If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   Did 50 honorary doctorates give Maya Angelou the right to call herself "Dr. Angelou"? If you answered no, you're a racist   (salon.com) divider line 548
    More: Interesting, poetic justice, cultural practice, doctoral dissertations, honorary degrees  
•       •       •

7310 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jun 2014 at 10:38 AM (19 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



548 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-03 04:17:17 PM  

stonicus: DROxINxTHExWIND: stonicus: ikanreed: stonicus: ikanreed: This text is now purple: American schools started to award Ph.D.s in 1861. When did Ben Franklin die? When did Maya Angelou die?

Oh, right, because degrees earned post-death are definitely the most respected, overall.  This makes the argument even weaker, not stronger.  God, it's like every paper I've read about symbolic racism encoded into totally self-deluded forum posts was full of shiat

FTFY

Oh, good to know that you deny basic observable facts about racial bias, that have been recorded through academic proceedings.     Now we can understand that you're just straight-up pro-racism.

You're right.  I am so racist.  I bleed racism.  I only eat the inside of Oreos.  Clearly, the *only* reason someone might not like Maya's poetry is that they are racist.  Couldn't possibly be they just don't like it.  It can only be because of the color of her skin.  Thank you for showing me the light.  And thank god it is white light.

What are your feelings about hip-hop music, "urban" fashion, Obama, the NBA, the state of welfare reform, stop and frisk laws, Spike Lee, cars with rims...

See, not liking one or several of these things isn't neccessarily an indication that you're a racist. but if you ALWAYS passionately argue against anything even remotely associated with black people...it raises questions.

hip hop music: no opinion in general, depends on the song.
urban fashion: I am fashion ignorant.  I wear shorts, flip flops, and nerdy t-shirts to work.
Obama: I am thriving under his administration.  Love him.
NBA: Always hated basketball
welfare reform: it is a good idea but our current implementation could use some fine tuning.
stop and frisk laws: 100% against them
Spike Lee: I think his movies suck.
Cars with rims: depends on the car and the rims.  Some look good together, some don't.



+1
 
2014-06-03 04:17:50 PM  

fireclown: Clemkadidlefark: I hate her because she was always blubbering anti-Semitic crap, her work and support of the Nation of Islam and opening her 'classes' in Arabic, slamming the Jews.

She was a Grade A +++ icon of the leftist puke bags

citation kinda wanted

/for future use


Maya Angelou #1
Maya Angelou #2
Maya Angelou #3
 
2014-06-03 04:19:31 PM  

ikanreed: DROxINxTHExWIND: What are your feelings about hip-hop music, "urban" fashion, Obama, the NBA, the state of welfare reform, stop and frisk laws, Spike Lee, cars with rims...

See, not liking one or several of these things isn't neccessarily an indication that you're a racist. but if you ALWAYS passionately argue against anything even remotely associated with black people...it raises questions.

I want to like this argument, but it falls the glaring flaw that the person it's used on can just latch onto anything they feel like as a counter example.  And they're not wrong.  That does defeat the argument.  But the clue is still there through the breadth or depth of dislike, without the universality.  But you can't prove anything.  So I find it kinda useless to actually use.


Your assessment is true only if my intention was to verbally trap him into losing the argument. I was asking a real question and simultaneously making the point that there are many Farkers who always seem to take the opposite side of any issue concerning or involving black people.
 
2014-06-03 04:20:27 PM  

Fafai: ikanreed: you can believe something is bad and still engage in it as a minor personal flaw. Being an active proponent of bad things is worse.

So when you come out and say "you guys are being gay lol," that's just a 'minor personal flaw' and somehow a less 'active' aggression than saying she didn't write good poetry. You're full of shiat. And attacking my world view (1 dimensional?) as if you know where I'm coming from when I haven't said shiat on the subject other than posted a video of Maya Angelou from the Richard Pryor Show (RIP both) that I remembered as being quite poignant and dramatic for a sketch comedy show, thinking people might appreciate that bit of entertainment history? That makes you look even worse. You are painting everyone who you even perceive as disagreeeing with you with the same brush. You look like a fool in here and your head is way too far up your own sanctimonious ass to realize it.


Let's break this down:

Accusing people of being gay:
I'm pretty sure the understanding of the idea of a circlejerk wherein people blindly confirm each others' opinions isn't a contentious concept.  It happens all the time on the internet.  This has little-to-nothing to do with actual sexuality.

Attacking your world view:
This is normal, and the fact that you find it insulting is the problem, not the fact that I did it.

"I haven't said shiat"
You were objecting to my criticism of another poster, and I was responding to that criticism.  Re-read with that context.  I'm sorry I'm not telling you how awesome you are all the time, like you're clearly used to, and instead just saying you're wrong.

"You paint everyone disagreeing with the same brush"
I explicitly didn't do that, that's your own extrapolation and intent to be offended.  Not my problem.

"You look like a fool, and are sanctimonious "
Sure I do, pal.  Let's just pretend I do, for the sake of argument.  What bearing does "foolishness" have to do with the idea that going way-the-fark out of your way to attack a dead black woman on grounds that are clearly specious can't be viewed as anything other than racist?
 
2014-06-03 04:23:13 PM  

Clemkadidlefark: fireclown: Clemkadidlefark: I hate her because she was always blubbering anti-Semitic crap, her work and support of the Nation of Islam and opening her 'classes' in Arabic, slamming the Jews.

She was a Grade A +++ icon of the leftist puke bags

citation kinda wanted

/for future use

Maya Angelou #1
Maya Angelou #2
Maya Angelou #3


In case you were wondering what kind of an insane, unbalanced person Debbie Schlussel (the source of the links above) was, read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debbie_Schlussel
 
2014-06-03 04:23:31 PM  
Ladies and gentlemen...Dr. Charles Bukowksi!
 
2014-06-03 04:26:19 PM  

RexTalionis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debbie_Schlussel


Almost impossible to distinguish from a neonazi asshat accusing Maya Angelou of being racist?  Oh my.  What's new?
 
2014-06-03 04:26:31 PM  

Clemkadidlefark: fireclown: Clemkadidlefark: I hate her because she was always blubbering anti-Semitic crap, her work and support of the Nation of Islam and opening her 'classes' in Arabic, slamming the Jews.

She was a Grade A +++ icon of the leftist puke bags

citation kinda wanted

/for future use

Maya Angelou #1
Maya Angelou #2
Maya Angelou #3


Don't click unless you want to get Schlussel all over yourself.
 
2014-06-03 04:26:47 PM  
I remember a time when Alex Jones wouldnt stop calling Ron Paul Doctor Paul. That made me chuckle quite a bit because a doctor falls below a Congressman in proprietary, He dishonoured Paul by refusing to call him by his proper title.
 
2014-06-03 04:30:54 PM  
ikanreed:   "You look like a fool, and are sanctimonious "
Sure I do, pal.  Let's just pretend I do, for the sake of argument.  What bearing does "foolishness" have to do with the idea that going way-the-fark out of your way to attack a dead black woman on grounds that are clearly specious can't be viewed as anything other than racist?


Out of our way?  She's the subject of this article and comment section.  It's why we're here.  If this had started as a discussion about Star Wars vs Star Trek and evolved into an argument of Maya Angelou, then you may have a point with your "way-the-fark out of our way" part.

As far as what does your foolishness have to do with your belief, it has everything to do with it.  A foolish belief by a foolish person.
 
2014-06-03 04:31:03 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: Your assessment is true only if my intention was to verbally trap him into losing the argument. I was asking a real question


Well that explains his issue withyour attempts to communicate. I don't think he can understand real conversation. He's explicitly stated the only reason he's still posting in here is to make the bad guys lose. He said he didn't like your tactic because it gave the person a chance to be 'not wrong' and 'defeat' the argument. Just look all all the absolute, either/or terminology there. Winning/losing is at the forefront of everyhting this guy says. It's very simple minded. He doesn't seem capable of nuance or any real connection.
 
2014-06-03 04:40:23 PM  

stonicus: Out of our way? She's the subject of this article and comment section. It's why we're here. If this had started as a discussion about Star Wars vs Star Trek and evolved into an argument of Maya Angelou, then you may have a point with your "way-the-fark out of our way" part.


Why do you care at all?  No one at all is demanding you call Maya Angelou "Doctor."  No, we're discussing people who insist others don't.  That's what makes it out-of-your-way.  It's a "We demand you demean this person" in a dead give away to ulterior motives, almost certainly predicated on race.  That's irrelevant now, because you've made it clear that's not the most important racist behavior you're interest in engaging in.  It was subtle before.  It's overt now.

stonicus: As far as what does your foolishness have to do with your belief, it has everything to do with it. A foolish belief by a foolish person.


And this is why you don't get to be an actual intelligent person, okay?  That's not how intelligence really works.  It doesn't bless you with perfect thoughts.  It doesn't grant you immunity to mistakes.  It doesn't mean any given disagreement with someone much much much dumber than you, you're going to be right on.  Let me assure you, by any given metric, I'm smarter than you.  Probably substantially so.  That doesn't mean I'm right.  I'm staking my rightness on the credibility of my arguments.
 
2014-06-03 04:45:51 PM  

ikanreed: And this is why you don't get to be an actual intelligent person, okay?  That's not how intelligence really works.  It doesn't bless you with perfect thoughts.  It doesn't grant you immunity to mistakes.  It doesn't mean any given disagreement with someone much much much dumber than you, you're going to be right on.  Let me assure you, by any given metric, I'm smarter than you.  Probably substantially so.  That doesn't mean I'm right.  I'm staking my rightness on the credibility of my arguments.


You're right, I don't get to be an actual intelligent person, like you, because I am not foolish, like you.
 
2014-06-03 04:52:41 PM  

stonicus: You're right, I don't get to be an actual intelligent person, like you, because I am not foolish, like you.


Um.  Okay.  Sure.  I can't refute any specific charge of foolishness, but I think the points I've made are relevant and important.
 
2014-06-03 04:55:20 PM  

ikanreed: stonicus: You're right, I don't get to be an actual intelligent person, like you, because I am not foolish, like you.

Um.  Okay.  Sure.  I can't refute any specific charge of foolishness, but I think the points I've made are relevant and important.


And you're the only one...
 
2014-06-03 04:56:50 PM  

stonicus: And you're the only one...


Oh no, a person who disagrees with me alleges widespread contempt for my opinions.
 
2014-06-03 05:01:10 PM  

ikanreed: stonicus: And you're the only one...

Oh no, a person who disagrees with me alleges widespread contempt for my opinions.


I'm clearly racist for disagreeing with you.  Also I am clearly misogynist/misandrist, depending on your gender.
 
2014-06-03 05:05:58 PM  

ikanreed: stonicus: And you're the only one...

Oh no, a person who disagrees with me alleges widespread contempt for my opinions.


Don't know about widespread contempt, but it would seem you should take a step back from the old keyboard and take a walk.  You have run the course of internet insanity, from drawing largely unsupportable conclusions that fellow commenters have evil motives, to trumpeting your supposed intellectual superiority over others.  Just stop, walk away.  Nothing you have said makes me believe the two commenters are racist, it would appear they merely are dismissive of the arts.  Take a breath.

Also, you did not allude to a circle jerk earlier, you made reference to a reach around.  I do not think that makes you homophobic, but for someone so quick to paint with the broad brush of racism, maybe you should cool that attitude.
 
2014-06-03 05:08:19 PM  

stonicus: ikanreed: stonicus: And you're the only one...

Oh no, a person who disagrees with me alleges widespread contempt for my opinions.

I'm clearly racist for disagreeing with you.  Also I am clearly misogynist/misandrist, depending on your gender.


And the fact that you think humans have to choose between two genders reveals the true depth of your bigotry!

/sarc
 
2014-06-03 05:08:41 PM  

stonicus: I'm clearly racist for disagreeing with you. Also I am clearly misogynist/misandrist, depending on your gender.


That's not what made you racist.  I won't accept that stupid deflection.  you've clearly just built yourself a "he called me racist because he disagreed" construction to protect yourself from cognitive dissonance.  That's not what I did.  I'm tearing that down right now.  You are racist because you said racist things.  And other (not specifically racist) things for racist reasons.  You can fix this.  You don't need to say I'm right.  You don't need to say Maya Angelou was a saint.  You just have to think about the arguments I've actually made about racism here.  Not the imagined ones.  The real ones.
 
2014-06-03 05:12:34 PM  

ikanreed: stonicus: I'm clearly racist for disagreeing with you. Also I am clearly misogynist/misandrist, depending on your gender.

That's not what made you racist.  I won't accept that stupid deflection.  you've clearly just built yourself a "he called me racist because he disagreed" construction to protect yourself from cognitive dissonance.  That's not what I did.  I'm tearing that down right now.  You are racist because you said racist things.  And other (not specifically racist) things for racist reasons.  You can fix this.  You don't need to say I'm right.  You don't need to say Maya Angelou was a saint.  You just have to think about the arguments I've actually made about racism here.  Not the imagined ones.  The real ones.


I've said nothing racist.  Just that I don't like Maya's poetry.  Sorry that ruffled your feathers so badly you precious little snowflake.
 
2014-06-03 05:12:47 PM  

Teufel Ritter: Don't know about widespread contempt, but it would seem you should take a step back from the old keyboard and take a walk. You have run the course of internet insanity, from drawing largely unsupportable conclusions that fellow commenters have evil motives, to trumpeting your supposed intellectual superiority over others. Just stop, walk away. Nothing you have said makes me believe the two commenters are racist, it would appear they merely are dismissive of the arts. Take a breath.

Also, you did not allude to a circle jerk earlier, you made reference to a reach around. I do not think that makes you homophobic, but for someone so quick to paint with the broad brush of racism, maybe you should cool that attitude.


No, I'm sorry.  That's not a fair conclusion, because again the thing they're contesting is a simple title of formality.  That doesn't have some distinction for arts v. science.  There isn't a non-racist explanation for the argument.

In the context of the original argument, it is absolutely a race thing.
 
2014-06-03 05:15:58 PM  

Teufel Ritter: you made reference to a reach around.


He also said "making out," which is totally hypocritical given his position in other threads about language like "man up," "pussy," "no homo," being hurtful. Of course it isn't referring to sexuality any more than stuff like "that so gay," (to mean 'that's stupid') does, but he has a problem with one and not the other. Seemingly the only differenc being when someone else does it.
 
2014-06-03 05:17:55 PM  

ikanreed: Teufel Ritter: Don't know about widespread contempt, but it would seem you should take a step back from the old keyboard and take a walk. You have run the course of internet insanity, from drawing largely unsupportable conclusions that fellow commenters have evil motives, to trumpeting your supposed intellectual superiority over others. Just stop, walk away. Nothing you have said makes me believe the two commenters are racist, it would appear they merely are dismissive of the arts. Take a breath.

Also, you did not allude to a circle jerk earlier, you made reference to a reach around. I do not think that makes you homophobic, but for someone so quick to paint with the broad brush of racism, maybe you should cool that attitude.

No, I'm sorry.  That's not a fair conclusion, because again the thing they're contesting is a simple title of formality.  That doesn't have some distinction for arts v. science.  There isn't a non-racist explanation for the argument.

In the context of the original argument, it is absolutely a race thing.


I beg to differ.  It may well be they find it silly to award PhDs (honorary or otherwise) in the fine or liberal arts.  The products of the arts fields can typically only be evaluated subjectively, and perhaps they dismiss the fields entirely.  On the other hand, work in the fields of life sciences and hard sciences often result in innovations capable of objective valuation (patents, processes, inventions, etc.) which measurably improve and extend human life.

You really should start at giving the commenters the benefit of the doubt.  I don't assume you are homophobic just because you used a common phrase (reach around) in an earlier rant, and you shouldn't assume racism is the motive behind everything you disagree with.  You sound as if you are coming unhinged.
 
2014-06-03 05:20:12 PM  

stonicus: I've said nothing racist. Just that I don't like Maya's poetry. Sorry that ruffled your feathers so badly you precious little snowflake.


Bullshiat. Out and out bullshiat.

The argument is over a damned title.  You don't get to deny people a title on the basis of how much you like their work.  The position you are inadvertantly and idiotically supporting is one that people shouldn't call her "Dr. Angelou".  Your defense(since you have retroactively claimed another posters' posts as supporting your own beliefs) is that she isn't good enough.

Study of this phenomenon in academia, dubbed "symbolic racism" is understood to relate with double standards for minorities.  This belies a racist belief system that also is understood to go along with people vehemently claiming to be "not racist".  This is pretty well studied, and the argument you use(and endorse) does not stand up as a logically consistent one.  So naturally we can presume, quite reasonably, that there are racist motivations to this.  Sure.  I will acknowledge I lacked certainty until you pretended symbolic racism didn't exist, or was made up by a bunch of manipulative people trying to convince you you're racist, or whatever your unspoken objection was.

That made it clear, in a more final sense that, yes, you are being racist.
 
2014-06-03 05:22:03 PM  

Teufel Ritter: I beg to differ. It may well be they find it silly to award PhDs (honorary or otherwise) in the fine or liberal arts. The products of the arts fields can typically only be evaluated subjectively, and perhaps they dismiss the fields entirely. On the other hand, work in the fields of life sciences and hard sciences often result in innovations capable of objective valuation (patents, processes, inventions, etc.) which measurably improve and extend human life.

You really should start at giving the commenters the benefit of the doubt. I don't assume you are homophobic just because you used a common phrase (reach around) in an earlier rant, and you shouldn't assume racism is the motive behind everything you disagree with. You sound as if you are coming unhinged.


But again, the "going out of their way to object to others" principal stands.  It's absolutely racism.  I want to give the benefit of the doubt, but you've got to see this in the broader context that lots of people engage in this kind of racism and it's not good for society as a whole.
 
2014-06-03 05:23:32 PM  

ikanreed: stonicus: I've said nothing racist. Just that I don't like Maya's poetry. Sorry that ruffled your feathers so badly you precious little snowflake.

Bullshiat. Out and out bullshiat.

The argument is over a damned title.  You don't get to deny people a title on the basis of how much you like their work.  The position you are inadvertantly and idiotically supporting is one that people shouldn't call her "Dr. Angelou".  Your defense(since you have retroactively claimed another posters' posts as supporting your own beliefs) is that she isn't good enough.

Study of this phenomenon in academia, dubbed "symbolic racism" is understood to relate with double standards for minorities.  This belies a racist belief system that also is understood to go along with people vehemently claiming to be "not racist".  This is pretty well studied, and the argument you use(and endorse) does not stand up as a logically consistent one.  So naturally we can presume, quite reasonably, that there are racist motivations to this.  Sure.  I will acknowledge I lacked certainty until you pretended symbolic racism didn't exist, or was made up by a bunch of manipulative people trying to convince you you're racist, or whatever your unspoken objection was.

That made it clear, in a more final sense that, yes, you are being racist.


Yet again, you are the one picking which difference between Franklin and Angelou to focus on.  You choose race, even though the other commenters have stated it is the field of study that is their concern.  Why do you refuse to believe them on their face?
 
2014-06-03 05:25:50 PM  

ikanreed: stonicus: I've said nothing racist. Just that I don't like Maya's poetry. Sorry that ruffled your feathers so badly you precious little snowflake.

Bullshiat. Out and out bullshiat.

The argument is over a damned title.  You don't get to deny people a title on the basis of how much you like their work.  The position you are inadvertantly and idiotically supporting is one that people shouldn't call her "Dr. Angelou".  Your defense(since you have retroactively claimed another posters' posts as supporting your own beliefs) is that she isn't good enough.

Study of this phenomenon in academia, dubbed "symbolic racism" is understood to relate with double standards for minorities.  This belies a racist belief system that also is understood to go along with people vehemently claiming to be "not racist".  This is pretty well studied, and the argument you use(and endorse) does not stand up as a logically consistent one.  So naturally we can presume, quite reasonably, that there are racist motivations to this.  Sure.  I will acknowledge I lacked certainty until you pretended symbolic racism didn't exist, or was made up by a bunch of manipulative people trying to convince you you're racist, or whatever your unspoken objection was.

That made it clear, in a more final sense that, yes, you are being racist.


If you actually had read all my posts, you would have seen the one where I was in favor of her using her title.  Stating that her lifetime of work in the field of poetry and literature was more than anyone who goes to college actually does.  I'll quote it here:
But in her field, she probably did more, wrote more, and knew more about poetry and literature than people who just sat in classes.  Her life experience shouldn't be discounted as if it didn't matter.  If it takes X number of hours learning literature to become a Doctor in it, and she has 10 times that amount from actually living it and doing it, then why shouldn't it count?

You just focused on the "I don't like her poetry" part and started running with it for some yet unknown reason.  Do I think she gets to use her doctor titles?  Yes I do.  Do I like her poetry personally?  No I don't.  I'm sorry you can't read and can't process more than one opinion or piece of information at a time.

So calm down, take a deep breathe... it's going to be OK, son.  There's no boogeyman here.  Feel better now?
 
2014-06-03 05:26:43 PM  

Teufel Ritter: Yet again, you are the one picking which difference between Franklin and Angelou to focus on. You choose race, even though the other commenters have stated it is the field of study that is their concern. Why do you refuse to believe them on their face?


I was cherry-picking because that was the very point that highlighted the racial difference.  If it was field of study, we'd have people making arguments for denying fine arts people the title "Doctor" from the beginning.  That wasn't true.  Too much benefit of the doubt here.
 
2014-06-03 05:28:59 PM  

ikanreed: Teufel Ritter: I beg to differ. It may well be they find it silly to award PhDs (honorary or otherwise) in the fine or liberal arts. The products of the arts fields can typically only be evaluated subjectively, and perhaps they dismiss the fields entirely. On the other hand, work in the fields of life sciences and hard sciences often result in innovations capable of objective valuation (patents, processes, inventions, etc.) which measurably improve and extend human life.

You really should start at giving the commenters the benefit of the doubt. I don't assume you are homophobic just because you used a common phrase (reach around) in an earlier rant, and you shouldn't assume racism is the motive behind everything you disagree with. You sound as if you are coming unhinged.

But again, the "going out of their way to object to others" principal stands.  It's absolutely racism.  I want to give the benefit of the doubt, but you've got to see this in the broader context that lots of people engage in this kind of racism and it's not good for society as a whole.


But it makes little sense to assume you know the true motivation behind why they would prefer she not be afforded the title "Dr."  Perhaps they are racist, but you have little proof of that.  It seems just as logical to claim sexism.  Perhaps they are both named Ben in real life, and that is why they love Franklin.  Maybe Maya Angelou was their professor and gave them failing grades, and that is why they don't like her.  Maybe they adore Franklin's contributions to society and find Angelou's trite for completely non racist reasons, e.g., maybe they hate poetry.  Why draw conclusions of racism?

/"There are many ways a sword might find itself in a field."
 
2014-06-03 05:29:48 PM  

stonicus: If you actually had read all my posts, you would have seen the one where I was in favor of her using her title. Stating that her lifetime of work in the field of poetry and literature was more than anyone who goes to college actually does. I'll quote it here:


I only accused you of racism when you said you took the racist assholes position as your own.

You went "Why are you calling me racist bro"
And I said "I wasn't, dumbass, it was this other guy who left no room for doubt"
Then you went "but his opinions are mine too"
And so I said "Okay, fine, you're racist too"

Do you not remember how this thread went at all?
 
2014-06-03 05:33:41 PM  

Teufel Ritter: Perhaps they are racist, but you have little proof of that.


That's true.  But sometimes proof is a high threshold for these things.  A lack of adequate alternate explanation, without racism as a common cause of exhibited behavior is a good yardstick.
 
2014-06-03 05:33:44 PM  

ikanreed: stonicus: If you actually had read all my posts, you would have seen the one where I was in favor of her using her title. Stating that her lifetime of work in the field of poetry and literature was more than anyone who goes to college actually does. I'll quote it here:

I only accused you of racism when you said you took the racist assholes position as your own.

You went "Why are you calling me racist bro"
And I said "I wasn't, dumbass, it was this other guy who left no room for doubt"
Then you went "but his opinions are mine too"
And so I said "Okay, fine, you're racist too"

Do you not remember how this thread went at all?


Yeah, and his opinion was "I like Franklin's contributions, I don't like Maya's".  Which is true.  I like Franklin's contributions to the world.  I don't like Maya's.  I recognize some do like her contributions, but I am not one of them.
I still don't see where you are getting all this racist nonsense from.

You're starting to get scary about all of this, as in, you might be the topic of a news article on Fark in the morning.
So go ahead, I'll let you say something witty and clever and let you have the last word.
 
2014-06-03 05:35:47 PM  
"You don't get to deny people a title on the basis of how much you like their work. "

That is literally what dissertation committees do. Of course, Maya Angelou wouldn't know anything about that.
 
2014-06-03 05:37:18 PM  
Why are people still trying to contradict what ikanreed says? It's already been established that he's smarter than everyone. He said so.
 
2014-06-03 05:37:28 PM  

lamecomedian: "You don't get to deny people a title on the basis of how much you like their work. "

That is literally what dissertation committees do. Of course, Maya Angelou wouldn't know anything about that.


No, it isn't.  But that gross simplification and raising yourself to the rank of an expert when many experts already granted her the title you're petulantly arguing over does seem kind of shiatty.
 
2014-06-03 05:38:53 PM  

stonicus: ikanreed: stonicus: If you actually had read all my posts, you would have seen the one where I was in favor of her using her title. Stating that her lifetime of work in the field of poetry and literature was more than anyone who goes to college actually does. I'll quote it here:

I only accused you of racism when you said you took the racist assholes position as your own.

You went "Why are you calling me racist bro"
And I said "I wasn't, dumbass, it was this other guy who left no room for doubt"
Then you went "but his opinions are mine too"
And so I said "Okay, fine, you're racist too"

Do you not remember how this thread went at all?

Yeah, and his opinion was "I like Franklin's contributions, I don't like Maya's".  Which is true.  I like Franklin's contributions to the world.  I don't like Maya's.  I recognize some do like her contributions, but I am not one of them.
I still don't see where you are getting all this racist nonsense from.

You're starting to get scary about all of this, as in, you might be the topic of a news article on Fark in the morning.
So go ahead, I'll let you say something witty and clever and let you have the last word.


Am I tagging back in, then? Sorry, I've got a head cold or something. Little loopy.

I'm curious about ikantread's occupation/education. Care to share, friend? Are you a professional SJW, or do you just read too much jezebel?
 
2014-06-03 05:41:04 PM  

Fafai: Why are people still trying to contradict what ikanreed says? It's already been established that he's smarter than everyone. He said so.


Because I made it clear that being smarter doesn't make you right and every argument should stand on its own merits, and their behavior is perfectly reasonable in that particular respect?


I make no bones about my intelligence.  I'm smart.  I value intelligence, but it's not a universal quality that will get you through everything.  Pretending I'm not smart out of some false modesty to gain the respect of others gets me nothing.  Being honest about my self image at least lets me be honest.
 
2014-06-03 05:42:06 PM  

ikanreed: lamecomedian: "You don't get to deny people a title on the basis of how much you like their work. "

That is literally what dissertation committees do. Of course, Maya Angelou wouldn't know anything about that.

No, it isn't.  But that gross simplification and raising yourself to the rank of an expert when many experts already granted her the title you're petulantly arguing over does seem kind of shiatty.


I didn't award myself a degree. I worked hard and wrote a thesis to earn it from an accredited university. Which is more than Maya Angelou ever did for hers.
 
2014-06-03 05:43:30 PM  

Teufel Ritter: You sound as if you are coming unhinged.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCBvGcMyQ5c
 
2014-06-03 05:45:16 PM  

ikanreed: at least lets me be honest.


What about using "making out" and "give me a reacharound" as insults while decrying the use of "that's gay," does that let you be honest?
 
2014-06-03 05:47:58 PM  
We're all racists now.
 
2014-06-03 06:15:45 PM  
I love these Maya Angelou threads. it gives me the chance to once again say she was pretentious, and stunk. he poetry was awful, but was worse was her oratory. god good, I don't how anyone could listen it. she could have been blue,  I don't care, she still was awful.
 
2014-06-03 06:16:45 PM  

Fafai: ikanreed: at least lets me be honest.

What about using "making out" and "give me a reacharound" as insults while decrying the use of "that's gay," does that let you be honest?


"I don't understand metaphorical language"

I get that it's a bit homophobic in nature, what I wrote, but it's not dishonest.  You guys were seriously all over each other.  Praising your own bad ideas when spoken by another.
 
2014-06-03 06:18:00 PM  

lamecomedian: I didn't award myself a degree. I worked hard and wrote a thesis to earn it from an accredited university. Which is more than Maya Angelou ever did for hers.


Yep, here we go.  See... this is the very edges of your racism.  You think Angelou didn't work hard?  What stereotype does that remind you of?
 
2014-06-03 06:21:12 PM  

ikanreed: debug: If she was white and you pointed it out, would you still be a racist?

Oh yeah, that's a real common problem.  And happens a lot.  With dead white people.  Your hypothetical sure shut down all those people who are identifying common symptoms of real world racism.

This is #3 on the list of things "not racist" racist people do:  Targeted minorities are held to a higher standard as to whether they deserve respect.


So you're saying that it's only racist if it's pointed out about someone that's a minority?  How's that work?

TBH, I doubt Maya Angelou cares if you refer to her as Dr or not, since she's dead and all and she's really the only person whose opinion about it mattered.
 
2014-06-03 06:25:42 PM  

debug: ikanreed: debug: If she was white and you pointed it out, would you still be a racist?

Oh yeah, that's a real common problem.  And happens a lot.  With dead white people.  Your hypothetical sure shut down all those people who are identifying common symptoms of real world racism.

This is #3 on the list of things "not racist" racist people do:  Targeted minorities are held to a higher standard as to whether they deserve respect.

So you're saying that it's only racist if it's pointed out about someone that's a minority?  How's that work?

TBH, I doubt Maya Angelou cares if you refer to her as Dr or not, since she's dead and all and she's really the only person whose opinion about it mattered.


No.  You can be racist towards a majority, it's just usually not nearly as covert, and so you don't need elaborate identification methods.
 
2014-06-03 06:27:53 PM  

ikanreed: Fafai: ikanreed: at least lets me be honest.

What about using "making out" and "give me a reacharound" as insults while decrying the use of "that's gay," does that let you be honest?

"I don't understand metaphorical language"

I get that it's a bit homophobic in nature, what I wrote, but it's not dishonest.  You guys were seriously all over each other.  Praising your own bad ideas when spoken by another.


I understand it. That's so gay, don't be a pussy, etc. Metaphorical language. Remember the thread with the posters around campus about "I don't say 'man up' because women can be strong too" and shiat? Remember what stance you took in that thread? What's the difference between that and this? No consistency. Total hypocrite.

Also I was not a part of that gay orgy upthread. You're getting confused again.
 
2014-06-03 06:28:30 PM  

ikanreed: lamecomedian: I didn't award myself a degree. I worked hard and wrote a thesis to earn it from an accredited university. Which is more than Maya Angelou ever did for hers.

Yep, here we go.  See... this is the very edges of your racism.  You think Angelou didn't work hard?  What stereotype does that remind you of?


Mitt Romney? Paul Ryan? I seem to recall a lot of "they didn't earn it" during the campaign.
 
2014-06-03 06:31:26 PM  

Inchoate: Snarfangel: Well, he did squander his resistance for a pocketful of mumbles.

Such are promises.


He did realize, of course that it was all just lies and jest.
 
Displayed 50 of 548 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report