@newtboy just fyi, maroon, i recently learned is a racial epithet.

I believe I learned the term from Bugs Bunny "What a maroon!"

But https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maroons apparently it's just another way to make fun of people with a lot of pigment in their skin. I only realized this when I heard it used as an actual insult. "Fuckin maroon." This is, consequently why maroon as a color is brownish/redish (to resemble the skin of the people that are on lonely islands aka people who have been "marooned")


I have no doubt that you didn't know this ahead of time, but just know it going forward. I don't think that's what you meant, and you wouldn't want to be misunderstood.

EDIT See also, art like this statue titled "Maroons surprised by dogs" (1893) (Brussels) by Louis Samain. Note the fetters on the hands and feet: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Wikibruz23.jpg (Pretty fucked up eh?)

EDIT 2 I think I also know the word from various TV show episode titles that are some version of "Marooned" when people become stranded.

==============================

EDIT 3 Oh yeah, and this dumbass. What did she think would happen? She didn't "Just walk in" she wore a disguise elaborate enough she filmed her "setup" that took long enough that it required montage-like speed in post. Not to mention she had to use her daughter's school id to get in.

Going through a makeover/disguise
Learning and following your daughter's schedule
Using your daughter's student ID

DOES NOT = just walking in

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Well, I guess I'm one of those niggers, because my banning finger is getting itchy.

Look, Gorillaman has been here long enough that I know he doesn't honestly believe this - (correct me if I'm wrong GM) however language matters here and I would ask you to refrain from racial epithets in comments. This is an official warning, blah blah, next comes banning.

This probably requires some background. The details of the story are not totally clear, and won't be pending an investigation. The facts are that Jonathan Martin left the team after what was described as a "breakdown" in the cafeteria. Apparently the team was pranking him by banding together and refusing to sit with him. This is the sort of behavior you see. Afterwards allegations of physical beating and voice mails were revealed that suggested Richie Incognito (I know, ironic name) was the primary perpetrator of the abuses.

Focus has been on the use of the racial epithet in question. Frankly, I think this is a red herring. I, like many of you, don't really care about the use of that word. That said, I think Shannon is correct in stating there are signs of something deeper here. That is, real actual issues of race relations.

You've heard here that Incognito is thought of as an "honorary black" in that locker room. More background is that Jonathan Martin would have been the third generation in his family to graduate from Harvard, but he decided to go to Stanford instead. It's been suggested that Martin was ostracized more for this reason than anything. He just came from a completely different place than most of the other guys playing. At its root, the allegation is that they made him feel uncomfortable for coming from a wealthy black family.

What I find much more upsetting than any epithet is what I interpreted to be a continuation of the sort of attitude Shannon was talking about. By implying he had used an incorrect word rather than emotionally flubbing its pronunciation the implication, to me, is that his intellect is not being respected. Since this clip is most definitely about race, and that is a common stereotype about black men, I couldn't help but wonder if his skin color biased your judgements. That, to me, is much more troubling than throwing around nigger, fag, or kyke with your friends.

In the end, I think this whole story will blow over. It's just as likely to me that Martin was replaced as a starter, and is now trying to lawyer up (call his parents) to cash out his career. We won't know until they look into it. Still, in this context, I was surprised people here of all places would belittle this sort of commentary, and by extension the commentator. It's disrespectful to the message if nothing else. If you don't find discussions of race relations worth being dignified then I guess I think you're kind of a dick even if you aren't a bigot.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by pumkinandstorm.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Never-shout-racial-epithets-at-a-man-with-a-water-hose

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by luxury_pie. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

In this case, I stand by "it has nothing to do with race". In the equivalent situation (Baltimore, black thugs/gang, drunk victim) put a black person in the victim's place and nothing changes. Actually, they may have killed/maimed the black victim. The white dude got off light, for Baltimore.

Anyway, they don't scream racial epithets. There is no evidence he was targeted due to being white.

_________________________________________________________________________

I say the Zimmerman case is about race because of Zimmerman's history of profiling black males as criminals. Even the black neighbor who praised Zimmerman said he was uncomfortable walking in his own neighborhood because of the profiling. That's pretty damning in itself.

I say it's about race because Zimmerman's only rationale for pursuing Martin with a loaded gun was his appearance.

I say it's about race, because Zimmerman on the 911 call called Martin a "coon".

I say it's about race due to the (in)actions of the police:
-A homicide goes down and the admitted killer is let go after a couple of hours due to his word in the absence of video or consistent eyewitness accounts? No thorough investigation while they held him? When have you ever heard of that happening? I have black friends who have been wrongly held for days on much less serious allegations.

-The victim, a young teenager, is not identified for days. On that night, the police didn't even canvas the community he was walking in to find out who he was. Can you imagine that happening to any of your teenage friends/relatives? I would think anyone would assume a normal teenager would have concerned parents worried about his absence. And at least look in the most likely place for the parents: the immediate neighborhood.

-They've corrupted the chain of evidence so much, the case had to be taken out of their hands

-This department has a history of mistreating blacks

Plenty of evidence and observations that can't reasonably be explained any other way.>> ^chilaxe:

>> ^longde:
Happens often enough; where are all those national stories?
And for you to level such a broad accusation, you have to show some proof/evidence/facts. Where are these videos you speak of where we without reason mislabel a hate crime?
>> ^chilaxe:
If the ethnicities were reversed, everybody above saying it's not a hate crime would be saying it's without a doubt a hate crime. It'd also be national news.


On the other video, you said: "This crime has nothing to do with race."
"Nothing to do with race" seems to be going a bit far, but the general argument could be reasonable.
If we believed in those standards, we'd apply them to the Trayvon Martin case.
We'd say the critical factors in Martin's case weren't about race, because Zimmerman's black neighbor said he'd have done the same thing, and any teenager who presents himself to the world as being part of gang culture would have a problem in a gated community that's having a problem with crime.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by eric3579.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by Zifnab. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Never-shout-racial-epithets-at-a-man-with-a-water-hose

I wonder if there is a video in existence with the power to make males feel objectified in the same way that Girls Gone Wild type videos make females feel objectified? I'd like to know what that feels like, but our culture just isn't even handed when it comes to gender and sexuality issues.

It's sort of like when Louis CK says that racial epithets like 'cracker' or 'honky' are not particularly offensive or menacing to most whites, they're just silly words - not to justify black racism towards whites. I applaud issy and hpqp's subversive rebuttals to the Christmas boob video, but I can't imagine too many males feeling oppressed by this. I think most guys who are relatively secure in their sexuality would find this funny. If anything, it seems like a fair trade: naked ladies for naked men.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Well, I have to channel gay Dag to determine this. (What's that you say? shouldn't be difficult?) I think this is too retro and ridiculous to have real sex appeal. Tom Selleck was a winner.>> ^hpqp:

Does it pass the test? >> ^dag:
Hmmm.

"Words are words?" That would be your response to a high school girl that has been called a racial epithet to her face by a hostile teammate? You're almost worse than her other teammates who insisted their chant is no big deal.

Even adults are not immune from hurtful language, so I don't see the point in pretending everyone should be a stoic about words that carry so much history, context, and baggage.

>> ^redyellowblue:

Viral Advert for Office MAx.


lol

>> ^Ryjkyj:

>> ^Yogi:
I've heard her go through routines where she just says racial epithets over and over. And just constantly trying to shock people gets boring...which is why when she does it she's not funny. It's not my opinion it's an objective measurement by an Un-Funny-O-Meter. A device I imagine will have to go overtime analyzing your next reply to one of my posts.
In short not everyone is funny all the time. They certainly aren't when they get formulaic.
You didn't say "racial epithets" before. You said "saying nigger over and over". I'm curious, with access to the entire internet at your fingertips, can you come up with one video, or even a transcription of one of her acts that meets that qualification? Or are you completely full of shit? I mean, that IS what you said isn't it?
You know what sets my Un-Funny-O-Meter off? Someone who once said that they found Rush Limbaugh hilarious calling Sarah Silverman formulaic.


You're pulling out my posting history to defend your opinion against my opinion of the funnyness of Sarah Silverman. You win the argument dude...grats....I still don't think she's that funny. I am now convinced that you're easily upset and a big baby about stupid shit though.

>> ^Yogi:

I've heard her go through routines where she just says racial epithets over and over. And just constantly trying to shock people gets boring...which is why when she does it she's not funny. It's not my opinion it's an objective measurement by an Un-Funny-O-Meter. A device I imagine will have to go overtime analyzing your next reply to one of my posts.
In short not everyone is funny all the time. They certainly aren't when they get formulaic.

You didn't say "racial epithets" before. You said "saying nigger over and over". I'm curious, with access to the entire internet at your fingertips, can you come up with one video, or even a transcription of one of her acts that meets that qualification? Or are you completely full of shit? I mean, that IS what you said isn't it?

You know what sets my Un-Funny-O-Meter off? Someone who once said that they found Rush Limbaugh hilarious calling Sarah Silverman formulaic.