This just goes to show that you don't have to be smart to run the government. In fact, it might be required to be a moron.
1. Nooses are showing up because it's almost Halloween. It's a Halloween theme.
Only among people who think blackface is an acceptable costume choice.
Oh don't be ridiculous.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
Considering that hanging is not a be-all-end-all symbol of lynching black people, I'd say "not retarded at all".
Halloween decorations obviously aren't covered by the law so this is a bit of an unnecessary tangent.
Really? I know you cannot read my post because I'm on your ignore list but for the benefit of others in the thread, who's to say a judge could not construe a particular Halloween prop as "threatening"? In, say, a "haunted house" kind of thing. A judge that sticks to the exact verbiage of the law could do exactly that, even if the threats are really no more than mood-inducing jests.
It sounds ridiculous but it is also entirely possible.
Hanging seems to be the most public but I remember reading tonnes of stuff about car drags and such. Saddam was hung too. It isn't the property of black people to feel persecuted by and it isn't automatically a symbol of hatred against them.
Its the same type of overreaction that removes Merry Christmas from stores or stops children playing cops and robbers with plastic guns because it offends a few people. Doesn't illicit the same response but it is overreacting.
This just goes to show that you don't have to be smart to run the government. In fact, it might be required to be a moron.
1. Nooses are showing up because it's almost Halloween. It's a Halloween theme.
Only among people who think blackface is an acceptable costume choice.
Oh don't be ridiculous.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
Considering that hanging is not a be-all-end-all symbol of lynching black people, I'd say "not retarded at all".
So I'll echo: don't be ridiculous.
I'd also mention that Cat is attempting to decontextualize the noose as a symbol, when it can mean something completely different in California from what it means in Alabama, or where it's specifically placed, or the images/words that accompany it.
I don't think you can really claim that kind of historical contextualization whilst simultaneously ignoring all the other kinds of context.
sdrawkcaB emaN on
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
Hanging seems to be the most public but I remember reading tonnes of stuff about car drags and such. Saddam was hung too. It isn't the property of black people to feel persecuted by and it isn't automatically a symbol of hatred against them.
It is when it's mailed to them, carved on their locker, or tied to their tree. This is not a particularly difficult concept.
Hanging seems to be the most public but I remember reading tonnes of stuff about car drags and such. Saddam was hung too. It isn't the property of black people to feel persecuted by and it isn't automatically a symbol of hatred against them.
It is when it's mailed to them, carved on their locker, or tied to their tree. This is not a particularly difficult concept.
There is a difference between hanging one on a tree outside a school though and hanging one on your porch amongst assorted halloween decorations.
Hanging seems to be the most public but I remember reading tonnes of stuff about car drags and such. Saddam was hung too. It isn't the property of black people to feel persecuted by and it isn't automatically a symbol of hatred against them.
It is when it's mailed to them, carved on their locker, or tied to their tree. This is not a particularly difficult concept.
Yeah, see, Dark Warrior is trying to entirely decontextualize the symbol of the noose, whereas Cat stops with historical context. Both are insufficient. That's why we have courts -- to examine the context and decide what the intent is, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
I'm trying to remember a single Halloween I can remember where nooses weren't all over the fucking place, strangling witches, scarecrows, and jack-o-lanterns alike. And I cannot remember a single nooseless Halloween in the last 20+ years. And I've lived in New York my entire life.
It certainly isn't a "new" fad or anything and it has nothing at all to do with anti-black racism.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
Well, I am certainly coming to learn that there are whole regions ignorant of the experiences of their neighbours and unwilling to learn. I guess you're right.
Juries aren't trained. They're often pretty damned stupid, in fact.
Well that's what lawyers and judges are for. I think pretty much any judge who isn't batshit insane would dismiss a case before it ever got to court if it were over halloween decorations.
Also the police who would presumably do the arresting/citing in the first place.
I mean, this shit is pretty common-sense. You can tell when something is threatening and when it is a goddamn Halloween decoration.
Hanging seems to be the most public but I remember reading tonnes of stuff about car drags and such. Saddam was hung too. It isn't the property of black people to feel persecuted by and it isn't automatically a symbol of hatred against them.
It is when it's mailed to them, carved on their locker, or tied to their tree. This is not a particularly difficult concept.
There is a difference between hanging one on a tree outside a school though and hanging one on your porch amongst assorted halloween decorations.
Thank you for enlightening us. I didn't know a concept such as 'intent' existed.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
Well, I am certainly coming to learn that there are whole regions ignorant of the experiences of their neighbours and unwilling to learn. I guess you're right.
And we're coming to learn that you're ignorant of any context except that which reinforces your argument.
Hanging seems to be the most public but I remember reading tonnes of stuff about car drags and such. Saddam was hung too. It isn't the property of black people to feel persecuted by and it isn't automatically a symbol of hatred against them.
It is when it's mailed to them, carved on their locker, or tied to their tree. This is not a particularly difficult concept.
There is a difference between hanging one on a tree outside a school though and hanging one on your porch amongst assorted halloween decorations.
Thank you for enlightening us. I didn't know a concept such as 'intent' existed.
The point I was making is that you might understand intent but courts/juries will just see "Minority feels threatened, easier to just snuff out the noose decoration".
What's retarded here (OK, one retarded thing here) is that Cat and Dark are arguing over a strawman in the first place. The new law takes intent into account, so really there's no point in arguing over whether or not nooses should be altogether banned in the first place.
Juries aren't trained. They're often pretty damned stupid, in fact.
Well that's what lawyers and judges are for. I think pretty much any judge who isn't batshit insane would dismiss a case before it ever got to court if it were over halloween decorations.
Judges in New York are elected though, and we all know how completely irrational elected officials can become when public pressure is applied.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
Well, I am certainly coming to learn that there are whole regions ignorant of the experiences of their neighbours and unwilling to learn. I guess you're right.
And we're coming to learn that you're ignorant of any context except that which reinforces your argument.
I mean, seriously.
What the fuck are you on about? I'm aware that the noose has multiple symbolisms. I'm arguing that in the US, in the current political climate, while all the Jena 6 and Imus kerfuffle is fresh in the public mind, one particular piece of symobolism takes precedent, and people ignoring that are either rampant assholes or plain oblivious fools.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
Well, I am certainly coming to learn that there are whole regions ignorant of the experiences of their neighbours and unwilling to learn. I guess you're right.
And we're coming to learn that you're ignorant of any context except that which reinforces your argument.
I mean, seriously.
What the fuck are you on about? I'm aware that the noose has multiple symbolisms. I'm arguing that in the US, in the current political climate, while all the Jena 6 and Imus kerfuffle is fresh in the public mind, one particular piece of symobolism takes precedent, and people ignoring that are either rampant assholes or plain oblivious fools.
You really think that the immediate context of say, that noose holding a skeleton, zombie, or witch doll, or in someone's house as part of party decorations would not override some broad supposed national context? Really?
Somehow I don't think that a black kids trick-or-treating at someone's house are going to feel harassed or unsafe if there is a skeleton hanging from a noose next to pumpkins and ghosts and shit.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
Well, I am certainly coming to learn that there are whole regions ignorant of the experiences of their neighbours and unwilling to learn. I guess you're right.
I really don't see how that makes a fake guillotine or fake electric-chair a better decoration.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
Well, I am certainly coming to learn that there are whole regions ignorant of the experiences of their neighbours and unwilling to learn. I guess you're right.
Maybe you should take this hypothesis of yours into a relevant topic. It certainly isn't relevant here, where nooses and Halloween are concerned. You are, in fact, completely ignorant to what the symbol of a "noose" means here. While tragic, the lynchings of blacks in America does not erase all the other uses of the noose in American history and I don't think it is appropriate at all to tiptoe around the subject of racism when it is completely irrelevant to do so. There's no need to outlaw or even make morally taboo the noose symbol because it has nothing to do with anti-black racism except in the potential and rare cases where a court might consider a noose symbol to be used threateningly, harassingly, or menacingly.
I mean, I don't know what to say. Cotton is a more appropriate symbol for black oppression than the noose and I plan on throwing away my cotton shirts any time soon.
one particular piece of symobolism takes precedent, and people ignoring that are either rampant assholes or plain oblivious fools.
The noose was nothing more than a tool used to lynch black Americans. It was also a tool used toward many other ends during many other periods of American history. It was not borne from anti-black lynching or racism and you seem to be the only person that really believes it to symbolize anti-black racism. It may be that certain people would use it in that manner, but the noose was nothing more than a weapon at the time and it was not a weapon that was restricted to black genocide. It was used before it for hundreds of years and may still be used in some locales for all I know.
Right, because they're never actually threatened because racism is all gone now, right?
Way to trivialize.
I think what Dark means is that people don't want to risk upsetting anyone, and when the slightest possibility of someone getting offended or feeling threatened presents itself people tend to just rub it out without looking into it thoroughly. If someone thinks an object may upset a group of people, or if one person happens to get upset about a noose - even one that's displayed without the intent of being threatening - people are quick to get rid of it.
Right, because they're never actually threatened because racism is all gone now, right?
Way to trivialize.
I think what Dark means is that people don't want to risk upsetting anyone, and when the slightest possibility of someone getting offended or feeling threatened presents itself people tend to just rub it out without looking into it thoroughly. If someone thinks an object may upset a group of people, or if one person happens to get upset about a noose - even one that's displayed without the intent of being threatening - people are quick to get rid of it.
I think that is a fear that is fabricated by the Right in order to de-legitimize useful legislation and initiatives to address the fact that some kinds of speech and action can only be analyzed accurately when examined in a context of race/gender/orientation, or other kinds of oppression.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
Well, I am certainly coming to learn that there are whole regions ignorant of the experiences of their neighbours and unwilling to learn. I guess you're right.
And we're coming to learn that you're ignorant of any context except that which reinforces your argument.
I mean, seriously.
What the fuck are you on about? I'm aware that the noose has multiple symbolisms. I'm arguing that in the US, in the current political climate, while all the Jena 6 and Imus kerfuffle is fresh in the public mind, one particular piece of symobolism takes precedent, and people ignoring that are either rampant assholes or plain oblivious fools.
I dunno, I tend to think that if someone were going to try to threaten black-people by putting up a noose at Halloween they'd have to do more than just hang it on their own porch among all the other Halloween decorations, and it couldn't very well be made of glow-in-the-dark plastic and have a skeleton permanently attached to it at the neck. If you snuck out at 2 am and put it up on a black family's porch, that would probably do it. But neighborhoods are a sea of fake death ranging from Wal-Mart to theatre quality here.
Right, because they're never actually threatened because racism is all gone now, right?
Way to trivialize.
I think what Dark means is that people don't want to risk upsetting anyone, and when the slightest possibility of someone getting offended or feeling threatened presents itself people tend to just rub it out without looking into it thoroughly. If someone thinks an object may upset a group of people, or if one person happens to get upset about a noose - even one that's displayed without the intent of being threatening - people are quick to get rid of it.
I think that is a fear that is fabricated by the Right in order to de-legitimize useful legislation and initiatives to address the fact that some kinds of speech and action can only be analyzed accurately when examined in a context of race/gender/orientation, or other kinds of oppression.
I dunno. I think most censorship (and yes, I understand that censorship is not necessarily the same thing as legislating against the display of anti-hate symbols) is borne from sensational over-protectiveness and misguided utilitarian views. Just my independant perspective.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
edited October 2007
Guys I am pretty sure that The Cat is not advocating banning nooses or anything of the sort.
She's just saying that yes, they do in fact have a racial connotation when they're directed at blacks. Which is - y'know - true.
Though hey, maybe racism will go away once the entire fucking country is as autistic as forum nerds and threats have to be written like "Go away black people who are not actually black but in fact brown, what is up with that anyway."
I'm talking about attitudes and prejudices. We may outlaw sending someone a picture of a noose with racial slurs and threats, but how does that really work to change the systemic racial prejudice in our country?
I would argue it doesn't, really, except for deterring that type of expression of the attitude, which doesn't really go to the heart of the problem. And it's more dangerous because society THINKS the problem is going away when really, it isn't.
It works because it sends a message to the idiots who do this shit that the community doesn't support them, Medopine. Which is the most effective way of stopping these idiots. Remember, most racists believe that most others believe as they do, they're just not willing to show it publically. When communities show that racisim isn't tolerated, it causes the perpetrators to recede into the shadows where they came from, because they realize they're not advocating a popular stance.
Well how fucking retarded would you have to be to ignore the history of lynching in the US because you're just so desperate to have that one motif on your front porch?
I do not believe that you appreciate how disparate the United States is.
Well, I am certainly coming to learn that there are whole regions ignorant of the experiences of their neighbours and unwilling to learn. I guess you're right.
Maybe you should take this hypothesis of yours into a relevant topic. It certainly isn't relevant here, where nooses and Halloween are concerned. You are, in fact, completely ignorant to what the symbol of a "noose" means here. While tragic, the lynchings of blacks in America does not erase all the other uses of the noose in American history and I don't think it is appropriate at all to tiptoe around the subject of racism when it is completely irrelevant to do so. There's no need to outlaw or even make morally taboo the noose symbol because it has nothing to do with anti-black racism except in the potential and rare cases where a court might consider a noose symbol to be used threateningly, harassingly, or menacingly.
I mean, I don't know what to say. Cotton is a more appropriate symbol for black oppression than the noose and I plan on throwing away my cotton shirts any time soon.
one particular piece of symobolism takes precedent, and people ignoring that are either rampant assholes or plain oblivious fools.
The noose was nothing more than a tool used to lynch black Americans. It was also a tool used toward many other ends during many other periods of American history. It was not borne from anti-black lynching or racism and you seem to be the only person that really believes it to symbolize anti-black racism. It may be that certain people would use it in that manner, but the noose was nothing more than a weapon at the time and it was not a weapon that was restricted to black genocide. It was used before it for hundreds of years and may still be used in some locales for all I know.
The noose was also a tool to inspire fear in black communities in the past, and as recently as a few weeks ago.
Guys I am pretty sure that The Cat is not advocating banning nooses or anything of the sort.
She's just saying that yes, they do in fact have a racial connotation when they're directed at blacks. Which is - y'know - true.
Though hey, maybe racism will go away once the entire fucking country is as autistic as forum nerds and threats have to be written like "Go away black people who are not actually black but in fact brown, what is up with that anyway."
No, I think she is actually stating that nooses are inappropriate because they are symbols for black lynching and in our current political climate, despite there being other historical contexts for the noose, this context is the only one worth evaluating whether it is used in a racial context or not.
In fact, I think that's exactly what she stated and thus implied that it doesn't matter if the intent of the symbol is to "be racist" or not. From what I gather, she believes the symbol itself is currently inappropriate no matter how or why it is displayed.
Guys I am pretty sure that The Cat is not advocating banning nooses or anything of the sort.
She's just saying that yes, they do in fact have a racial connotation when they're directed at blacks. Which is - y'know - true.
No, she made it pretty clear that putting up a noose in any context is wrong, because all other contexts are going to be overridden by historical context and the current national context. Basically, she's asserting that somehow contexts which are seperated from the noose itself by geography, culture, and time will override the immediate context.
Which is ridiculous.
Though hey, maybe racism will go away once the entire fucking country is as autistic as forum nerds and threats have to be written like "Go away black people who are not actually black but in fact brown, what is up with that anyway."
Posts
Considering that hanging is not a be-all-end-all symbol of lynching black people, I'd say "not retarded at all".
So I'll echo: don't be ridiculous.
Really? I know you cannot read my post because I'm on your ignore list but for the benefit of others in the thread, who's to say a judge could not construe a particular Halloween prop as "threatening"? In, say, a "haunted house" kind of thing. A judge that sticks to the exact verbiage of the law could do exactly that, even if the threats are really no more than mood-inducing jests.
It sounds ridiculous but it is also entirely possible.
Its the same type of overreaction that removes Merry Christmas from stores or stops children playing cops and robbers with plastic guns because it offends a few people. Doesn't illicit the same response but it is overreacting.
That's good, because it sounded like you were getting all huffy on principle before.
I'd also mention that Cat is attempting to decontextualize the noose as a symbol, when it can mean something completely different in California from what it means in Alabama, or where it's specifically placed, or the images/words that accompany it.
I don't think you can really claim that kind of historical contextualization whilst simultaneously ignoring all the other kinds of context.
It is when it's mailed to them, carved on their locker, or tied to their tree. This is not a particularly difficult concept.
There is a difference between hanging one on a tree outside a school though and hanging one on your porch amongst assorted halloween decorations.
Yeah, see, Dark Warrior is trying to entirely decontextualize the symbol of the noose, whereas Cat stops with historical context. Both are insufficient. That's why we have courts -- to examine the context and decide what the intent is, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Well in this case, I wouldn't say they need the new law, but if they want to go there I'd prefer they do it the way I described.
So I suppose I'm still huffy. :P
Good thing we have courts full of specially trained men and women capable of making these shockingly difficult distinctions.
We are on the same wavelength tonight.
It certainly isn't a "new" fad or anything and it has nothing at all to do with anti-black racism.
Well that's what lawyers and judges are for. I think pretty much any judge who isn't batshit insane would dismiss a case before it ever got to court if it were over halloween decorations.
Also the police who would presumably do the arresting/citing in the first place.
I mean, this shit is pretty common-sense. You can tell when something is threatening and when it is a goddamn Halloween decoration.
Thank you for enlightening us. I didn't know a concept such as 'intent' existed.
And we're coming to learn that you're ignorant of any context except that which reinforces your argument.
I mean, seriously.
The point I was making is that you might understand intent but courts/juries will just see "Minority feels threatened, easier to just snuff out the noose decoration".
Is that why we don't allow them to decide whether a murderer had was insane at the time of the murder?
Right, because they're never actually threatened because racism is all gone now, right?
Way to trivialize.
What the fuck are you on about? I'm aware that the noose has multiple symbolisms. I'm arguing that in the US, in the current political climate, while all the Jena 6 and Imus kerfuffle is fresh in the public mind, one particular piece of symobolism takes precedent, and people ignoring that are either rampant assholes or plain oblivious fools.
Eh. I live with myself one day at a time.
As long as people have the right to decorate their porch with a noose.
You really think that the immediate context of say, that noose holding a skeleton, zombie, or witch doll, or in someone's house as part of party decorations would not override some broad supposed national context? Really?
Somehow I don't think that a black kids trick-or-treating at someone's house are going to feel harassed or unsafe if there is a skeleton hanging from a noose next to pumpkins and ghosts and shit.
Fixed.
I really don't see how that makes a fake guillotine or fake electric-chair a better decoration.
Maybe you should take this hypothesis of yours into a relevant topic. It certainly isn't relevant here, where nooses and Halloween are concerned. You are, in fact, completely ignorant to what the symbol of a "noose" means here. While tragic, the lynchings of blacks in America does not erase all the other uses of the noose in American history and I don't think it is appropriate at all to tiptoe around the subject of racism when it is completely irrelevant to do so. There's no need to outlaw or even make morally taboo the noose symbol because it has nothing to do with anti-black racism except in the potential and rare cases where a court might consider a noose symbol to be used threateningly, harassingly, or menacingly.
I mean, I don't know what to say. Cotton is a more appropriate symbol for black oppression than the noose and I plan on throwing away my cotton shirts any time soon.
The noose was nothing more than a tool used to lynch black Americans. It was also a tool used toward many other ends during many other periods of American history. It was not borne from anti-black lynching or racism and you seem to be the only person that really believes it to symbolize anti-black racism. It may be that certain people would use it in that manner, but the noose was nothing more than a weapon at the time and it was not a weapon that was restricted to black genocide. It was used before it for hundreds of years and may still be used in some locales for all I know.
I think what Dark means is that people don't want to risk upsetting anyone, and when the slightest possibility of someone getting offended or feeling threatened presents itself people tend to just rub it out without looking into it thoroughly. If someone thinks an object may upset a group of people, or if one person happens to get upset about a noose - even one that's displayed without the intent of being threatening - people are quick to get rid of it.
I think that is a fear that is fabricated by the Right in order to de-legitimize useful legislation and initiatives to address the fact that some kinds of speech and action can only be analyzed accurately when examined in a context of race/gender/orientation, or other kinds of oppression.
I dunno, I tend to think that if someone were going to try to threaten black-people by putting up a noose at Halloween they'd have to do more than just hang it on their own porch among all the other Halloween decorations, and it couldn't very well be made of glow-in-the-dark plastic and have a skeleton permanently attached to it at the neck. If you snuck out at 2 am and put it up on a black family's porch, that would probably do it. But neighborhoods are a sea of fake death ranging from Wal-Mart to theatre quality here.
I dunno. I think most censorship (and yes, I understand that censorship is not necessarily the same thing as legislating against the display of anti-hate symbols) is borne from sensational over-protectiveness and misguided utilitarian views. Just my independant perspective.
She's just saying that yes, they do in fact have a racial connotation when they're directed at blacks. Which is - y'know - true.
Though hey, maybe racism will go away once the entire fucking country is as autistic as forum nerds and threats have to be written like "Go away black people who are not actually black but in fact brown, what is up with that anyway."
It works because it sends a message to the idiots who do this shit that the community doesn't support them, Medopine. Which is the most effective way of stopping these idiots. Remember, most racists believe that most others believe as they do, they're just not willing to show it publically. When communities show that racisim isn't tolerated, it causes the perpetrators to recede into the shadows where they came from, because they realize they're not advocating a popular stance.
The noose was also a tool to inspire fear in black communities in the past, and as recently as a few weeks ago.
No, I think she is actually stating that nooses are inappropriate because they are symbols for black lynching and in our current political climate, despite there being other historical contexts for the noose, this context is the only one worth evaluating whether it is used in a racial context or not.
In fact, I think that's exactly what she stated and thus implied that it doesn't matter if the intent of the symbol is to "be racist" or not. From what I gather, she believes the symbol itself is currently inappropriate no matter how or why it is displayed.
No, she made it pretty clear that putting up a noose in any context is wrong, because all other contexts are going to be overridden by historical context and the current national context. Basically, she's asserting that somehow contexts which are seperated from the noose itself by geography, culture, and time will override the immediate context.
Which is ridiculous.
I wish I could sig you three times.