One year later, we're still here. Thank you, Seattle, for your resilience and readership throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Contributions from our readers are a crucial lifeline for The Stranger as we write our new future. We're calling up legislators, breaking down what's going on at Seattle City Hall, and covering the region's enduring arts scenes thanks to assistance from readers like you. If The Stranger is an essential part of your life, please make a one-time or recurring contribution today to ensure we're here to serve you tomorrow.
We're so grateful for your support.
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Newsletters
Sign up for the latest news and to win free tickets to events
Stranger Tickets
Buy tickets to events around Seattle
EverOut
Things To Do
Comprehensive calendar of Seattle events
EverOut App
The easiest way to find Seattle's best events
Publication Info
Check it out
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Comments
It's not that hard. You post like three of these Viacom videos a week, it's not like you don't know how the embed works. Put them below the damned jump.
That said, it was all worth it for Colbert's Malkin dig. #shaaaaade
Seriously?
There are many people who personally attack Jack Gleeson because they hate Joffrey.
Disagree. Sometimes removing the concealing curtain isn't kind, but in this case the revealed truth is important. Calling out crazy has social utility. Calling out stupid opinions has social utility. And calling out misusers of racism, sexism et al. labeling has social utility.
This woman's a whacko.
It's important not to tolerate stupidity, because it can end up normalizing stupid behavior among people who identify as good liberal anti-racists and not just the twactivists.
I like Colbert a lot and find Park increasingly repellent, but saying "it's satire!" isn't a blanket justification.
This doesn't ring true at all. If I had time for Youtube I could probably find more than a few satirical bits about "burritos" or Obama being a "Gangsta."
Which ethnic minority *would* have been an acceptable reference for this particular piece?
@31 Colbert doing old black stereotypes would never happen, even if he felt it was an appropriate way to satirize a target. He, or the network, would know that there would be a backlash, from people saying, "Even if it's satire, these stereotypes are part of an extremely painful history that you aren't part of and shouldn't exploit for a quick joke."
Like I said, I do like Colbert and think he's generally terrifically on target, but I don't think it's wrong to acknowledge that this joke was a poor one. Yes, he's making a larger point, but that doesn't necessarily mean Asian people have to deal with offense towards their community.
She strikes me as a damaged person who has a self-fulfilling complex that guarantees that every venomous thing she visits upon others (which she dubs activism) is mirrored back to her (making her a victim). If you see her new interview in Salon--the latest in their flood--she is arguing that all white people, everywhere and always, are bullying oppressors no matter whether they agree or disagree, speak or remain silent, empathize or pathologize,. She is basically arguing that because she lives the daily experience of racism that she is therefore given a free pass to attack, demean, and bully any white person and that if they object they are "tone-policing" and confirming her presumptive dismissal of them. She cannot be wrong, ever, and she is never responsible for her own conduct.
"Anti-racist activists" like her make me insane. They make it impossible to have a genuine conversation about race and racism and they are PC gifts for the right. It's not an accident that Malkin, Ms. Internment = Yay!, counts her a friend.
http://www.salon.com/2014/04/03/cancelco…
I have an American Studies PhD, and on some particularly disheartening days in grad school I feared this was the consensus of the field, especially when a simple question like, "Ok, what evidence do you have for that argument?" would prompt a harangue about how I hid behind empiricism so that I wouldn't have to acknowledge my white privilege.
And just round the corner from that ad-hominem were the "The scientific method is another tool of the oppressor" rants.
Yep, don't miss those either.
What I will say for Salon, however, is that this interview does seem to be showing that she is unstable, narcissistic, and so consumed with venom towards white people that she has no capacity for intellectual honesty, let alone grasps of basic empathy, nuance, or contradiction. As such, she is not someone sincere anti-racists should be touting.
I agree that the Salon interview is very effective to that measure. As someone who is an Asian mutt, I grew up always having to explain myself, and guess what? I get tired of it sometimes, but the guillotine ain't the right answer, so I just keep a FAQ sheet around to hand to the ignorant. I'll bet she'd dismiss me as indicative of White Man Hegemony anyway.
She got as much attention as she did because there are lots of people who would like Stephen Colbert gone for reasons completely unrelated to the joke that got him in trouble when quoted out of context. I also wouldn't be surprised if some of the Twitter support she got was paid shills, which happens all the time to make certain hashtags "trend".
Stephen's original joke was clearly just that, a joke, and the whole point was that Dan Snyder's real foundation was no more acceptable than Stephen Colbert's fake foundation. Anyone with half a brain could see that.
1. mr. Snyder maintains the name redskins and oh about 1 million fans just love it; most Native Americans, and many others, are offended by this name.
2. All Americans maintain a system in which DC residents lack voting rights; as well as Puerto Rico, Guam, A. Samoa, VI, etc. This isn't "disrespectful words" but an actual legal system of second class citizenship, putting some 6.5 millions into a legally subjugated status without democracy.
isn't it a bit hypocritical for americans outside of DC/Puerto Rico, etc., to complain about 1, but not 2?