nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Roseanne fired but Sarah Jeong hired?

splashuum

I find it incredible that main stream media can pick and choose who and what they define as racist.
Sarah Jeong has just been hired by the New York Times despite her clear hatred against white people. What is even more astounding is that the NYT have doubled down on Jeong after seeing her tweets. They have now publicly declared a vote of confidence in her.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Franz Von Peppercorn

keffiyeh wrote: »

When you say 'white guilt' but it's actually 'acknowledgement', subtract the white from guilt, and then figure it out, because it's real obvious.

You know what never mind, messing around with intentionally dense internet trolls with racist snowflake agendas is just boring. The 'acknowledgement' required is what the white race perpetrated against places like the African and American continents. Reframing the argument into just 'british colonists' is extremely intellectually dishonest. Plenty of others have benefitted from it. I can't imagine being such a butthurt baby that maybe acknowledging this would make me whinge online.

What’s the “white race”. Is it the Albanians? The Latvians? The Greeks? The Serbs? The Irish. Most of the EU is in fact made up of countries with no imperial past. Some have been colonised.

Do all of these groups have the same responsibility for British or French colonialism as say, the brits or French?

And the people responsible for American colonialism (in say manifest destiny) are all American. Only about 20% of the world’s white population is American. And only 70% of the US, and declining, is white but the imperialism of the US hasn’t exactly gone away, you know.

Sarah Jeong is an imperialist, I’m not.

Franz Von Peppercorn

SnakePlissken wrote: »

So because a British colonist acted brutally toward an African several centuries ago, an Irish man should feel guilt as he is the same skin tone as said colonist?

Yeah, you're a racist gob****e.

I think that in the “white race guilt” fallacy we are also responsible for the British imperialism in Ireland too. When the brits shot protestors in Derry, or when famine food was exported out of Ireland, that was all white guilt. They were just as guilty as us, we were as guilty as them. Anything else would be “reductionist”.

fullstop

DONTMATTER wrote: »

Am, the British security forces were still bombing and shooting innocent Irish people dead in the very recent past.

Ah they were just angry men™

Yer Da sells Avon

Nermal wrote: »

much like your posting

Keepaneye wrote: »

It's funny, the same insufferable poster defending this cretin will always attack a poster decrying potentially dangerous refugees being released in Ireland. Selective social justice warriors.

Omackeral wrote: »

Because he's an absolute hypocrite on this

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Nope; he's just a moron.

Ah here, you wouldn't want to be thin-skinned when expressing views that differ from those of The Serious Men of Boards. Lads, do yourselves a favour; don't spend the Sunday night of the August bank holiday weekend getting outraged at someone having a opinion on the internet. G'way and get a hug off someone, FFS.

hatrickpatrick wrote:

Racism and sexism against whites and males is dangerous because of the accompanying undertone of "you deserve this somehow". Children who cannot possibly be expected to understand the "macro" debates and contexts to these battles are going to come across this stuff and just think "great, the world hates me because I'm white / a boy". And yes, it is "the world", because when you're a young pre-teen, what you see in the newspapers or on the TV does represent the world at large, in your young mind.

I accept that it could be damaging if young males or young white people were constantly subjected to, and took literally, the "urgh... men... white ppl" narrative that you see on some parts of the internet, Twitter especially. It's not usually meant to be taken literally though - and it shouldn't take too much effort to see such comments in their true context either. Do a quick search for "men r trash" or "why are white people..." and you could easily come away thinking that 'misandry' and 'anti-white racism' are the biggest issues facing society today. Dig a bit deeper though, and it's just people blowing off steam, spouting hyperbolic crap, using 'white people' as shorthand for 'assholes who happen to be white', or in the case of Sarah Jeong, simply breaking the 'two wrongs don't make a right' rule and trolling the trolls.

Sweetemotion

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Ah here, you wouldn't want to be thin-skinned when expressing views that differ from those of The Serious Men of Boards. Lads, do yourselves a favour; don't spend the Sunday night of the August bank holiday weekend getting outraged at someone having a opinion on the internet. G'way and get a hug off someone, FFS.

I accept that it could be damaging if young males or young white people were constantly subjected to, and took literally, the "urgh... men... white ppl" narrative that you see on some parts of the internet, Twitter especially. It's not usually meant to be taken literally though - and it shouldn't take too much effort to see such comments in their true context either. Do a quick search for "men r trash" or "why are white people..." and you could easily come away thinking that 'misandry' and 'anti-white racism' are the biggest issues facing society today. Dig a bit deeper though, and it's just people blowing off steam, spouting hyperbolic crap, using 'white people' as shorthand for 'assholes who happen to be white', or in the case of Sarah Jeong, simply breaking the 'two wrongs don't make a right' rule and trolling the trolls.

Yawn...

2 Scoops

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

trolling the trolls.

Pretty long troll, years even. Click the tweet, scroll down and see for yourself.

https://twitter.com/nickmon1112/status/1025437806775226368

Venom

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Ah here, you wouldn't want to be thin-skinned when expressing views that differ from those of The Serious Men of Boards. Lads, do yourselves a favour; don't spend the Sunday night of the August bank holiday weekend getting outraged at someone having a opinion on the internet. G'way and get a hug off someone, FFS.

I accept that it could be damaging if young males or young white people were constantly subjected to, and took literally, the "urgh... men... white ppl" narrative that you see on some parts of the internet, Twitter especially. It's not usually meant to be taken literally though - and it shouldn't take too much effort to see such comments in their true context either. Do a quick search for "men r trash" or "why are white people..." and you could easily come away thinking that 'misandry' and 'anti-white racism' are the biggest issues facing society today. Dig a bit deeper though, and it's just people blowing off steam, spouting hyperbolic crap, using 'white people' as shorthand for 'assholes who happen to be white', or in the case of Sarah Jeong, simply breaking the 'two wrongs don't make a right' rule and trolling the trolls.

Racism is racism. Just because you are ok with it and justify it as blowing off steam doesn't mean it is. All your posts in this thread have been trying to downplay the actions of an out and out racist, who you continue to make excuses for.

Jeong wasn't responding to trolls when speaking at Harvard, ranting and blaming all the worlds problems on white people. She wasn't responding to trolls with her five years worth of tweets, just blanket statements that again were aimed at white people. She wasn't responding to trolls when attacking the victims of the UVA Rolling Stone false rape claim, because once again they were white. She is just a racist and no amount of bs excuses from her, the New York Times or you will change that.

Outlaw Pete

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

... trolling the trolls.

She's not trolling. She posted hundreds upon hundreds of vile tweets ffs.

Here's a few particularly vile ones:

https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/692545556237914116

https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/547580782030888960

pleas advice

she forgot to add: /s

.

..

/s

deco nate

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

She's not trolling. She posted hundreds upon hundreds of vile tweets ffs.

Here's a few particularly vile ones:

https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/692545556237914116

https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/547580782030888960

So can I say she smells of msg? And ghee??

She is a troll of the highest order. Still Cant believe she got a high paying job from her racist (yes, all of her racist) tweets.

The world has gone crazy now, kick one of your journalists out of his job for racist posts and months later, replace him with someone that has posted nothing but racist posts?!
And people defending her?
This world is truly crazy now, Aslan was right.

Yer Da sells Avon

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

She's not trolling. She posted hundreds upon hundreds of vile tweets ffs.

Here's a few particularly vile ones:

https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/692545556237914116

https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/547580782030888960

'Vile' lol. The Daily Mail called, they want their terminology back. I dunno, maybe she doesn't literally want to cut people. Maybe what she was doing there was using hyperbole to make an exaggerated point. Or maybe the staff at the New York Times will have to watch themselves.

She uses the language of the right ('PC lies'), so I'm guessing there's some element of piss-takery going on there, maybe? Certainly has the effect of some top notch trolling anyway (i.e. drawing out the kind of outraged responses that she's getting, from the kind of people who wouldn't ordinarily give two hoots about racism).

deco nate

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

'Vile' lol. The Daily Mail called, they want their terminology back.

Certainly has the effect of some top notch trolling anyway .

Hello, Yea. But try harder next time...

pleas advice

Kevin Myers is turning in his grave

Yer Da sells Avon

pleas advice wrote: »

Kevin Myers is turning in his grave

Myers, now there's a troll. And then he went and spoiled it all by saying something stupid about the Jews, when his actual target wasn't the Jews at all - who he's actually rather fond of, in a weird sort of way - but those poor highly-paid women who aren't paid quite as highly as their male counterparts. Such a messy, undignified ending.

pleas advice

people were just too dumb to understand the point he was trying to make,

Outlaw Pete

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

'Vile' lol. The Daily Mail called, they want their terminology back.

Now that's lazy and laughable, as sure even your friends use that term.

I dunno...

Yeah, I noticed and you should have stopped there as everything after that was just excuses for her racism. This wasn't a handful of tweets over a few months. This was many hundreds over several years and it was expressed in other areas of her life also. You seem incapable of wrapping your head around the fact that an Asian or Black person can hate whites in the same way a white person can hate Asians or Blacks. Had this been a white journalist that was saying these vile things about Asians or Blacks, you would not be on here making excuses for them. Not a hope.

Malayalam

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Now that's lazy and laughable, as sure even your friends use that term.

Yeah, I noticed and you should have stopped there as everything after that was just excuses for her racism. This wasn't a handful of tweets over a few months. This was many hundreds over several years and it was expressed in other areas of her life also. You seem incapable of wrapping your head around the fact that an Asian or Black person can hate whites in the same way a white person can hate Asians or Blacks. Had this been a white journalist that was saying these vile things about Asians or Blacks, you would not be on here making excuses for them. Not a hope.

It's not just that an Asian or Black can hate Whites as much as vice versa - we all know the human capacity to be an arsehole - it is the almost feverish ideology that there is some perverse atonement to be extracted from people whose ancestry happens to be white skinned. A bizarre theatre of sado-masochistic intersectional pseudo politics. White people especially males to hang their heads in a submissive acting out that is supposed to correct a version of history. And it is a version. Someone earlier asked who benefited from slavery. It was initially the native Africans who sold their own to colonialists, in a well developed slave trade that had long existed on the continent, so they were the first beneficiaries. And the English enslaved the Irish also, sold to the Caribbean etc. The Vikings enslaved many north Europeans. The Arabs enslaved Mediterraneans. Feudal lords enslaved the peasantry. Native American tribes enslaved each other. Etc etc. There would have to be a great deal of complex global submission domination public theatre for history to be corrected and frankly I would find it all too exhausting. Can we just skip forward to the part where we are Star Trek mature please?

[Deleted User]

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

'Vile' lol. The Daily Mail called, they want their terminology back. I dunno, maybe she doesn't literally want to cut people. Maybe what she was doing there was using hyperbole to make an exaggerated point. Or maybe the staff at the New York Times will have to watch themselves.

She uses the language of the right ('PC lies'), so I'm guessing there's some element of piss-takery going on there, maybe? Certainly has the effect of some top notch trolling anyway (i.e. drawing out the kind of outraged responses that she's getting, from the kind of people who wouldn't ordinarily give two hoots about racism).

"Daily Mail, lol", "Serious Men of Boards", "She's just using hyperbole". Why don't you just say that she's s racist scumbag with a horrible view and stop trying to justify it or make allowances.

White people dont have the monopoly on being bigoted, racist scumbags. It's ok for you to admit that this wagon (and that's what she is, before you taking umbrage at that too) is way out of line for her public viewpoints. It's ok to just take it on its own without needing quantifiers and what-abouts. Scummy views being espoused by a scummy woman, regardless of ethnicity.

I'd have the exact same view if you substitute any other skin colour in. Racism is to be abhorred, no matter who is perpetuating it.

Just condemn her sh*te for the absolute muck it is. Try not to be swayed by how she looks, it's be a bit racist like...

Lash Into The Pints

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Please tell me you’re a parody account.

Nope; he's just a moron.

It's kind of interesting to watch him. First to downplay the racism, then justify it. He's probably white too, I wonder where the self hate comes from?

DickSwiveller Returns

20Cent wrote: »

Serious bang of gammon off this thread practicaly sizzling. Lol.

Is that an insult based on a person's skin complexion? Very interesting seeing the people who liked it, too.

Outlaw Pete

Malayalam wrote: »

It's not just that an Asian or Black can hate Whites as much as vice versa...

Of course, was just using those as examples.

With that particular user could easily have said Muslims, or Indian people, or basically any non-straight, non-white section of society. The social cache which these SJWs trade in, via virtual signalling, becomes almost worthless if white straight people can also be offended and maligned as a group.

As the saying goes: misery loves company but it hates competition.

Keepaneye

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

Is that an insult based on someones skin complexion? Very interesting seeing the people who liked it, too.

I see they have deleted it.

Wonder what kind of reaction I would get if I said, "serious bang of raw fish in here" in the ladies lounge forum.

DickSwiveller Returns

Keepaneye wrote: »

I see they have deleted it.

Wonder what kind of reaction I would get if I said, "serious bang of raw fish in here" in the ladies lounge forum.

Still there on the third page, keepaneye. I'm particularly shocked at one of the people who liked it. He's usually very holier than thou.

Keepaneye

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

Still there on the third page, keepaneye. I'm particularly shocked at one of the people who liked it. He's usually very holier than thou.

Must have missed it. I am not surprised.

pickarooney

What does 'bang of gammon' mean? Is it a reference to the police?

DickSwiveller Returns

pickarooney wrote: »

What does 'bang of gammon' mean? Is it a reference to the police?

I think it's an insult used by Remainers in Britain aimed at working class white people. Based on their skin complexion. Funny how certain posters can get away with certain forms of racism isn't it?

Niles Crane

Why is gammon ham being used by anybody as a form of insult.

there is nothing as nice as gammon ham, potatoes and butter and a slice of pineapple.

[Deleted User]

Lash Into The Pints wrote: »

It's kind of interesting to watch him. First to downplay the racism, then justify it. He's probably white too, I wonder where the self hate comes from?

Live shot right here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tEiguYmgxA

Yer Da sells Avon

Omackeral wrote: »

"Daily Mail, lol", "Serious Men of Boards", "She's just using hyperbole". Why don't you just say that she's s racist scumbag with a horrible view and stop trying to justify it or make allowances.

White people dont have the monopoly on being bigoted, racist scumbags. It's ok for you to admit that this wagon (and that's what she is, before you taking umbrage at that too) is way out of line for her public viewpoints. It's ok to just take it on its own without needing quantifiers and what-abouts. Scummy views being espoused by a scummy woman, regardless of ethnicity.

I'd have the exact same view if you substitute any other skin colour in. Racism is to be abhorred, no matter who is perpetuating it.

Just condemn her sh*te for the absolute muck it is. Try not to be swayed by how she looks, it's be a bit racist like...

She was shitposting on Twitter. I've seen enough of that kind of stuff not to take it seriously, whoever is spouting it, and I don't see why it should prevent someone from getting a job with a newspaper.

DickSwiveller Returns wrote:

Is that an insult based on someones skin complexion?

I don't know about you, but it makes me red in the face. Anyway, enjoy the bank holiday and wear sunscreen. :mad:

Will I Am Not

Gammon is hardly racist. Sure the people using it are often gammony looking yokes anyway.
Even this fella is a bit...