Old Yearbook Scandals

[Chooky 13319]

16 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Standing next to a KKK costume makes it worse though.

This sentence is technically subjective but objectively hilarious.

[hayden_horn 11365]

17 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Vile thing wearing  black face ?  I'd say it has something to do with the context.  Stupid and insensitive seems a more measured definition of what he was doing.  Standing next to a KKK costume makes it worse though. Obviously they were laughing it all off.  Not much to laugh off about those costumes .

this is exactly correct.

he should resign.

let's say, for instance, that he did do the michael jackson thing, and that's what we were talking about today. he could easily talk about how he was stupid for darkening his face, but that he really wanted to pull off the michael jackson look because of the moonwalk thing. i think he could get past that, because he wasn't trying to be a caricature symbol of the jim crow south racism, and was instead trying to be a person.

however, that costume, in conjunction with the KKK costume is clearly playing off racial stereotypes in a non-positive manner. i don't care which one of those is him, both are unforgivable in 1984 america. he went full all jolson with the blackface and racial stereotype. and he did it apparently in concert with a guy in kkk robes as a joke. 

the problem is that the joke is not funny. and it wouldn't have been in 1984. i was 6 in 1984, and i knew blackface was racist and taboo. and my dad was a bigot.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Chooky said:

This sentence is technically subjective but objectively hilarious.

 The black face was bad enough, then he compounds it by standing next to a KKK costume. Please explain the hilarity.

[Chooky 13319]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'll defer to the folks of color

I'll just defer.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

this is exactly correct.

he should resign.

let's say, for instance, that he did do the michael jackson thing, and that's what we were talking about today. he could easily talk about how he was stupid for darkening his face, but that he really wanted to pull off the michael jackson look because of the moonwalk thing. i think he could get past that, because he wasn't trying to be a caricature symbol of the jim crow south racism, and was instead trying to be a person.

however, that costume, in conjunction with the KKK costume is clearly playing off racial stereotypes in a non-positive manner. i don't care which one of those is him, both are unforgivable in 1984 america. he went full all jolson with the blackface and racial stereotype. and he did it apparently in concert with a guy in kkk robes as a joke. 

the problem is that the joke is not funny. and it wouldn't have been in 1984. i was 6 in 1984, and i knew blackface was racist and taboo. and my dad was a bigot.

It wasn't funny when it was done by Bing Crosby in his movies, but our (white culture) culture accepted it then.  I never understood how anyone could do that and think it was OK ever.  Michael Jackson or dressing up like Michael Jordan.. maybe, maaaaaaybe. That costume is just all kinds of wrong.

[SaucyJack 3504]

6 minutes ago, Chooky said:

I'll just defer.

[Spankytoes 1743]

2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Man, comparing Malcolm X to confederates. That's impressive. 

I don't think "comparing" means what you think it means. I did notice that you didn't answer the question.

[Spankytoes 1743]

6 hours ago, Slade said:

Is Malcolm X anywhere near on the same level as people that started a civil war that killed tens of thousands of people over keeping slavery? One wanted liberation for black people in an oppressive society, the other wanted to keep chattel slavery alive, hmm...

Who said that they are on the same level? I'm just asking a question. How do you feel about it?

[Spankytoes 1743]

4 hours ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Local issue for local voters. 

Kind of like being a governor of Virginia and letting the fate be in the hands of those affected, I suppose.

[Chooky 13319]

26 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

 The black face was bad enough, then he compounds it by standing next to a KKK costume. Please explain the hilarity.

Most things compound negatively when standing next to a KKK costume.  Unlike a Riesling and a Havarti slice, it's pretty much always a bad pairing.

Captain Crunch and a KKK costume:  bad pairing

Plaid vest and a KKK costume:  bad pairing

Kangol hat and a KKK costume:  bad pairing

Liquid Smoke and a KKK costume:  bad pairing

Blackface and a KKK costume:  well, naturally ...

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

4 minutes ago, Chooky said:

Most things compound negatively when standing next to a KKK costume.  Unlike a Riesling and a Havarti slice, it's pretty much always a bad pairing.

Captain Crunch and a KKK costume:  bad pairing

Plaid vest and a KKK costume:  bad pairing

Kangol hat and a KKK costume:  bad pairing

Liquid Smoke and a KKK costume:  bad pairing

Blackface and a KKK costume:  well, naturally ...

 

Golly gee thanks all so much for that. 

[Slade 263]

7 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Who said that they are on the same level? I'm just asking a question. How do you feel about it?

Should be left to the local citizens. If black folks want to name a street, school, whatever in their community after a Civil Rights figure such as Malcolm X then I'm all for it. That's much better than sending our kids to schools named after Confederate figures while living in a predominantly black area where the student body is mostly black for example. 

[David Dennison 18951]

18 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Kind of like being a governor of Virginia and letting the fate be in the hands of those affected, I suppose.

The voters will never have another say when it comes to Ralph Northam.

[Chooky 13319]

3 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Golly gee thanks all so much for that. 

Just trying to save you a few keyboard taps.  Those keys wear out after awhile.  Pass the savings on to purchasing a zoot suit to wear at your next invitation to a quinceanera. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

20 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Kind of like being a governor of Virginia and letting the fate be in the hands of those affected, I suppose.

Exactly. 

[lemonlime 5503]

On 2/3/2019 at 7:45 PM, TwiceHorn said:

Oh for fucks sake.

JFC.  It's more than a little disturbing that a bunch of doctors who apparently weren't (aren't?) troubled by posing in blackface and/or in a klan hood with publication in a yearbook are treating patients, patients who may well be black or Jewish.  And the medical school was so racist that other students there didn't put the kibosh in putting that photo in a yearbook.  Fuck, I have Jewish nieces who live in Virginia.  Hope they aren't treating with a pediatrician who finds wearing a klan hood funny.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, Chooky said:

Just trying to save you a few keyboard taps.  Those keys wear out after awhile.  Pass the savings on to purchasing a zoot suit to wear at your next invitation to a quinceanera. 

Heeeey, fuck you ass hole.  I'm sure you hear that a lot, and not just from friends and family.

[Spankytoes 1743]

1 minute ago, Slade said:

Should be left to the local citizens. If black folks want to name a street, school, whatever in their community after a Civil Rights figure such as Malcolm X then I'm all for it. That's much better than sending our kids to schools named after Confederate figures while living in a predominantly black area where the student body is mostly black for example. 

A few things here:

1. I agree, it should be left to local citizens to comment and decide the fate. So why does Nancy Pelosi's opinion, or any talking head for that matter, mean anything in this controversy? The citizens of Virginia are the only voices that should be heard. They have the ability to express their outrage, if any, at the polls.

2. I've traveled a lot. I don't think I recall seeing a Malcolm X Blvd. in a predominately white area nor a Jefferson Davis High School in a predominately black area. I'm not saying that neither of these things exist, just that it would be a unicorn.

But, if racial makeup is the criteria we are using, then it kind of defeats the argument doesn't it? 80% of the population of Virginia isn't black. 

Still, the question remains: How do you personally feel about Malcolm X statues or streets named after him? 

[Chooky 13319]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Heeeey, fuck you ass hole.

Which is it?  Ass or hole?  You're being redundant here.

[David Dennison 18951]

1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

A few things here:

1. I agree, it should be left to local citizens to comment and decide the fate. So why does Nancy Pelosi's opinion, or any talking head for that matter, mean anything in this controversy? The citizens of Virginia are the only voices that should be heard. They have the ability to express their outrage, if any, at the polls.

2. I've traveled a lot. I don't think I recall seeing a Malcolm X Blvd. in a predominately white area nor a Jefferson Davis High School in a predominately black area. I'm not saying that neither of these things exist, just that it would be a unicorn.

But, if racial makeup is the criteria we are using, then it kind of defeats the argument doesn't it? 80% of the population of Virginia isn't black. 

Still, the question remains: How do you personally feel about Malcolm X statues or streets named after him? 

It's much more likely that you'll see the latter, particularly in the south. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

2 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

1. I agree, it should be left to local citizens to comment and decide the fate. So why does Nancy Pelosi's opinion, or any talking head for that matter, mean anything in this controversy? The citizens of Virginia are the only voices that should be heard. They have the ability to express their outrage, if any, at the polls.

It matters because we live in an era of "outrage". Everyone is outraged and if you don't join in with the outrage/condemnation, you support it (evidently). 

[David Dennison 18951]

1 minute ago, Cheeseweasel said:

It matters because we live in an era of "outrage". Everyone is outraged and if you don't join in with the outrage/condemnation, you support it (evidently). 

In this particular case, the outrage is completely warranted.

[Spankytoes 1743]

Just now, Cheeseweasel said:

It matters because we live in an era of "outrage". Everyone is outraged and if you don't join in with the outrage/condemnation, you support it (evidently). 

Bingo.

I don't believe I've seen someone offer an opinion that the photo is anything other than completely disgusting. Yet, if you don't have your pitchfork out because of the facts, you might as well be wearing a Klan uniform even though his ability/inability to govern doesn't affect 98% of the people who see themselves as political and sociological experts.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

In this particular case, the outrage is completely warranted.

At what point are we crying wolf? When everything is an outrage, nothing is.

FWIW, I agree that this is pretty bad and if I lived in Virginia, I'd call for his resignation.

[lemonlime 5503]

I love how the "age of outrage" comments are always directed at people outraged at say for example pediatricians and governors dressed in klan hoods or in blackface.  it's never addressed at the people pretending to be outraged over Starbucks Christmas cups or the Kinky Boots float at Macy's Thanksgiving parade.

[Slade 263]

6 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

A few things here:

1. I agree, it should be left to local citizens to comment and decide the fate. So why does Nancy Pelosi's opinion, or any talking head for that matter, mean anything in this controversy? The citizens of Virginia are the only voices that should be heard. They have the ability to express their outrage, if any, at the polls.

2. I've traveled a lot. I don't think I recall seeing a Malcolm X Blvd. in a predominately white area nor a Jefferson Davis High School in a predominately black area. I'm not saying that neither of these things exist, just that it would be a unicorn.

But, if racial makeup is the criteria we are using, then it kind of defeats the argument doesn't it? 80% of the population of Virginia isn't black. 

Still, the question remains: How do you personally feel about Malcolm X statues or streets named after him? 

To your second point I'm from Port Arthur, last year our school board changed the names of a couple of schools named after Confederate figures (Robert E. Lee Elementary and Dick Dowling Elementary) to something else. PA is mostly minority, black and Hispanic, people here were fine with the name change. A big stink was made on the local news media's Facebook page by folks that don't even live there, take a guess at who was mad. 

How do I personally feel about Malcolm X statues or streets named after him? I'm fine with it. As far as I know the only thing he did was be unapologetically black and upset the white supremacist power structure at the time. He didn't start a civil war. 

 

[Hank Kingsley 21059]

5 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

At what point are we crying wolf? When everything is an outrage, nothing is.

Nope. When everything is an outrage, the Republican Party counterattacks with their own outrage while gaslighting and deflecting full blame onto their opponent. 

 

Edited February 5, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[David Dennison 18951]

2 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

I love how the "age of outrage" comments are always directed at people outraged at say for example pediatricians and governors dressed in klan hoods or in blackface.  it's never addressed at the people pretending to be outraged over Starbucks Christmas cups or the Kinky Boots float at Macy's Thanksgiving parade.

"Age of outrage" comments pop up when white people don't like being condemned for doing things that offend people.

[Spankytoes 1743]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

In this particular case, the outrage is completely warranted.

Depends. Over the picture? 100% agree with you and I don't think I've seen someone disagree with that. Over the circumstances? Well, it depends on what side of the fence reside on. It either exposes the guy as a lifelong racist, despite nothing in his policies backing that claim, or it was poor judgment from a 20-something back in the day with absolutely no context to the situation. (Was it a costume party? Was it a Fraternity gig? Was it a "joke"? Was it a run-of-the-mill Friday night in med school?) 

Are you offended by a picture of Obama and Jeremiah Wright? What about a still from the movie "White Chicks"? I think most people can put that into context of the situation.

[Hank Scorpio 17731]

I'm just impressed with the consistency of the racists on this board. I thought they would be calling for Northam's head, but apparently supporting racist shit trumps supporting your party. Really inspiring stuff. 

[David Dennison 18951]

Just now, Spankytoes said:

Depends. Over the picture? 100% agree with you and I don't think I've seen someone disagree with that. Over the circumstances? Well, it depends on what side of the fence reside on. It either exposes the guy as a lifelong racist, despite nothing in his policies backing that claim, or it was poor judgment from a 20-something back in the day with absolutely no context to the situation. (Was it a costume party? Was it a Fraternity gig? Was it a "joke"? Was it a run-of-the-mill Friday night in med school?) 

Are you offended by a picture of Obama and Jeremiah Wright? What about a still from the movie "White Chicks"? I think most people can put that into context of the situation.

In what context is black face or a KKK outfit OK?

[Spankytoes 1743]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

In what context is black face or a KKK outfit OK?

Now or in 1985 when the incident occurred? In what context are AIDS jokes or calling someone a faggot OK?

[Hank Kingsley 21059]

Never if you are in public office.  

 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

9 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

I love how the "age of outrage" comments are always directed at people outraged at say for example pediatricians and governors dressed in klan hoods or in blackface.  it's never addressed at the people pretending to be outraged over Starbucks Christmas cups or the Kinky Boots float at Macy's Thanksgiving parade.

First of heard of either of these. So the outrage must not have been too loud. Or perhaps I'm not on Facebook so I don't see it.

Regardless, faux outrage is faux outrage regardless of the source.

[lemonlime 5503]

2 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Now or in 1985 when the incident occurred? In what context are AIDS jokes or calling someone a faggot OK?

Were you alive in 1985?  This wasn't ok then.  By any stretch.  

And to be clear it was never ok at any time, ever, but by 1985 no one but the most racist ass would think this was acceptable.

[Asithappens 974]

Just now, lemonlime said:

Were you alive in 1985?  This wasn't ok then.  By any stretch.  

And to be clear it was never ok at any time, ever, but by 1985 no one but the most racist ass would think this was acceptable.

Not ok in 1985?

Maybe you're right. But we are talking about Virginia. And if we want to be honest about it, it was probably ok in Texas, too.

 

[David Dennison 18951]

Just now, Spankytoes said:

Now or in 1985 when the incident occurred? In what context are AIDS jokes or calling someone a faggot OK?

In what context is black face or a KKK outfit OK in 1985?

And to answer your second question, only in the context of comedy or satire, and even then it's questionable.

[Hank Kingsley 21059]

1 minute ago, Cheeseweasel said:

First of heard of either of these. So the outrage must not have been too loud. Or perhaps I'm not on Facebook so I don't see it.

Regardless, faux outrage is faux outrage regardless of the source.

Maybe save the faux outrage angle for a thread where you don't agree with calls for his resignation. 

 

 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

7 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

I'm just impressed with the consistency of the racists on this board. 

I'm impressed that someone who doesn't have a dog in this hunt is quickly branded a racist. 

[Dahobbs 17689]

1 minute ago, Asithappens said:

Not ok in 1985?

Maybe you're right. But we are talking about Virginia. And if we want to be honest about it, it was probably ok in Texas, too.

 

No, it wasn't. Jeezus. 

[Kyle 207]

2 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

If he was a Republican, the coordinated GOP attack to defend Northam would be fully operational right now. 

 

Like it did for Steve King?  I get today's environment encourages reflexive, emotional "whataboutism," but I mean at least try to have a modicum of intellectual honesty. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Maybe save the faux outrage angle for a thread where you don't agree with calls for his resignation. 

Please show your work.

16 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

At what point are we crying wolf? When everything is an outrage, nothing is.

FWIW, I agree that this is pretty bad and if I lived in Virginia, I'd call for his resignation.

 

[Spankytoes 1743]

1 minute ago, lemonlime said:

Were you alive in 1985?  This wasn't ok then.  By any stretch.  

And to be clear it was never ok at any time, ever, but by 1985 no one but the most racist ass would think this was acceptable.

I was alive in 1985. I've also watched "Remember the Titans", which took place 13 years prior to the photo. I also remember a Jefferson Davis statue being on UT's campus up until recently.

I member.

[Horn Dog 9944]

I went to a Halloween party dressed up as OU tranny cheerleader years ago.   I am sure there are pics.  My political future is fucked.

[elfenix 34337]

It's much more likely that you'll see the latter, particularly in the south. 

Apparently he's never been to Houston.

[Spankytoes 1743]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

In what context is black face or a KKK outfit OK in 1985?

And to answer your second question, only in the context of comedy or satire, and even then it's questionable.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but maybe as a poor choice of a joke between friends? I'm guessing this wasn't a pre-game for a Friday night and more of a "Jake dressed up like Dennis Rodman" type of thing. 

[Hank Kingsley 21059]

3 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Please show your work.

 

I'll simplify it. Don't bitch about faux outrage on a thread where you AGREE with this particular outrage. 

 

Edited February 5, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[lemonlime 5503]

Just now, Spankytoes said:

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but maybe as a poor choice of a joke between friends? I'm guessing this wasn't a pre-game for a Friday night and more of a "Jake dressed up like Dennis Rodman" type of thing. 

That they decided to publish in a yearbook for the world to see.  

[Asithappens 974]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

No, it wasn't. Jeezus. 

This is a state that elected Trump in bigly margins. 

And Ted Cruz.

Wake up.

[Spankytoes 1743]

Just now, lemonlime said:

That they decided to publish in a yearbook for the world to see.  

Which is consequential. Had they not posted it in a yearbook, it still would have happened yet no one would have been the wiser. Northam keeps his job and this thread doesn't exist. No one would be calling him a racist and we would be talking about Trump's latest misstep instead.

That's pretty much exactly my point. A stupid act by a "kid" was encapsulated when it should have been long forgotten 35 years ago.