I’ll have to rewatch it. But RDJ’s character was for sure meant to be satire.
Black panther
- Thread starter heelmanwilm
- Start date
I’ll have to rewatch it. But RDJ’s character was for sure meant to be satire.
I can't really know if they knew that they should be offended or not.
I guess the two options are A) they didn't know that they should be offended, or B) they did know they should be offended, but still chose to not get offended or voice the fact they were offended because they didn't want to create a huge stir over something trivial (a concept that has since been abandoned)
Soooo, you're standing by the statement of they have to be told when or when not to be offended? Not to mention, if there are white people who are offended (and, we know there are)... there's a reason for that, too. Have you ever really considered what the impetus for that feeling might be?
No. They don't need to be told when and when not to be offended. They can be offended or not on their own accord. I merely said in 1986 there was no one there to tell them that they should be offended. Today, there are plenty of people to tell them that they should be offended
No, what is it?
I see you don't know either. Maybe someone else will come along to educate both of us.
Well then it's not very fair for you not to give me the answer of "what is the impetus", now is it?
That was a question, not an answer. You gave me the answer to that question.
I stand corrected, you are right. My response should have read "Yes, I have - but I'm unable to come up with the answer". Care to help me understand now?
I doubt it. You already have your mind made up. There's nothing to help you understand.
But, you said, in 1986 there was no one to tell them they should be offended. Who are you referring to, or talking about??? They can be offended or not by their own accord, except back then there was "no one" to tell them they should. Who is the "no one" in that statement?
Sooo... white people. They didn't have white people who were trying to be empathetic around to encourage them to be offended. Now, those people are on every corner messing it up for the white people who can't seem to feel any empathy. Black people just took it in stride until the "SJW's" had to show up and make black people feel that they "should be" offended. ETA: Or, at the very least, showing their discontent about it was okay to do! They could voice an opposition to it and not be "put back in their place."
That's almost like saying that African slaves needed free white people to encourage them to understand that there was a down side to being forced to do manual labor for no pay and be owned by a white person for their entire life. They couldn't figure that out for themselves. Or, maybe they could, but it was irrelevant because they had no way to change the situation. And, before long, you had white people trying to force slave owners to give them up. Those bastards.
Can you help me understand? I hope not.
Last edited:
Ask Kanye. He said it was a choice.
He should know. The SJW's fear Kanye. He thinks too deeply for them to corrupt him.
I definitely want satire and parody to always remain open and have their boundaries pushed. Being offensive, or rather, controversial, can usually have some very funny outcomes. It's just like with words, it depends on the context and the intent. But, you can't be surprised when people voice their opposition to it. And, usually, you can tell what the intent was supposed to be. Then again, we're all using our own unique filters and they converge together in our collective culture and somewhere along the line "popular opinion" gets redefined.
Yes, exactly.
I don't see the similarity. And saying they couldn't figure that out for themselves is when it starts to get racist.
I know. That's why I said you told me all I needed to know earlier.
No, it doesn't start to get racist. It's absolutely racist. That's why I'm not sure what makes you keep doing it. But it's probably because you don't understand or see the similarity.
Strong rebuttal. With poasts like this one, it’s easy to see why so many here value your participation here.
And, just to clarify; I'm not trying to say, or imply that your perspective is flawed, or "wrong" or anything like that. It's just different from mine.
I see where you're coming from. I can even be on the same page when it comes to some things- Silent Sam, for example. People can take anything too far. But, "too far" is subjective. I'm not bothered by these movies either. I don't see the point in changing names of buildings. But, I also understand why people want them changed or taken down.
You wanna know what frustrates me? Censorship on TV! I'm watching Caddyshack on Sundance. Never watch ANYTHING on Sundance! They, of course, must censor the hell out of the dialogue. I find it interesting WHAT they decide to sensor. G*dammit is fine (which I never use or even like to hear, but I can control my speech). Fart, turd, colored boy, all okay. "Shit" gets bleeped. There's a line where Chevy Chase says "homo" in the scene with Lacey Underall. They bleep that out. The word and context is censored. That's one of many. If they're going to censor movie dialogue, then they shouldn't be allowed to broadcast the damned thing at all. I mean, edit the nudity, if you must, but the words??? No way!
I don’t want to speak for @Hark_The_Sound_2010 , but I think what he’s saying (and you already knew this but since you’re being obtuse, I’ll spell it out for you) is that SJWs are not good hearted people that are “empathizing” with the plight of the black man. They’re self serving troublemakers that are using the very distant past mistreatment of blacks as an opportunity to feed their own need for attention and to suppress some weird guilt they have from being born white. Furthermore, blacks had more to be offended by in 1986 (although that was still decades after everything was made right) yet they chose not to be offended to the degree in which we see 32 years later when even more “progress” has been made. I wonder why that is.
Well, that's your opinion. It never changes. You're not known for an abundance of empathy either. You think EVERY "SJW" is exactly the same. Some of them do take it too far and they aren't helping the situation.
And, I've come to realize, for myself, that it's not a guilt of being born white. It's more of a feeling of obligation to offer sort of a "perpetual apology" for what our ancestors did. It's not a guilt of being born white. It's a guilt of being born from a heritage that imposed an institutionalized racial bigotry that permeated the entire culture. It oppressed, and dehumanized people because of their race and their heritage. It was codified in the laws. So, when you come into a full awareness of that, it MIGHT make you feel compelled see things (or try to see things) from their perspective, and still know that you can never fully see it and experience it the way they do. You feel you owe them empathy. And, it's not even because they're descended from the "really oppressed" people for the, as you say "really distant past." It's because I feel ashamed of what happened to them, and I want to rectify it for myself, in the here-and-now.
And, that "really distant past" comment is BS to me. My father went to segregated schools and black people came to his back door if they came to his house. That was mostly his father's rules, but it illustrates how recent the distant past truly is. ETA: If my father had been alive when I had a live-in black girlfriend? He would have disowned me. I guarantee that.
Last edited:
Yeah, I ****ing hate it when they censor words. Bunch of ***** and ******s.
They've been censoring TV and Radio for a looooooong time.
Donald Wildmon was a SJW, I guess.
http://people.com/archive/methodist...st-sex-violence-and-booze-on-tv-vol-10-no-22/
This is what our difference of opinion boils down to. You feel as though you need to apologize for the actions of a bunch of people who you never even met, for their actions against a bunch of people that not a single black person today ever met.
What if that went beyond race. I’d be pretty pissed if cops came to arrest/fine me because my great great grandfather robbed a bank and got away with it back in the day. Which actually brings me to another point. My ancestors weren’t even in the USA when slavery was legal. But yet I’m expected to “perpetually apologize” to people, half of whom don’t have ancestors that were in this country at that time to get treated that way either? Just because I happen to be white, and they happen to be black - talk about being racist.
I don't "expect you" to perpetually apologize, or feel any empathy, or sympathy, or anything except for the scorn you presently feel. I predict you'll remain exactly the way you are now.
As I alluded to in my previous poast, my ancestors came to the USA around the turn of the 20th century - they were Italian and Irish. If you're not aware, the Italians and Irish were treated like crap at that time too. Maybe in 100 years, there will be people pushing for the country to perpetually apologize to my great grandson, for things that happened to my great grandfather. I think the chances of that are slim (unless a group would politically benefit from taking up that initiative), but it could happen I guess. I would think that's wrong to do as well.
All people have been mistreated at some point in history. No race/civilization has come through history without being enslaved, conquered, pillaged, etc. So why are blacks the ones that appear to claim some monopoly on having been persecuted? I've never heard the idea of reparations with regard to the Irish. Hell, the word "slave" originates from the slavs of eastern Europe who were enslaved by those in the middle and far east. That's literally how the word came to be. The slavs were white.
In addition, I've always found it strange that people make such a big deal out of the fact that Europeans came to America and ran off the native Americans. That's how civilizations are created - by conquering new lands and staking claim. I mean, obviously it sucked for the American Indians and I am sorry for them. But I wouldn't be alive today had my ancestors not done what they did. America would have never been born and never have come to be the greatest, freest most noble civilization the world has ever known. How can people be upset with that? It's how human existence has worked for thousands of years - survival of the fittest, no?
You're right. The Italians and Irish that chose to come here of their own volition were ostracized by people who were already here. I'm going to make a huge leap and guess that their experience wasn't anywhere near the same as African slaves. But, I'm not surprised to see that you've stayed the course with your refusal to try and see it any other way. Congratulations.
I am open to seeing it another way, you just haven't given me compelling reasons why it makes sense to apologize for certain things you had no involvement in, and not apologize for other things that you had no involvement in.
It's not up to me to make you feel anything. I'm not responsible for you to do, or think, or feel anything. I'm responsible for how I feel about something. After seeing you go in the opposite direction, and try to compare your ancestry to black people... I know you're not open to seeing it another way. In fact, I think I said the same thing on the previous page of the thread. You're stuck right where you want to be.
Look on the bright side @Hark_The_Sound_2010; At least you didn't author this pile of bullshit. You only liked it.
So I actually watched this movie last night, since we had some discussions about it. I liked it okay. I agree that they should've scrapped the African accents just because they were really bad. Should've just made it American accents like how Brits do British accents whenever they make a movie about Rome.
The "blacks need to rise up over the whites" undertones weren't exactly subtle, but I expected it. The only thing I didn't really understand about the movie was the connection they tried to make (mostly Michael B. Jordan's character) that somehow, all black people all over the world were Wakandans or at least Wakanda's responsibility. That seemed like a stretch to me, unless I missed something.
I thought the different tribe leaders were real cheesy and it kinda seemed like something out of that Adam Sandler movie "Blended."
But I liked it well enough for someone who doesn't geek out about super hero movies. I loved Andy Serkis in it. Dude got SWOLE for that role.
The "blacks need to rise up over the whites" undertones weren't exactly subtle, but I expected it. The only thing I didn't really understand about the movie was the connection they tried to make (mostly Michael B. Jordan's character) that somehow, all black people all over the world were Wakandans or at least Wakanda's responsibility. That seemed like a stretch to me, unless I missed something.
I thought the different tribe leaders were real cheesy and it kinda seemed like something out of that Adam Sandler movie "Blended."
But I liked it well enough for someone who doesn't geek out about super hero movies. I loved Andy Serkis in it. Dude got SWOLE for that role.
Well that's interesting, considering I've stated a few times that I am. But I guess you know my intentions better than I know them myself.
Again, I'm only stuck here because you've been unable to give compelling enough reasons to move.
Great. Congratulations on saying you're open to a different understanding. You should be commended. I didn't realize you weren't getting enough recognition for your progressive side.
As I said, I'm not responsible for changing it. You are. Don't blame me. You know, the whole "lead a horse to water" thing.
