I thought referring to Asian folks as "Orientals" was in itself a no-no? I could be wrong, but I thought as such. Asians are people and Oriental is cuisine.
That being said, Asian chicks are very pretty, but generally not enough curves on 'em.
that's why i prefer the indian women. and not native american. like... india. damn...
So just out of curiosity, where was the outrage from the political-correctness crowd? What if Rosie had said something like "And over in Africa, the newsman said "booga booga Danny DeVito ooga booga The View"?
This is similar to the point I was trying to make in my Richeal Richards thread (which garnered a pretty good discussion, despite a few irksome responses late in the game) ... Its only a problem if the non-PC remark involves black people. That's where the U.S. is at.
This is similar to the point I was trying to make in my Richeal Richards thread (which garnered a pretty good discussion, despite a few irksome responses late in the game) ... Its only a problem if the non-PC remark involves black people. That's where the U.S. is at.
Do you think it's different in say....Canada?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
You ever been mocked for sounding a certain way? How do you feel about people poking fun at the race of whichever parent your Asian heritage comes from?
I guess I could be called hyper-sensitive, but truthfully, Rosie's comments are something I would've expected from someone talking about how Orientals talk.......from someone in fifth grade, that is.
I don't think Rosie was mocking anybody for sounding a certain way. She was trying to make light of the world-wide attention being given to Danny DeVito's appearance on the View.
It's important to consider the context of the joke. The punchline is not that chinese people sound funny. The punchline is that chinese people care about something that we normally wouldn't think them to care about. Her intentions were to illustrate the irony of the situation, not to set asians apart as different or to sum them up with a condescending generalization.
So, considering the context of the joke, I would not be offended if someone were to do the same thing in my presence.
What about the "dirka dirka dirka" dialogue from Team America? Do you think arabs should have been offended?
I thought referring to Asian folks as "Orientals" was in itself a no-no? I could be wrong, but I thought as such. Asians are people and Oriental is cuisine.
That being said, Asian chicks are very pretty, but generally not enough curves on 'em.
You beat me to it sir. As a half-asian I consider this somewhat offensive. Then again, I'm the whitest asian on the block
I don't think people should take things offensively unless they actually feel that that certain person was meaning it in a negative sense. Terms carry different meanings to each person saying them. These things should be viewed on an individual basis unless the term was originated as a negative term and has always been viewed as such. Because sometimes, actually more often than not, people are just looking for a word to describe and communicate with.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I'm chinese and I have no problem with Oriental. I don't see what is so offensive at all about that term. I don't use it much cause I prefer Asian but really don't care. In regards to Rosie, yes, I did find that offensive just because it is just such a cliche and a common way people make fun of chinese people. I don't care what the intent was, it was offensive. That said, I think there is a huge distinction in what she said and the context in which she said it and what Kramer said. I chalk this one up as a mistake rather than racism.
Oh c'mon, you know that was funny...."Comed yan" That's some funny shit!!
Maybe one day you'll find a doctor who can remove that HUGE stick out of your ass.
I'm surprised someone hasnt stuck a boot up your ass. This person, right or wrong, is offended by this incident and you decide to make racial jokes at her. Really smooth. I bet you get your ass kicked alot.
I'm surprised someone hasnt stuck a boot up your ass.
LOL! A boot up my ass? And exactly how would anyone stick a boot up my ass? Was that an attempt to be Ultra-Tough, while being Ultra-Sensitive.......at the same time? Oh wow, you're so sensitive and so enlightened.......yet so manly and tough.
. This person, right or wrong, is offended by this incident and you decide to make racial jokes at her.
First of all, it wasn't a "racial joke". It was a linguistic word-play. "Yan" means "Hell". Comdey-Hell. Get it? See if you can get over your hard-guy, tough-guy with delicate sensitivites complex long enough to understand the meaning of the word-play joke.
So what you're saying is that physical violence, in you opinion, is a reasonable and acceptable response/action to a little linguistic word-play?
It's so very funny how everyone can laugh when Carlos Mencia impersonates and pokes fun at every race, gender, sexual-orientation and religion on the planet. Or when any comed-yan pokes fun at others.
But yet some washed up, so-called, ex-comed-yan/actor/Talk Show Host desperately makes an attempt for attention by poking fun at Asian linguistics; you all lose your minds and get so very sensitive about it.
Again, the only persons who could sit here and claim to be offended or shocked by Rosie's comments with any legitimacy and honesty- are any persons who have never, ever laughed, giggled or snickered at any comed-yan's impersonations, satire, parody and jokes regarding the mannerisms, speech patterns, culture or lifestyle of gay men/women, blacks, mexicans, whites, middle easterners, jews, Indians (both native and Asian) or any other people on the planet.
Otherwise, you're all being very selective hypocrites.
Again, the only persons who could sit here and claim to be offended or shocked by Rosie's comments with any legitimacy and honesty- are any persons who have never, ever laughed, giggled or snickered at any comed-yan's impersonations, satire, parody and jokes regarding the mannerisms, speech patterns, culture or lifestyle of gay men/women, blacks, mexicans, whites, middle easterners, jews, Indians (both native and Asian) or any other people on the planet.
Otherwise, you're all being very selective hypocrites.
The only persons who can sit here and claim to be offended and shocked by Rosie's comments with legitimacy and honesty are those individuals who have emotions. When one legitimately emotionally feels something, there is no escaping the fact that one legitimately emotionally feels something.
The distortion I see here is in confusing logic with emotion. They are entirely separate issues. If you try to make emotions logically line up, you're partaking of an exercise in futility. Alogical emotions are not logical and therefore will not fit logical constructs, no matter how hard we try to make them.
On the other hand, those we can legitimately call hypocrites are those who fall into the category of being human. The human condition itself guarantees that we will contradict and conflict with our own selves, between head and heart. It's par for the course. Where I see the problem is not in hypocricy, but in trying to fit vast, inherently diverse humans into a linear process of logic, for the sake of an argument. While you are using logic in trying to do so, it cannot work.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
This is similar to the point I was trying to make in my Richeal Richards thread .
Richeal Richards?!?!? I didn't know that Scooby Doo posted on here! Or is that another lame attempt at "asian" humor. You know, adding "r's" where they don't belong
"The leads are weak!"
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
if you did the same thing by talking with a deep voice and saying that you're a bull-dyke...she'll be offended...understand now?
Bull-dyke? Now that's a funny term! How do we know that Rosie would be offended by this??? If she was then I agree with the post. Otherwise I think that we are WAY too fucking sensitive with finding things offensive. Is the Asian Al Sharpton going to be suing Rosie for slander?!? For the record I am a white male who has no problems with black comedians making fun of whites. Or any other attempt at poking fun. I sometimes wish that Bill Hicks was still alive to see all this. But then I think about how sensitive this country has become and realize he would have been burned at the stake by now. RIP Bill.
"The leads are weak!"
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
Richeal Richards?!?!? I didn't know that Scooby Doo posted on here! Or is that another lame attempt at "asian" humor. You know, adding "r's" where they don't belong
(call me a hypocrite....)
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Otherwise I think that we are WAY too fucking sensitive with finding things offensive.
We may be sensitive. It that is the case, do you suggest we ignore that in hopes that it will go away? That's what's called ignore-ance and denial.
The thing is, if people are sensitive about something, that is what it is. Someone can't pretend otherwise. If people deny their feelings, we get exactly what we have in our evolution right now: a majority of people who have no understanding of how to solve their interpersonal problems (also happening on the world stage), because they are ignoring them. The irony is that once the emotions are addressed and dealt with, they go away. When they are ignored, there are underlying tensions that seep out everywhere. Emotions were a part of our brain functioning that developed for a reason, and when we discard them, we operate in an imbalanced way. Personally, I'm for problem solving. I'm for clearing up issues so we can actually live our lives and have fun. I'm for contributing to solutions, not to problems.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I don't think people should take things offensively unless they actually feel that that certain person was meaning it in a negative sense. Terms carry different meanings to each person saying them. These things should be viewed on an individual basis unless the term was originated as a negative term and has always been viewed as such. Because sometimes, actually more often than not, people are just looking for a word to describe and communicate with.
We may be sensitive. It that is the case, do you suggest we ignore that in hopes that it will go away? That's what's called ignore-ance and denial.
The thing is, if people are sensitive about something, that is what it is. Someone can't pretend otherwise. If people deny their feelings, we get exactly what we have in our evolution right now: a majority of people who have no understanding of how to solve their interpersonal problems (also happening on the world stage), because they are ignoring them. The irony is that once the emotions are addressed and dealt with, they go away. When they are ignored, there are underlying tensions that seep out everywhere. Emotions were a part of our brain functioning that developed for a reason, and when we discard them, we operate in an imbalanced way. Personally, I'm for problem solving. I'm for clearing up issues so we can actually live our lives and have fun. I'm for contributing to solutions, not to problems.
All I'm saying is consider the source. If the Klan is coming to your town (or may already be there) and they are preaching hate and destruction we must confront and deactivate any power or perceived power they may have. However, if the source is a comedian/ne and they are making a (imo) harmless statement then it should be taken as that. I never said to ignore, but I am sick of people drawing attention just for press as opposed to actually being offended. If you are sensitive enough, one can be offended by most anything a comedian says. There job is to make fun and for many of them to do impressions to get a response of laughter. The response to what Rosie did just brings out more fears of mine that we are heading into such a politically correct state, one of which we will never return from, that comedians will forever be censored. Richard Pryor, Lenny Bruce, Bill Hicks, and George Carlin are all heroes to me. They had taken comedy where no one else had and I'm glad that recordings will forever exist of them so that down the road when the only comedians allowed on network television are Carrot Top and Bonnie Hunt, I can put on my dvd's of the greats and laugh my ass off. That is if I'm not required to burn said discs before then.
"The leads are weak!"
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
We may be sensitive. It that is the case, do you suggest we ignore that in hopes that it will go away? That's what's called ignore-ance and denial.
Occassionally being offended comes with freedom of speech. Sorry.
Like Abook said (this is the 2nd time I've agreed with her this week - say yer prayers!), folks need to rethink their feelings a bit and not be so sensitive. Common sense applies - if it's done in hate, then yeah be pissed. If it's done in humor, then either laugh or don't/move on. Not a big deal.
Ever heard a black person (comedian, random dude, whatever) make fun of how white people talk? It's HILARIOUS. I didn't get offended, didn't make a thread about it.
All I'm saying is consider the source. If the Klan is coming to your town (or may already be there) and they are preaching hate and destruction we must confront and deactivate any power or perceived power they may have. However, if the source is a comedian/ne and they are making a (imo) harmless statement then it should be taken as that. I never said to ignore, but I am sick of people drawing attention just for press as opposed to actually being offended. If you are sensitive enough, one can be offended by most anything a comedian says. There job is to make fun and for many of them to do impressions to get a response of laughter. The response to what Rosie did just brings out more fears of mine that we are heading into such a politically correct state, one of which we will never return from, that comedians will forever be censored. Richard Pryor, Lenny Bruce, Bill Hicks, and George Carlin are all heroes to me. They had taken comedy where no one else had and I'm glad that recordings will forever exist of them so that down the road when the only comedians allowed on network television are Carrot Top and Bonnie Hunt, I can put on my dvd's of the greats and laugh my ass off. That is if I'm not required to burn said discs before then.
If you are less sensitive given any topic, it's ineffective to suggest to a person more sensitive to the subject to not feel what they do in fact feel. They aren't suggesting you feel the way they feel. They are merely asking that their base stance be taken into consideration, and be taken seriously. The only way negotiation works is when the TWO basic stances are acknowledged as a given and taken seriously. Yet you, theoretically, seem to be suggesting more sensitive people "should" feel the way you do. To suggest that others be like one's self is a skewed approach and prevents negotiation and problem solving. And in psychology, it's considered co-dependent. Of course 95% of our population is considered codependent at this point, which is why we are evolving through more complex ways of problem solving as a solution. Whether we like it or not.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Occassionally being offended comes with freedom of speech. Sorry.
I know.
I'm talking about having one's base position in any disagreement, and standing behind an expectation that your position be taken seriously before any kind of problem solving on an issue can take place. One need not defend why they think or feel what they do. Finding solutions extends from one's position. It does not extend from sacrificing one's position. In negotiation, concessions are made in good will, with reciprocity. In this thread, their has been little sign that others are willing to meet the op in the middle to any degree. Yet there are lots of signs that the "majority" expects this poster to sacrifice his/her feelings for the opposing side. Interesting.
Like Abook said (this is the 2nd time I've agreed with her this week - say yer prayers!), folks need to rethink their feelings a bit and not be so sensitive. Common sense applies - if it's done in hate, then yeah be pissed. If it's done in humor, then either laugh or don't/move on. Not a big deal.
Are you suggesting people with different attitudes to your own adopt your attitude. That would be an effective problem solving approach....if it worked.
Ever heard a black person (comedian, random dude, whatever) make fun of how white people talk? It's HILARIOUS. I didn't get offended, didn't make a thread about it
What I find hilarious is when non-minorities think their insensitivity to minority issues works both ways to the same degree.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
If you are less sensitive given any topic, it's ineffective to suggest to a person more sensitive to the subject to not feel what they do in fact feel. They aren't suggesting you feel the way they feel. They are merely asking that their base stance be taken into consideration, and be taken seriously. The only way negotiation works is when the TWO basic stances are acknowledged as a given and taken seriously. Yet you, theoretically, seem to be suggesting more sensitive people "should" feel the way you do. To suggest that others be like one's self is a skewed approach and prevents negotiation and problem solving. And in psychology, it's considered co-dependent. Of course 95% of our population is considered codependent at this point, which is why we are evolving through more complex ways of problem solving as a solution. Whether we like it or not.
If people are offended then fine. If they are more sensitive than me that is fine too. I just hope that wilth all of this "pollution solution" there isn't even greater censorship of are already limited freedom of speech. To those who say freedom of speech still exists, I would be willing to wager almost anything that if Rosie was to make another "racist" remark she would be asked to leave the show. I don't even like the woman, but her freedom of speech should be upheld! Being offended is natural, but as I stated before when you deal with a comedian virtually anyone could take offense to something in that comedians act if they were sensitive enough, however they could also change the channel.
"The leads are weak!"
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
If people are offended then fine. If they are more sensitive than me that is fine too. I just hope that wilth all of this "pollution solution" there isn't even greater censorship of are already limited freedom of speech. To those who say freedom of speech still exists, I would be willing to wager almost anything that if Rosie was to make another "racist" remark she would be asked to leave the show. I don't even like the woman, but her freedom of speech should be upheld! Being offended is natural, but as I stated before when you deal with a comedian virtually anyone could take offense to something in that comedians act if they were sensitive enough, however they could also change the channel.
I agree that the freedom of speech be upheld. That is another equally valid stance here. I'm thinking a show like the view would make interactive concessions, lonnngggg before they would compromise their freedom of speech (I would think they would draw the line at freedom of speech). At least that would be what I would find to be appropriate for the other stance. I also doubt the original poster would want their feelings, or racial issues acknowledge at the expense of free speech. It's not either/or. The thing is when all this stuff is put on the table, the fear of loss and risk turns out to be the illusion. Actual growth is what comes of it. Growth is about improvement. It's the denial and ignorance and avoiding growth that is the real problem.
Comedy is an art form. It is not at risk. Comedy will continue to make points that hit people beyond the level of logic. I have the impression Rosie was not intending her objectional approach as the gist of her point, therefore in reality, it's probably not a huge deal for her to realize something she did not understand prior to this situation and make small amendments that does not affect her artform.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
The only persons who can sit here and claim to be offended and shocked by Rosie's comments with legitimacy and honesty are those individuals who have emotions.
Everyone has emotions. All kinds of different and varying emotions. But not all emotions warrant and deserve a platform for protest. Not all emotions are honest. Especially those rooted in hypocrisy and double-standard.
Yes, as human beings we are all prone to hypocrisy and double-standards on some level and on some issues. But as human beings we need to learn to be honest with ourselves and the with the people around us. Be honest enough and self-aware enough to realize and acknowledge those double-standards/ hypocrisies and own up to it. It is irresponsible to spout off about some nonsense that Roise O'Donnel said, yet still enjoy a good laugh when the joke is on someone else.
To sit here and play the role of Sensitive Sally to these poor and wounded individuals:rolleyes: who are emotionally injured by what Rosie said; only puts you (and anyone else) in the role of enabler and appeaser to dishonesty.
This is the very same type of dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards that leads to rampant wars and the banning of words and the banning of subjects/issues which are permitted to be discussed.
The exact type of dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards that leads to cheating husbands (of many years and many lovers/affairs) beating or killing their wives, when after 10 years of loyalty and commitment the wife gets fed up with her cheating husband and either cheats herself or leaves the moron for another man.
It's the type of dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards that when appeased, nurtured and coddled, that sets a precedent of acceptance and can develope into much more serious and dangerous dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards. Something this country and the human species has experienced and seen occur so many times in the past and present.
This country has turned into a landscape littered with overly-sensitive, spineless, dishonest individuals with weak character and irresponsible tendancies. Honesty with oneself has become an antiquated notion, replaced by self-serving, every emotion-glorifying, ego-feeding individuals who spend way too much time stroking their own ego and their own notions of good -intent; while justifying yet another act of irresponsibilty and unaccountability.
Yeah, we all have emotions. But learning to be honest with ourselves and keeping those emotions to an honest and realistic proportion; would go a long way to the progress and integration of our cultures and society.
Learn to accept our own individual quirks, individual characteristics and shortcomings and learn to appreciate that which makes us different from each other. Learn to appreciate those differences and appreciate the humor in it all.
Learn to realize that those differences can be perceived, even in the face of parody, satire and humor; as endearing and lovable differences. Believe it or not some people (such as myself) prefer to celebrate our differences and perceive it stimulating that we are not all exactly alike. I celebrate our differences. It makes the world a far more interesting place to live ......a better place to live.
It's not all about hate and denigration. It only becomes about hate and denigration if you want to make it about that, or if you interpret it all as hate.
To sit here and play the role of Sensitive Sally to these poor and wounded individuals:rolleyes: who are emotionally injured by what Rosie said; only puts you (and anyone else) in the role of enabler and appeaser to dishonesty.
Validating someone's feelings is definitely not a dyfunctional enabling behaviour. It looks like you are equating your moral judgments with reality here. I see your judgments as your opinion (and they stand as such). Hoever, I don't see them as being about the op or the subject matter, but instead about you.
This is the very same type of dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards that leads to rampant wars and the banning of words and the banning of subjects/issues which are permitted to be discussed.
In my opinion it is the leaving of these variables as a blended mash that is the cause of these problems. Sincerely seeking to untangle and comprehend these issues clears up problems of war and banning of words. Uncovering and knowing is the opposite of ignorance.
It's the type of dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards that when appeased, nurtured and coddled, that sets a precedent of acceptance and can develope into much more serious and dangerous dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards. Something this country and the human species has experienced and seen occur so many times in the past and present.
I personally think that coddling ignorance is the problem. Digging one's feet into progress is the problem. Avoiding adaptation in life is an evolutionary problem that causes fallout of maladaption.
Believe it or not some people (such as myself) prefer to celebrate our differences and perceive it stimulating that we are not all exactly alike. I celebrate our differences. It makes the world a far more interesting place to live ......a better place to live.
It looks like you only celebrate the differences that are easy to celebrate. And that when there is conflict, then it becomes all about your point of view, at the expense of the other one--in this thread, anyway. I happen to see a world where two opposing views can stand, 100% with respect, dignity and understanding.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Ignorance is as prevelent in the forms of perception and interpretation, as it is in the form of expression.
Without honesty, responsibility and acknowledgement of one's own hypocrisy and double-standards; there can never be true understanding.
All you're left with is........self-interest or should I say the need for the world to cater to one's every whim and emotion; regardless how dishonest that emotion.
Comments
Only if you're not an orient..... I mean Asian.
that's why i prefer the indian women. and not native american. like... india. damn...
ill be back.
dude, chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature, asian-american please.
This is similar to the point I was trying to make in my Richeal Richards thread (which garnered a pretty good discussion, despite a few irksome responses late in the game) ... Its only a problem if the non-PC remark involves black people. That's where the U.S. is at.
Classic!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I don't think Rosie was mocking anybody for sounding a certain way. She was trying to make light of the world-wide attention being given to Danny DeVito's appearance on the View.
It's important to consider the context of the joke. The punchline is not that chinese people sound funny. The punchline is that chinese people care about something that we normally wouldn't think them to care about. Her intentions were to illustrate the irony of the situation, not to set asians apart as different or to sum them up with a condescending generalization.
So, considering the context of the joke, I would not be offended if someone were to do the same thing in my presence.
What about the "dirka dirka dirka" dialogue from Team America? Do you think arabs should have been offended?
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
You beat me to it sir. As a half-asian I consider this somewhat offensive. Then again, I'm the whitest asian on the block
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I never really did either but other Asians seem to think so. Full blooded Asians at work call me half-breed(all in good fun though)
Most Asians think oriental should be used to describe lamps, rugs, foods, and a certain train.
They consider "Oriental" a style not a classification of people.
I'm surprised someone hasnt stuck a boot up your ass. This person, right or wrong, is offended by this incident and you decide to make racial jokes at her. Really smooth. I bet you get your ass kicked alot.
LOL! A boot up my ass? And exactly how would anyone stick a boot up my ass? Was that an attempt to be Ultra-Tough, while being Ultra-Sensitive.......at the same time? Oh wow, you're so sensitive and so enlightened.......yet so manly and tough.
First of all, it wasn't a "racial joke". It was a linguistic word-play. "Yan" means "Hell". Comdey-Hell. Get it? See if you can get over your hard-guy, tough-guy with delicate sensitivites complex long enough to understand the meaning of the word-play joke.
http://www.yutopian.net/names/15/15yan50.html
You mean like......."Smooth Jazz"?
So what you're saying is that physical violence, in you opinion, is a reasonable and acceptable response/action to a little linguistic word-play?
It's so very funny how everyone can laugh when Carlos Mencia impersonates and pokes fun at every race, gender, sexual-orientation and religion on the planet. Or when any comed-yan pokes fun at others.
But yet some washed up, so-called, ex-comed-yan/actor/Talk Show Host desperately makes an attempt for attention by poking fun at Asian linguistics; you all lose your minds and get so very sensitive about it.
Again, the only persons who could sit here and claim to be offended or shocked by Rosie's comments with any legitimacy and honesty- are any persons who have never, ever laughed, giggled or snickered at any comed-yan's impersonations, satire, parody and jokes regarding the mannerisms, speech patterns, culture or lifestyle of gay men/women, blacks, mexicans, whites, middle easterners, jews, Indians (both native and Asian) or any other people on the planet.
Otherwise, you're all being very selective hypocrites.
The distortion I see here is in confusing logic with emotion. They are entirely separate issues. If you try to make emotions logically line up, you're partaking of an exercise in futility. Alogical emotions are not logical and therefore will not fit logical constructs, no matter how hard we try to make them.
On the other hand, those we can legitimately call hypocrites are those who fall into the category of being human. The human condition itself guarantees that we will contradict and conflict with our own selves, between head and heart. It's par for the course. Where I see the problem is not in hypocricy, but in trying to fit vast, inherently diverse humans into a linear process of logic, for the sake of an argument. While you are using logic in trying to do so, it cannot work.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Richeal Richards?!?!? I didn't know that Scooby Doo posted on here! Or is that another lame attempt at "asian" humor. You know, adding "r's" where they don't belong
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
"What's your name?"
"FUCK YOU! THAT"S MY NAME!"
Bull-dyke? Now that's a funny term! How do we know that Rosie would be offended by this??? If she was then I agree with the post. Otherwise I think that we are WAY too fucking sensitive with finding things offensive. Is the Asian Al Sharpton going to be suing Rosie for slander?!? For the record I am a white male who has no problems with black comedians making fun of whites. Or any other attempt at poking fun. I sometimes wish that Bill Hicks was still alive to see all this. But then I think about how sensitive this country has become and realize he would have been burned at the stake by now. RIP Bill.
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
"What's your name?"
"FUCK YOU! THAT"S MY NAME!"
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
The thing is, if people are sensitive about something, that is what it is. Someone can't pretend otherwise. If people deny their feelings, we get exactly what we have in our evolution right now: a majority of people who have no understanding of how to solve their interpersonal problems (also happening on the world stage), because they are ignoring them. The irony is that once the emotions are addressed and dealt with, they go away. When they are ignored, there are underlying tensions that seep out everywhere. Emotions were a part of our brain functioning that developed for a reason, and when we discard them, we operate in an imbalanced way. Personally, I'm for problem solving. I'm for clearing up issues so we can actually live our lives and have fun. I'm for contributing to solutions, not to problems.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
i... agree....
All I'm saying is consider the source. If the Klan is coming to your town (or may already be there) and they are preaching hate and destruction we must confront and deactivate any power or perceived power they may have. However, if the source is a comedian/ne and they are making a (imo) harmless statement then it should be taken as that. I never said to ignore, but I am sick of people drawing attention just for press as opposed to actually being offended. If you are sensitive enough, one can be offended by most anything a comedian says. There job is to make fun and for many of them to do impressions to get a response of laughter. The response to what Rosie did just brings out more fears of mine that we are heading into such a politically correct state, one of which we will never return from, that comedians will forever be censored. Richard Pryor, Lenny Bruce, Bill Hicks, and George Carlin are all heroes to me. They had taken comedy where no one else had and I'm glad that recordings will forever exist of them so that down the road when the only comedians allowed on network television are Carrot Top and Bonnie Hunt, I can put on my dvd's of the greats and laugh my ass off. That is if I'm not required to burn said discs before then.
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
"What's your name?"
"FUCK YOU! THAT"S MY NAME!"
Occassionally being offended comes with freedom of speech. Sorry.
Like Abook said (this is the 2nd time I've agreed with her this week - say yer prayers!), folks need to rethink their feelings a bit and not be so sensitive. Common sense applies - if it's done in hate, then yeah be pissed. If it's done in humor, then either laugh or don't/move on. Not a big deal.
Ever heard a black person (comedian, random dude, whatever) make fun of how white people talk? It's HILARIOUS. I didn't get offended, didn't make a thread about it.
If you are less sensitive given any topic, it's ineffective to suggest to a person more sensitive to the subject to not feel what they do in fact feel. They aren't suggesting you feel the way they feel. They are merely asking that their base stance be taken into consideration, and be taken seriously. The only way negotiation works is when the TWO basic stances are acknowledged as a given and taken seriously. Yet you, theoretically, seem to be suggesting more sensitive people "should" feel the way you do. To suggest that others be like one's self is a skewed approach and prevents negotiation and problem solving. And in psychology, it's considered co-dependent. Of course 95% of our population is considered codependent at this point, which is why we are evolving through more complex ways of problem solving as a solution. Whether we like it or not.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I'm talking about having one's base position in any disagreement, and standing behind an expectation that your position be taken seriously before any kind of problem solving on an issue can take place. One need not defend why they think or feel what they do. Finding solutions extends from one's position. It does not extend from sacrificing one's position. In negotiation, concessions are made in good will, with reciprocity. In this thread, their has been little sign that others are willing to meet the op in the middle to any degree. Yet there are lots of signs that the "majority" expects this poster to sacrifice his/her feelings for the opposing side. Interesting.
Are you suggesting people with different attitudes to your own adopt your attitude. That would be an effective problem solving approach....if it worked.
What I find hilarious is when non-minorities think their insensitivity to minority issues works both ways to the same degree.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
If people are offended then fine. If they are more sensitive than me that is fine too. I just hope that wilth all of this "pollution solution" there isn't even greater censorship of are already limited freedom of speech. To those who say freedom of speech still exists, I would be willing to wager almost anything that if Rosie was to make another "racist" remark she would be asked to leave the show. I don't even like the woman, but her freedom of speech should be upheld! Being offended is natural, but as I stated before when you deal with a comedian virtually anyone could take offense to something in that comedians act if they were sensitive enough, however they could also change the channel.
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
"What's your name?"
"FUCK YOU! THAT"S MY NAME!"
Comedy is an art form. It is not at risk. Comedy will continue to make points that hit people beyond the level of logic. I have the impression Rosie was not intending her objectional approach as the gist of her point, therefore in reality, it's probably not a huge deal for her to realize something she did not understand prior to this situation and make small amendments that does not affect her artform.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Everyone has emotions. All kinds of different and varying emotions. But not all emotions warrant and deserve a platform for protest. Not all emotions are honest. Especially those rooted in hypocrisy and double-standard.
Yes, as human beings we are all prone to hypocrisy and double-standards on some level and on some issues. But as human beings we need to learn to be honest with ourselves and the with the people around us. Be honest enough and self-aware enough to realize and acknowledge those double-standards/ hypocrisies and own up to it. It is irresponsible to spout off about some nonsense that Roise O'Donnel said, yet still enjoy a good laugh when the joke is on someone else.
To sit here and play the role of Sensitive Sally to these poor and wounded individuals:rolleyes: who are emotionally injured by what Rosie said; only puts you (and anyone else) in the role of enabler and appeaser to dishonesty.
This is the very same type of dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards that leads to rampant wars and the banning of words and the banning of subjects/issues which are permitted to be discussed.
The exact type of dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards that leads to cheating husbands (of many years and many lovers/affairs) beating or killing their wives, when after 10 years of loyalty and commitment the wife gets fed up with her cheating husband and either cheats herself or leaves the moron for another man.
It's the type of dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards that when appeased, nurtured and coddled, that sets a precedent of acceptance and can develope into much more serious and dangerous dishonesty, hypocrisy and double-standards. Something this country and the human species has experienced and seen occur so many times in the past and present.
This country has turned into a landscape littered with overly-sensitive, spineless, dishonest individuals with weak character and irresponsible tendancies. Honesty with oneself has become an antiquated notion, replaced by self-serving, every emotion-glorifying, ego-feeding individuals who spend way too much time stroking their own ego and their own notions of good -intent; while justifying yet another act of irresponsibilty and unaccountability.
Yeah, we all have emotions. But learning to be honest with ourselves and keeping those emotions to an honest and realistic proportion; would go a long way to the progress and integration of our cultures and society.
Learn to accept our own individual quirks, individual characteristics and shortcomings and learn to appreciate that which makes us different from each other. Learn to appreciate those differences and appreciate the humor in it all.
Learn to realize that those differences can be perceived, even in the face of parody, satire and humor; as endearing and lovable differences. Believe it or not some people (such as myself) prefer to celebrate our differences and perceive it stimulating that we are not all exactly alike. I celebrate our differences. It makes the world a far more interesting place to live ......a better place to live.
It's not all about hate and denigration. It only becomes about hate and denigration if you want to make it about that, or if you interpret it all as hate.
In my opinion it is the leaving of these variables as a blended mash that is the cause of these problems. Sincerely seeking to untangle and comprehend these issues clears up problems of war and banning of words. Uncovering and knowing is the opposite of ignorance.
I personally think that coddling ignorance is the problem. Digging one's feet into progress is the problem. Avoiding adaptation in life is an evolutionary problem that causes fallout of maladaption.
It looks like you only celebrate the differences that are easy to celebrate. And that when there is conflict, then it becomes all about your point of view, at the expense of the other one--in this thread, anyway. I happen to see a world where two opposing views can stand, 100% with respect, dignity and understanding.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Without honesty, responsibility and acknowledgement of one's own hypocrisy and double-standards; there can never be true understanding.
All you're left with is........self-interest or should I say the need for the world to cater to one's every whim and emotion; regardless how dishonest that emotion.