collective assigning of guilt based solely on skin color is the very root of racism, not an antidote.

Some of us realize that we as white people benefit from a society with pre-baked views like that, even if we don't support it.
How am I benefiting from it? Concretely. Like, if I apply to a college, do I get extra points for being white? No, quite the opposite. If I am a deputy in Clayton County, GA, do I get promoted easier because I am white? No, I get fired along with all other white deputies because a racist black sheriff got elected. And so on.

Even if we had no hand in creating it. Yet, if we want to change, if we want an even playing field for all, we have to admit to these things. Acknowledging that is difficult. To believe that your life's circumstances are due entirely to your own good or bad choices in that life when the largest determination of success is how wealthy your parents were is absurd. We live in a society where wealth trickles down through families over time. This is simply undeniable. Exceptions only prove the rule here. The fact that people of color were severely denied opportunity, housing and wealth in the past is also undeniable. Yet, many white people expect people of color to pull hard on those bootstraps and not acknowledge that those terrible past acts currently affect the present, in both social attitudes and concrete accumulated wealth. They have blinders on while they insist that everyone else is just making these concepts up because they literally like to feel guilty. It would be comical if it didn't perpetuate so much damage.

The solution to racism is to not treat people differently based on race. To perpetuate racist attitudes (this time against whites) as some sort of "payback" is not going to solve anything.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just as a reminder, here is Rule 8 #7:

8. FR makes available to you TFT provided that you agree to and abide by the Terms of Use, including that you agree:
...
(7) Not to goad, harass, insult, flame, spam, or invade the privacy of any the owners or any other registered member of this board;
...

If you read the Clarification of Rules for that item, you will find this helpful explanation:

Calling a fellow poster a liar, deceitful, or making a similar accusation, is not acceptable even if you believe that your fellow poster really is a liar or deceitful. This kind of accusation never furthers the debate. Some people sincerely believe the strangest, most illogical things, and they aren't 'lying' when they express those irrational beliefs. They really believe them to be true, even when they obviously contradict other things they have said. The only acceptable response to what appears to be a lie from a fellow poster is to present evidence or argument to contradict what your fellow poster has said.

Similarly, hyperbolic or overly emotive language and imagery, such as unwarranted comparisons to Nazi Germany, are generally discouraged and will be deleted if they appear to serve no purpose other than to inflame the discussion. We strive for rational and civil discussion here at TF, and if the moderators believe a post or a part of a post is counterproductive to that, they may need to edit.

For the most part, any personal remark about another member may be subject to edit/infraction. Address the content of the person's post; refrain from making comments about the person.

Note: If you have questions about board policies, address them in the Private Feedback forum.
 
Adults don't handle morality by defining specific rules for every circumstance. They use universal ethical principles to navigate social situations, and these principles lead to highly nuanced behaviour (such as it being only a mild insult to call G W Bush a monkey, but completely unacceptable to use the same epithet for Michelle Obama).

Hence the calls to grow up.

That double standard sounds to me much more like applying "specific rules" (ok to call A an X but not to call B an X) rather than applying universal principles. Universal principles are kind of antithetical to having rules that only apply to certain subgroups of humanity.
It's not a double standard. It's a recognition that not all subgroups have identical history. :rolleyes:
And in general, if the goal is to achieve real racial equality, should we not work to reduce disparate outrage based on race, not work to perpetuate it or even to make it worse? Should the "monkey" insult be treated the same as it is now in 20 years? 50 years? 500 years? I do not see how it can ever change with the current attitude.
It won't unless morons stop using it.

FFS I covered this already less than a week ago:
...

History starts now. This is not something from 40 years ago, it is from the much more recent past. And the only way to move on from it - to allow time to make it pass into, if not respectability, then at least rehabilitation - is to NOT DO IT for a long enough time that all those who were subjected to the insult are now dead.

Every time you raise the spectre of this racist insult again, you restart the clock. IF you want to rehabilitate jokes about people being apes, such that they are NOT racist when applied to black people, THEN you need to stop making such jokes. Your grandchildren or great-grandchildren might thank you for it.

Humour is tragedy plus time. If you try for humour without giving it enough time, you just look like a fucking jerk.

When it comes to what is or is not insulting, society binds us, and the root of those bonds is history. Ignore recent history, and you don't come across as a brave warrior for modernity, you come across as a vile and insensitive prick. There is no alternative, no way you can fight that, no option to disregard it - because it binds us whether we like it or not.

Grow. The fuck. Up.
 
According to biology, humans are apes. All of us.
Yep.
The problem then comes with those who make an artificial distinction, not supported by biology.

Such as the woman who looked forward to Melania being in the WH, rather than 'that ape in high heels.'

Biologically, M. Trump is the new ape, not an alternative to an ape...
 
According to biology, humans are apes. All of us.

Yeah, but most of the alt-right white supremacists (aka, Trump supporters) who Roseanne was trying to appeal to do not believe in evolution (or climate change or much of science), and the few that do hold an unscientific theistic version of evolution where humans are not merely a variant of apes but evolved "above" and "beyond" apes into a higher level of some cosmic hierarchy of worth.

Thus, to her and her fellow Trump fans, pointing out that a person is an "ape" is intended a racist insult implying that, like apes, people of that race are lower and inferior. The fact that she unwittingly used a scientific fact as part of her intended insult, just means she is a moron in addition to being a racist (which most racists are).
 
Back
Top Bottom