[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

>"If I create a character who's part of a group

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 508
Thread images: 25

File: image.png (94KB, 298x329px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
image.png
94KB, 298x329px
>"If I create a character who's part of a group and have them express my particular views, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me."
>>
why not just make a south park general?
>>
>>77601441
>If I create a character who's part of a group and have them express my particular views, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me

>If I see people as monoliths and assume one speaks for all, with no regard for the character's actions being consistent with the personal code they've evinced on this show for years, I'll have stupid opinions like this
>>
>>77601473
I don't want to be forced to interact with cancerous general regulars to discuss the weekly episode. Besides, South Park discussion is dead during hiatuses.
>>
>>77601617
What the fuck is the matter with you?
>>
>>77601540

>SP Characters
>consistent

Topkek.mp5
>>
>>77601648
What the fuck is the matter with you?
>>
I just don't get what this arc is supposed to be saying. Okay, PC people are all self righteous privileged people who just want to get laid? Okay, but that's not the reality. The people who talk about micro aggressions and marginalized groups are the people /co/ calls tumblerwhales and shit.

I'm not defending SJW stuff, I'm just wondering what the hell the message is. The appeal to audacity normally works but it's gone off the rails here.
>>
>>77601718
>>77601648
What the fuck is the matter with the both of you?
>>
>>77601782
Generals are among one of the worst aspects of /co/.
>>
Jimmy's a parody of the retarded stand-up comedian from Facts of Life, you twit.
>>
>>77601680
Except it is. There was already a previous episode about journalism where Jimmy was the one who kept going "actually it's about ethics in journalism" when everyone else just wanted ratings.

>I remember when we all made an oath to each other, way back when started playing news reporter, that we would never let anything jeopardize our integrity! Well our integrity is jeopardized! And if we can't report news the honest way, what good is n-news reporting?

It made complete sense for Jimmy to be the one defying PC Principal.
>>
File: 1447824219857.jpg (50KB, 519x533px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1447824219857.jpg
50KB, 519x533px
>>77601852
They even mention crab people in that episode!
>>
>>77601743
>I'm not defending SJW stuff, I'm just wondering what the hell the message is.
Trey and Matt won't aim at the rainbow-haired Tumblrinas straight on. They're putting that obnoxiousness in other obnoxious people (the PC frat bros) to get the message across.
>>
>>77601743

The frat bros are a visual shorthand for the privileged narcissistic bullied a lot of SJWs are.
>>
>>77601743
I didn't take it as wanting to get laid specifically or literally, but rather that an abundant number of PC/SJW people feel superior and/or that they deserve a pat on the back for their views and actions. Or mostly just their views because like many online SJWs, the PC frat boys don't actually help any under privileged groups, and only "support" them by language policing and attacking people who make innocent 'micro aggressions'.
>>
>>77601743
Yeah I still have no clue why frat chads are PC. Seems like a wasted opportunity. And PC principal's voice is shit if he's supposed to be a chad.
>>
>>77601743
>I just don't get what this arc is supposed to be saying. Okay, PC people are all self righteous privileged people who just want to get laid? Okay, but that's not the reality.

Are PC people doing it to get laid? Some of them, sure. But they are all doing it for what the episode uses getting laid as shorthand for - social status.
>>
>>77601949
>Yeah I still have no clue why frat chads are PC
it's essentially a way to merge "White Knights on the hunt for m'lady" with a homogenized group of people with a similar goal
>>
>>77601743
They've been characterizing liberals as self-interested, bourgeois, hypocritical phonies for years. Same way they show conservatives as insane brutes.

That's the extent of South Park's lazy, cynical "insight". Of course, now that it' about internet stuff, the edgy crowd here goes wild.
>>
>>77601473
Because generals are a cancer that needs to be eradicated.
>>
>>77601743
You seem to be one of those people that confuse SJ with SJWs. The W has meaning, and is an important distinction.
>>
>>77602178
Social Justice has been corrupted to no end by the third-wave feminists.
>>
>>77602178
The distinction is worthless, everyone can draw the line wherever they want.

>>77602206
Case in point.
>>
>>77601441

Nah, they're just poking fun at white knighting, man.

Like how it's every straight white girl's job to get mad when someone calls me a faggot.

Not everyone's as thin-skinned as the SJW crowd wants to believe.
>>
okay, but what if you are handicapped and have a problem with the word "retarded"?

This episode felt like abled people acting like white people who say why they should be able to say "nigger"
>>
Kind of like what PC principal did with that retarded kid in that episode right?
>>
>>77602497
>This episode felt like abled people acting like white people who say why they should be able to say "nigger"
It's not the same by any means, retard. Also, South Park already did a whole episode on the word "nigger".

This argument really sounds like something an SJW would say. Hmm...
>>
>>77602497
What if you're handicapped and don't have a problem with the word "retarded"?

The point was never that Jimmy thinks people should say retarded, it was that he wanted to report the news as accurately as possible and PC Principal wanted to censor an event that actually happened just because he didn't like the words someone used to describe it.
>>
>>77601441
>SJW posters mad as hell
Cry more retards
>>
>>77602541
>"Are you now or have you ever been a SJW?"

>>77602553
>What if you're handicapped and don't have a problem with the word "retarded"?
Who gives a fuck if you personally don't have a problem with it? That's like saying cops should be able to shove their baton up people's ass because it happens to be your fetish.
>>
>>77602541

I'm a disabled person and I'm telling you I have a problem with it? It's not just because my feelings get hurt. I get treated differently in general because people lump this shit together.

>>77602553

He's not censoring the event though. He's censoring the words people use to express themselves. There's different ways to say you think something is idiotic than "retarded"

Like "idiotic" for instance
>>
>>77602653
>Who gives a fuck if you personally don't have a problem with it?
That argument cuts both ways, retard.

>That's like saying cops should be able to shove their baton up people's ass because it happens to be your fetish.
Typical SJW argument: lumping together words and actions. (eg. "digital lynching").
>>
>>77601852

In an earlier episode he was a shill for microtransaction games
>>
>>77601949
I think it serves a couple purposes.

Part of it is a simple joke about how dudebros and PC people are complete opposites, and so PC dudebros are silly.

I think the other might be a way of getting across that SJWs, despite their appearances, are really just a bunch of bullies trying to fit in with each other.
>>
>>77602653
>thinking that physical violence and a word you don't like are comparative

How about you turn off the TV if you don't like something you hear
>>
>>77602497
>okay, but what if you are handicapped and have a problem with the word "retarded"?
Then you're double retarded.
>>
>>77602676
Jimmy was reporting what a student said, and the student said the lunch thing was "retarded". Once you start distorting the meanings of words because you don't like them, you wind up with news channels reporting crime rising among "urban youth".

>>77602653
>Who gives a fuck if you personally don't have a problem with it? That's like saying cops should be able to shove their baton up people's ass because it happens to be your fetish.

Sure, that sounds like exactly the same thing.
>>
>>77602676
People using "retarded" to mean "stupid" aren't using the word wrong.
>>
>>77602774
>I'm a disabled person and I'm telling you I have a problem with it?
>It's not just because my feelings get hurt.
And you want what, retard? Special treatment? Oh, I can think of some "special treatment" you really need. The sonderbehandlung kind.

>I get treated differently in general because people lump this shit together.
What shit gets lumped together? What are you talking about?

>There's different ways to say you think something is idiotic than "retarded"
>Like "idiotic" for instance
Saying you cannot use this or that word, for any reason whatsoever, is still a form of censorship.
>>
>>77602653
>Who gives a fuck if you personally don't have a problem with it? That's like saying cops should be able to shove their baton up people's ass because it happens to be your fetish.
Uh, no. That would be causing tangible harm to someone. You can't use feelings as a measure of what is and isn't allowed because you'd immediately have to call one person's feeling more important than someone else's.
>>
>>77602944
>>77602772

Okay, let's talk about this shit because you don't seem to realize. It's more than my feelings get hurt. People who have mental disabilities receive particular preconceptions about them, and saying "retarded" reinforces it. You're expected to fall in line with a certain kind of behavior. People expect you to act either inspirationally disadvantaged, or in a way they can talk over you. When you're what they decide is smart enough to "realize" how you're being treated, they act indignant while chastising you for not showing humility like a proper disabled person. Social services either treat you with kid gloves or decide if you have a certain amount of aptitude, you can "take care of yourself". Either way people cling to the notion you're someone they can treat like a second class of citizen, deny opportunities or services to, or say anything about.

I work as hard as anyone else does to get employment. I've been passed over, ignored, and harassed in all areas over it. Most of the claims of on the job harassment I've made have been rejected by management and I've been once fired for creating a hostile work environment because I asked for some common fucking courtesy on the job.

But yes. It doesn't hurt anyone. My skin is too thin. I got it now.
>>
>>77602083
Not really they're libertarians whose idea is to live and let live to an extent.
They're not right but most of the time both sides are also wrong.
And everyone is self interested and as such hypocritical.
>>
>>77602258
But if people aren't allowed to call people out for being dicks, why do you think it's okay for you to call them dicks, seems kind of like a double standard.
>>
>>77603240
>I work as hard as anyone else does to get employment. I've been passed over, ignored, and harassed in all areas over it. Most of the claims of on the job harassment I've made have been rejected by management and I've been once fired for creating a hostile work environment because I asked for some common fucking courtesy on the job.

You sound like you have a major chip on the shoulder.

I can see why someone would fire you.
>>
>>77603480

Yes sir I'll take it again and again yes sir please sir I'm humble sir please fuck me in the ass some more sir
>>
>>77602921
You act like people calling you out for using certain language is the equivalent of censorship. Newsflash, it's not. The first amendment doesn't protect you from facing social scorn for being inconsiderate.
>>
File: waiter.png (107KB, 640x480px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
waiter.png
107KB, 640x480px
>>77603515
one retard extra salt coming right up!
>>
>>77603515
>Is accused of having a chip on his shoulder
>this reply
kek
>>
>>77603515
Being a passive-aggressive little bitch probably hasn't helped endear you to colleagues and bosses either, huh?
>>
>>77602832
Wasn't it an Op-ed piece written by a different student? The point is that Jimmy is a shit editor who should invest in a thesaurus.
>>
>>77603515
im starting to see why people havent wanted to deal with you or treat you like a person
>>
>>77603515

You seem very upset. Did you forget to take your meds?
>>
>>77603750
Because the disabled remind them of their own mortality?
>>
>>77603535

>telling people to stop using words you don't like isn't censorship
>>
>>77601441
I realized last night that Jimmy essentially has lost almost all of his stutter. He did have a lot of shit to say in that episode though.
>>
>>77603240
>When you're what they decide is smart enough to "realize" how you're being treated, they act indignant while chastising you for not showing humility like a proper disabled person.
What?

I've never met a single person in person or online who thinks this way.
>>
>>77603791
>hey man can you not use the word "cunt" to describe my baby daughter
>WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM OF SPEECH
>>
>>77603819

Nice strawman.
>>
>>77603535
Newsflash, freedom of speech isn't just a law. It's a philosophy that undergirds western societies and is aimed at keeping them free. The First Amendment only mentions the state because the Constitution is a contract between the state and citizens.

So while you can face social scorn for being "inconsiderate", lobbying and applying pressure to get people fired because you don't like private speech and opinions they've held is contrary to the concept of free speech.
>>
>>77603535
>You act like people calling you out for using certain language is the equivalent of censorship.
People telling you you can't is.
>>
>>77603819
>I will make my side use polite wording and lowercase letters
>The opposition will be in all caps and be as confrontational as possible
>>
>>77603661
He was direct, you're being passive agressive in this your post.
>>
>>77603900
Maybe, but I get along just fine at work.
>>
>>77603846
Man I don't give a fuck if it is a strawman. The freedom of speech is not your unbreakable shield that allows you to throw out slurs like candy in Halloween.
>>
>>77603480
I'm amazed that you've garnered enough insight to be able to tell a man's life story and behavioral patterns by a paragraph and a few lines.

I should give you a gold star.
>>
>>77603889
IS THIS BETTER? I WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS OKAY WITH YOU BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A SERIOUS DISCUSSION.
>>
>>77603937
What can I say? Retards are all the same.
>>
>>77603928

>Man I don't give a fuck if it is a strawman

Typical SJW "argument" everyone
>>
>>77603914
That's not an accomplishment.
>>
>>77603964
In the sense that they're all on 4chan.
>>
>>77603964
Takes one to know one, right?
>>
File: 1446576042017.jpg (84KB, 508x504px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1446576042017.jpg
84KB, 508x504px
>>77604008
>>77603997
>RIDF

Keep going like this and you'll drown before the nurse comes to wipe the froth from your lips.
>>
>>77603928

So you're for censorship then.
>>
and to think people call this board /co/mblr when this thread is just an excuse for us all to say retard as much as possible
>>
>>77601743
>Okay, PC people are all self righteous privileged people who just want to get laid?
No, PC people claim to be fighting for the oppressed, but most of the time they're just using it as an excuse to remove people from their lives or make themselves look better in social circles. Basically, their PC for their own benefits as opposed to others outside their specific peer groups.
For example, I was on facebook (yeah, I know, facebook is shit, but when I was working at Sears it was the only way to avoid doing actual work) and this girl was posting about how Google was offering free coding lessons for women and minorities. I pointed out how that sounded stupid because in a way, they already do by giving you the ability to search for it with their search engine, making the whole thing seem like an obvious stunt to make themselves look good. So, rather than just disagreeing with me on it like a normal person would, she unfriended me, and she does that with everyone who doesn't agree with her 100%. They're part of a growing population of kids (many of whom are in or just coming out of college) who try to separate themselves from individuals who don't completely agree with them on political and social issues. They have to be as PC as possible in order to avoid being ostracized by their peer groups and that's what the Pussy Crushing gag was all about, showing how PC is more for the individual's benefit than the oppressed groups'
Also, the whole thing with them all having their dates fill out consent forms was kinda funny.
>>
>>77602497
>>77603240
>>77602676
There is no difference between idiocy and mental disability.

Intelligence (not knowledge) is determined by your genes. Some people are born smarter than others. Some people are born WAY stupider than others.

If treating intelligence as a good thing and stupidity as a bad thing is no longer okay, our entire society is doomed.
>>
>>77603857
How? Are they arresting you? have you been fired or violently attacked for saying these things on your own time? if not I think you're the thin skinned one who doesn't like being told that someone doesn't appreciate you being an asshole.
>>
>>77603535

>Censorship literally means removing things you deem unacceptable
>But policing people's words totally isn't censorship you guys!
>>
>>77601782
General fucking fusk

They bleed out discussion and they create self important tripfags. Leaving the generals left to talk about shitty headcannons/fanart/and tripfags.

general threads are cancer.
>>
>>77604215

Jesus, why don't you just go back to tumblr or even reddit. I'm sure you'll find more like minded individuals there. You can even have your own safe space!
>>
>>77603819
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajXAqX9hfHM
>>
>>77604215
>Is the concept that people might have the common decency to want other who are not exactly like them to be treated the same so differently without an ulterior motive?

English motherfucker, speak it.
>>
>>77604258
Wait, so you don't want me "here" because you want this "space" to be "safe" from all these hurtful ideas? The amount of doublethink going on here is staggering.
>>
>>77604041
I'm for you shutting your whore mouth.
>>
>all these pc/sjws
>on 4chan
>on a thread specifically about south park

do you people go out of your way to get triggered?
>>
Jimmy is the hero we need.

Jimmy is the hero we deserve.
>>
>>77604150
So if some guys just started shouting NIGGER and KIKE I can't tell him to shut up because that would policing someone's language which would be censorship which would be bad.
>>
>>77604296
Sorry, what I meant to say was:
Is the concept that people might have the common decency to want others who are not exactly like them, to be treated the same, so alien to you that you cannot conceive they don't have an ulterior motive? By this logic every white abolitionist or civil rights supporter, or every Christian who supports the first amendment's religious freedom clause was lying?
>>
>>77604113
So Where you born with the stupid genes retard?
>>
>>77602178
But 4chan taught me to think everyone left of center wants to kill all white men
>>
>>77604453
If he was obstructing your day or activities by yelling kike and nigger in your face, sure.

If he's not doing anything to infringe on your rights, you can't crash into his house and demand he stop his thought crimes because he's writing that kikes and niggers are destroying American on the internet, or any other platform that he has the rights to.
>>
>>77604462

>stopping slavery and people from literally getting murdered is the same as getting pissy on the internet because someone said a no-no word
>>
>>77604453
You'd be violating his safe-space if you did.
>>
>>77604041
There's nothing wrong with censorship done by reasonable individuals.
>>
>>77604453

Did you ever considered that person yelling nigger and kike could have Tourette's? Stop being so fucking ableist.
>>
>>77604450
Do you not want certain opinions said here? Wasn't all these big bad SJW's not wanting certain things said what you were against? Yet now you seem to be for it.
>>
>>77604589

I assume by "reasonable individuals" you mean "people with the same opinions as me".
>>
>>77604589
>There's nothing wrong with censorship done by reasonable individuals.
B-but censorship is ok when the RIGHT people do it!
>>
>>77603851

but firing someone because they try to stand up for a non hostile workplace, that's perfectly fine.
>>
Fuck off to Tumblr.
>>
>>77604517
Funny, tumblr is the site that taught me that.
>>
>>77604611
Well considering that /co/ wants to ban Steven Universe discussion, then yeah.
>>
>>77604540
Well let's say he was an editor of a hateful extreme right-wing newspaper who had managed to bulid a strong base of supporters and is now running for a mayor in the small town where I live and frequently held hate rallies in public spaces like the park. Are you saying that I can't yell "shut the fuck up" at one his ralloes because doing so would be language policing?
>>
>>77604654
>Steven Universe discussion

Heh
>>
>>77601441
>>"If I create a character who's part of a group and have them express my particular views, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me."
Both sides are guilty of this, and even pointing out this idea makes you guilty of it becuase it carries the implication that you believe there's no way a particular minority can hold that view.

So congratulations John, you are the demons.
>>
>>77604543
The fact that slavery and murder are worse has nothing to do with the thrust of the argument, which is that you don't seem to think it;s possible to care about people who are not identical to you without having ulterior motives.
>>
>>77604624
I assume by "people with the same opinions as me" you mean peope with common decency.
>>
>>77604611

That's not the point. I don't go on tumblr and cry about liberals. Why do you go on 4can and cry about slurs? You're here for the SU general aren't you?
>>
>>77604693
Pretty big assumption there.
>>
>>77604661
Your freedom of speech that allows you to say 'shut the fuck up' in a public area without restricting the rights of the others around you like that also protects THEIR free speech to say whatever racist shit you disagree with.

You can't have your freedom of speech without theirs. You can't demand that the law side with you trying to silence them.

They can be as racist and vile as they like and you STILL don't demand free speech more than they do.
>>
>>77604680

It's more that I don't believe that people who don't belong to a group have a leg to stand on when they're talking about/trying to make a point about shit that affects said group. Those are Trey and Matt's experiences, they're what the way THINK people should react to said experiences.

What makes them at all qualified to speak towards what handicapped people do or don't think about?
>>
>>77603819
>Comparing verbal agression to ethics on news reporting
Well done, anon!
>>
>>77601441
This, pretty much.
>>
>>77604716
No villains think themselves as such.
>>
>>77604716
I assume by "pretty big assumption" you mean pretty big dick.
>>
>>77604681

Not true. Everything humans do is for selfish reasons.
>>
>>77604743
"a leg to stand on"
way to go, making fun of jimmy
thats not very PC of you
>>
>>77604698
Never watched it, I'm here for the comics discussion mostly, I find some good news and often some interesting insights on stuff.
>>
>>77602774
Video games aren't news
>>
>>77604635
Depends on what they think "trying to stand up for a non-hostile workplace" means. If he's bitching about nothing to people who can't do anything about it based on just his sense of persecution, then yeah, he's going to get fired if his co-workers are irritated by his behavior.

Remember that gay black guy who shot and killed two reporters on live television? He was also fired for "trying to stand up for a non-hostile workplace". Only in that case, it meant bitching about completely innocent phrases, like filing a complaint against a co-worker who said another reporter was "out in the field" because he thought it was a reference to cotton fields.
>>
>>77604750
Now I definitely don't want to see a newspaper calling my baby daughter a cunt.
>>
>>77603240
Are you disabled due to type 2 diabetes by any chance? Or perhaps you have a rough case of PTSD from viewing horrific bullying on the Internet?
>>
>>77603819
You're baby daughter is a cunt. All women are cunts.

As long as I don't directly restrict your movement and your rights, I am fully entitled to my opinion, no matter the words I use.
>>
>>77604789
Only if you get really really abstract about it. I mean you could say an abolitionist thinks an equal society is a stronger society but at that point were getting so long-term and abstract that to say their being "selfish" is laughable.
>>
>>77601743
>Okay, but that's not the reality
It is, though.
>>
>>77604105
tl:dr
>>
>>77604836
i guess in a way youre right, but im pretty sure part of the ethics of news reporting is not to directly attack a person
>>
>>77604743
Here's the thing man. Matt and Trey are saying that Jimmy, this ONE particular character, has no problem with a word. You're the one saying it's representative of all disabled characters.

And it's true. Law of averages means that yes, there IS going to be a portion of any minority that holds views you might not expect them to. There are women that are pro abortion. There are blacks that vote republican. And yes, there are mentally handicapped people that have no problem with the word "Retarded".

Are Matt and Trey being disrespectful? Let's go way, way back to when I was a kid and they did that first episode about Timmy with Phil Collins and he was doing this same white knighting deal where you can't treat the handicapped kid like a person and joke around with him and have fun...why? Because it made HIM uncomfortable.

What makes them qualified? What makes them NEED to be? Maybe they have friends that qualify. You don't know. I personally do have a lot of people that qualify in my life, and I can refer to them on this stuff, and many of them don't give a shit.

And for the record, are you demanding that same level of qualification when someone like Dave Willis starts talking through a brown woman mouthpiece about how everything is sexist?

This idea that you've gotta be a part of a group to hold an opinion or to somehow "count" is that same cult of personality politics bullshit that got us in these messes in the first place.
>>
>>77604795

that expression comes from tables and chairs, but nice try.
>>
>>77604743

Their point wasn't "all handicapped people think this" or "it's ok to say the word retarded to a handicapped person's face". The point was that censoring someone's opinion in a newspaper when you're trying to report actual facts is not good journalism.
>>
>>77604892
Well it also just might be an objective fact that the baby daughter is a cunt so you never know.
>>
>>77603240
Do you have assburgers?

That shit makes fucking annoying fucking cunts and you probably deserved to be fired.

Source: grew up with assburger sibling.
>>
File: image.jpg (1MB, 3888x2592px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
image.jpg
1MB, 3888x2592px
>>77603515
How much for your rare salts, spice merchant?
>>
>>77604910
Why would you stand on a table?
>>
>>77604912
Asking someone to use a different word than retarded isn't censoring speech. There is a lot of different words to use that can still properly express someone's opinion.
>>
>In another significant revision, "mentally retarded" is no longer the preferred term, replaced by "mentally disabled."

lrn 2 AP Stylebook
>>
>>77604915
yeah i guess so, it all depends on the context of the situation
>>
>>77601949
Because, going for the dyed hair, fat girl look would be too typical, and it points out that PC people in general are bullies and if you see a big frat dude telling you what to say, you'd think that.
>>
>>77603240
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqiGWd0-0Os
>>
>>77604956
It's called a table dance and it's a living.
>>
>>77604956
Hey man, if he wants to stand on a table, let him
Are opressing him?
thats not very PC of you
>>
>>77604898

it's not about it "counting". When abled people talk about disabilities, they're coming from a position of privilege. And in this case, they're expressing a view that conveniently absolves abled people of all responsibility in a matter that many people find offensive, while using a disabled character to make that opinion seem more legitimate.

Why does their opinion matter more than people who actually live with this shit? Because they don't deal with the consequences of having to live with this in their lives, they can talk about it without as much fear of backlash in their lives.

What good does an opinion on this matter that's not informed by life experience do anyone?
>>
>>77604482
Can't tell if all the typos are on purpose as some kind of meta-joke or not.
>>
>>77604964

At that point you might as well not report anything at all or just make it up yourself if you're making people have to reword their opinions
>>
>>77605011
And what do you have that makes you qualified?
>>
>>77604642
misconstruing everyone as the shit you see on r/tumblrinaction is your problem
>>
>>77604453
You can tell him to shut up, as you also have free speech. However, he is not in any way obligated to listen to you.
>>
>>77605047
>r/tumblrinaction

I have no clue what that is.
>>
>>77601441
Are you retarded? Seriously are you retarded?

The show does what's funny, it doesnt express anyones real views. Can you not read the disclaimer at the beginning of every fucking episode

Goddamn youre an idiot
>>
>>77605087
It's literally Reddit.
>>
>>77605087
its probably where what you see comes from
>>
>>77605011
>position of priveilege
Oh boy, you must be wild at parties
>>
>>77605011
>they're coming from a position of privilege
>>
>>77605028
How small is your vocabulary that your go to word is retarded?
>>
>>77601441
>"If I create a character who's part of a group and have them express my particular views, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me."
I don't have a picture of Anita but this is the next best thing.
>>
>>77605100
>>77605107
Well I don't use reddit, so there you go.
>>
>>77605094
>it doesnt express anyones real views.
I think OP is an idiot but saying South Park doesn't push any particular messages this is blatantly untrue.
>>
>>77605128
So people with low vocabulary ie THE POOR (or first graders as it was in the episode) don't deserve to have their free speech?
>>
>>77605128

The character in the show that said retarded was a young child, so pretty small.
>>
>>77605109
>>77605116
do mras just pretend privilege doesnt exist

w8 i think thats the definition of privilege
>>
>>77605168
>>77605170

then where the fuck is the editor to fix it?
>>
>>77605175
Do SJWs like to make everything into identity politics?

Oh wait I think that's definition of SJWs.
>>
>>77605168
They deserve to have a thesaurus.
>>
>>77605194

So you missed the entire point of the episode then
>>
>>77605175
>mras
>when no one is talking about sex privilege
>At best, this discussion is about ableism
This is why no one can take you types seriously. You conflate everything in to one big privilege pile in a way that can only be read as bait or stupidity.

Now, because you opened the door on this, tell us what your qualifications are to talk about privilege without being a complete hypocrite. What are you that makes you qualified to hold your and express opinions so openly?
>>
>>77605011
>position of privilege
>>
>>77605011

Since when are jews privileged?
>>
>>77605194
So basically what you're saying is that Donald Trump should be president.
Because think about it. By your logic, reporters have a moral responsibility not to report on the crazy racist shit he says, but to clean up his speech so that it's acceptable.
Which means that, at the end of the day, he comes off a pretty nice and reasonable guy, because otherwise someone might be offended.
So why not vote for him?

Let people be offensive and dig their own graves.
>>
>>77601888
>>77601743
They'll aim at anyone head on if it's funny. They have the very best lawyers. They opted to use frat boys for the juxtaposition. On the one hand, fit boys are very different from fat girls. But frat boys are another group prone to insular thinking and hassling people in packs.
>>
>>77605219
Was the point that jimmy was a shitty editor because seriously he was.
>>
>>77605175
Privilege is a concept that's been appropriated by the lazy and entitled to describe anyone who has a slight advantage over then due to any number of extraneous factors. Boo fucking hoo nobody feels bad for you. Get your shit together and stop being a fucking whiner.
>>
I get it that you tumblr cunts feel bad because everybody's starting to wake up from their 2014 PC high, but could you stop making this same exact thread after every fucking episode this season?
>>
>>77605268

Was the retarded thing a quote from an official?

i haven't seen the episode and i still feel like i'm not in the top 5 shitposters iit
>>
>>77605268
I really don't know how you got that from his post.
>>
>>77605259
Being Jewish is fucking retarded so

You'd think they'd be the right people to speak for retards.
>>
>>77605268
Jimmy wasn't reporting that little kid verbatim. Jimmy gave that little kid Op-ed who then used the word retard than got pissy when PC principal asked him to do a common practice for school newspapers by allowing the head faculty member a chance to screen his paper.
>>
>>77605297
No it was in an editorial and Jimmy definitely failed as an editor when he didn't ask the kid to rewrite his article.
>>
>>77605340
He's reporting on the school, naturally he wouldn't let the school dictact what he could and couldn't print.

That's why he took the paper off-site.
>>
>>77605297
>i haven't seen the episode
It shows And yes, it was.

Basically it goes like this. Jimmy publishes a quote from a kindergartner that said the word "retarded".
PC Principal gets mad because that's a bad word.
Jimmy says "That's a direct quote in an editorial. Censoring it would be dishonest".
PC Principal says "I need to approve everything that's published or you can't publish."

>>77605298
Let's take the same example in the show and apply it to the whole "Mexicans are rapists and drug lords" thing. Only this time, let's do what PC Principal wants.

Trump says "Mexicans are rapists and drug lords"
The editors of the world say "That's offensive material. No one shuld be exposed to it"
Now no one knows Trump is going around saying mexicans are rapists and drug lords.
Is obfuscating the truth like that better, or worse for mexicans? Is it better, or worse for Trump' and his campaign? Who ACTUALLY benefits from hiding something like that?
>>
>>77605268
>that leap in logic
Are you sure you're not donald trump anon?
>>
>>77605340
>Jimmy gave that little kid Op-ed

>Jimmy wasn't reporting that little kid verbatim
Technically doesn't that mean the kid is reporting himself verbatim?
>>
>>77601949
To reinforce the idea that PC folks are tribalistic bullies. That would be lost if they just went down the typical route of portraying them as limp-wrist effete faggots.
>>
>>77605357
Or he valued the honesty of a lower-class first grader opinion even though the language he used.
>>
>>77605357

The little kid didn't write shit. Jimmy was interviewing him and the kid called something retarded. So Jimmy quoted the kid exactly as he said it.
>>
>>77601441
Missed the point/10
>>
>>77605390
No.
>>
>>77605357
...Are you sure you know what editorials are?
Because every time I see an editorial it's got a little disclaimer that says "Anything you read here is this one asshole's opinion and not necessarily that of this network or publication.

That disclaimer, like the W, is there for a reason.
>>
>>77605407
Why even use the quote tho? Jimmy just sounds like he's a shitty journalist.
>>
>>77605175
Because it retardedly assumes that inequal treatment boils down to "Group A is treated better than Group B", instead of the more complex reality.

Sexism is a good example. The idea that women are fragile and innocent while men are tough can hurt both women (who get treated as incompetent and incapable of doing things on their own) and men (who are held to harsher standards).
>>
>>77605428
Yes
Now skip to the part where you "can't even".
>>
>>77605467

Are you baiting because you're doing a pretty good job
>>
>>77605467

So you're saying if you're reporting on people's opinions you shouldn't include opinions you don't like?
>>
I'm glad the PC people are frat boys, if it wasn't it would look like a pleb comic.

How would Randy join them? be a beta man who has white guilt or something. Wouldn't as be entertaining.
>>
>>77605511
Why use the first graders opinion and not just find someone else's opinion?
>>
>>77605492
It's not like journalist use every opinion given to them off the street.
>>
>>77605538

You're really adamant about censoring people's opinions huh
>>
>>77605538
Because that's how you get Fox News.
>>
>>77605472
Can't even what?
>>
>>77605425
I get the joke it just sucks
>>
>>77605580
I'm adamant about how Jimmy is a shitty journalist and editor.
>it's all about the truth man
>>
>>77605580
News isn't about opinions. It's about facts and objectivity.
>>
File: Camel.jpg (22KB, 210x240px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Camel.jpg
22KB, 210x240px
>>77605645
>>
>>77605624
>>77605663
Whelp, he ran out of bait.
Thread's over. Everyone go home.
>>
>>77605645

When you strictly ask people their opinions on a subject then yeah it's about opinions
>>
>>77605680
Jimmy wasn't reporting on the first graders opinion. He was reporting on the cafteria and decided that this random first grader's opinion was crucial for the story even tho that's bullshit.
>>
>>77603792
was jimmies stutter physically based or was it just a confidence thing? he seems to lose his stutter when ever he's pissed or confident?
>>
>>77605677
Journalism isn't bait and it isn't about including everyone's opinion.
>>
>>77605574
No, but direct quotes help enforce the exact meaning of what the interviewed feels. They chose their fucking words to use, and THAT'S what you should respect. People say what they intend to say to express what they think or feel. By censoring or altering a quote you misrepresent them and their case. To change anything that the interviewed stated would miss the entire goddamn point of quoting. You don't have to agree with or respect what they think, but you sure as fuck shouldn't argue about what they said.
>>77605728
The report included a response to the cafeteria's decision. Factually, objectively, someone thinks some way about something. The way they think it is subjective, but them having that stance can be objectively proven, through the fucking interview. Altering any of the speech would detract from the original meaning and misrepresent the interviewed.
>>
>>77605730
He has cerebral palsy, so it's something he was born with.
>>
>>77605769
Then jimmy should've attributed the quote then
>how do you know he didn't
Because PC principal didn't beat up a first grader.
>>
>>77605769
Why use the quote? Was it poignant or something? Sounds like Jimmy was too lazy to go out and ask for a different quote.
>>
>>77605893
>Because PC principal didn't beat up a first grader.
PC Princpal is (barely( a parody of the kind of person that's too busy being outraged to finish reading past what offends him or look for context or details.

Kind of like how there are people out there that insist that you have hardcore criminals in your work of fiction use the word "bitch" it means you, the author, are sexist and need to be taken down a peg.
>>
>>77605893
>Because PC principal didn't beat up a first grader.
PC Principal is A TRIGGER-HAPPY IDIOT. He saw the fucking word and immediately broke, and rather than looking at the paper for the writer, went on the warpath in the school itself.

>>77605910
>Was it poignant or something?
It certainly emphasized the ludicrous new cafeteria policy and some students' discontent with it. Jimmy even says "the word he used to best describe the new policy was 'retarded'". Just because someone's feelings would get hurt doesn't mean you shouldn't tell the truth.
>oh but he didn't have to tell the whole truth
To accurately report on how the student was feeling, yes, yes does. There are lies of commission, and lies of omission. Never let what others will feel prevent you from saying what you feel.

You faggot.
>>
>>77601441
As someone who is disabled, I did agree with Jimmy.
>>
>>77605972
That first grader opinion isn't the whole truth. It's just an opinion.
>>
>>77606063
And it was located in op-ed. Yknow. Where the opinions on the editorial are published.
>>
>>77605609
>joke

So this is a joke to you?
>>
BOY SURE IS A BUNCH OF UNCLE ABLES AROUND HERE!
>>
>>77601441
>minorities all think the same and if one doesn't they're a sockpuppet.
Hi Anita.
>>
>>77603819
Well if her parent is any indication she'll likely be one eventually.
>>
>>77604964
There's a difference between asking and forcing.
>>
>>77606414
You should told that hypothetical parent.
>>
>>77604453

As old Moot said, I'm a fan of ignoring it. Because that person is being an attention whore or lazy b8.
>>
>>77605128
There's nothing wrong with the word retarded. It was applied to the handicapped originally as a nicer word to refer to them then the alternatives. Then school children took it as an insult for a generation or two and now it's base?

Fuck that.
>>
>>77606624
deal with it, grandpa.
>>
sure is /reddit/ in here
>>
>>77601441
>I'll get offended on behalf of other people
/co/mblr pls
>>
>>77602676
Words can have multiple meanings with different intents. It's the evolution of the english language. When they say something is retarded, they mean stupid, they're not literally equating it to a disabled person. Like when someone on 4chan says you have autism, it's not because they literally think you have autism but rather that you're obsessive and can't let little things go.
>>
This was basically a #notyourshield episode

PC principal only listened to minorities that shared his worldview and marginalized others
>>
>>77603819
Comic related, it's literally every equivalence you've used.
>>
>>77607026
Do you have the one for non-ants?
>>
>>77605175
You literally have no idea what they look like at all, you have literally no idea who these people who disagree with you are.

You are assuming they're a boogeyman who's privileged to discount their arguments. You know, Hotwheels aka the owner of literallyredditchan is a massive faggot but I can guarantee he doesn't agree with you and is fine with someone using the word retard despite being disabled himself. So how are you going to discredit his argument for free speech? You can't just say "Oh, he's saying it from a position of privilege" because he isn't.

You see why this argument doesn't work m8? You don't speak for all handicapped people just because you can sit here and tell sob stories about your experiences. You don't even know if any of the people disagreeing with you aren't disabled yet you assume they're straight (on /co/ kek), white, able bodied males to suit disregard their arguments in favor of your personal experiences and feelings which are things that are never relevant in an argument.
>>
>>77601441
Whether or not Jimmy believes the word "retarded" is acceptable is irrelevant. The point is free speech and journalistic integrity.

It was a first grader who used the word to begin with. In other words, a 6 year old and not someone who is particularly intelligent, cultured, or mature. But that 6 year old has the right to say what he wants in an essay or op ed.
>>
>>77605340
>Have an independent party's newspaper be screened (read censured) by the institution they're meant to be reporting on.
>brush it off as 'common decency'

Ithink reading some worthwhile philosophers who've written at length on this issue , like Popper would be more helpful than spouting this privilege and micro-aggression rhetoric malarkey ad nauseam
>>
>>77605200
wtf it's not like i started it. and don't call me a sjw
>>77605237
i don't think i'm qualified but that doesn't mean i should just ignore it and continue with business-as-usual because it doesn't affect me. did you ever think about what "check your privilege" means beyond ironic 4chan memes?
>>77605273
"just shut up and do it" isn't helping anybody. all this is telling me is you truly don't understand what privilege (moreso lack thereof) implies.
>>77605470
no i think it assumes that inequal treatment stems from a majority culture that inherently marginalized minority groups. youre boiling it down to "group a is treated better than group b" to avoid responsibility.
>>77607251
not that other anon btw
>>
>>77607437
Look buddy, nobody's going to listen to your spiel here. Nobody wants your kool-aid. You're wasting time and effort.
>>
>>77607437
>no i think it assumes that inequal treatment stems from a majority culture that inherently marginalized minority groups
It doesn't, though. Women aren't a minority at all.

>to avoid responsibility.
What responsibility?
>>
>>77607437
This has to be elaborate trolling. Nobody is this fucking retarded.
>>
File: 1428682880284.gif (2MB, 406x422px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1428682880284.gif
2MB, 406x422px
Why the fuck would I care about a cripple who was butthurt and not cool?

Stephen Hawking got it: no one likes a little bitch.
>>
>>77602258
Fucking this. It is extremely annoying when a straight white girl gets offended for me, by me, for calling myself a faggot. It's mind boggling the mental gymnastics these people will do.
>>
>>77604890
Nigga this ain't Reddit
>>
>>77603240
As someone who is, by the dictionary definition, retarded...son, you're a retard in the slang sense.

Granted, I happen to be lucky enough that I was born in a time before a lot of mental problems were considered "okay" so they worked with me to make me some semblance of normal. My general memory is shitty unless it's involving something I want (for example, ask me to pick you up something from the store and I'll have forgotten what you wanted by the time I arrive, but that video game coming out next year I won't shut the fuck about how I can't wait for) and it's really hard to sense sarcasm (so I end up taking a lot of things seriously that I probably shouldn't) but I'm empathic as shit, being able to tell when someone's feeling crappy no matter how much they try to hide it from the world and nobody else has any idea. I'm book-smart but have no common sense. I can't dish it out, but you can attempt to insult me all day if you like and I can shrug it off like it's nothing, and sometimes I've even laughed when being insulted because what was said was so spot on it was funny. That in particular seems to piss people off and I hate hurting people, even unintentionally. Finally, I've got the benefits of "retard strength" but I'm functional enough that I won't go all Lenny on someone accidentally.
>>
>>77604964
>There is a lot of different words to use that can still properly express someone's opinion.
I think that the point was that if that's the word they feel necessary to express their opinion, that's the word they should use, even if they face backlash.

Which is why Jimmy took the paper off-site. He actually plays by PC principals rules.
>>
>>77607652
ok. you can keep indulging yourself in narcissistic /pol/ culture. all i'm saying is maybe think for yourself
>>77607661
ok? i wasn't really talking about white girls

>What responsibility?
"responsibility" as in simple acknowledgment
>>77607682
dont shame me to excuse yourself from thinking about where you stand for a second
>>
File: image.jpg (52KB, 555x644px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
image.jpg
52KB, 555x644px
>>77601441
Almost all of his episodes are shit, the only ok one I can remember is the one when he tried to be in a gang
>>
>>77608480
i liked him in red sleigh down
>>
>>77608467
I agree with you on a fair amount of points, but you type like you're from Tumblr so I'm going to call you a fag and be done with it.
>>
>>77608530
ive never been on tumblr
>>
File: 1 in 3.jpg (119KB, 560x1477px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1 in 3.jpg
119KB, 560x1477px
>>77608572
I don't believe you.
>>
>>77607661
I'd still like to know what makes you so qualified to talk down to people you know nothing about.
>>
>>77608586
ok.
>>
>>77608480
His steroid episode is hilarious
>>
>>77605645
No it isn't. It never was. That's why there's such a thing as an editorial line to follow.
>>
>>77603466
There's calling someone out on being a dick, then there's berating and trying to outcast them from society like a fucking bully. Which do you feel the PC crowd is going for?
>>
>>77608605
What people? Who am I talking down to?

>>77608467
Are you acknowledging that "male privilege" is not a thing, then?
>>
>>77610552
Not him but it does. As does female privilege.
>>
>>77608467
>ok? i wasn't really talking about white girls
You said that unequal treatment stems from the majority ganging up on the minority. Women are not a minority, so now you're either saying men and women are treated equally, or you're contradicting your previous statement.
>>
>>77610578
You see, this is why "privilege" in this context is a stupid word. It tries to paint something as a nice, easy-to-follow case of "this side gets treated better". But instead, the inequality is much more hazy - Not only are there scenarios in which the usually "underprivileged" side is now the "privileged" one, but many scenarios where it's subjective which side is better off.

For example, American women during WWII were "privileged" from the point of view of women who didn't want to get drafted, but "underprivileged" from the point of view of women who wanted to enlist.

Turning it into a black-and-white issue is extremely harmful.
>>
>>77604105
fuck off retard
>>
>>77601743
The exchange Sharon and Randy share in the latest episode is pretty much the entire message.
>>
>>77610703
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Krq6Bn0hVGM
Link for those who need a refresher
>>
Jimmy represents a minority, all right. The minority of people with conviction and ethics.
>>
>>77601441

Do you know that you're an ad?
>>
>>77601441
Tards are usually pretty chill about their retardation, they own it.
>>
>>77610703
>>77610715
To expand upon this further, they likely used fratbros as a mouthpiece for social justice as they're a more universal representation of bullies.
>>
>>77610727
Are shills an ad?
>>
>>77610657
"Privilege" is a fine word, it's how stupid people use it to oversimplify shit that's an issue. Like many words.
>>
>>77610738
The PC frat said it themselves. They've wrapped it around so much that they're the victims now. That's the same concept behind privilege. Those who are "privileged" are bad, and those "marginalized" are good. Similar to the womb envy reaction to Freud's penis envy theory, it's purely contradictory to reverse the scales of society..
>>
>>77605100
>"literally"
yeah, and so are you.
>>
I'm going to be so disappointed if the final reveal isn't Crab People. There's way too many coincidences.
>>
>>77611110
I'm going to be disappointed if it is. A reveal you see a mile away isn't much of a reveal
>>
>>77603665
The point of editing op-eds isn't to change anything. Because if you do then it becomes different from what the person is trying to express. Jimmy never says the word is okay, just that it's how someone feels.
>>
You guys want to hear some dumb shit?
I was having an argument with one of my close friends who has some SJW tendencies and somewhere along the lines he literally said that minorities can't be racist, blacks, hispanics, asians, etc can be racist in the USA because of the power bullshit.

So I asked him, "Okay, you take a white person whose spouting 'chinkchongchang I like to eat cats' in America and this person is racist yes? You put him in China and is he racist?"

And my friend literally said the white person wasn't racist because he was spouting this shit in china. Why the hell are modern SJWs trying to individualize racism and sexism to just one gender/race. It's a joke.
>>
>>77601441
>If I speak for minorities and similar people, I will be seen as good. afterall, they need me to say that its wrong

the swing goes both ways
>>
>>77611325
Because they follow a circular logic established self-serving cunts with no ability to understand human behavior or the effects their ideas would have when implemented.
Also they must believe they can't be racist or sexist because otherwise they would have to admit that they are the biggest offender in most cases.
>>
>>77608480
Only ep of his I didn't like was funnybot.
>>
>>77611110
Crab people reveal would be really dumb.

Besides, they already confirmed that its ad people.
>>
>White, able-bodied, generally from above average socio-economic backgrounds ITT not understanding certain people get marginalized and that feels like shit

>B-but if I was disabled I wouldn't mind, grow some thicker skin faggot!!!!!

How could you possibly know that? You don't know what it feels like because you can never experience it. "Privilege" might have become an overused meme, but it's a real concept.

I don't care what you say and to whom, but it bothers me when people just refuse to recognize that other people might have a different point of view and that that point of view might be just as valid as theirs.

You don't know jack shit about anything, go read a book.
>>
>>77612946
How do you know?
What are your qualifications?
>>
>>77610976
I literally don't know what your problem is.
>>
>>77612946

Are you litterally shaking?

>I don't care what you say and to whom, but it bothers me when people just refuse to recognize that other people might have a different point of view
>proceeds to be bothered by people with a different view.
>>
>>77611266
>the point of editing isn't editing
I guess Journalism has absolutely no standards and just allows rough drafts to be printed.
>>
File: 1399954617396.jpg (83KB, 651x489px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1399954617396.jpg
83KB, 651x489px
>>77612946
>I don't care what you say and to whom, but it bothers me when people just refuse to recognize that other people might have a different point of view and that that point of view might be just as valid as theirs.
You really don't see the irony there, do you? That's amazing.
This White Man's Burden thing you people do where you run around fighting battles on people's behalf is just as much an exercise of your privilege as any hate speech. It's condescending and infantalizing in a way that does infinitely more harm than good, and you're too busy feeling good about yourselfs to even entertain that thought.
>>
>>77601441
>if I imply things I'll sound more informed than I really am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpxV1lRBp9I
>>
>>77612980
What are you qualifications?
>>
>>77612946
Brown-skinned child of West Asian parentage raised by poorfag parents who fled to America and sacrificed everything so he could make something good of himself speaking.

Fuck off. Not everyone crumbles as easily as you do.
>>
>>77613032
>>77613015
What's your point of view again? That people's feelings don't matter at all and that people can't react negatively to what you say or else it's censorship?
>>
>>77613048
You fuck off man. Your singular life experience doesn't invalidate his point of view.
>>
>>77613048
Your background can suck a dick namefag.
>>
>>77613040
Well, I'm black, pretty firmly under the poverty line, and I work with special needs kids on a routine basis because my late sibling had problems that could arguably have fit on the autism spectrum. (I've been told by psychologists that I could also, on the asperger's end, but to be honest I'm a little scared of getting that kind of diagnosis and the stigmas that follow and woulds sooner just deal with my social anxiety without labels.) My mother does similar work in the social services division and I try to follow in her footsteps with my volunteer work.

So yeah, I've got experience. And I've learned that BECAUSE mental disabilities are a spectrum there are plenty of people that would qualify as "retarded" that are communicative enough to say "Hey, I have a problem with that. Don't call me that" and there are others that can't do more than bark and hide under tables. You have to decide on a case by case basis and not treat the mentally disabled or otherwise under-advantaged as a monolithic hivemind. Should you be respectful? Yes. But no more than towards any other person. Because they're people too.

Your turn. What makes YOU so qualified to white knight and treat everyone around you like children that can' possibly be able to defend themselves?
>>
>>77613072
His point of view is that people are monoliths who all perceive reality in pre-defined ways predictable by demographic status. That is, always has been, and always will be a stupid point of view.

>>77613095
Would being a faggot aid the point? Because I'd try it then.
>>
>>77613015
>>77613032

What I'm saying is that I'm bothered by people who can't see that there is more in the world than their own frame of mind. What you do with that information is your own choice.

If you want to call people niggers that's completely fine, it just bothers me when people don't understand or want to understand that it can be hurtful.

>>77613048

>I'm not offended by it so no one can be

Again, I'm not trying to make everyone play nice with eachother. I'm simply saying that just because YOU can't understand people would be offended, that doesn't mean that people who do get offended are somehow wrong.
>>
>>77613062
First off, you're talking to two different people. But given your arguments I can see how that kind of concept is lost on you since this whole time you've been acting like everyone can be lumped into easily defined groups.

My point of view is that people are diverse, and that diversity of opinions and feelings means that just because YOU have a problem with a word doesn't mean someone else will. Even if that someone is also the accepted target of that word. Because again, people are individuals with their own scales as to what is and isnt offensive. Some gays own the word fag, some get offended by it. Some women will flip off at being called a bitch, other's refer to themselves as such gleefully. The whole nigger/nigga thing you could do entire documentaries about.

I think a good rule of thumb is to play it safe and gauge the comfort levels of the individual. Have people you know you can joke around and shoot the shit with, and others you know "I can't say this around them". Don't bother trying to appease the entire group, because doing so requires you to turn that group into a monolith, and turning people into a monolithic hive-mind is wrong. Respect others, but respect the truth as well.
>>
How can Social Justice be good, when its specifically not Justice?
>>
>>77613124
>Again, I'm not trying to make everyone play nice with eachother. I'm simply saying that just because YOU can't understand people would be offended, that doesn't mean that people who do get offended are somehow wrong.

I'm not saying the people who are offended are wrong or that I can't understand why some would be offended, I'm saying its wrong to believe that EVERYONE who fits in that category would naturally be offended by virtue of being in that category. A lot of this stuff tends to be white people taking offense on behalf of the people they believe should be taking offense.
>>
>>77613124
>What I'm saying is that I'm bothered by people who can't see that there is more in the world than their own frame of mind

Okay, let me put it this way.
I'm black. The word nigger doesn't offend me. People can and have used it on me, in jest and in hatred both. At the same time I CERTAINLY want to know if a politician or other person in a position of authority is going around calling people niggers, and the context and reasons for them saying it, and I and wouldn't want a newspaper to censor that.

How does that fit into your little narrative about understanding feelings?
>>
>>77613128
>I think a good rule of thumb is to play it safe and gauge the comfort levels of the individual. Have people you know you can joke around and shoot the shit with, and others you know "I can't say this around them". Don't bother trying to appease the entire group, because doing so requires you to turn that group into a monolith, and turning people into a monolithic hive-mind is wrong. Respect others, but respect the truth as well.

Yeah, this. The kind of language I would use would depend on the audience.
>>
>>77613132
It's Social Just Us, because it's just for their little feel good club.
>>
>>77613101
Can you even read? Has the anti-SJW circlejerk completely destroy your ability to understand words? Go back to that post and point to me where he even begins to talk about monoliths and shit.
>>
>>77613194
He has to actually use the word "monolith" for it to qualify as the concept he's describing?
>>
>>77613205
No but you should be able to point out where in his argument he starts to argue that everyone perceive reality in the same way.
>>
>>77613152

If a politician used the word nigger in an op-ed piece, like with "retarded" in this episode, I think the newspaper should not publish it, but instead write a piece about how a politician (a representative for the people) uses a term which is widely accepted as derogatory to refer to a large portion of said people. That said, I think it should be the newspaper's own choice.

I was going to type up a whole paragraph explaining basic discursive and semiologic theory, but why bother, people are just going to go

>SJW XD
>>
I really like PC Principal is that wrong?
>>
>>77613356
He seems sympathetic and wanting to do the right thing but coming across as a MAJOR asshole about it and going way too far about what's right and what's wrong like SJWs
>inb4 stock "Liberal nigger degeneracy lovers are not sympathetic" response
>>
>>77613356
>I really like ads
kill yourself
>>
>>77613356
PC principal is actually the only PC frat bro who actually cares about the cause and not just puss smashing, so yeea like away.
>>
>>77613295
>, I think the newspaper should not publish it, but instead write a piece about how a politician (a representative for the people) uses a term which is widely accepted as derogatory to refer to a large portion of said people.
The ambiguity of that turns it into a big grey area where people can speculate and spin and say he didn't say something as bad as he did in our hypothetical. That benefits the politician more than it does me, the supposed victim.

Let's try another hypothetical. An athlete gets accused of rape. Rather than use the word rape, because that word might offend someone, the newspaper instead writes a piece as to how he was "strongly inappropriate with the woman". Is wording more or less offensive. More importantly, who does it benefit more, the athlete or the victim?
>>
>>77613384
I hate that tiptoe around a word stuff because it's almost exactly like the conversation in 1984 about using vocabulary to control people.

>Bad? We don't need such a thing. Ungood will suffice.
>>
>>77613384
>Already using the word victim when talking about an accusation.
Let's go for 'accuser'.
>>
>>77613476
Fair point.
>>
>>77602774
and that's related to integrity in journalism how? Maybe if he was using Super School News to shill it, but he wasn't.
>>
>>77601441
You mean Kyle the kike or Stan the religiously despodent?
>>
>>77613384

What the hell are you on about, how is this relevant to any of my arguments? I'm not saying you should or shouldn't tip toe around anyone's feelings. I'll repeat my actual argument for the 4th time:

Just because you don't understand people get offended, doesn't mean that they can not get offended.

All your hypothetical situations mean jack shit, ESPECIALLY against my argument. The situation is more complicated than to warrant one blanket statement which completely covers it all, who'dda thunk?
>>
>>77605259
Since they can fill out the Caucasian bracket when submitting applications. Yet they still act like an oppressed minority. They think they were persecuted because of their religion rather than their cancerous parasitic ideals.
>>
>>77613384
>>77613476
>>77613562
This is also addressing the 'acceptability' of certain word usage. A bit politically coloured too if you remember the push against 'victim blaming' trying to have men guilty until proven innocent and the popular idea that language shapes thought.

It's a push for making the 'right' word choices in order to instil the right state of mind. So it's something you'd expect on an SJW forum.
But one of the good ones, nobody is claiming the use of the word victim is oppressing them and potentially triggering traumatic episodes.

The helpful suggestion could have been safely ignored and the maker of such would only have embarrassed themselves by pressing the issue further.
>>
File: 1416618557822.jpg (436KB, 960x930px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1416618557822.jpg
436KB, 960x930px
Holy shit, this fucking thead is why people call us /co/mblr and treat us as the worst board.
>>
>>77613763

>Jews have cancerous parasitic ideals
>Muslims have cancerous parasitic ideals
>Christian have cancerous parasitic ideals
>White people have cancerous parasitic ideals
>Black people have cancerous parasitic ideals

Hey, bud, culture, religion, race or any social strcutures are not hiveminds. Their belief structures *might* be built upon "cancerous parasitic ideals", but not every individual adhering to those beliefs are "cancerous" or "parasitic". Beliefs do not warrant persecution.

Stay edgy though, my man
>>
>>77604105
This more or less.

Americans are going through a fucked up cultural change.
>>
>>77602497
>This episode felt like abled people acting like white people who say why they should be able to say "nigger"

Nigger and nigga are not the same word. Black people don't say nigger
>>
>>77613732
>Just because you don't understand people get offended, doesn't mean that they can not get offended
The inverse of this is also true though. Why can't you admit that there are people, even minorities, that don't get offended by certain language.

Yes SOME people get offended by some things. Why should they be catered to exclusively?
>>
>>77602653
Because Jimmy is a (10 year old nonwithstanding) is the newspaper's curator and has the right to do so.
>>
>>77614249
It's definitely a bad thing to cater to the loudest complainers.
>>
>>77613853
>Hey, bud, culture, religion, race or any social strcutures are not hiveminds.

Neither they are inconsequntial.

>Their belief structures *might* be built upon "cancerous parasitic ideals", but not every individual adhering to those beliefs are "cancerous" or "parasitic"

No, the rest at best are weak people who enable cancerous parasites through inaction, at worst their supporters who don't have will to act.

>Beliefs do not warrant persecution.

Nazis called, they are rump-rustled about being persecuted for their beliefs.
>>
>>77601441

> If I claim to be fighting on behalf of a particular group, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me.
>>
>>77613356
he's a misguided idealist who also looks good and is /fit/, and knows how to approach some problems. Can be sympathized with.
>>
File: ddddddddddddddd.jpg (22KB, 350x328px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
ddddddddddddddd.jpg
22KB, 350x328px
>>77614341
wait.... I can't tell if this comment is intended to be against the episode or against the SJWs.....

The lesson appears to be identity should not be used in the calculation of justice! Fair is fair, and percieved oppression should be disregarded!
>>
>>77603535
"calling out" does not mean you are right.
Your retarded opinion that a word is offensive is not objective ok thanks bye.
>>
>>77613853

>Hey, bud, culture, religion, race or any social strcutures are not hiveminds
two thirds of the Muslim population in Britain believe that any criticism of Islam or drawing of Mohammad should be punishable under the LAW with a PRISON SENTENCE.
The population of Muslims in Britain is about 3 million. About 10% of Britain is Muslim.

The same two thirds of Muslims in Britain would like sharia law as it is in place in Saudi Arabia.

I dare you to reconcile this with any first world nation and say those opinions are not fundamentally opposed.
>>
>>77601441
You're a literal nazi, plz die.
>>
>>77614448
Alright but I'm still going to call you out when you use offensive or racist language.
>>
>>77614448
You're not brave or a hero by saying Nigger or Retard anon.
>>
>>77614589
I should add:
5-10% of those 3 million Muslims believe that violence against people who insult or criticize Islam or draw any depiction of the prophet is acceptable.
>>
>>77614623
Why?
>>
>>77614640
What an utterly worthless strawman of a post.
>>
>>77614658
Because I find it offensive and would rather not you use them.
>>
I've always separated being insulted and being offended. Being insulted means being personally attacked, while being offended is kind of just meaningless and being angry at something just because you can. Like being insulted means that there's actual antagonism towards you, but with being offended, you're just breeding your own antagonism to go off on others. Being offended means you need a thicker skin, being insulted means someone is deliberately mocking you. You need a thick skin for both, but being insulted I think is more legitimate than being offended.
>>
>>77614703
But I find them not offensive.
And I would rather use them. So why is your opinion worth more than mine?
>>
>>77614658
Does the idea of someone calling you out on your offensive language trigger you? Are you literally shaking right now and can't even?
>>
>>77614727
Why is your opinion worth more than mine?
>>
>>77614727
Why don't you find it offensive? Is it because of the environment you grew up in?
>>
>>77614737
When did I say it was?
The presumption that I must change my language assumes that your opinion that it is offensive means that your opinion is correct.

The presumption that I don't change it doesn't require either opinion to be right or wrong as it is not enforcing either position.
>>
>>77614749
>Why don't you find it offensive?
Because it's a word.
>>
>>77614737
His opinion isnt worth more than yours, but your opinion isnt grounds to ban anyone rights.
Otherwise your opinion that races should be segregated would have weight on others rights, instead of just being shit being spoken by a shithead.
>>
>77614729
does the idea of calling someone out on not being as correct as you think they should be fill you with glee? Does it make you want to crush some puss? Do you feel like you are a better person over it, considering you have to go so low in order to self validate?
>>
>>77614796
Words can be offensive.
>>
>>77614839
I disagree with your opinion.
>>
>>77614850
It's not really an opinion as more a fact of life. Language can very much be offensive and there are words that are used to demean others.
>>
>>77614886
>It's not really an opinion
It is entirely an opinion. You can't substantiate it, because it's never been objective.
>>
>>77614951

Anon, literally nothing about life, save scientific facts, is objective. Claiming that you need objective proof of someone's opinion in order to make a cultural rule about it is a way to have an indistinct mess of a culture with hardly any rules at all.
>>
>>77614951
are you saying that offensive words never existed? That nobody has ever used slurs like nigger amd faggot?
>>
>>77615056

Bringing this back around to the point:

Offensive is taken, not given.
>>
>>77615056
Not that anon, but why do you get to make the cultural rules? Within my lifetime, the cultural rule was that gays were gross abominations. And it can't just be a matter of who finds something offensive, because I can go outside, right now, and within fifteen minutes probably find as many people that hold that *opinion* still and are offended by two dudes kissing.

>But they're wrong
you'll say, but your own logic, if it can be called that, betrays you. That's the problem with feelings based defenses. You're not special for having feelings. Anyone can do it.
>>
As someone with autism and has been often been called retarded to insult me for my autism, I honestly agree with Jimmy in the latest South Park episode.
As long as people get offended by words, people will always uses those words specifically to insult people.
The best way to counter offensive language is not to fight it, but to change it's meaning. Very few people find the words lame, moron, or cretin particularly offensive when used in their currently most common definition.
Let people use retard as a synonym for for something they don't like. The faster it becomes disassociated from its original meaning, the better.
>>
>>77614886
Words can be offensive and demeaning. Being offended and demeaned is part of a healthy process of maturing as a human being.

Being offended and demeaned (and knowing how to respond to it well) is part of a healthy, balanced adulthood.
>>
>>77614886
>>77615191
Yet treating someone like a child that can't fend for themselves and tell you directly that they have a problem with something isn't demeaning, because reasons.
>>
>>77615112

> Why do you get to make cultural rules?

Well first, I'd like to clarify that I am not actually of the whole "ban offensive words" school, I'm just noting certain things.

> Why do you get to make the cultural rules

Because they have the power to do so. That's literally all it is. Gays are no longer thought of as gross abominations because people who thought they weren't captured enough institutions and focuses of power (or convinced existing ones that they weren't) and then the culture changed. Saying "but, that's just your opinion, and MY opinion is-" is the death cry of the cultural loser.

If enough people who find those words offensive and think their use should be punished capture the centers and institutions of power, they will make it so the use of those words will be punishable. (In fact, they already are, in many ways.) It matters not one bit that you think it's unfair that their opinions get backing and have force behind them and yours don't.

In fact, if we go meta, saying something like "People's opinions shouldn't make cultural rules" is, in itself, a cultural rule. It is, in fact, the very heart of liberalism (in the civilizational sense, not the political sense.) And it's always been a weak rule at that, since of COURSE cultural rules are made out of people's opinions - there is literally nothing else they could be made out of.
>>
>>77614321

>implying nazi's weren't persecuted for acting upon those beliefs
>>
>>77614321
It's funny because after the war the kind of persecution national socialists saw world wide was far from acceptable though. The only reason they were singled out like this was because it was allowed by the winners of the war. There's really no justification for it.
>>
>>77613158
>>77613128
These, basically. Don't be an asshole and be considerate of how others feel, but realize that your honesty should come first.
>>
You know, there's a real world example of a handicapped guy standing up for freedom of speech to the letter if the law...and people decided to attack him and dox him... Seems like the mere mention of his name on this website will incur a black plague
>>
>>77615124
With mental illness it's a very interesting case. It seems to be a bit of a losing battle; whatever the term you use for someone's mental development being stunded, that term will be eventually co-opted to mean 'stupid' and then you'll have to come up with a different term
>>
>>77613732
>Just because you don't understand people get offended, doesn't mean that they can not get offended.

At what point am I ever obligated to give a flying fuck? Nobody has the right to not be offended.
>>
>>77614839
>words hurt worse than slamming the door on my dick.
>>
>>77613295
>let's not publish the full interview, with all the context necessary to understand why he said nigger
>let's publish an opinion piece on why I think using this word is baaaaad
do you work for kotaku by any chance?
>>
>>77613732
Offense is never given, it is always taken
>>
>>77615735
You're not, but if people think you're an asshole for your opinions that's on you to deal with.

It's a thing that happens where people think that the rigours of free speech/thought end at them. People can get offended at something and think that they have the right not to be offended. Sometimes, people cause offence to someone else and seem to think that they have the right to not have to deal with people being offended because of their words.
>>
>>77612946
What you said feels fucking shitty too, you faggot. Do you know what it feels like to be patronized for a perceived "disability" even though it's not a big deal at all? The only way to not hurt anyone's feelings is to never say anything at all.

And that's fucking retarded. I'd ask you to read a book, but one can't expect a retard to read.
>>
File: i_feel_stupid1.gif (499KB, 500x248px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
i_feel_stupid1.gif
499KB, 500x248px
>>77601852

I never really even caught that it was an homage to Gamergate, geez i feel stupid.
>>
>>77616698

You should feel even more stupid now, because that episode came out well before GG existed
>>
>>77613026
If it's a quote someone said in an interview, that's not a rough draft, that's their final draft and what they allow to be printed. Any editor that modifies a quote to change the context or wording is fucking worthless.

>>77613124
>just because YOU can't understand people would be offended, that doesn't mean that people who do get offended are somehow wrong.
People who get offended aren't right or wrong, they're just offended. They're allowed to do that just as much as people are allowed to say what would offend them. At the end of the day, context and intent are important. Some people believe words are bullets, and maybe they can be, but these SJW types are jumping under the bullets casually being dropped by people. They're jumping at Mach 1 and then accusing the speaker of "shooting".
>>
>>77604964
>Asking someone to use a different word than retarded isn't censoring speech.
PC Principal wasn't asking them to use a different word.

He demanded to have final approval on the news.

The comparison would be the POTUS demanding the he have final say on media reporting across the US.
>>
>>77613295
>If a politician used the word nigger in an op-ed piece, like with "retarded" in this episode, I think the newspaper should not publish it, but instead write a piece about how a politician (a representative for the people) uses a term which is widely accepted as derogatory to refer to a large portion of said people.
That's absolutely retarded.
>>
>>77602497
>This episode felt like abled people acting like white people who say why they should be able to say "nigger"
They should. People can say what they want. If someone gets offended, that's their right - They are free to dislike that person. But the speaker has no obligation to avoid offending them.
>>
File: 345234.jpg (34KB, 640x451px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
345234.jpg
34KB, 640x451px
It's weird. It's like half of Tumblr is ass blasted and the other half is too busy fawning over Tweek and Craig.
>>
>>77615056
>Anon, literally nothing about life, save scientific facts, is objective
>Nothing but objective things are objective
>>
If South Park was around 100 years ago they would have been anti suffragettes.
I wouldn't put much stock in anything they say. They take pot shots at both sides, but the truth is they're fairly conservative and hate any sort of change.
>>
>>77615067
Whether they're offensive or not is up to the individual.
>>
>>77617222
That's how school newspapers work.
>>
>>77617584
>but the truth is they're fairly conservative and hate any sort of change.

They've really only been consistent with censorship.

Everything else is just for laughs. Unless you think they like Trump and just showed him being a complete shit heel and getting raped to death by the multi sex change survivor so they could make fun of other people and not get called out on it.
>>
>>77617676
>That's how school newspapers work.

>Ignores that nothing that takes place at South Park elementary is always literally about what takes place in an elementary school.

Did you have a Rush Limbaugh proxy giving the morning announcements in your school?
>>
File: 1445449433774.png (753KB, 1008x672px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1445449433774.png
753KB, 1008x672px
If only Jimmy was distraught by the mean word and had an overweight pink haired woman to champion him.
>>
>>77617676
And then he had to deliver the paper outside of the school
>>
>>77617676
Except it isn't, and legal action can be taken if that is attempted.
>>
>>77617719
did you not?
>>
>>77618023
Dances With Smurfs would have been infinitely more interesting than the Pledge of Allegiance and the lunch menu.
>>
>>77617806
Pretty sure school newspaper do require the approval of the faculty.
>>
>>77601441
So no more minority characters expressing opinions, right? Should there be no more minority characters or should minorities just not be allowed to talk?

Or you could try seeing minority characters as individuals and not representatives of entire groups.
>>
>>77601441
Minorities don't have a hivemind, anon.
>>
>>77614623
>call you out
You mean object? Or are you going to fight him in the schoolyard like that term implies?
>>
>>77618170
Elementary schools might, but high school and especially university papers have the rights to full autonomy
>>
>>77604105
>So, rather than just disagreeing with me on it like a normal person would, she unfriended me

I hardly ever use facebook but I remember around the time Brian Griffin "died" some dude I went to high school was seriously upset about it so I unfriended him right away.

I disagreed with the guy on a lot of shit before and that was ok, but no way am I going to associate with someone who takes the death of Brian Griffin seriously.
>>
I love how this thread has been all about blasting the retarded SJW (easily recognizable for leaving two spaces after quoting: >>77612946/>>77605011/>>77604743/>>77603240/>>77602676) into the fucking ground. Keep it up.
>>
>>77618765
Damn right there's going to be a fight after school.
>>
>>77603240

You think that has anything to do with what word people use? Tell people they can't use retarded in a derogatory way, and they'll just replace it by sarcastically calling you "special" or something.
>>
>>77620201
>Tell people they can't use retarded in a derogatory way, and they'll just replace it by sarcastically calling you "special" or something.

Isn't that how things basically are already?
>>
>>77620100

I'm not him, but leaving in a line break looks better, especially if you're quoting/writing walls of text.
>>
We all say words like "retard," but we don't mean to demean kids that have special needs. We just need a word and it's the greatest word we've got to describe vegans and members of PETA. When I say "faggot" you might think that it's terrible, but I don't mean to hurt your feelings, homosexual. It's a word I need just for people in general, like the lead singer of Interpol. Cynical people think that it's hate speech. They can all lick me where the good lord laced me. The color of your skin doesn't matter to me and the colors of a fascist don't change just because you call him a bleeding-heart.
>>
>>77611325
he's kind of right. reverse-racism isn't really the same as racism but what sjws fail to understand is that it perpetuates mentalities that lead to racism and other forms of oppression in the first place
>>
File: 4ac.jpg (72KB, 621x621px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
4ac.jpg
72KB, 621x621px
>>77601441
bait
>>
>>77613356

He is pretty much one of the best SP villains that appeared in years.
>>
>>77610595
i said majority culture, which is very predominantly male. what i was saying there is that it has a much more damaging affect on minorities and women in other countries than american white girls. i mean there are problems with how white women are treated here but i feel a lot of issues (shit like manspreading comes to mind) are just contrivances made up by privileged girls with no actual gendered problem in their life as an excuse to feel oppressed. i see a lot of the same behaviors in a lot of first world people though, not just sjw white girls.
>>
>>77621715
i think the real big problem here is people refuse contentment. even when everything really is ok
>>
I find it interesting that no one's noticed that Jimmy is simultaneously presenting a normal way to note that a word bothers you.

Every time someone called him special, he said he preferred the word handicap and ended it there. He didn't make a huge deal about it or try to police their language or act superior in expressing himself. He just made his inclination clear.

This is speculation, but the intent there seems to be that you can't force people to think or act a certain way, and while some things may offend you, all you can do is let people know. If you can't reach an agreement with them, either you deal with it, or you stop associating with them.

And most importantly, bullying people into acting exactly the way you think is right is awful. The world is full of terrible people, regardless of social norms, and learning how to deal with them is part of what makes societies work. Making rules strict to the point where no one is allowed to do or say anything, including things that don't actually hurt people, does more damage to good people than bad people.

tl;dr: You can't make people stop being assholes, you've just got to learn how to deal with it appropriately, which language policing and villainizing is not.
>>
>>77621815

I didn't see it as him being offended by the word special so much as him discouraging people from tiptoeing around terms that they may be uncomfortable with. By saying "handicapped" with no hesitation and no awkwardness attached to it, he was merely demonstrating that there is nothing to be afraid of.
>>
>>77621877
That's a valid interpretation. Either way, it's demonstrating a more appropriate alternative to bullying and ostracizing people.
>>
>>77621877
using mental conversation gymnastics to not say what you want to say is just as marginalizing as just calling him a retard
>>
File: 1447903199242.jpg (16KB, 587x663px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1447903199242.jpg
16KB, 587x663px
>>77601743
>male feminists don't do what they do to get laid

Ok senpai
>>
>>77603819
freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences of speech
If you call someone's baby a cunt you'll probably have that person either be mad at you or just disassociate from you. Legally they can't do anything other than verbally rebuke you, but they could deck you in the face because just because its illegal to assault someone, doesn't mean they cant.
>>
>>77605094
>Are you retarded?
Look, asshole.

I'm not that anon. I happen to be on your side. But you gotta stop starting posts this way.

It's fucking ridiculous and counter-productive. You are never going to win any battles this way. Not when you force them to turtle immediately and deflect any good points you happen to make.

Fucking moron.
>>
>>77601743
>at least 50% of male feminists aren't the new nice guy
Seriously
>>
>>77621715
>i said majority culture, which is very predominantly male.
What?

Are you saying women don't gang up on other people? Because that would be the wrongest thing I've ever heard.
>>
>>77621586
>reverse-racism isn't really the same as racism
"Reverse-racism" is a nonsense word. If a black guy is prejudiced against white people, he's racist.
>>
>People think PC is worse than being called a nigger and a faggot
Is there a reason for why the majority of the anti-PC people are straight white men
>>
>>77622819
Because the majority of people on the internet are straight white men.
>>
>>77622764
do you know what culture means?
>>77622801
it doesn't mean as much in a culture where he's marginalized. why is it that every mra argument can be boiled down to "no u"?
>>
>>77623149
>do you know what culture means?
Learned, shared behavior.

How is it a male thing? If anything, it's not culture at all - Tribalism is coded into human instinct.

>>77623149
Racism isn't defined by how much it affects people.
>>
>>77623223
it's not inherently a male thing, it happened to be built by white men.
>muh instinct
ok get off the computer and go live in the woods and feed on deer if instinct is so important. fuck off with this shit. the thing about humans is that there is more to our understanding than instinct.
>Racism isn't defined by how much it affects people.
..except it is. if it didn't affect anyone it wouldn't mean anything at all. did you think about this at all before posting? does "no u" ever start to get boring?
>>
>>77623149
>why is it that every mra argument can be boiled down to "no u"?
Why is it anyone even slightly opposed to political correctness is immediately deemed an MRA?

Secondly, where is the "no u"?
>>
>>77601743
>Okay, but that's not the reality.
Literally a lie.
>>
>>77623308
it's not being opposed to political correctness (whatever that even means) it's just a red flag when every argument can be boiled down to "but what about meeee" and an absolute refusal to even acknowledge problems in white/male culture at all. i guess that's what i mean by "no u"
>>
>>77623299
>it happened to be built by white men.
What do you base this belief on? There is no correlation at all between the race that built a society and how prejudiced that society is. There have been and still are societies created by non-whites that are just as intolerant as any white-built society.

>ok get off the computer and go live in the woods and feed on deer if instinct is so important. fuck off with this shit. the thing about humans is that there is more to our understanding than instinct.
Point to where I said instinct was a good thing.

I'm saying that blaming such a universal behavior on a specific race and gender is ridiculous.

>..except it is.
No. Racism is treating people differently based on their race. That's the definition. It's not determined by how effective it is.

>does "no u" ever start to get boring?
Where do you see me claiming anything that can be read as "no u"?
>>
>>77623406
>"but what about meeee"
Where did I say this?

Where did I refuse to acknowledge there were problems?

I'm saying that you can't write these problems off as being black-and-white, where the solution is to attack a specific group. That's not going to fix things. Treat people as equals; no "punching up vs. punching down" nonsense that creates animosity between groups.
>>
>>77623476
>There is no correlation at all between the race that built a society and how prejudiced that society is.
>There have been and still are societies created by non-whites that are just as intolerant as any white-built society.
wtf so youre saying there's a correlation?
>Point to where I said instinct was a good thing. I'm saying that blaming such a universal behavior on a specific race and gender is ridiculous.
i agree, i'm not saying blame white people because white people. i'm saying there are problems with white (or whatever dominant culture is present in a society) culture as it inherently marginalizes people unaffiliated
>No. Racism is treating people differently based on their race. That's the definition. It's not determined by how effective it is.
but it's effects are what makes it a problem at all. i never said racism against whites in a white culture isn't racist, it's just not as harmful
>>77623534
i agree
>>
>>77623577
>i never said racism against whites in a white culture isn't racist

Not even a part of this argument but you're a fucking idiot. That's exactly what you said here. >>77621586
>reverse-racism isn't really the same as racism


Also
>i'm saying there are problems with white (or whatever dominant culture is present in a society) culture as it inherently marginalizes people unaffiliated

So, as long as there is SOME kind of majority in any society, that majority is automatically problematic?
>>
>>77623577
>wtf so youre saying there's a correlation?
I pointed out two things that are the same. I didn't say non-white societies were MORE intolerant. I said they were JUST AS intolerant.

>i'm saying there are problems with white (or whatever dominant culture is present in a society) culture as it inherently marginalizes people unaffiliated
But that's neither a white thing nor a male thing.
>>
>>77623696
..i said it wasn't the same. nothing in that post contradicts my other post. if i disagreed that it was racist i wouldnt have used the term reverse-racism at all

>So, as long as there is SOME kind of majority in any society, that majority is automatically problematic?
not necessarily but it's a shitty part of human nature we need to get over. i mean you can go over to some places in south africa and see black culture have the same effect on white people.
>>77623744
anon why are you still insisting i'm saying anything is an inherent white or male thing? its just that the typical dominant cultures are dictated by whites and males. it's a human issue in general, minorities can take advantage of it in the same ways
>>
>>77601441
>"If I c-c-c-create a character who's p-part of a group and have them express my pa-pa-PArticular views, it'll seem like that p-p-particular minority agrees with me."
>>
>>77623792

So reverse racism is a subtype of racism. but at the same time it's different from racism? That's like saying squares are different from rectangles.

Also, what makes it reverse? At what point did we establish that racism has a default direction?
>>
>>77604105
Sorry, but I didn't give you consent to dialogue with me, so your opinion has been discarded as a result.
>>
>>77623862
reverse racism refers to it in the context of being used against the dominant culture. it IS different anon. like i said it's not a good thing as it feeds mentalities that create prejudice in the first place but it is different in the context of culture
>>
>>77623792
>anon why are you still insisting i'm saying anything is an inherent white or male thing?
Because you literally said that majority culture was created by white males.

>its just that the typical dominant cultures are dictated by whites and males.
Males are dominant in most societies because they are physically more powerful. But when a group has only women, the same majority "culture" shows up.

And it's not tied to whites, either. The same mentality is just as prevalent in societies where whites are not dominant.
>>
>>77623933
i Literally didn't

i Literally agree with what you're saying here. i Literally don't know why you think i disagree. i Literally thin youre just associating me with the sjw archetype in your head and are just arguing with that instead of really paying attention to what i'm saying
>>
>>77623926
Splitting it into a "racism vs. reverse-racism" binary assumes that there is always clear dominance of one culture over another, and that the dominance is always to the same degree.

Like a lot of other things brought up in this argument, it paints too black-and-white of a picture to actually help anyone and just furthers animosity between groups.
>>
>>77623995
>i Literally didn't

>>77623299
>it's not inherently a male thing, it happened to be built by white men.
>>
>>77623926

>>77623926
>reverse racism refers to it in the context of being used against the dominant culture.

First, I don't know how the fuck you can be racist against a culture. Wouldn't that be culturism or something?

Second, there is nothing in the definition of racism that establishes it as something that only the "privileged" or "dominant" or whatever can do towards the "unprivileged" or "submissive" or whatever. If someone from the majority is racist toward someone in the minority, it's racism. If someone from the minority is racist toward someone in the majority, it's still racism. If you're going to define some kind of "Reverse racism" as opposed to another kind, first you are going to need to establish that "forward racism" is an actual thing.
>>
>>77624072
ok. i'm not trying to act like an authority on the subject. there are people who can give you a way smarter idea of what i'm talking about than me
>>77624106
>it's not inherently a male thing
read, anon. i've clarified like five times its subjective to the culture. white/male culture make up a lot of these. i was just going to call it dominator culture but i figured that would cause more confusion, whoops.
>>77624119
what's with this definition talk? i'm talking about racism's effects. racism against blacks exists because of white dominator culture. why is this so confusing to you? racism against blacks in a white culture is more harmful because it promotes mentalities that marginalize black people further. racism against whites in a white culture isn't as harmful since there's no minority being marginalized BUT still fuels animosity and is anti-progressive. i don't agree that it's harmless, but it is different. hence racism/reverse-racism, but in the bigger picture, yes, they are the same thing
>>
>>77624475
>smarter
maybe 'clearer' is a better word
>>
>>77624475
You don't need to invent a new term just because one specific instance of racism is deemed more harmful than another. And even if you did, I don' see where the "reverse" comes from. No one refers to being stabbed as being "reverse-impaled."

>what's with this definition talk?

It's relevant when you try to claim that reverse-racism is a legitimate term with a legitimate use, and as other have said in this thread, racism does not have an established direction. Especially since you keep bringing it back to blacks and whites. If racism by whites against blacks is regular racism, and racism by blacks against whites is reverse racism, then what is racism by Asians against Latinos? Perpendicular racism? What about if a Native American hates Jews? In what direction is that racism going? Vertically?
>>
>>77624780
quit arguing with your sjw archetype and read what i'm talking about

racism = dominant racial culture used against minority group within that culture to marginalize them
reverse-racism = minority group within a dominant culture reversing the same hatred out of vulnerability

whites and blacks are just two prominent examples i was using. do you know anything about how the world works outside of a dictionary?
>>
>>77628694
Stop being the archetype and we'll stop arguing with you senpai
>>
>>77628694
>racism = dominant racial culture used against minority group within that culture to marginalize them
That's not what racism is.

>reverse-racism = minority group within a dominant culture reversing the same hatred out of vulnerability
What do you call racism between groups who are not dominant over one another?

Or when which side is "more dominant" is fuzzy?

Racism does not have a default direction. Assuming that racism against a majority is an abnormal form of racism is dumb.
>>
>>77629002
there you go again
>>77629328
where do you think racist mentalities come from? muh dictionary didn't invent racism
>>
>>77628694
I love you guys because by your logic I can't be sexist because I only hate white women. And that's can't be racist either. So I'm in the clear.
>>
>>77601441

>thinking those with mental disabilities are "people" and that they have "opinions"
>>
>>77630031
women are a minority culture anon. not a Literal minority. you can keep completely misconstruing what i mean like a dense 5th grader but you dont actually have a point
>>
File: 1440900763988.jpg (31KB, 615x456px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1440900763988.jpg
31KB, 615x456px
>>77605269
>They'll aim at anyone head on if it's funny.

Which is why they are talking about Social Justice but not naming/making fun of a single, famous SJW? Not even one!?
That's suspicious as fuck and you know it.
>>
>>77630108
jimmy doesnt even have a mental disability
>>
>>77629959
>where do you think racist mentalities come from?
From the human instinct of tribalism. There have been countless conflicts between people's of roughly equal power based purely on "They're not like us".
>>
>>77613032
I like how there is now a viral video of this taking place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8UTj8lQJhY
>>
>>77630154
>women are a minority culture anon.
What the fuck does that mean?
>>
>>77630154
>women are a minority culture anon.
Women aren't a monolith pal. It's myopically racist to assume the problems facing brown women in the third world are even remotely as inconsequential as manspreading and video game jiggle physics.
>>
>>77630264
ok? what does this have to do with racism in the context of agriculture and society? again there is more to human behavior than instincts
>>77630300
the group mentalities societies are built around, these are very primarily masculine. feminine culture has pretty much always had less power than masculine culture. THINK anon, i believe in you!
>>77630426
>It's myopically racist to assume the problems facing brown women in the third world are even remotely as inconsequential as manspreading and video game jiggle physics.
wow where did you get any of that from? islamic oppression of women comes from male dominator culture. manspreading comes from bored privileged white girls looking for something unrelated to complain about. i dont even care about video games or whatever youre on about there
>>
>>77602653

A big part of it that you're missing, and proving oh so wonderfully, is that it's about people who have no say in the matter telling people who have all the say that they're wrong.

Jimmy is handicapped and doesn't take issue with the word retarded. He's told that he is brainwashed, he is talked over, they try to guilt him into changing his opinion on a subject that is more or less about him, the people who claim to accept him for what he is are uncomfortable around him because of what he is but won't admit it.

It also highlights the wonderful hypocrisy of both sides of these arguments because they both do this to one another.
>>
>>77630638
>manspreading comes from bored privileged white girls looking for something unrelated to complain about. i
Exactly. And I hate those bored privileged white girls. Which can't be sexist or racist, because I'm the exact opposite of a bored privileged white girl
>>
>>77628694
>quit arguing with your sjw archetype and read what i'm talking about

I argued with the things you said. If your words look like a sjw archetype upon rereading them, that's on you. I mean, you already have the "arbitrarily redefining words to suit my argument" thing down.

>racism = dominant racial culture used against minority group within that culture to marginalize them

That's literally not what racism means. There doesn't have to be any imbalance of power at all.

> do you know anything about how the world works outside of a dictionary?

I know that a person from one minority group can be racist towards people from a different minority group, which is apparently not even possible under your definitions of racism and reverse-racism.
>>
>>77631030
i don't care about your completely hypothetical dictionary reality anon. it takes on a different meaning in the context of society. you know, the reality you live around. why are you still insinuating that i think reverse-racism isn't racism because i dare say that there's a difference on how it actually affects people? this is why i'm accusing you of strawmanning, because that's exactly what youre doing. do you have something to actually say or do i have to repeat myself again?
>>
>>77631198
>why are you still insinuating that i think reverse-racism isn't racism

Because you said so?

>>77621586
>reverse-racism isn't really the same as racism
>>
>>77631198
Not that anon but couldn't you answer the question? What *is* it if the Korean grocer treats a black customer like he's going to steal something? It's not reverse, and it's not classic, neither is dominant in this scenario. So what is it?
>>
>>77631341
>isn't really
>really
>as in there are differences
>>77631357
his mistrust comes from white culture and its effects on how people view blacks. you don't have to be white to be indoctrinated
>>
>>77631485
asian cultures can have the same problem btw if youre gonna give me that nonsense
>>
>>77631485
What if this is happening in Korea?

Hell, when I went to Japan I was not allowed to go in certain stores and there's No Gaijin Allowed signs. You want to blame white people for that too?
>>
>>77630638
>ok? what does this have to do with racism in the context of agriculture and society?
It's what creates it.

>the group mentalities societies are built around, these are very primarily masculine. feminine culture has pretty much always had less power than masculine culture.
Having less power =/= minority. And no, group mentalities are not created by male dominance. They arise from instincts held by all humans.

It's true that males are dominant in almost all cultures, but that is not the source of minorities being treated unfairly.
>>
>>77631577
yeah that's asian dominator culture creating fear of whites. it contradicts nothing i've actually been saying, youre just getting caught up in the whole white example to feel victimized
>>
>>77631485
There is no difference. "Reverse-racism" IS racism. The entire idea is based on the false assumption that a majority being prejudiced against a minority is "normal" racism, when there is no default direction for racism.
>>
>>77631636
>yeah that's asian dominator culture creating fear of whites.
I'm not white. But I can see why you'd assume that, since I disagree with you.
>>
>>77631485
>his mistrust comes from white culture
This is blatantly untrue.

Are you seriously blaming whites for the existence of racism? Suggesting that the other races all got along until the evil white people introduced racism into their hearts?
>>
>>77631636
The fact that racism can go both ways, and between groups of roughly the same power, just demonstrates that racism has nothing to do with majority/minority.
>>
>>77631636
Wait, let me see if I understand you here. A white guy in America who hates black guys and a Chinese guy in China who hates white guys are committing the same kind of racism.
And a Latino guy in China who hates Chinese and a Vietnamese guy in the United states who hates white people are both committing reverse racism.

And an Aboriginal guy in France who hates Haitians has simply been indoctrinated by French white dominant culture to be racist.

Is that right, according to you?
>>
>>77631636
Are you trying to say that cultures naturally like to stay in close knit groups and secretly despise any culture that's not theirs? That's one of the biggest flaws of multiculturalism.
>>
>>77601441
It's almost like you've never watched a single episode of south park and are upset now that South Park is attacking your particular ideologies?
>>
>>77631636

I feel like these arguments are really racist in and of themselves...

You pretty much say whites are behind pushing entire races and how they act and treat others.

I remember a shitty tumblr post from years ago where a man in India called out a white american woman who reblogged something he had posted, blaming white people, and he said that the racism he faced had nothing to do with whites as other Asian's treated him poorly... And she told him he was incorrect and that his problems were due to whites.

Cultures had issues with other races before the white man came about, they had them after, they'll always have them.

The white male isn't some boogie man they're just an easy scapegoat to explain away that people are naturally just self important douchebags.
>>
>>77632014
>I feel like these arguments are really racist in and of themselves...
Probably because this kind of argument removes all agency from the minorities. They can't just hate something of their own volition, it has to be because they were indoctrinated by the group in power.
>>
>>77631711
ok sorry for assuming. just replace white with non-asian
>>77631763
no i've been saying that culture encourages fear and dominance and those are very often based around race. i guess i shouldnt have used white as an example because it triggered y'all too hard i guess
>>77631831
not really. all i'm saying is identifying with a culture (in this case a racial one) can lead to fear of other racial cultures and when that group is dominant in a society that can have drastic consequences (and it has). some singular hypothetical aboriginal guy in france being mad at haitians for whatever reason is pretty meaningless in the context of dominator culture as a group-based negative societal force
>>77631929
i guess. i don't really like the idea of identifying with cultures in general since it gives you a set of ideals that have nothing to do with you as an individual and makes you act in ways you wouldn't on your own volition
>>77632014
no i'm saying that dominator culture encourages fear. maybe it's not the group in power but it often is and nothing is absolute
>>
>>77632307
>i don't really like the idea of identifying with cultures in general since it gives you a set of ideals that have nothing to do with you as an individual and makes you act in ways you wouldn't on your own volition
Yet you insist that if a minority hates another, it's not of their own volition, but because of the majority zeitgeist. Couldn't you extend that courtesy to others?
>>
>>77632511
it often is anon. again, nothing is absolute. i don't know why youre acting like the dominant culture in a society having an effect on everyone or most people is such a weird concept
>>
>>77632550
Probably because it just as often isn't and culture isn't a cut and dry binary of dominant/subservient.
>>
>>77631831
Well, let's take this a step further. Say an Arab guy from London, a Japanese guy from Japan, and a white guy who was adopted by a Chinese family in Detroit are all vacationing in the same hotel in Cancun, Mexico. For some reason.

The Arab guy gets a little drunk and mistakes the white guy for a Jew and lets go of a few choice slurs. The Japanese guy doesn't understand what the fuck the Arab guy is saying, but he decides to join in and call the white guy a baka gaijin or whatever the fuck. The white guy turns to one of the locals and tells him "I don't need this. I already got enough shit for the color of my skin while living in the nigger capital of the USA."

Is this an example of regular racism or reverse racism? Show your work.
>>
>>77632636
i don't think any culture is subservient but there is a dominant culture in every society and it usually affects the subcultures within it whether it's acknowledged or not
>>
>>77632550
Because, to be perfectly frank, the overwhelming majority of the time I hear the stuff you're saying in this particular wording is from white people that are extremely guilty of >>77613032 and need to make everything, up to and including my blackness, about them.

You people don't have control of enough that you have to take credit for my hate too? You already stole music from us. Let us have SOMETHING.
>>
>>77632808
i dont care about your tumblr strawman
>>
>>77632894
Yes you've made it blatantly clear you don't care about anything but your own myopic theories about how the world operates. To the point that even when the people you're supposedly arguing on the behalf of are telling you it's not like that, they must be wrong and brainwashed.
>>
>>77633065
Well, how the fuck could you not be brainwashed? We've already established that the white man's dictionary can't be trusted. You can't even tell what racism is until an enlightened individual comes along and explains it for you.
>>
>>77633065
..i'm not arguing on behalf of anyone. i haven't even mentioned any specific racial issue. youre choosing to see what you want to see in me because of my "wording" or whatever
>>
>>77633206

>youre choosing to see what you want to see in me because of my "wording" or whatever

Yeah guys, don't judge this anon by what he says and how he says it. If you do, you're just arguing with a sjw strawman.
>>
>>77604589
Who gets to decide something is reasonable or unreasonable in this aspect? Someone with your opinion? That's a very dangerous statement that you've made and it's a clear and present danger to democracy and freedom of speech, itself. Life isn't going to coddle you, dickwad. People out there are ass holes, and you dont get to shut them up because this is a nation where open dialogue is supposed to be celebrated - yes even when it is unreasonable or "mean" towards others. You are by definition a fascist ass hole.
>>
>>77633274
barely anyone has been arguing with what i'm actually trying to say. pretending i'm speaking on black issues like ive been doing that at all means nothing to me. ive been talking about racial culture this whole time, and i dared to use white culture as an example which triggered the sjw archetype i guess
>>
>>77633151
sorry for thinking on the origins of racism beyond "dictionary definitions", which is apparently "instinct" and that's literally it.
>>
>>77633467
When everyone misunderstands you it might be possible that the one who failed to communicate effectively was you.

I can assure you that it looks like people are arguing with a sjw archetype because that is how you come across, right down to redefining words as it suits you.
>>
>>77605011
You are turning this into a different thing all together and making mountains out of mole hills. Jimmy has ALWAYS been against censorship and has ALWAYS had a sense of humor and said the word retarded. He doesn't give a shit, and Matt and Trey aren't going to change his character just because you think it's offensive. Why are you here? You clearly don't enjoy Southpark, lest you would have had a fucking idea as to Jimmy's character. You want to make a scene? Go ahead, but don't you dare try and act self righteous you insufferable cunt. You don't get to lump Jimmy in and ascribe your thoughts and ideas onto him. You don't get to make him a spokesperson for all that is handicapped. if you truly care about handicapped, and if you truly wish you weren't treated any different, you would be okay with this. Stop treating him like he is something more than a normal person. He's disabled, not a fucking icon.
>>