andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Why is it offensive?
> I don't know the guy and I have only watched this part of the show, but
> to me it sounds like a sarcastic joke. What he implied is that TV and
> society used to be much more racist and that he is glad that has changed.
> Sure, if you take the exact same words and put it in a speach with a
> racist context it would be offensive. In this context, in the way he
> says it and with the reaction of the other guy, it clearly isn't. So
> again: why do you think it is offensive?


I took it as a cynical joke on the current (not past) state of race in the US.
I think it shows he has a low view of the general public and/or the studio or
television network.   I'm not sure that having a low view of the public is even
what bothers me.  Basically it sounded accusational to me.   To me, being
accused out-of-hand actually would offend me.

Charles

Post a reply to this message

On 8-7-2011 8:04, Charles C wrote:
> andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
>> Why is it offensive?
>> I don't know the guy and I have only watched this part of the show, but
>> to me it sounds like a sarcastic joke. What he implied is that TV and
>> society used to be much more racist and that he is glad that has changed.
>> Sure, if you take the exact same words and put it in a speach with a
>> racist context it would be offensive. In this context, in the way he
>> says it and with the reaction of the other guy, it clearly isn't. So
>> again: why do you think it is offensive?
>
>
> I took it as a cynical joke on the current (not past) state of race in the US.

No that can't be, because evidently there is a black man hosting that show.

> I think it shows he has a low view of the general public and/or the studio or
> television network.   I'm not sure that having a low view of the public is even
> what bothers me.  Basically it sounded accusational to me.   To me, being
> accused out-of-hand actually would offend me.

to me it is the sort of things people say who know one another well. I 
do that sort of things all the time. Particularly with women, (not many 
people of african origins around, I have trouble recognizing Jews, but 
luckily we have some muslims in the lab). At least a couple of times per 
week I say something that out of context would be sexist or racist. 
Often it has the same undertone as your example: 'I am glad things 
changed and you can be here doing what you do, and you do it well'. So 
don't ask for a written transcript of all my conversations, you might 
feel offended.
In the same vain, I have said things in the past to our mascot that were 
totally misunderstood by people listening in. I checked later with him 
and he seemed just as surprised as I was.
As a rule, I would say that if a person A says something to a person B 
about a group that B is evidenly a member of 
(african/woman/ginger/dwarf) in a light-hearted way and B smiles, it was 
meant ironic and both understood that. Taking it seriously as an 
outsider will meet with surprise and incomprehension by both A and B.

-- 
Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per 
citizen per day.

Post a reply to this message

andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 8-7-2011 8:04, Charles C wrote:
> > andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
> >> Why is it offensive?
> >> I don't know the guy and I have only watched this part of the show, but
> >> to me it sounds like a sarcastic joke. What he implied is that TV and
> >> society used to be much more racist and that he is glad that has changed.
> >> Sure, if you take the exact same words and put it in a speach with a
> >> racist context it would be offensive. In this context, in the way he
> >> says it and with the reaction of the other guy, it clearly isn't. So
> >> again: why do you think it is offensive?
> >
> >
> > I took it as a cynical joke on the current (not past) state of race in the US.
>
> No that can't be, because evidently there is a black man hosting that show.
>
> > I think it shows he has a low view of the general public and/or the studio or
> > television network.   I'm not sure that having a low view of the public is even
> > what bothers me.  Basically it sounded accusational to me.   To me, being
> > accused out-of-hand actually would offend me.
>
> to me it is the sort of things people say who know one another well. I
> do that sort of things all the time. Particularly with women, (not many
> people of african origins around, I have trouble recognizing Jews, but
> luckily we have some muslims in the lab). At least a couple of times per
> week I say something that out of context would be sexist or racist.
> Often it has the same undertone as your example: 'I am glad things
> changed and you can be here doing what you do, and you do it well'. So
> don't ask for a written transcript of all my conversations, you might
> feel offended.
> In the same vain, I have said things in the past to our mascot that were
> totally misunderstood by people listening in. I checked later with him
> and he seemed just as surprised as I was.
> As a rule, I would say that if a person A says something to a person B
> about a group that B is evidenly a member of
> (african/woman/ginger/dwarf) in a light-hearted way and B smiles, it was
> meant ironic and both understood that. Taking it seriously as an
> outsider will meet with surprise and incomprehension by both A and B.
>
> --
> Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per
> citizen per day.


You have to understand that Tavis's comment was not about black men or a black
man. It was about a third party.   Tavis is "A" and Cedric is "B" but Cedric is
not a member of "C".  "C" would be whoever might be included in the group
labeled "they" in Tavis's comment.    "C" was the subject of Tavis's comment.

If someone were to think that he or she might be in Tavis's "they" ("C") then he
or she might be offended to think that Tavis has such a low and pre-conceived
view of him or her.

If Tavis were talking about something long ago / past, then there would be no
need to feel "impressed."   Consider this statement: "I'm just impressed that
your house has electricity."   It could be a compliment if household electricity
were brand new.  It can easily be derogatory since electricity is....not new.

Statements like:
"I'm impressed with how far technology has come."
"I'm impressed with how far society has come."
.....are not derogatory because they acknowledge a long change over time.

Statements like:
"I'm impressed that [fill in blank with anything well below normal
expectations]."
......tend to be derogatory because they belittle, condescend....

Charles

Post a reply to this message

On 9-7-2011 21:33, Charles C wrote:
> andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
>> On 8-7-2011 8:04, Charles C wrote:
>>> andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>   wrote:
>>>> Why is it offensive?
>>>> I don't know the guy and I have only watched this part of the show, but
>>>> to me it sounds like a sarcastic joke. What he implied is that TV and
>>>> society used to be much more racist and that he is glad that has changed.
>>>> Sure, if you take the exact same words and put it in a speach with a
>>>> racist context it would be offensive. In this context, in the way he
>>>> says it and with the reaction of the other guy, it clearly isn't. So
>>>> again: why do you think it is offensive?
>>>
>>>
>>> I took it as a cynical joke on the current (not past) state of race in the US.
>>
>> No that can't be, because evidently there is a black man hosting that show.
>>
>>> I think it shows he has a low view of the general public and/or the studio or
>>> television network.   I'm not sure that having a low view of the public is even
>>> what bothers me.  Basically it sounded accusational to me.   To me, being
>>> accused out-of-hand actually would offend me.
>>
>> to me it is the sort of things people say who know one another well. I
>> do that sort of things all the time. Particularly with women, (not many
>> people of african origins around, I have trouble recognizing Jews, but
>> luckily we have some muslims in the lab). At least a couple of times per
>> week I say something that out of context would be sexist or racist.
>> Often it has the same undertone as your example: 'I am glad things
>> changed and you can be here doing what you do, and you do it well'. So
>> don't ask for a written transcript of all my conversations, you might
>> feel offended.
>> In the same vain, I have said things in the past to our mascot that were
>> totally misunderstood by people listening in. I checked later with him
>> and he seemed just as surprised as I was.
>> As a rule, I would say that if a person A says something to a person B
>> about a group that B is evidenly a member of
>> (african/woman/ginger/dwarf) in a light-hearted way and B smiles, it was
>> meant ironic and both understood that. Taking it seriously as an
>> outsider will meet with surprise and incomprehension by both A and B.
>>
>> --
>> Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per
>> citizen per day.
>
>
> You have to understand that Tavis's comment was not about black men or a black
> man. It was about a third party.

I think I got that. ;)

> Tavis is "A" and Cedric is "B" but Cedric is
> not a member of "C".  "C" would be whoever might be included in the group
> labeled "they" in Tavis's comment."C" was the subject of Tavis's comment.

"C" being the intersection of the set of everybody thinking that if you 
leave money in the vicinity of a black man, he will steal it, and the 
set of TV bosses. Right?

> If someone were to think that he or she might be in Tavis's "they" ("C") then he
> or she might be offended to think that Tavis has such a low and pre-conceived
> view of him or her.

I think that should be "If someone were to think that Tavis thinks that 
he or she might be in "C" then...".
When someone is offended by something he or she thinks somebody else 
thinks, we are dealing with somebody trying desperately to find an 
excuse to be offended. No logical reasoning will keep that person from 
this state of being offended because there is no way to disprove 
somebody did think something.

>
> If Tavis were talking about something long ago / past, then there would be no
> need to feel "impressed."   Consider this statement: "I'm just impressed that
> your house has electricity."   It could be a compliment if household electricity
> were brand new.  It can easily be derogatory since electricity is....not new.

Sure, but in this case both men are old enough to have experienced open 
and publicly supported racism.

> Statements like:
> "I'm impressed with how far technology has come."
> "I'm impressed with how far society has come."
> .....are not derogatory because they acknowledge a long change over time.
>
> Statements like:
> "I'm impressed that [fill in blank with anything well below normal
> expectations]."
> ......tend to be derogatory

or just plain ironic/sarcastic, as in this case.

> because they belittle, condescend....



-- 
Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per 
citizen per day.

Post a reply to this message

On 7/9/2011 12:33, Charles C wrote:
> It can easily be derogatory since electricity is....not new.

Both those guys (and me) are old enough that when we were born, black people 
were legally disallowed from marrying white people, and the government 
passed laws specifically disallowing black people to protect themselves 
against random police brutality beating them into the hospital for walking 
in a white neighborhood.

You act like "trusting a black guy with expensive portable stuff" is *not* 
new here.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message

andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> "C" being the intersection of the set of everybody thinking that if you
> leave money in the vicinity of a black man, he will steal it, and the
> set of TV bosses. Right?

I think we have no way to know exactly who he meant other than every listener
making their own guess.  So I don't think we can define "C" narrowly like this.
If I were a white, non-racist TV boss, I might think he's talking about me.  If
everybody knows that they aren't part "C", and that "C" just means those who are
guilty of being a racist TV boss, then sure, nobody will feel accused.

To be honest I am not personally or directly offended so much as I am interested
in the "wait, did he actually say that", and when / why people can make such
remarks.

On the other hand, if you want to make the point that it's just one little
comment; don't blow it out of proportion, I agree.  I think that too many things
get blown out of proportion.  Everybody says stupid things.  I've just been
typing more than I expected to here because I felt like my original point wasn't
communicated well.


Charles

Post a reply to this message

On 7/9/2011 15:43, Charles C wrote:
> and when / why people can make such remarks.

I think both the when and why are directly answered by the fact that he felt 
the need to do so and you understood what he was saying.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> On 7/9/2011 15:43, Charles C wrote:
> > and when / why people can make such remarks.
>
> I think both the when and why are directly answered by the fact that he felt
> the need to do so and you understood what he was saying.
>
> --
> Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
>    "Coding without comments is like
>     driving without turn signals."

Sure, that's when and why he said it.  What I was trying to get at is in the
word "can":
To expand, what I meant by
"...and when / why people can make such remarks"
is
"...and under what circumstances it is socially acceptable to make such
remarks".

Is your point that anybody should be able to say whatever's on their mind?

Charles

Post a reply to this message

On 7/9/2011 17:11, Charles C wrote:
> "...and under what circumstances it is socially acceptable to make such
> remarks".
>
> Is your point that anybody should be able to say whatever's on their mind?

No. My point is that it's socially acceptable to make such a joke because 
racism is far far from rare in the USA.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> On 7/9/2011 17:11, Charles C wrote:
> > "...and under what circumstances it is socially acceptable to make such
> > remarks".
> >
> > Is your point that anybody should be able to say whatever's on their mind?
>
> No. My point is that it's socially acceptable to make such a joke because
> racism is far far from rare in the USA.

Yes I suppose you're right.   I still like the idea better of presuming a person
or group is not racist rather than the other way around.

Charles

Post a reply to this message