• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Stephen Colbert - Racist

From the comments here are a few that show what I mean about giving feminism a bad name:
You fascistic, progressive dolts have so many idiotic PC rules that it's comical when you begin to eat your own.

I love it when liberals are skewered by other liberals.

All that is missing is "power to the people" and maybe "Vive Che".

Get a freaking life or get laid, one of the two. You won't be as cranky.

Why is this woman so damn crazy and angry? It's like someone put a couple of womens studies book in a blender and poured it out all over a computer.

Suey Park is another left wing radical conformist.....
Click to expand...
And so on.

At least there are reasonable voices in the comments like, "Why is this in Time?"
 
marplots said:
From the link:
"The entertainment industry has perfected the development of white, cis, straight, male characters."

What does "cis" mean in that sentence? Her code words are sometimes hard to parse.
Click to expand...

Cissexual.
The opposite of transsexual.

For instance, I am cissexual as my body has male bits and brain thinks of itself as male.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
TNo, the problem is confusing satire meant to illustrate that stereotype with actual discrimination. Colbert is on your side, Suey.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Indeed. Sad that she fails to realize this. Stupid woman is stupid, why are we even paying attention to her?
 
beren said:
Cissexual.
The opposite of transsexual.

For instance, I am cissexual as my body has male bits and brain thinks of itself as male.
Click to expand...

CynicalSkeptic said:
CisgenderWP
Click to expand...

Thank you both.
If I reword the original sentence: "The entertainment industry has perfected the development of white, cis, straight, male characters."

To: "The entertainment industry has perfected the development of white, trans, straight, male characters."

Does it still make sense or do some of the terms imply or contradict the others?

And finally, I'd like to note the taxonomy is getting clunky. Even in zoology texts, unless strict specificity is demanded, we start seeing initials or clipping down to species name alone. We need a shorthand, although I wonder whether the distinctions made only support identity balkanization.

If the purpose is to make such labels less relevant (to reduce discrimination), it seems the labels eventually defeat their own purpose.
 
Morrigan said:
Cis is the opposite of trans. Not sure why you're still confused.
Click to expand...

Well, if I am a cis male, how does that differ from being a trans male, insofar as my relationships with others is concerned?

I can see how it might come up at a doctor's appointment, in the same way as having three testicles might. But at work? Or, generally, in the way I relate to the world at large?

The labels seem self-defeating in that way. So many of them are not open to cursory inspection - nor do they need to be - and, unlike race or overt gender signs (breasts for example) couldn't form the basis for discrimination.

I know this is considered a form of oppression by suggesting suppression of some personal, important identifier, but if we wish to overcome discrimination, removing from examination the basis of the discrimination seems pretty straightforward. Why, for instance, is my gender identification of any more significance than my political opinions, and why should it matter in other than intimate contexts or contexts where the difference actually makes a difference? If I were running for office, I'd expect to have to display my politics. Otherwise? Not so much. And it seems egotistical to bring up my political leanings out of context just so I can then ask you to ignore them.

If a Christian feels she didn't get hired because of her religion, I think my first question might be, "But how did they know you are a Christian?"

Does anyone on this forum know I'm gay? Should it matter?
 
Last edited:
beren said:
I imagine sex is different if your body feels "wrong" to you.
Click to expand...

Probably so. And if I'm having sex (or before, probably), this would no doubt come up. What puzzles me is how this rises to a conspiracy against the category as she states. Is it because of "The Crying Game?"
 
ThunderChunky said:
More from the great intellectual civil rights activist of out time Suey Park:

"link"

Apparently, the fact that she made herself look like an idiot actually proves her point. Fascinating world view.
Click to expand...
It's very much like the mind-set of a conspiracy theorist where beliefs follow self-reinforcing loops.

If you disagree with her POV then you are part of the racist system that is dismissing her because of racism.

The sad part is that there is probably something to the root of her position which is the treatment of minorities and women in this country. But her situation doesn't appear to be evidence of that.
 
ThunderChunky said:
Because the PC police like Suey Park are attempting to stifle comedy. Yes, the joke is funnier in context, but the fact that Colbert is a comedian and that this was obvious comedy is more than enough context.
Click to expand...

The phrase "PC police" is an immediate warning sign that someone simply wants to be offensive without anyone providing negative feedback. If Colbert has the right to say things, then so does Park.

As I said before, this sort of comedy is on the edge, and it will, inevitably, annoy people, and the comedy team will sometimes get it wrong. Colbert is a big boy, he's used to it, he handled this very well, he'll live well. This isn't like that Michael Richards tape (FYI: I think people should get over that). Suey Park is 23, she'll grow, an hopefully learn to do better. The folks who disagree, but don't descend into slurs, will also be fine.

But, again, Colbert himself was upset that the twitter account in question pulled his punchline out of context. Why are people still defending that tweet, when the well-practiced, brilliant comedian, thinks they messed up?

And yes, I know Park has advanced beyond that - likely because Asian people had nothing to do with the matter until Colbert's staff pulled them in. I can see a "Why am *I* the butt of the joke" view here - especially since she's said this clearly.
 
Snorkio said:
It's very much like the mind-set of a conspiracy theorist where beliefs follow self-reinforcing loops.

If you disagree with her POV then you are part of the racist system that is dismissing her because of racism.

The sad part is that there is probably something to the root of her position which is the treatment of minorities and women in this country. But her situation doesn't appear to be evidence of that.
Click to expand...

Here's the problem: arbitrarily dismissing or outright insulting people because of race/gender/sexuality/whatever, does actually happen quite a bit - particularly on social media sites like (or even especially) Twitter. Republicans are notorious for spewing slurs based on the ravings of Michelle Malkin, but to be honest, independents and Democrats can be pretty bad as well. I expect Park is responding largely to that - which is no shock for a 23 year old - given that it annoys and wears out people much older than her. It's a bad attitude to take into an interview, but I've seen worse from her age.
 
Mumbles said:
The phrase "PC police" is an immediate warning sign that someone simply wants to be offensive without anyone providing negative feedback. If Colbert has the right to say things, then so does Park.
Click to expand...

Who said otherwise? It's the PC police that are trying to silence people and it seems like you are defending them. Negative feedback is one thing, but pulling out the pitchforks against comedians because you don't like their jokes is another.

As I said, the joke stands on it's own. Colbert never wrote it so his opinion on it is irrelevant. Either way, what do you have against people defending the joke from this onslaught of stupidity? Negative feedback is only okay in one direction? Positive feedback is not allowed?
 
ThunderChunky said:
It's the PC police that are trying to silence people and it seems like you are defending them.
Click to expand...
The so-called "PC Police" (use of which term is, as Mumbles says, always a red flag) are simply trying to raise the level of discourse above gratuitous insults and gutter banter. People who use the term "PC Police" are attempting to defend the "right" to needlessly and deliberately cause offense. As a civilised society, we should be above this.
 
arthwollipot said:
The so-called "PC Police" (use of which term is, as Mumbles says, always a red flag) are simply trying to raise the level of discourse above gratuitous insults and gutter banter. People who use the term "PC Police" are attempting to defend the "right" to needlessly and deliberately cause offense. As a civilised society, we should be above this.
Click to expand...

No, they (and I guess you too) are trying to silence people--especially comedians. They are not just responding to what offends them but actively looking for things to be offended by. Thats why the PC police is an appropriate term.

This wasn't an example of a politician saying something insensitive, it was a comedy. Racial humor is a valid form of humor. As a civilized society, art such as comedy should not be restricted to the tastes of the most sensitive and banal.
 
Mumbles said:
Again, why bother defending it, when Colbert himself said that the joke needs context?
Click to expand...

So? Just because someone disagrees with Suey doesn't mean they have to agree with Colbert about everything.
 
Mumbles said:
The phrase "PC police" is an immediate warning sign that someone simply wants to be offensive without anyone providing negative feedback.
Click to expand...

No it isn't.

If Colbert has the right to say things, then so does Park.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

As I said before, this sort of comedy is on the edge, and it will, inevitably, annoy people, and the comedy team will sometimes get it wrong. Colbert is a big boy, he's used to it, he handled this very well, he'll live well. This isn't like that Michael Richards tape (FYI: I think people should get over that). Suey Park is 23, she'll grow, an hopefully learn to do better. The folks who disagree, but don't descend into slurs, will also be fine.
Click to expand...

Agreed. However, many people do lose their jobs in these types situations. And that is exactly what Suey was calling for. Ever since nipplegate, networks and radio companies have been particularly prone to playing things safe and catering to the will of the offended (not that they never did so beforehand either).

But, again, Colbert himself was upset that the twitter account in question pulled his punchline out of context. Why are people still defending that tweet, when the well-practiced, brilliant comedian, thinks they messed up?
Click to expand...

Strange, eh? It's almost as if they're thinking for themselves or something.
 
ThunderChunky said:
No, they (and I guess you too) are trying to silence people--especially comedians.
Click to expand...
:nope:

But I guess if you believe gratuitous insults are a valid method of discourse, you are motivated to reason your way out of this. There are plenty of comedians who make a a perfectly good living without insulting entire demographics.

The right to free speech does not and should not carry with it an obligation to be offensive.
 
arthwollipot said:
:nope:

But I guess if you believe gratuitous insults are a valid method of discourse, you are motivated to reason your way out of this.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a "gratuitous insult". It was a joke.

There are plenty of comedians who make a a perfectly good living without insulting entire demographics.
Click to expand...

Like who?

The right to free speech does not and should not carry with it an obligation to be offensive.
Click to expand...

Wait, do you think someone is arguing that speech should not be allowed unless it's offensive? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom