"Hipster racism, is engaging in behaviors traditionally regarded as racist and defending them as being performed ironically or satirically." It was one of "The 10 biggest race and pop culture trends of 2006."
Yeah, well, if you remember it, you'd better forget it, because it's 2015, and it could ruin your whole life.
October 6, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
38 comments:
Sarah Silverman built her entire career on this.
Ahh...the old "I was joking! Can't you take a joke?" switcheroo. I bet it still works if your politics are right.
I have a black co-worker with whom I occasionally joke based on racial stereotypes, with him as likely to start such conversations as me. I would hate for any of that to be taken out of context. However:
I would never put such things in writing, let alone on facebook.
I would never involve his children.
I would never joke about him in a conversation in which he was not participating.
Is that Racism defined down to using Navaho symbols without permission from the Tribal chiefs.
The sweet Navahos were the last deadly raider Indian Tribe after the Comanches to be conquered with the help of Kit Carson and the US Army. . The Navahos were a plague to all other tribes (Races) but being so did one good thing. They made Texas uninhabitable for Spanish Empires Mexicans until the Spanish finally gave it up to the Texans of Scots Irish descent like Carson who fought them until we won.
"Sarah Silverman built her entire career on this."
That is to say, it's not for amateurs. Silverman paid a price for it, but chose to do it.
The guy whose professional suicide is recounted at the link also made the horrible mistake of posting a photograph of somebody else's child and having that child become the target of jokes that might have been comprehended as hipster racism in the abstract. Put a specific child there and nobody wants to hear that weird defense.
The rule of thumb should be: Don't use children. Vary from that at your peril.
That is a very cute kid!
Never put anything on Facebook (or in email) that you don't want seen on the front page of the Newspaper.
Same with blog comments -- although there's really only one comment I've ever made here (that I remember) that I regret.
one of the woman was fired for saying "I didn't know you were a slave owner" clearly that is meant as a joke. Since there is no such thing as legal slavery. But also, it's not exactly saying positive things about the photograph. She was suggesting in a mocking tone that the picture was like a white master and his slave posing for a photograph. Unless she endorses slavery it's not positive.
I engage in this type of up humor all the time. I recognize Them as jokes. It's very similar to gallows humor where you make jokes about ghastly things to lighten the mood.
Now, should he post them on Facebook? Probably not. But, they are jokes. People have completely lost ability to get jokes anymore.
jr565: We live in a Society where People are looking to take offense at something, indeed at being the most offended by some trivial nonsense.
Witness the brouhaha about the Sorority girls at the Diamondbacks game taking selfies, and the Announcers ridiculing them for it. Suddenly the Guardian (which I admit is excellent at identifying things that people will take umbrage at, then publicizing them, and then sitting back and raking in the webhits) says this is all a sexist plot, and suddenly people are falling all over themselves saying how horrible horrible horrible it is.
The next brilliant comic will take this and mock it and make a killing. Maybe someone is already doing that and I don't know about it -- likely.
Another comment says "with your donation of 32.75 you can help save a life. Ok get out of here kid I'm trying to look good on Facebook" clearly highlighting the fact that it looks like he's posing with the kid as a means of exploitation. Modeled after those old Sally strut hers commercials where she's standing in front of starving Africans and saying "for the price of a cup of coffee a day, you can save a child's life"
Not serious. And not flattering of the idea that someone would do that. Yet, to someone who doesn't get the joke it's offensive and fire worthy.
How about crazy ass college professors who are The New Boss pretending they're niggers, singing along to Bob Dylan and yammering about freedom for rich gay men to fuck each other in the ass while she's chaining down generations of kids to a lifetime of servitude to debt to pay for said crazy ass college professor's perverse, corrupt, idle and lavish lifestyle?
Is that racist?
Is it racist for a wealthy, corrupt, idle and decadent white fag hag to hijack and exploit the civil rights movement for 45 years by pretending that she and her son are niggers?
We've become so stupid and weak of character.
More interesting to me is the way the term "racism" is becoming generic. Someone on NPR the other day used "racist" to describe a negative view of Islam - not of any particular dark-skinned Muslims, just someone's objection to the tenets of the religion itself.
So maybe racism is becoming its own irony, that is, as the American synonym for someone who is an infidel with respect to just about anything the accuser wants to tag him for.
The rule of thumb should be: Don't use children.
Except to harvest their organs for profit apparently......
. . ."That is to say, it's not for amateurs. Silverman paid a price for it, but chose to do it." . . .
Not sure who decreed there would be no "Pro/Am" division in competitive hipster racism.
Also, unclear as to what price Silverman paid.
Look, as comedy, ironic racism is just lazy. More broadly, it's stupid at best and dangerous (see results) at worst.
Of course, kids are a no no.
We've become so stupid and weak of character.
That's only part of it - you're supposed to then tell us about the time you stoically withstood some joke directed at you on the basis of your race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, etc.
"The Navahos were a plague to all other tribes (Races)...."
If you're trying to make an analogy by stating incorrectly that the different Indian tribes were different races, you're way off. A more apt analogy would be to competing nations, warring with each other in competition over resources and power.
Gahrie said...
'The rule of thumb should be: Don't use children.'
Except to harvest their organs for profit apparently......
If someone had referred to the kid as a "blob of tissue" this incident might have become internationally reported news.
"Remember "hipster racism"?"
No.
Anyone who could be so stupid as to put up this picture and participate in jokey comments with others along the lines as this guy did, deserves to be fired. I'm sorry for him, especially as this may make it difficult for him to find another position, but a presumably intelligent adult with the sense to work in a professional situation has no excuse here.
As far as I know, Sarah Silverman has never worked for Polaris Marketing Group. If she did, and she decided to do her comedy routine and PMG's corporate leadership believed it reflected negatively upon their profit margins, then I would expect that she too would have been fired.
Now personally, I happen to believe that comedy should trump everything. But this country values property rights over comedy rights. It's ridiculous- our priorities are totally out of whack.
It's a bizarre story. The employer's statement seems to accept the statements were actual insults instead of politically incorrect jokes. I understand why that employer felt he had to term the employee, it was another employee's kid and it would effect their future working relationship. But for others whose comments had nothing to do with their jobs?
I note the Root is glowing over multiple people losing their jobs. Society's headed in a bad direction with this. If the left is going to ruin people's lives to further their political / social activist goals they should expect to be on the receiving end soon. I wonder what they'll have to say then.
I was way into the Klan before they went corporate. But not because I hate black people in general; I only hate the Mnogo, this micro-ethnicity from the eastern shore of Lake Nyasa. You've probably never heard of them.
In looking again at the linked story, I don't see that Gerod made any of the "comedic" racist remarks himself, but he sure didn't do anything to shut up his idiot friends. If Gerod's intent was to show a sweet picture of this little boy, he could have added context by making a remark, such as, "Here's me with my co-worker's cool kid!" At the very least, he should immediately have responded to the comments by saying, "Shut the fuck up, you stupid dicks! This is a sweet kid and he's my co-worker's son. I don't find any humor in your racist remarks and I will un-friend you all if you don't apologize immediately!"
It may or may not have helped him keep his job, but it would have given weight to any claims he has made or will make that he didn't agree with or approve of the remarks and that, as he does claim, "he has been wronged, too."
Paul Zrimsek for the win...
"Paul Zrimsek for the win..."
Shouting Thomas for the lose...
I LOL'ed. Good one Paul!
In the Oct 6 issue of The New Yorker, there is an article by Jennifer Gonnerman about a father's difficulty adjusting to the murder of his daughter. The father is a black man. His daughter was a promising young woman who lived in the projects. She was murdered mostly because she lived in a building whose young residents were having a feud with other young residents who lived in a different building in the same project. That's what she got killed for. She lived in the wrong building. She pleaded for her life before they shot her........The article details the father's efforts to understand the crime and forgive its perpetrators which he succeeds in doing. Compare and contrast the father's journey with the mother of this child. She rejoices in his firing and is offended because it didn't happen sooner. There's something out of joint here......It was a series of bad jokes. The guy should apologize and apologize sincerely. The mother should accept the fact that not every stupid joke is malicious and rise above rather than luxuriate in her anger.
For once I'm with RC. For a marketing guy he sure isn't too swift.
If we're going to ban people for offensiveness I want to ban feminists for saying I'm a rapist, or that I'm part of patriarchy. Or blacks saying I have privilege and am racist. Or that Christians are judgemental aholes. All are negative judgements which I find offensive. You should have no right to make them. Oh, you do?
Then I have similar rights. Your worldview is similar not off the table when it comes to criticism and/or derision.
jr565,
I mean, if you and your neighbors worked for, say, a marketing firm, and she was going around posting that "all men are rapists" on her Facebook and your other neighbor posted that "Christians are judgemental [sic] aholes," and it got out and embarassed your firm, the firm might very well fire them because the company has to look out for its bottomline (they might not fire them, of course, if it was like a niche marketing firm that specialized in Left-wing outreach or something). This is nothing new.
At the very least, he should immediately have responded to the comments by saying, "Shut the fuck up, you stupid dicks! This is a sweet kid and he's my co-worker's son. I don't find any humor in your racist remarks and I will un-friend you all if you don't apologize immediately!"
Agree with all your comments today Robert, and would add my own in response to the above--He could have easily deleted the ugly comments and left his initial photo, which seems ill-advised anyway regardless of motivation. Who posts a photo on Facebook of someone else's child? If it's something like, "Hey, my little buddy is visiting me at work today!" that would be acceptable, if he and the mother were friends, but it doesn't seem to be that kind of thing.
And as Bob observes above, how is this person in marketing?!
"It was one of "The 10 biggest race and pop culture trends of 2006."
Maybe for hipsters in Williamsburg, but that "trend" didn't really export much. And thank God for that.
"People who had seen the Facebook post and were upset by it had started contacting the employers of the people writing the 'atrocious' comments."
These people are the true villains. If you see people joking around on Facebook and you try to get those people (people you know!) fired, you're a fucking asshole - not some hero. You're a despicable person. What goes around comes around. Mind your own fucking business. You're not the taste police.
@Real American:
Yeah...sure...the people who contacted the employers of the people making the offensive remarks are the "real villains."
NOT.
I would not try to get someone fired from their job for making offensive remarks online, so I do not cheer those who do. However, it is inconceivable that presumably intelligent people would not recognize how offensive and insulting their remarks were, and would not say to themselves, Nope...not gonna post that!"
Everyone today knows that one's presence on Facebook (and similar sites) is easily discovered, and is often even monitored by companies seeking to learn how their employees may be behaving outside work. I have a friend who refuses to have a Facebook account because his employer does this. My friend does not behave in an unseemly manner online, but he has learned from past experience to keep his private life private and not to let his employers or coworkers know any more about his personal behavior than they can see at work.
I know these idiots are idiots because only idiots would post such remarks online and NOT be aware they were making their remarks to the whole world. I'm sorry these idiots lost their jobs--not because I don't think they're repugnant, but because losing one's job in today's world can have devastating impact not just on one's own life but on one's family--but they're idiots and are solely responsible for losing their jobs.
Real American:
xkcd.com/386/
but arguing on the net is one thing, deliberately trying to damage someone's life is another. What ever happened to a frown and "Stop that. What are you thinking?"
There's an old quote from the usenet days about (duh) usenet that runs something like this: "It's a big house party. In one room, well-dressed people are standing around sipping white wine and discussing Rilke. Down the hall people are huffing nitrous from garbage bags and setting fire to the sofas."
(By the way - Captcha thinks quiche is a pie. Don't let Megan McArdle hear about this.)
Bobby wrote:
I mean, if you and your neighbors worked for, say, a marketing firm, and she was going around posting that "all men are rapists" on her Facebook and your other neighbor posted that "Christians are judgemental [sic] aholes," and it got out and embarassed your firm, the firm might very well fire them because the company has to look out for its bottomline (they might not fire them, of course, if it was like a niche marketing firm that specialized in Left-wing outreach or something). This is nothing new.
That is actually true. Companies cave to the pressure to punish. Not saying those posting said comments wont get in trouble. Just that those saying what is being said is problematic are not getting the joke.
Also, if this is going to be the new norm I'm going to have to call companies and get people in trouble more often for stating opnions on Facebook? Oh, you said Christianity is a superstcion and its followers are a bunch of idiots? Fired!
Scroll up two posts later. Where Ann asks us to caption the photo. BEWARE what you post. Really, how is what this guy did different than that? If someone captions the post about the jihadi woman, and makes a funny they might be triggering a blacklash that costs them a job.
If we can just tie back the identity to the person, we will have your balls!
"Silverman paid a price for it, but chose to do it."
Because it made her more famous than her talent deserved. It was a well calculated career move, that benefited her overall.
Post a Comment