|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 03 2018 16:05 nojok wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2018 08:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 03 2018 08:02 nojok wrote:On June 03 2018 07:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 03 2018 07:24 nojok wrote:On June 03 2018 06:42 Oleo wrote:
Except there is no before/after implication at all, how does that work with 3 women being shown, before/after/???.
Its 3 women of different skin type and color being randomly shown, message being: dove will give you beautiful, clean skin regardless of type or color. Yeah, it's not racist. The child who cried wolf... I think for communication purposes the term that most accurately captures it is "racially insensitive" I don't get how it's insensitive. Transforming a Black person into a white person is insensitive to the history of this country and those living in it's shadow. When you systematically destroy people's culture and force them to adopt your own by threat of torture and/or death it's then insensitive to create imagery that transforms Black people into white people. On June 03 2018 08:00 Emnjay808 wrote:
You can find racism in everything if you look for it. There's a reason we went from talking about atrocious and blatant racism to some stupid ad. It's a lot more comfortable for many white people to talk about how racism makes them feel attacked rather than why they are failing so terribly at addressing the issues. Ok it's very far fetched but I get it. But your second point is exactly the thing I said, focusing on this ad is a distraction from actually racist problems and an hindrance to solve said problems. We also have some racism issues in France but the descendants from salvery don't feel closely related to slavery. It's a thing from the past though they point some problematic consequences, they don't identify as strongly with their enslaved ancestors. The founders of negritude don't seem full of hatred, they're heavily inspired by the Enlightenment.
If you think the experience of Black people in France is anything remotely comparable to Black people in the US for at least the last 100+ years you may want to learn more about the Black experience in the US throughout history.
I understand why you would have read that as specifically about slavery, but it wasn't.
As to the second point, the ad is offensive and people are free to get upset about it. Dove didn't mean to offend people so they apologized and the world keeps turning.
Where it becomes a distraction is when (typically) white people want to talk about that, instead of the hundreds of other overtly and disgustingly horrible racist things they do little/nothing to address. Then they typically expect someone like myself to politely explain to them some basic understanding of racism while they try to explain why they are the victim of an overly sensitive society and the more attacked they feel the less they'll do to stand up to the horrific abuses they typically can't be bothered to demand be addressed anyway. "This is what pushes people to the alt-right/nazi/Republicans etc..." usually comes with it.
It's a waste of time really and I've done that dance too many times to be interested anymore.
|
Just like not every commercial that shows a woman vacuum cleaning or working in the kitchen is necessarily being sexist, the Dove commercial doesn't have to be racist for the changing of the colors that is put on display.
|
On June 03 2018 17:26 a_flayer wrote:
Just like not every commercial that shows a woman vacuum cleaning or working in the kitchen is necessarily being sexist, the Dove commercial doesn't have to be racist for the changing of the colors that is put on display.
It doesn't have to be, but a lot of colored people were offended by it, and a lot of white people took one look at it and realized why that might be the case... So Dove took it down and apologized for their unintended racism.
What do you hope to extract from stubbornly insisting that *you*, a white man from the other side of the ocean to where this was perceived as a problem, didn't find it racist?
|
As I said before, I see the racism quite clearly and support the removal of the commercial from the airwaves. What are you talking about?
|
On June 03 2018 17:35 a_flayer wrote:
As I said before, I see the racism quite clearly and support the removal of the commercial from the airwaves. What are you talking about?
Then what was that pointless post about stating that it didn't "have" to be racist. No, Dove didn't *have* to make a racist commercial, but they did. And they could probably have used people of different skin tones in juxtaposition without being racist. But they didn't. So what was your point?
|
I thought it was a good way of pointing out how it's potentially not racist.
|
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up.
|
On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up.
It's almost like you haven't read a single post the past 3 pages where we explain to you why it's racist and why it doesn't matter that you don't think it is.
|
On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up.
I am flabbergasted. I had you down as a fairly intelligent guy. But instead of listening to the arguments, you're doubling down on your initial wrong statement.
Dove's ad was racially insensitive, given the context and history of what they were depicting. Now you can say that Dove didn't mean to refer to those connotations, but *lots* of people took one look at it and said "yeah, it has those connotations". Now Dove took it down, because they agreed that with so many people seeing those connotations, it was not a good ad to sell soap with. However, if Dove had not been a little bit racist (or at least contracted some black people to a preview of their ad), they would have realized those, rather obvious, connotations for themselves. And not aired it at all in that state. But that is okay, we're all a little bit racist. But most of us, like Dove, recognize when we fuck up, and apologize. Not you, you double down. And no, perhaps it wouldn't be racist if it had only aired in Bulgaria, where the idea of washing the black off people had (apparently) never been thought of, but it didn't. It aired on one of the most racially charged countries in the world. And you willfully ignoring that context just makes me a bit sad that I had misjudged you. But yeah, you do you.
|
On June 03 2018 18:11 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up. It's almost like you haven't read a single post the past 3 pages where we explain to you why it's racist and why it doesn't matter that you don't think it is.
I have my own opinion. You have yours. Nothing changes. Does that sum it up? 
On June 03 2018 18:24 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up. I am flabbergasted. I had you down as a fairly intelligent guy. But instead of listening to the arguments, you're doubling down on your initial wrong statement. Dove's ad was racially insensitive, given the context and history of what they were depicting. Now you can say that Dove didn't mean to refer to those connotations, but *lots* of people took one look at it and said "yeah, it has those connotations". Now Dove took it down, because they agreed that with so many people seeing those connotations, it was not a good ad to sell soap with. However, if Dove had not been a little bit racist (or at least contracted some black people to a preview of their ad), they would have realized those, rather obvious, connotations for themselves. And not aired it at all in that state. But that is okay, we're all a little bit racist. But most of us, like Dove, recognize when we fuck up, and apologize. Not you, you double down. And no, perhaps it wouldn't be racist if it had only aired in Bulgaria, where the idea of washing the black off people had (apparently) never been thought of, but it didn't. It aired on one of the most racially charged countries in the world. And you willfully ignoring that context just makes me a bit sad that I had misjudged you. But yeah, you do you.
Well, you could be disappointed all you want. My goal isn't to be liked by everyone and that's ok.
Could Dove's ad be misinterpreted? It could be. Was it intended to be racist? No, I hope not. I just think you're too serious to discuss this over however many pages. I just wanted to point out that you give Dove too much credit when you say "they fixed it, now the world is back to normal again". Companies like Dove don't fix anything; they only do it when it affects their revenue. You praise them for nothing.
|
I enjoy reading this thread when I’m drunk.
On topic: I wonder what the black actor thought while doing the commercial. He prolly didn’t care or rationalized that it wasn’t worth losing his role if he mentioned that this might be seen as racist.
|
On June 03 2018 18:24 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2018 18:11 Excludos wrote:On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up. It's almost like you haven't read a single post the past 3 pages where we explain to you why it's racist and why it doesn't matter that you don't think it is. I have my own opinion. You have yours. Nothing changes. Does that sum it up?
Nooo! That's the entire point! Our opinions does not matter. Enough people think it's racist, so it is. It doesn't matter for a nanosecond that you or anyone else don't personally find it offensive. But I'm repeating myself here now, and you're continuing to prove that you're not actually reading what people are saying. This is not how discussions are done my man. You can't just ignore everyone and then still think you have a point which has been discredited several times.
|
On June 03 2018 18:38 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2018 18:24 sc-darkness wrote:On June 03 2018 18:11 Excludos wrote:On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up. It's almost like you haven't read a single post the past 3 pages where we explain to you why it's racist and why it doesn't matter that you don't think it is. I have my own opinion. You have yours. Nothing changes. Does that sum it up? Nooo! That's the entire point! Our opinions does not matter. Enough people think it's racist, so it is. It doesn't matter for a nanosecond that you or anyone else don't personally find it offensive. But I'm repeating myself here now, and you're continuing to prove that you're not actually reading what people are saying. This is not how discussions are done my man. You can't just ignore everyone and then still think you have a point which has been discredited several times.
No, I'm reading opinions but I'm not the type who could easily be a victim of peer pressure. Or, maybe there's something about your posts that doesn't convince me yet. You ignore my points, while you want me to accept yours? It's not going to happen and you could be disappointed all you want as I said. Maybe this is one of west vs east cultural differences.
|
On June 03 2018 18:41 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2018 18:38 Excludos wrote:On June 03 2018 18:24 sc-darkness wrote:On June 03 2018 18:11 Excludos wrote:On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up. It's almost like you haven't read a single post the past 3 pages where we explain to you why it's racist and why it doesn't matter that you don't think it is. I have my own opinion. You have yours. Nothing changes. Does that sum it up? Nooo! That's the entire point! Our opinions does not matter. Enough people think it's racist, so it is. It doesn't matter for a nanosecond that you or anyone else don't personally find it offensive. But I'm repeating myself here now, and you're continuing to prove that you're not actually reading what people are saying. This is not how discussions are done my man. You can't just ignore everyone and then still think you have a point which has been discredited several times. No, I'm reading opinions but I'm not the type who could easily be a victim of peer pressure. Or, maybe there's something about your posts that doesn't convince me yet. You ignore my points, while you want me to accept yours? It's not going to happen and you could be disappointed all you want as I said. Maybe this is one of west vs east cultural differences.
If x person made a sign saying "whites r bad my dudes" and a bunch of white people found it racist, then it's racist. Some non-white person saying it isn't racist to them doesn't make it not racist to the group that the sign is about, which is the group we should be listening to on this subject. If a large enough number of black people thought "hey, that's kinda racist," then it's racist by most measures. Racism is a lot about how target groups feel, from what I understand.
Besides, why should you be allowed to decide what is and is not racist to other groups of people? Just because you don't get offended by it doesn't mean that those other people shouldn't rationally be offended. They have a reason to.
|
On June 03 2018 18:24 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2018 18:11 Excludos wrote:On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up. It's almost like you haven't read a single post the past 3 pages where we explain to you why it's racist and why it doesn't matter that you don't think it is. I have my own opinion. You have yours. Nothing changes. Does that sum it up? Show nested quote +On June 03 2018 18:24 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2018 18:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Dove's ad wasn't racist, you're just thin-skinned and think of racial implications for no good reason. The only reason companies like Dove put adverts down is because they're, SURPRISE, private business so they care about profit. If people cry too much, it's going to hurt their profit, so they have to do what people want. If tomorrow you cry that Dove's cream is white and that's racist, they're going to make it blue so you could shut up. I am flabbergasted. I had you down as a fairly intelligent guy. But instead of listening to the arguments, you're doubling down on your initial wrong statement. Dove's ad was racially insensitive, given the context and history of what they were depicting. Now you can say that Dove didn't mean to refer to those connotations, but *lots* of people took one look at it and said "yeah, it has those connotations". Now Dove took it down, because they agreed that with so many people seeing those connotations, it was not a good ad to sell soap with. However, if Dove had not been a little bit racist (or at least contracted some black people to a preview of their ad), they would have realized those, rather obvious, connotations for themselves. And not aired it at all in that state. But that is okay, we're all a little bit racist. But most of us, like Dove, recognize when we fuck up, and apologize. Not you, you double down. And no, perhaps it wouldn't be racist if it had only aired in Bulgaria, where the idea of washing the black off people had (apparently) never been thought of, but it didn't. It aired on one of the most racially charged countries in the world. And you willfully ignoring that context just makes me a bit sad that I had misjudged you. But yeah, you do you. Well, you could be disappointed all you want. My goal isn't to be liked by everyone and that's ok. Could Dove's ad be misinterpreted? It could be. Was it intended to be racist? No, I hope not. I just think you're too serious to discuss this over however many pages. I just wanted to point out that you give Dove too much credit when you say "they fixed it, now the world is back to normal again". Companies like Dove don't fix anything; they only do it when it affects their revenue. You praise them for nothing.
I don't know how you read "they fixed it, now everything is well with the world again" anywhere into my post. Lets go over this:
1. *YOU* brought this up as an example of "political correctness gone mad". That sparked the discussion that your example was a terrible one, because it was actually a fairly clearcut example of people justifiably shitting all over Dove for broadcasting a racist ad.
2. I, and many other people, joined the discussion not to try to make a larger point about racism and whether it is *solved* now that Dove has been properly chastised. You reading that into anything anybody said here is you imagining things. All I was trying to *solve* was that just because you don't see something offensive in that ad, doesn't mean it *isn't* offensive.
3. I don't give Dove much credit at all. I think there are two possible explanations for putting their ad out there in the first place. (1) they are flaming bigots and willfully made an ad about "washing the dirt off niggers", and got caught out and forced to retract their shitty racist message, or (2) they are naive twats who didn't do their screening properly and inadvertently made a racist ad. They realized their mistake and are truthfully sorry that their message could be interpreted in this way. I will choose to believe it's number (2), which is just a bit of a corporate blunder, but more importantly, yet another example of how little of a shit we actually give about the opinion of people who aren't white: in a big advertisement campaign, this company didn't even think about how their "multicultural" message might be interpreted by some of those other cultures. It's a very sad and sorry state, and this is far from the only example... and that's only in messaging. The real problems come in when that messaging is interpreted as "oh well, the only culture that matters is white culture, and therefore the only people that matter are white people", which feeds into hundreds of systemic problems, from cops shooting a disproportionate number of black people (cops shooting people is the problem here, but they shoot mostly black people, which makes it a racial problem), reinforcing racial segregation, etc. etc. etc. And I am far from an expert on why this matters. I'm a white guy on the other side of the ocean. But at least I realize it does matter, whereas you have your eyes shut tightly, fingers in your ears and are chanting "NOT RACIST" at the top of your lungs.
|
How many times do you want me to tell you this? It could be interpreted as racist, but I doubt that was their idea to be racist. I don't give a fuck if they change order so a white woman turns into a black one. I'll literally give zero fucks about it. Same as white woman turning into a middle-eastern one. That's because I can tell when someone is openly trying to be racist and when they just made a mistake and didn't mean it. That's the difference between me and thin-skinned people.
|
And as we told you during the converstion, racism isn't only about intent.
|
On June 03 2018 20:15 TheDwf wrote:
And as we told you during the converstion, racism isn't only about intent.
Sorry, that's alien to me! How could you be racist with no intentions whatsoever? You're either racist or you're not. There's no middle point.
|
5930 Posts
Racist behaviour born from ignorance is still racism. See: how a lot of white expats feel in East Asia when they get treated with kid gloves.
|
You can accidentally say something racist. I know, my white ass from an all whit community said a few thinghe should have whenI move away from home. It was fine, because I apologized and didn’t do it again.
Racism isn’t about intent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
