Thoughts on the Lizzo twerking at NBA game vol. This Why Rikishi trending

[RustyShackleford]

no im not saying that is happening
im saying demanding the Lizzo lyric be rewritten would be the equivalent of demanding british reference to ciggarettes as **** be re written.


and imo that's a weird notion.

we don't do that with british vulgarities so I think its strange that some UK people expect americans to do it.
if something is vulgar in your country just censor it.

Again, Lizzo is selling music for an international audience though.

Second, most regular consumers of music and media don't have unilateral power to censor words in media.

Just censor it sounds great ....if you have the power to censor it.

And I don't think Scotland Yard were the people calling Lizzo out online.

So I think what some of her fans did by directly appealing to her was the only way they could have influenced the situation. And I think it was the better way to go about it than lobbying a group like the police.

 

[Nouss]

The word is spaz?
What's the context of it being derogatory?

I've lived in the uk and haven't heard that one.

I read that it's a derogatory term for disabled people.

 

[Mark Antony]

Is it an outdated term that became offensive, or were British people really over here just roasting disabled people?

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Again, Lizzo is selling music for an international audience though.

Second, most regular consumers of music and media don't have unilateral power to censor words in media.

Just censor it sounds great ....if you have the power to censor it.

And I don't think Scotland Yard were the people calling Lizzo out online.

So I think what some of her fans did by directly appealing to her was the only way they could have influenced the situation. And I think it was the better way to go about it than lobbying a group like the police.

Well yah it's an international audience, so imo the audience should be aware that cultural context matters
if you choose to consume music from an international artist.

Like I said it was nice of her to do it.

I just find the notion of making a word you know means something else in another country conform to your countries culture to be weird.

I guess if you have the power to make it happen good for you.

But personally I think preserving cultural specificity is more interesting
than compressing everything into some kind of vague flattened anti culture version of English.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Well yah it's an international audience, so imo the audience should be aware that cultural context matters
if you choose to consume music from an international artist.

Like I said it was nice of her to do it.

I just find the notion of making a word you know means something else in another country conform to your countries culture to be weird.

I guess if you have the power to make it happen good for you.

But personally I think preserving cultural specificity is more interesting
than compressing everything into some kind of vague flattened anti culture version of English.

Ok guess

I have no response because I think there isn't much more to say about something that is not actually happening.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Guess lizzo had more learning to do.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Guess lizzo had more learning to do.

I read the article, it seems the person giving the commentary is more taking issue with the people that criticized Lizzo, not Lizzo herself.

Basically saying Lizzo is trying to be accommodating, but some white people took this situation as a opportunity to talk slick about a black woman, and that isn't good.

That seems like a fair criticism and important point.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

I read the article, it seems the person giving the commentary is more taking issue with the people that criticized Lizzo, not Lizzo herself.

Basically saying Lizzo is trying to be accommodating, but some white people took this situation as a opportunity to talk slick about a black woman, and that isn't good.

That seems like a fair criticism and important point.

Minds can differ,

but for me personally I find this identitatian style of argumentation to be tiresome, unpersuasive, and often counter productive

So It's hard for me to take any of it seriously.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Minds can differ,

but for me personally I find this identitatian style of argumentation to be tiresome, unpersuasive, and often counter productive

So It's hard for me to take any of it seriously.

Minds can differ about what? You made a comment implying the article was aiming some criticism at Lizzo, that wasn't the case though. I'm just pointing that out

The person made a similar argument to what you were saying. But now it is tiresome?

When singer-songwriter Lizzo's new single, "Grrrls," sparked a heated online discussion over the weekend about ableist language, Black disabled activist Vilissa Thompson noticed that the conversations were dominated by certain people within the disability community.

White disabled people in the U.S. and the U.K. were calling out the singer for using the word "spaz," which many consider an ableist slur. Buried among these critiques, however, was the perspective of Black disabled people, who raised points about the need for cultural nuance and an intersectional lens to the situation.

"The erasure of Black disabled people, when it comes to a Black entertainer, has been very prominent throughout this whole thing," Thompson, a licensed master social worker, told NPR.

Language has history, and it holds different weight to different communities​

The term "spaz" originates from the term "spastic," which has historically been used to describe people with spastic paralysis or cerebral palsy. Often used in a derogatory way to describe people with disabilities, "spaz" or "spaz out" has also been used to refer to someone losing physical control or simply acting "weird" or "uncool."

Sponsor Message

In online conversations, white disabled people in the U.S. and the U.K were speaking about their experiences with the word. Meanwhile, Black people in the U.S. and the U.K. pointed out how the word, which some say is a part of African American Vernacular English, is used differently by Black people within their countries. Thompson wished there were an amplification of Black disabled people who understand the nuances of those who use the word and those who are reclaiming it.

She pointed out that language evolves and that if the history of the word is offensive or has been used to oppress a particular group, it's on each person to unlearn it.

"The onus is on us to not just unlearn but also update and improve the way that we communicate with each other, so that our words are intentionally used, so that they don't cause unintentional harm," Thompson said.

Thompson believes that the way people go about critiquing others is very important. In reading the discussions online, she said she noticed they perpetuated anti-Blackness and misogynoir, or misogyny directed at Black women.

She noted that rather than fostering an open dialogue about ableist language and engaging in a conversation with Lizzo about it, the critiques piled on and missed the mark.

"I was shocked but not surprised by the way that white disabled people, especially those who claim to be in solidarity with Black disabled people, engaged in the conversation. You are not in solidarity with us if your behavior during this time in addressing Lizzo can be read as problematic [and] offensive," Thompson said.

Holding people accountable is important but so is recognizing the racial dynamics at play​

Criticism is much harsher for Black people with high profiles, particularly if they are not disabled and stumble when it comes to disability and language, Thompson added. For example, when white musicians use ableist language in their songs, they may receive some backlash but not the same visceral reaction that Black people do, Thompson said.

"I'm always particular about how white people and non-Black people of color engage with Black women who look a certain way. [Lizzo is] unintentionally a polarizing figure ... because she has the audacity to be comfortable in her skin as a fat Black woman. If she does something that people don't like, the pile-ons feel exacerbated, and at times unnecessarily, when it comes to her," she said.

Lizzo released a statement on Monday acknowledging the "harmful word" in her song and announcing a rerecorded version of the song without the slur in it. "I never want to promote derogatory language. As a fat black woman in America, I've had many hurtful words used against me so I overstand the power words can have (whether intentionally or in my case, unintentionally)," she wrote in her statement.



Shortly after the post and the song's rerelease, disabled people praised Lizzo for being so receptive and for responding well to the community's feedback.

Thompson noted, however, that she was not surprised that Lizzo responded the way that she did. Having done work in Black progressive spaces, Thompson has seen Black people who are not versed in disability but who actively work to do better. They know the importance of understanding when they've messed up and being inclusive to everybody, she said.

"Grace and room for correction are typically not given [to Black people]. The double standard of inconsistent reactions is profound. They don't trust Black people to do the right thing," she said.

Kinda seems you are being overly dismissive because a progressive person phrases an argument in a certain way. As usual

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Minds can differ about what? The person made a similar argument to what you were saying. But now it is tiresome?

Kinda seems you are being overly dismissive because a progressive person phrase an argument in a certain way.

I said the identitatian aspect of it is what I find tiresome.

The person can't simply say the obvious, "words mean different things in different cultures"

Instead they have to frame it in this heirchy of victim hood,/oppression Olympics
To give their argument moral authority.


"DISABLED peopt are saying this"
but I'll trump that with "BLACK disabled people say that"

But wait I'll raise you with "black disabled WOMEN"!

Minds can differ about this style of argument

I find much of cultural progressivism to be intellectually bankrupt
so quite naturally I'm gunna find many of their arguments unpursuasive.

 

[RustyShackleford]

I said the identitatian aspect of it is what I find tiresome.

The person can't simply say the obvious, "words mean different things in different cultures"

Instead they have to frame it in this heirchy of victim hood,/oppression Olympics
To give their argument moral authority.


"DISABLED peopt are saying this"
but I'll trump that with "BLACK disabled people say that"

But wait I'll raise you with "black disabled WOMEN"!

Minds can differ about this style of argument

I find much of cultural progressivism to be intellectually bankrupt
so quite naturally I'm gunna find many of their arguments unpursuasive.

-So why didn't you state that was the issue from the jump, you made it seem they were criticizing Lizzo. Makes me believe you didn't even read the article before posting the Twitter link and were doing a drive-by.

-So you got the patience for all types of problematic white dudes, can ask people to focus on Kevin Samuels's basic dating advice and to mostly put aside the problematic stuff, but for "cultural progressives" you got zero patience

You completely ignore the person's general argument because the framing pissed you off. If someone else did this in a discussion you would have a MASSIVE issue with this. This is something you criticize progressives for doing a ton. When you and Methodical Management back and forth, you repeatedly took issue with progressives for acting like this.

And because of your issue with some progressive, you are inclined to just dismiss their points. Doesn't seem very intellectually honest to me. Just saying.

But ok man, a progressive on the internet pissed you off, for check notes.....not phrasing an argument a certain way" gotcha

 

[osh kosh bosh]

-So why didn't you state that was the issue from the jump, you made it seem they were criticizing Lizzo. Makes me believe you didn't even read the article before posting the Twitter link.

-So you got the patience for all types of problematic white dudes, can ask people to focus on Kevin Samuels's basic dating advice and to mostly put aside the problematic stuff, but for "cultural progressives" you got zero patience

You completely ignore the person's general argument because the framing pissed you off. If someone else did this in a discussion you would have a MASSIVE issue with this. This is something you criticize progressives for doing a ton. When you and Methodical Management back and forth, you repeatedly took issue with progressives for acting like this.

And because of your issue with some progressive, you are inclined to just dismiss it. Doesn't seem very intellectually honest to me. Just saying.

But ok man, a progressive on the internet pissed you off, for check notes.....not phrasing an argument a certain way" gotcha

It's not the "phrasing" the argument is not "words are different in different cultures."

There argument is black disabled people say this word is different in a different culture and they are right because they are black and disabled.

If one person says american black people have lower IQ scores because black people are genetically inferior.

And another person says black peoplehave lower IQ scores because of segregated schools lack of resources.


The difference between these two arguments is not "phrasing". They are different arguments dispite making the same core factual claim.


And as you know by now at bottom I think the entire project of policing "harmful" words

is like 90% fake, dumb and counter productive.
None of this self flagulation over words is really helping disabled people.


It's not "phrasing" imo their rationale and goal is imo mostly stupid and counter productive.


Imo You are reaching to make some meta argument as usual

 

[1995]

I should've never posted that damn tweet

 

[RustyShackleford]

It's not the "phrasing" the argument is not "words are different in different cultures."

There argument is black disabled people say this word is different in a different culture and they are right because they are black and disabled.

If one person says american black people have lower IQ scores because black people are genetically inferior.

And another person says black peoplehave lower IQ scores because of segregated schools lack of resources.


The difference between these two arguments is not "phrasing". They are different arguments dispite making the same core factual claim.


And as you know by now at bottom I think the entire project of policing "harmful" words

is like 90% fake, dumb and counter productive.
None of this self flagulation over words is really helping disabled people.


It's not "phrasing" imo their rationale and goal is imo mostly stupid and counter productive.


Imo You are reaching to make some meta argument as usual

This is laughable that you say this

Because you posted a link to an article and refuse to address the core argument made in it. I pointed this out. Instead, you are talking about the style in which they argue the point, and make a criticism of cultural progressives generally, all to rationalize why you are dismissive of the points being made. But yeah, I'm the one reaching to make some meta argument. Ok Osh, sure.

The person didn't say that black people are right because they are black, they said their perspectives were not included in the conversation.

So spare me, this post 100% makes me believe you didn't read the article before posting it.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

This is laughable that you say this

Because you posted a link to an article and refuse to address the core argument made in it. That is what I am pointing out

The person didn't say that black people are right, they said their perspectives were not included in the conversation

So ****ing spare me, this post makes me 100% believe you didn't read the article before posting it.

That's not the core argument how many times you repeat it.

The argument is primarily about the erasure of black disabled people, words being different about different cultures is being used to support that central thesis.

The story quotes black disabled activists, the concluding paragraph is about black disabled people, the headline about black disabled identity. It's like one part of the article is about the basic speech aspect of it.

It's an obvious reach to make a meta argument about hypocrisy, give it a rest.

 

[RustyShackleford]

That's not the core argument how many times you repeat it.

The argument is primarily about the erasure of black disabled people, words being different about different cultures is being used to support that central thesis.

The story quotes black disabled activists, the concluding paragraph is about black disabled people, the headline about black disabled identity. It's like one part of the article is about the basic speech aspect of it.

It's an obvious reach to make a meta argument about hypocrisy, give it a rest.

Dude ****ing miss me

One second it is minds can differ, and when mine differs, it is then "no, I'm right"

This was another "a progressive pissed me" off drive-by.

Now you are scrambling to clean it up

But yes, I believe you are often a hypocrite when it comes to this stuff. I won't deny I also was pointing out how unprincipled you are regarding certain things.

Like I told you before, people on NT have memories, me included

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Dude ****ing miss me

This was another "a progressive pissed me" off drive-by.

Now you are scrambling to clean it up

But yes, I believe you are often a hypocrite when it comes to this stuff. I won't deny I also was pointing out how unprincipled you are regarding certain things.

Pffft meta argument all the way down.

"The sky is blue"

Rusty: what about at night?

"Well yes the sky is not blue at night, but in the day time it's generally blue "

Rusty: "OOOOOHH THERE YOU GO RECALIBRATING YOUR ARGUMENT SCRAMBLING TO CLEAN IT UP--"

Give it a rest man

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Cena vs. Orton

 

[osh kosh bosh]

But yes, I believe you are often a hypocrite when it comes to this stuff. I won't deny I also was pointing out how unprincipled you are regarding certain things.

Like I told you before, people on NT have memories, me included

"pointing out how unprincipled you are"

how unbelievably laughable
we can all do meta argument its easy;

through your power of mind reading, you have determined, lord knoweth how
that I did not read the article.
and you have turned an article that the thesis, headline, conclusion, quotes from experts are about mostly about black disabled identity,

into a john mcwhorter piece on linguistics.

all in an scrambling attempt to reframe the argument as hypocritical and unprincipled.

and the cherry on top you determined my motivations are irrational contempt for progressives .
but you don't have irrational contempt for conservatives. no no,
your ideological opposition is based on totally Spockian rationality.

give. it. a. rest.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Pffft meta argument all the way down.

"The sky is blue"

Rusty: what about at night?

"Well yest the sky is not blue at night, but in the day time it's generally blue "

Rusty: "OOOOOHH THERE YOU GO RECALIBRATING YOUR ARGUMENT SCRAMBLING TO CLEAN IT UP--"

Give it a rest man

You posted an article, that implied something they were talking about Lizzo. I responded with my view of the article. Then you said minds can differ.

The meta argument you are talking about is my criticism out your hypocrisy regarding progressive arguments

If you are gonna make a dialogue joke and post a meme at least make them funny if they are not gonna make sense given the context.

So go to your shrine of problematic white dudes and thank zaddy Elon Musk for your internet, pull up a Joe Rogan clip to fap to, and feel great about yourself Osh.

But you totally put another internet progressive in their place.

Great job champ

 

[RustyShackleford]

"pointing out how unprincipled you are"

how unbelievably laughable
we can all do meta argument its easy;

through your power of mind reading, you have determined, lord knoweth how
that I did not read the article.
and you have turned an article that the thesis, headline, conclusion, quotes from experts are about mostly about black disabled identity,

into a john mcwhorter piece on linguistics.

all in an scrambling attempt to reframe the argument as hypocritical and unprincipled.

and the cherry on top you determined my motivations are irrational contempt for progressives .
but you don't have irrational contempt for conservatives. no no,
your ideological opposition is based on totally Spockian rationality.

give. it. a. rest.

I said I believe you didn't read it. I didn't mind reading, I am stating my beliefs based on what I observe

The fact that you "Mr. Address exactly what I said", can't return the favor only leads me to believe you aren't reading what is in front of you even more.

Irrational contempt for conservatives? ok. Please enlighten me to where my criticisms turns irrational because I seem to remember you agree with nearly all of it.

Seems you are the one reaching here

 

[osh kosh bosh]

You posted an article, that implied something they were talking about Lizzo. I responded with my view of the article. Then you said minds can differ.

The meta argument you are talking about is my criticism out your hypocrisy regarding progressive arguments

If you are gonna make a dialogue joke and post a meme at least make them funny if they are not gonna make sense given the context.

So go to your shrine of problematic white dudes and thank zaddy Elon Musk for your internet, pull up a Joe Rogan clip to fap to, and feel great about yourself Osh.

You totally put another internet progressive in their place.

Great job champ

please Lizzo by capitulating to white disabled demands, it was erasure of black disabled people.
obviously the identetarians can't frontally criticize a fat black women so they dress it up, but the implication is obvious.
what I was mocking in my original post, is the absurdity of these word games.

the principle is the same, nothing has changed, anyone who knows my stances on these things would have easily been able to predict my position on it. its the very opposite of unprincipled.


but you still want to reach. just quit it.

 

[RustyShackleford]

please Lizzo by capitulating to white disabled demands, it was erasure of black disabled people.
obviously the identetarians can't frontally criticize a fat black women so they dress it up, but the implication is obvious.
what I was mocking in my original post, is the absurdity of these word games.

the principle is the same, nothing has changed, anyone who knows my stances on these things would have easily been able to predict my position on it. its the very opposite of unprincipled.


but you still want to reach. just quit it.

It is unprincipled because you don't hold everyone to the same standard you hold certain progressives.

That was my point

You even have admitted you hold progressives to a higher standard than other groups, you expect better from them. I am saying that is stance is manifesting itself in some bad ways in your arguments. You ask people to not just fallback to on their ideological leaning to make snap decisions, but don't see you are falling into that trap yourself

 

[osh kosh bosh]

I said I believe you didn't read it. I didn't mind reading, I am stating my beliefs based on what I observe

The fact that you "Mr. Address exactly what I said", can't return the favor only leads me to believe you aren't reading what is in front of you even more.

Irrational contempt for conservatives? ok. Please enlighten me to where my criticisms turns irrational because I seem to remember you agree with nearly all of it.

Seems you are the one reaching here

i don't believe your contempt for conservatives are irrational.
I presume you come by them honestly. only you can decide what you feel the need to criticize or oppose.

I think this kind of cultural progressivism is mostly bad, so naturally I criticize people who engage in it.
but the implication of your post is I due to some irrational hatred.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

It is unprincipled because you don't hold everyone to the same standard you hold certain progressives.

That was my point

You even have admitted you hold progressives to a higher standard than other groups, you expect better from them. I am saying that is stance is manifesting itself in some bad ways in your arguments. You ask people to not just fallback to on their ideological leaning to make snap decisions, but don't see you are falling into that trap yourself

It's not that the standards are different, it's motivation.

I don't feel the need to post about conservatives
I generally don't feel the need to post about things that most people have said or agree with.
and in general "conservatives are bad" is my baseline expectation for life. so i don't see point in stating the obvious.

its not like this is network news and im going to give both sides equal time.

just because I post more about progressives doesn't mean that I think more highly of them
or they meet my standards and progressives don't.

i do this with every subject

I post lot about 1960's basketball because most NT basketball fans are wrong about the 1960's NBA.
I don't see how any of this is "unprincipled".