Comedy Sketch
There is a comedy video on MTV now, Was that Racist? An Inside Out Parody | Decoded | MTV News. It was created by Franchesca Ramsey, who is famous for the viral video Shit White Girls Say…to Black Girls. In the credits, it says: “Brought to you with love by: MTV Other.”
A young poc lady goes into a coffee shop. The barista is on the phone, and holds up a finger to indicate that he will wait on her in a minute. The young lady is escorted by her emotions: Shade, Paranoia, Weariness, Fury, and Hope. All except Fury are ladies. Shade, Weariness, and Hope are wearing tacky wigs.
At :57 the young lady asks the barista if they have iced coffee. The barista ignores her. Paranoia asks if this seems a little racist. Hope says he is busy. At 1:01, Fury looks straight into the camera and says the barista is busy organizing a klan rally.
At this point, PG turned the video off. Yes, this is satire. But many people are encouraged to let their emotions out. It is highly believable for someone to say the barista is busy organizing a klan rally.
Lets turn the tables around. Lets say it was a pwoc customer, and the barista was a poc. The customer doesn’t get waited on immediately. The customer says the barista is busy planning a robbery. A lot of people would think that goes too far for a comedy sketch.
A white customer shows up. The poc and pwoc smile at each other, acknowledging the poor customer service. One of the emotions says “he gets it.” Fury says something about showing basic human decency, and should be buy him a cookie. In case you don’t know, when a pwoc points out that they do not engage in “racist” behavior, this is known, with derision, as asking for a cookie.
The barista comes out, and looks in the direction of the pwoc customer when he asks for the order. Fury says “this guy is officially the most racist barista in America … it’s because we’re black.” Flames are coming out of Fury’s head.
The pwoc customer says that the poc was here first. One of the emotions says we are living in a post racial America. At 2:09, the barista hands the poc the coffee. Under the edge of his shirt sleeve is seen a stars and bars tattoo. Fury raises his arm and says “called it.”
This is supposed to be entertainment. Probably some viewers will get a kick out of Fury, and his mouth. There will be some who think this is a bit much. Most will just shrug it off. Many people have encountered others, who do not have the grace to keep their emotions under control, and say foolish things. It is not pretty. PG did not think it was funny
@chamblee54 would a coffee shop allow a barista to have a visible csa tattoo? i doubt it
@chescaleigh @chamblee54 is it possible to suspend your disbelief for a 2 minute comedy sketch?
Pictures today are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
Founding Babydaddies
People often try to justify their opinions by saying that the “founding fathers” agree with them. They often are guilty of selective use of history. A good place to start would be to define what we mean by the phrase founding fathers. This is a repost
The FF word was not used before 1916. A senator from Ohio named Warren Harding used the phrase in the keynote address of the 1916 Republican convention. Mr. Harding was elected President in 1920, and is regarded as perhaps the most corrupt man to ever hold the office.
There are two groups of men who could be considered the founding fathers. (The fathers part is correct. Both groups are 100% white male.) The Continental Congress issued the Declaration of Independence, which cut the ties to England. Eleven years later, the Constitutional Convention wrote the Constitution that governs America today. While the Continental Congress was braver, the Constitution is the document that tells our government how to function. For the purposes of this feature, the men of the Constitutional Convention are the founding fathers.
Before moving on, we should remember eight men who signed the Declaration of Independence, and later attended the Constitutional Convention. Both documents were signed by George Clymer, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Morris, George Read, Roger Sherman, and James Wilson. George Wythe left the Convention without signing the new document. Elbridge Gerry (the namesake of gerrymandering) refused to sign the Constitution because it did not have a Bill of Rights.
The original topic of this discussion was about whether the founding fathers owned slaves. Many people wonder about this. If you go to google, and type in “did the founding fathers”, the first four answers are owned slaves, believed in G-d, have a death wish, and smoke weed.
The answer, to the obvious question, is an obvious answer. Yes, many of the founding fathers owned slaves. A name by name rundown of the 39 signatories of the Constitution was not done for this blogpost. There is this revealing comment at wiki answers about the prevalence of slave ownership. “John Adams, his second cousin Samuel Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Paine were the only men who are traditionally known as founding fathers who did not own slaves.
Benjamin Franklin was indeed a founder of the Abolitionist Society, but he owned two slaves, named King and George. Franklin’s newspaper, the Pennsylvania Gazette routinely ran ads for sale or purchase of slaves.
Patrick Henry is another founding father who owned slaves, although his speeches would make one think otherwise. Despite his “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” speech, he had up to 70 slaves at a time. He did apologize from time to time. He knew it was wrong, he was accountable to his God, and bemoaned the “general inconvenience of living without them.”
Patrick Henry was a star of the Revolution, but not present at the Constitutional Convention. The author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, was in Europe during the convention. Mr. Jefferson not only owned slaves, he took one to be his mistress, and kidsmama.
One of the more controversial features of the Constitution is the 3/5 rule. Here are the original words “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.” In other words, a slave was only considered to be 60% of a person.
This is offensive to people today. It was a compromise. The agricultural southern states did not want to give up their slaves. The northern states did not want to give up Congressional representation. This was the first of many compromises made about slavery, ending with the War between the States. This webpage goes into more detail about the nature of slavery.
The research for this feature turned up a rather cynical document called The myth of the “Founding Fathers” . It is written by Adolph Nixon. He asks : “most rational persons realize that such political mythology is sheer nonsense, but it begs the question, who were the Founding Fathers and what makes them so great that they’re wiser than you are?” (The link for this information keeps changing. Here is the latest source. This is not a totally reliable source.)
Mr. Nixon reviews the 39 white men who signed the Constitution. He does not follow the rule, if you can’t say anything nice about someone, then don’t say anything at all. Of the 39, 12 were specified as slave owners, with many tagged as “slave breeders”.
The Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, have served America well. However it was intended, it was written so that it could be amended, and to grow with the young republic. It has on occasion been ignored (when was the last time Congress declared war?). However fine a document it is, it was created by men. These were men of their time, who could not have foreseen the changes that America has gone through. Those who talk the most about the founding fathers know the least about them.
Racism Education
A link keeps turning up on facebook. It is for an item, 18 Things White People Should Know/Do Before Discussing Racism. It was posted at The Frisky | Celebrity Gossip, Relationship Advice, Beauty and Fashion Tips. The facility has a series of suggested posts at the top of the page. The first one you see is BLOWJOB TECHNIQUES YOU NEED TO TRY.
18 Things is supposed to be educational. PG was encouraged to read the piece two weeks ago, and found it lacking. The link today was from a combination facebook friend/ facebook unfriend. Maybe 18 Things deserves another look.
18 Things is garbage. Take a look at number one. “1. It is uncomfortable to talk about racism. It is more uncomfortable to live it.” You would never know this from the number of people who seem to enjoy talking about racism. The louder you talk, and the more passion you display, the more truth your words have. Maybe what is uncomfortable is to quit talking, and listen.
But then, maybe the idea is for everyone to talk at once. Here is item 16: “16. Silence does nothing. Blank stares and silence do not further this difficult but necessary conversation.” If you are going to listen to someone, it is very helpful to keep your mouth shut.
“2. “Colorblindness” is a cop-out. The statements “but I don’t see color” or “I never care about color” do not help to build a case against systemic racism. Try being the only White person in an environment. You will notice color then.” This is a curious paragraph. Sentence one has little to do with sentences two, three, and four.
Sentences three and four are connected. The author assumes that the PWOC reading this piece has never been the only pale face in an enviornment. Actually, it is probably more common to be the only white person in the room, than to be the only black person in a room full of whites.
“3. Oprah’s success does not mean the end of racism. The singular success of a Black man or woman (i.e. Oprah, or Tiger Woods, or President Obama) is never a valid argument against the existence of racism. By this logic, the success of Frederick Douglass or Amanda America Dickson during the 19th century would be grounds for disproving slavery.”
Has anyone ever said that the success of Oprah Winfrey is the end of racism? Do you have a link for that? Ok, and even if they did say that, it would be wildly untrue. But it gets better. If you agree with this statement that very few people have made, that is like saying that the success of Frederick Douglass disproves slavery. This is ridiculous.
The rest of the piece is not much better. Items 4, 5, 9, 14, and 15, can be summed up with the five words … there is racism in America. You are encouraged to use google to educate yourself. This can go in different directions. Maybe you could google “logical fallacy,” or “critical thinking.”
This feature should not be taken as denying the existence of a race problem in America. (The words racism/racist are problematic.) People should be treated with kindness and respect. Opportunities should be available to all people. The police should not target racially defined populations. Celebrities should not say tacky things.
The question arises, though. What value do articles like 18 Things have? Do they inform people who need to learn? Are they preaching to the choir? (Frisky has a header ad for Red Bull. Do articles like this sell power energy drinks?)
There are other possibilities. Do articles like 18 Things trivialize racial problems? Maybe the constant promotion of nonsense like 18 Things will lead people to believe that there really isn’t a race problem in America. People who uncritically praise articles like this are doing more harm than good. Those who claim to educate should be held to some sort of standard. Posting nonsense on the internet is not the same thing as working for equality and justice.
This is a repost. Pictures are from The Library of Congress.
How Black Is BHO?
Episode 35741 of bloggingheads.tv is another edition of the two black guys, @JohnHMcWhorter and @GlennLoury. They had plenty to talk about. PG has been burned out on racial discussions, and kept turning it off and on. Finally, at the 43 minute mark, PG realized that it was just fifteen minutes to go. He might as well listen to the rest of the show.
At 46:11, there was something to listen to. Dr. McWhorter had been talking about the eulogy BHO gave at the funeral of Rev. Clementa Pickney. The message was set in the rhythyms of the black church. It was very well received.
BHO was raised by white people. He lived in Hawaii and Indonesia. BHO attended Columbia University and Harvard Law School. When BHO came to Chicago, and began a political career, it was suggested that he find a church. This church affiliation is essential to an identity as a black politician. The act of speaking, in a black church, in the manner of a black minister, is something that BHO learned as an adult.
Rachel Dolezal was discussed on the show. Here is a white woman, who presented herself as black. After a while, she was roundly criticized for doing so. It was said that she has not suffered the hardships, and oppression, that comes with being black. Therefore, this light skinned woman is the object of derision for claiming to be black.
BHO was raised by white people in Hawaii and Indonesia. Arguably, he has suffered little, if any, of the oppression that most black people face. He chose to attend a black church in part because he wanted a political base. And yet, this half white man with dark skin is routinely accepted as a black man. Racial labeling, like beauty, is skin deep.
Pictures are from The Library of Congress.
Paula Deen Two Years Later
Two years ago, the media racism carnival centered around Paula Deen. A disgruntled former employee was shaking down the celebrity. The DFE, who was white, claimed racial discrimination. Many say the DFE was exploiting the oppression of black people for personal gain.
A few things have happened since this story was published. These three links tell part of the story. Race-based claims thrown out in Paula Deen lawsuit, Paula Deen lawsuit appears to be over; settlement a possibility, Paula Deen closes restaurant at center of harassment lawsuit.
This story is a repost. Some of the links in this story no longer work. The link to Deposition of plaintiff Lisa T. Jackson vs. Paula Deen Enterprises, etc. does work. Pages 15 and 153 are interesting. On page 267, Lisa Jackson says that Jim Crow is a singer.
The New York Times did it’s liberal media duty Saturday with a story about Savannah, and the Paula Deen controversy. There were three curious words in paragraph four. “The predicament that Ms. Deen finds herself in began when a former employee — a white woman who is now managing restaurants in Atlanta — filed a discrimination lawsuit in March 2012.”
This thing has seemed, er, fishy from the get go. The restaurant industry is full of disgruntled former employees, few of whom are paragons of virtue. DFE worked in a restaurant partially owned by a famous person. It is uncertain how active the famous person was in the day to day operation of the restaurant. DFE has a lawyer, who gets famous person to say embarrassing things in a deposition. Somehow, this deposition is leaked to National Enquirer. And now we learn that DFE is white.
Confirmation of the ethnicity of DFE is tough to come by. Few pictures are available. You have to ask Mr. Google repeated questions. A law industry blog called Huseby (spell check suggestion:Houseboy) has a good story on the matter, with a couple of links.
The attorney for the plaintiff, Matthew Billips, has a few issues. “The case began with an “inflammatory letter seeking over a million dollars for forgo filing a lawsuit and allow Deen ‘a chance to salvage a brand that can continue to have value,’ ” Withers’ document said. (Tom Withers, attorney for Bubba Hiers, the brother of Paula Deen) In the motion to dismiss Billips, Withers quoted a tweet by Billips in which he said “suing Paula Deen is a hoot.” Withers also referred to a sexually laced tweet Billips directed at Deen “even more concerning.” In it, “Billips promises to symbolically undress and have sex with” Deen, Withers said. “Billips has posted sexually explicit tweets using extremely graphic and profane language and imagery. He has used the “N” word,” Withers’ motion said.”
Huseby links to an article in the ABA Journal that is downright fascinating. This feature confirms that Lisa Jackson, the DFE/plaintiff, is melanin deficient. The Deen-Hiers legal team has filed a motion, that is highly entertaining. Unfortunately, the pdf is not copy friendly, so the ABA summary will have to do. If you have the time to read the legal motion, you will enjoy it.
“The motion by lawyer Tom Withers says the plaintiff pursuing race-based claims has no standing to assert them because she is white, the Savannah Morning News reports. The plaintiff, Lisa Jackson, had claimed she was sexually harassed and worked in a racially hostile environment at a restaurant owned by Deen and her brother. Withers represents Deen’s brother and the restaurant.
According to the motion, Jackson claimed she was offended because her nieces “are bi-racial with an African-American father.” But the motion says there is just one niece, and she is related to Jackson’s partner, who said in a deposition that the niece’s father is Hispanic and she hasn’t seen the girl in years…. “Jackson cannot enforce someone else’s right, and she has no actionable claim for feeling ‘uncomfortable’ around discriminatory conduct directed at others … Jackson must show that any harassment was directed toward her because she was white, but at her deposition she alleged she was treated more favorably than African American employees at the restaurant.” (p.153)
Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
POTUS WTF
There are two words that are considered politically incorrect to use. This is the F-word, and the N-word. According to the NATO Phonetic Alphabet, this is Foxtrot and November.
Marc Maron is a comedian by trade. He is the perp behind the WTF podcast. This is not Whiskey Tango Foxtrot. Mr. Maron opens the show by saying welcome whatthefuckers, what the fuckadelics, what the fuqstix, etc, etc. He finagles Foxtrot into the fucking furniture.
Today was episode #613 of WTF. The guest in the garage was @POTUS himself, Barack Obama. In honor of the occasion, Mr. Maron dispensed with the Foxtrot litany. The show began right away, without commercials or monolog.
The guest made up for the absense of Foxtrot. At 46:40, BHO said the N-word. This is what people will be talking about this week. Rachel whatshername can resume her search for a new hairdresser in private. Global warming will not be affected.
@bob_owens The white half of @POTUS is racist for using the “n-word.” @tuxedotomybowti Someone said President Obama is racist for using the n-word. Seriously? We have had presidents own slaves. Wth @MattyIceAZ Fox News cares more about the N-word taken out of context than any scientific expert taken in context.
PG has felt for a long time that America does itself no favor by getting hysterical over November. Yes, it is hurtful to a significant portion of our population. The problem is, when you make a federal case (literally) out of using November in public, you give six letters more power than they deserve.
As BHO noted, racism is more than saying November. Not using the magic word will not make Police kinder and gentler. Dropping those six letters will not create economic opportunity, end the war on drugs, disconnect the school to prison pipeline, or make sperm donors fulfill their duty as fathers. November is a symptom, not the disease. It remains to be seen if the disease is treatable. Euthanasia cannot be ruled out. Pictures are from The Library of Congress.
Stars And Bars
@KenSimonSays The Confederate flag began flying over SC Capitol in 1962 as protest to desegregation. It’s not “heritage”, it’s racism. #TakeItDown
As Richard Nixon might have said, let me make one thing perfectly clear. PG is no fan of the stars and bars. Whatever value the “Confederate Flag” may have as a symbol of southern heritage has been obscured by its use as a symbol of hatred for black people. South Carolina should not fly the “Confederate flag” over the state capitol.
On the other hand, PG does not like being lied to. If you are offended by a symbol, then say you are offended by a symbol. Don’t rewrite history to support your cause. If your cause is so wonderful, then you should not need to conjure up so called facts from history.
In 1956, Georgia incorporated the stars and bars into the state flag. In 1993, people wanted to change the flag. So far, so good. The flag was an aesthetic eyesore. The flag was offensive to a significant portion of the state population. The flag eventually was changed, and changed again.
There was one problem with the 1993 effort to change the flag. Governor Zell Miller, a strong proponent of flag change, said in a speech that the stars and bars were added to the flag, in 1956, as a protest against integration. Many people accepted this bit of historic revision without question.
Some did not believe that for a minute. The legislature in 1956 was not that smart. They were a bunch of white males who were, with a few exceptions, racist, alcoholic crooks. If someone had suggested a flag change as a stand of defiance against desegregation, they might have thought it a good idea, but few Georgia legislators thought like that. This was 1956. The sixties, where protest became the new national pastime, were a few years away.
PG did some research, and found a newspaper article from February 1956 announcing the new flag. The article did not mention protesting integration. Instead, the legislature said they wanted to honor the Confederacy. The cult of the Confederacy was stronger in 1956 than it is today.
@chamblee54 “flag began flying over SC Capitol as protest to desegregation” ~ do you have documentation for that claim?
@KenSimonSays link 01 (pages 18-19, et al); link 02 (para 1); link 03
The three links provided are scholarly accounts of various issues. None of them showed that the motive for flying the stars and bars was a “protest to desegregation.” This passage from link03 is typical. “The flag was first raised over the capitol in 1962, just a few years before Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In its historical context, the decision to first fly the flag over the South Carolina capitol can reasonably be seen as a defiant act by a legislature determined to resist national pressure to desegregate.”
Link01 tells much the same story. “South Carolina began its official celebration of the Confederate flag in 1962 during a time when many white Southerners were resisting the end of Jim Crow Laws with police dogs and much worse. Traditionally, governments fly flags to endorse or approve what is symbolized, and not to provide history lessons.”
The next sentence is ironic. This is lawyer writing, which is mostly incomprehensible to people like PG. This sentence is probably not intended in the way PG is taking it. “In Croson, the Court established three basic principles of skepticism, consistency, and congruence concerning governmental race based classifications.” PG seldom needs encouragement to be skeptical.
@chamblee54 “in it’s historic context, the decision to first fly the flag …can reasonably be seen as a defiant act” (1)
@chamblee54 A scholar talking about historic context is not good enough I want a newspaper account from 1962 saying (2)
@chamblee54 this is why the flag is being flown they pulled this BS in GA over the state flag https://chamblee54.wordpress.com/2015/05/03/changing-the-flag/ …
@KenSimonSays Ah BS, from a man who quotes himself to try and prove a point. Hey, you’re entitled to kick your feet all you want.
@KenSimonSays And keep in mind, these are the same ppl who’ve convinced themselves that Civil War was fought over “states rigjhts”
@KenSimonSays and not slavery, so they’re very good at bullshitting themselves.
@KenSimonSays Eventually, the bigots are going to not have any more space to wriggle out of.
@Brimshack Did you really think they would actually say they were flying the flag to protest desegregation? (@Brimshack retweeted the first tweet from @KenSimonSays. PG currently follows @Brimshack, who is based in Alaska.)
@chamblee54 I went through this with the ga state flag – am no fan of csa flag – the protest integration thing rings false (1)
@chamblee54 you say it is to protest integration, a publicity stunt … of course they would say that is why they did it(2)
@KenSimonSays Not a publicity stunt. A temper tantrum codified into law. You think politicians are above such things? Or that the
@KenSimonSays flag suddenly magically appeared after almost a full century of not really being an issue…until integration enters
@KenSimonSays the picture, first in schools in the ’50s and more and more in the proceeding years. Closing your eyes to this is
@KenSimonSays what’s got a lot of people down there thinking the war was “northern aggression” over “states rights”.
@Brimshack That isn’t clear at all. This would be one of many disingenuous narratives produced by neoconfederates.
@KenSimonSays But that flag will come down eventually, it’s just a matter of time. And you’ll pout & write abt how unfair it is,
@KenSimonSays how it violates your free speech, dishonors memory of the dead, govt intrusion, all the while the real reason is the
@KenSimonSays that Yankees came down & told wealthy sadists what to do with their slaves & you side with the slave owners.
This is why we can’t have nice things. At no time did PG support South Carolina flying the stars and bars. All he did was show “skepticism,” per link01, to an statement. This statement was used to support something that all three parties agree on. People get so attached to their arguments that a little bit of “skepticism” makes them crazy. Just for the record, in case you missed it the first time: South Carolina should not fly the “Confederate flag” over the state capitol.
The issue of the stars and bars continues to be much talked about. The gun culture is untouchable. The concept of solving problems through violence is not challenged. The verbal abuse culture is celebrated, especially in the Jesus worship church. Denial of mental health issues has become politically correct, at least where Dylann Roof is concerned. Since none of these root causes of the Charleston tragedy are going to be addressed, people focus on a tacky historic symbol.
Pictures of Union Soldiers from the War Between the States, are from The Library of Congress.
How To Drive In Atlanta
1. You must first learn to pronounce the city name, Atlana. Old-timers are still allowed to call it Alana.
2. The morning rush hour is from 5:00 am to noon. The evening rush hour is from noon to 7:00 pm. Friday’s rush hour starts on Thursday morning.
3. The minimum acceptable speed on I-285 is 80 mph. On I-75 and I-85, your speed is expected to at least match the highway number. Anything less is considered ‘Wussy’.
4. Forget the traffic rules you learned elsewhere. Atlanta has its own version of traffic rules. For example, Ferraris and Lamborghinis owned by sports stars go first at a four-way stop. Cars/trucks with the loudest muffler go second. The trucks with the biggest tires go third. The HOV lanes are for the slow Floridians passing through who are used to hogging the left lane everywhere.
5. If you actually stop at a yellow light or stop sign, you will be rear ended, cussed out, and possibly shot. Unless there is a police car nearby.
6. Never honk at anyone. Ever. Seriously. It’s another offense that can get you shot.
7. Road construction is permanent and continuous. Detour barrels are moved around for your entertainment pleasure during the middle of the night to make the next day’s driving a bit more exciting. Generally, city roads other than the main streets have more potholes and bumps (usually speed bumps) than most dirt roads in the countryside.
8. Watch carefully for road hazards such as drunks, possums, skunks, dogs, barrels, cones, furniture, cats, mattresses, shredded tires, squirrels, rabbits, and crows.
9. Spelling of street names may change from block to block, e.g., Clairmont, Claremont, Clairmonte.
10. If someone actually has their turn signal on, wave them to the shoulder immediately to let them know it has been “accidentally activated”.
11. If you are in the left lane and only driving 75 in a 55-65 mph zone, k, e.g., you are considered a road hazard and will be “flipped off” accordingly. If you return the flip, you’ll be shot.
12. For summer driving, it is advisable to wear potholders on your hands. This is a repost. Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
Implicit Association Test
PG came across a link. The post was: What comes to mind when you see her headscarf? Let’s look at what your mind is seeing. Technically, this is about the hijab, pronounced eeJOB. If you google hijab, you will have the opportunity to buy one.
The article talked about the unspoken assumptions people have about a woman with a hijab. For PG, these are going to be mostly positive. Most of the Muslims PG has known are great people. The turmoil caused by aggressive Jesus worshipers is absent when dealing with Muslims.
Much of the article deals with “unconscious bias.” You are given the chance to take a “test your unconscious bias and find the areas of your perspective that need a little extra TLC.” PG is not sure that he trusts “Psychologists from Harvard, UW, and UVA.” Still, the only cost for taking this test will probably be damage to his mental health.
Before you start, there is a disclaimer. “IP addresses are routinely recorded, but are completely confidential.” There is a difference between confidential and anonymous. Big brother knows about PG anyway, so this test probably won’t make much difference. You are asked to agree to the following statement: “I am aware of the possibility of encountering interpretations of my IAT test performance with which I may not agree. Knowing this, I wish to proceed.” Fasten your digital seat belt.
Next, you choose a test. The first page has 15 options: Sexuality, Native American, Weapons, Arab-Muslim, etc. PG chooses “Weapons (‘Weapons – Harmless Objects’ IAT). This IAT requires the ability to recognize White and Black faces, and images of weapons or harmless objects.)
The first thing to do is answer a questionnaire. You are asked how warm or cold you feel towards white people, and black people. There is a list of statements that you agree or disagree, slightly, moderately, or strongly. Some of these statements are: I think of myself as someone who has an assertive personality, I have considered being an entertainer.
The heart of the test uses photographs. There are pictures of black people, and pictures of white people. There are pictures of weapons, like a bayonet, a historic pistol, a hand grenade, and a battle ax. There are pictures of harmless objects, like a water bottle, tape recorder, camera, and can of Coca Cola. Many of these could be used a weapons; a can of Coca Cola could be thrown at someone. Many Police consider a camera a weapon.
The pictures are flashed on the screen. You hit the e key for the left side, and the i key for the right side. At first the two choices are kept separate, i.e. you choose black or white, weapon or harmless. Then the two groups are combined. The choice is left side black weapons, and right side white harmless. Then they shift sides, to black harmless and white weapons. You are shown a picture, and choose which category to put it in.
The last questionnaire is the demographics. Annual family income is not considered. Ethnicity refers to hispanic/latin, or non hispanic/latin. Religion, age, “political identity,” gender (only male or female,) and education are considered, among other factors.
The result: “Your data suggest a strong association of Black Americans with Weapons compared to White Americans. … The interpretation is described as ‘automatic association between weapons and White Americans’ if you responded faster when weapons and White American images were classified with the same key than when weapons and Black Americans were classified with the same key.”
Whatever. Maybe PG should take another test for comparison. Maybe this time, choose a subject where hateful judgement is not in your face everyday. Since the seminal article is about the hijab, maybe … “You have opted to complete the Arab Muslim – Other People IAT.”
The opening questionnaire is different.”I attempt to appear nonprejudiced toward Arab Muslims in order to avoid disapproval from others, NO spontaneous prejudiced thoughts come into my mind when I encounter an unfamiliar Arab Muslim.”
This test is different from the race test. Instead of photographs, words were used. For the two groups of people, we have names (seemingly all male.) Examples: Arab Muslim – Akbar, Ashraf, Habib – – Other People – Benoit, Philippe, Guillame. The other categories are Good and Bad. Examples: Good – Joy, Love, Peace – – Bad – Agony, Terrible, Horrible.
PG made more mistakes in the fancy part of the Arab test. He took a couple of breaks to take screen shots, one of which is included in this report. At times, he felt himself automatically blaming the Arabs for bad things. This did not happen, consciously, in the race/weapons test.
The result: Your data suggest little to no automatic preference between Other People and Arab Muslims. … This new test was prompted by the events of September 11, 2001. Suicide pilots, identified as Arab Muslims, crashed airplanes into the World Trade Center towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. killing about 4,000 people.
While this may have some value to the ivory tower crowd, it does not tell PG much about himself. Arguably, IAT says more about the researchers than it does the respondents. It is doubtful that these tests will “find the areas of your perspective that need a little extra TLC.” Pictures from The Library of Congress. These pictures were not used in the IAT studied today.
RuPaul Has Striven
People are getting tired of talking about #transracial, or whatever that hairdo challenged woman was claiming to be today. An interview with RuPaul is usually more entertaining. Especially when a *possessive pronoun disputed* reality show is going to be shown in Great Britain, and needs promotion.The result: RuPaul: ‘Drag is dangerous. We are making fun of everything’
The article is about what you would expect. There was a comment about not wanting to drop “she-mail” from RPDR. This bit of language whimsy had the PC police on red alert. If you want to be old fashioned and read the article, just follow the link. The real fun starts in the comments. Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
Celtiberico Rebel who dressed like “boy who fell to Earth” Is Illuminati lizardmen conspiracy true?
The article Celtiberico links to is full of zesty quotes. “Drag Race is a brutal look at the underground world of radical homosexuality. Hosted by a lanky female serpent by the name of RuPaul … Drag Race is much more than a Gay Agenda plot to lure the heterosexual population into hardcore sodomy. By assaulting patriotic Christendom with seductively sensual transgenderism … It comes as no surprise, then, to learn that RuPaul ends each show with the ancient Freemasonic incantations of “Shan-te” and “Sa-che,” both of which are prayers spoken in the original Coptic and meant to invoke the Illuminati god of enchantment, Isis. … This unassailable evidence seems to suggest that Drag Race is an attempt to infect the media with viral images of shape-shifting sex vixens to make complete alien domination more comprehensible for the human race.”
BeckyP Although RuPaul has striven to make a positive contribution, and remains an excellent role model, the same cannot be said of Bruce Jenner..and yet Bruce Jenner appears on the front cover of Vanity Fair. Astonishing. Blythe Freeman Striven is a past participle, please rephrase. whood I strive. They strived. We are striving. They have striven. calm yourself down. RoyalSuperiority Aren’t both ‘has strived’ and ‘has striven’ equally acceptable here? Mihangelap “we strove” equally acceptable Pollik RuPaul? Positive role model? To whom? (Clue: it is not the trans community)
snecko Why not spend time being angry with people who disagree with you? I’d be willing to bet that, by and large, people involved in drag would share 99% of your worldview. I just don’t get this obsession of nitpicking at the habits of people who are essentially your comrades when there are actual bigots still out there. Drag’s ‘transmisogyny’ and racism, if it exists, is obviously not the intended message or the guiding values of the movement. To me, it seems to be about being who you want to be in a non-judgemental and loving atmosphere, which should be pretty groovy to anyone remotely on the left. I just don’t get why you would attempt to shit all over it for accidental transgressions which are debatable in the first place.
Pixles Counted Yep. The dress and all the makeup in the world cannot take all the chauvinism away from this kind of masculinist ideology. I’m sorry for whatever happened to you, Rupaul. You don’t have to follow the same cycle of abuse, you can choose to break the chains of violence. We are strong, and we don’t need your paternalistic neoliberal self-help philosophies to get us through the day. We have before you and we will after you. Step out of the way. georges1 Sorry, but who is this ‘we’? ArundelXVI Yeesh. Did RuPaul kick your dog or something?
vonZeppelinThis comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
bcnteacher Love Ru Paul but I am my own role model.
Toomuchstupidhere No, drag is boring and predictable – yesterday’s news. Trans is much more thought provoking. sUgadee I know this is the guardian, where British ignorance is highly valued and accepted, but the show has had a few trans contestants.
Sceptic101 I’m confused. The Guardian seems to habitually refer to transvestites, transsexuals, etc as ‘she’. Is this a new and realistic policy? chickenlover4 Either Ru specified to use the pronoun “he” or I think it’s a “he” because in the interview he is not in drag. If you’re in drag it would be “she” or “they”. I think pronouns are subjective to each individual and you just have to exercise sensitivity. People will forgive you for not using the correct pronoun. (PG is recovering from a run in with the pronoun police. *They* do not forgive.)
pineapplesage exhibitionist nihilism xesolor Self-gratifying troll.
Magnolia La Manga If drag is embarrassing these self-respecting gays (whatever that means), I think it’s doing exactly what it’s supposed to…
HelloKittyFanClub I had to scroll to the top of the page for a moment to check if I was on the Daily Mail comments section. Some of you seriously need to get over yourselves; between the veiled and not so veiled homophobic comments and the negative know-it-alls you sure know how to drag (ho-ho) down a show that is all about fun, entertainment, light and love.
Privilege
@Flyswatter Understanding your own privilege @chamblee54 thank you for using privilege without a racial adjective both people in this story are white.
The link is to a cartoon. It is the story of Richard and Paula. The man is born to wealth, doesn’t screw up, and does well. The woman is born to poverty, doesn’t screw up, and does less well.
In the last panel, the woman is working at an event. She holds a plate in front of the man. While he is taking an item off the plate, the man answers the question “What is the secret of your success?””Less whinging, more hard work I say. I’m sick of people asking for handouts. No one ever handed me anything on plate.”
The cartoon is from New Zealand. Both Richard and Paula are white. There were dark skinned people in New Zealand before whitey arrived. They are not the concern of this cartoonist.
In the USA, you almost never see the word privilege without a racial adjective. It is as if the only kind of privilege was white privilege. Talk about privilege has become a rhetorical weapon. The national conversation about race makes suffers as a result.
Pictures are from The Library of Congress.
He Lied
There is a discussion at Bloggingheadstv about the recent events in Baltimore MD. The featured speakers, Glenn Loury and John McWhorter, have been heard from before. This is a thought provoking discussion. If you are multi tasking, you might not get much done. The temptation to stop and take notes will be great.
At BHTV, you can create a sound bite, known as a dinglelink, when something gets your attention. This chat produced three dinglelinks. These serve to illustrate the points that are going to be made. There are other things that could be said, but most people have a limited attention span.
At 23:19, the men are discussing one of the witnesses to the Micheal Brown shooting. Dr. Loury starts to talk loud, and says “he lied.” This is a problem.
During the Ferguson fiasco, America was hit over the head with a lot of talk, often at top volume. There was the spectacle of a crowd of people walking into a funeral with their hands in the air. A great deal of the shouting was based on lies. If you question these lies, you can expect to be called a racist. The little boy said he saw a wolf.
If you think Dr. Loury gets worked up in the first clip, wait until he talks about the #Baltimoreuprising. Dr. Loury does not like the expression. He might have a point. The disturbance was a reaction from a population in pain. It was not the first step in a revolution.
One of the popular memes of this “conversation about race” is complaining about “media double standards.” Complaints about profit motivated media are popular with both liberals and conservatives. In the Baltimore banter, videos of white people misbehaving after sporting events are shown, and the stern voiced commenter wonders why the media does not treat these people as harshly as the Baltimore crowd.
With the #Baltimoreuprising hashtag, this media commentary goes up a notch. When drunken white sports fans act out, it is a riot. When poor urban people loot stores, it is the #Baltimoreuprising. There is no telling where this will end up.
The last clip shows Dr. McWhorter asking if poor people are going to demand, of their neighborhoods, “no more thugs.” It is apparent that Dr. McWhorter does not read the same people on facebook that others do. The word “thug” is now considered a racist slur. Instead of attacking the problem, twitter nation is attacking the word that describes the problem. Pictures today are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
Chamblee54 
leave a comment