Liam Neeson says some mad shit

[Brewster McCloud]

18 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

For some reason, not being allowed to split the post any more.

Bit in Italics: It's not gossip - it's a serious issue, regardless of who's spouting it. Roseanne Barr didn't actually do anything, but she said something significant enough that people felt it had to be dealt with. It's about the influence they have, which you've pointed out in this post. And yes, the issue was already being discussed, and now Neeson's utterances have been submitted as the most recent entry to a body of instances up for discussion. 

Bit in bold: Just because it isn't new doesn't mean people shouldn't get pissed off. It's 2019, and issues that should've been dealt with a long time ago are still emerging today. 

Bit in regular: Who's asking for floridity? Everyone I've spoken to has expressed concerns about the content of his apology, not his diction. To take one anecdotal example from a friend of mine (and, needless to say, I'm aware she's not the ultimate authority on this, but her views are as valid as any other POC's): 'Not once did he or his interviewer say "that was racist." Nor did he say "I have some internal conditioning that I have worked hard to overcome" no personal accountability.'

 

What influence does Roseanne Barr have? She called someone a "monkey" on Twitter, which, however stupid, she had a right to do. She lost her TV show as a result, ridiculously. Were people donning white hoods after reading her tweet? She said sorry afterwards, but apparently an apology has to be worded in a certain way to work now to please the mob. It's very strange and a little sad. 

[Carbomb]

Just now, Brewster McCloud said:

What influence does Roseanne Barr have? She called someone a "monkey" on Twitter, which, however stupid, she had a right to do. She lost her TV show as a result, ridiculously. Were people donning white hoods after her reading her tweet? She said sorry afterwards, but apparently an apology has to be worded in a certain way to work now to please the mob. It's very strange and a little sad. 

I refer you to my previous post. You want to tell people of colour what sort of apology they should accept, go ahead.

[Brewster McCloud]

3 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

I refer you to my previous post. You want to tell people of colour what sort of apology they should accept, go ahead.

I'm suggesting that people of any colour should accept any heartfelt apology, despite its wording. What the fuck?

[Sergio Mendacious]

Edit

[tiger_rick]

9 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

And, yes, Neeson admitted that to have that mindset was wrong, but the whole thing is still incredibly sketchy. His apology was, as Carbomb said, insubstantial at best. And, to go back to the old Jeremy Hardy bit, there are countless people out there who have never indulged racist revenge fantasies in the first place, so I'm not going to spend my time patting someone on the back for having had one and then changed their mind.

It's not about patting the bloke on the back, it's about taking the positive from it and trying to encourage other people to see the error of their ways. Not excusing but using it. I was focussed on the disgusting language but I've cone around to Barnes' thinking.

[Carbomb]

Just now, Brewster McCloud said:

I'm suggesting that people of any colour should accept any heartfelt apology, despite its wording. What the fuck?

The fuck is I'm suggesting you should think twice about telling POC what they should think constitutes a heartfelt apology, and whether it goes far enough.

[Brewster McCloud]

9 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

I mentioned the Trayvon Martin case because the timing was prescient, and because it was a case of a black man being murdered for his blackness by a self-styled keeper of the peace who pursued and stalked him against police instructions. The exact thing that Neeson had admitted to fantasizing about.

Read Ibram X. Kendi's "Stamped From The Beginning" - the mentality Neeson has admitted to has had real life consequence for centuries, and continue to do so today. Maybe you think context doesn't matter and that racist rhetoric is somehow wholly unrelated to racist actions, but that's not borne out by reality.

Yes, what happened to Trayvon Martin was terrible - that's the kind of thing that deserves a wider conversation, not someone's fantasies during a moment of trauma. I really do wonder if Neeson would have acted on his impulses if a black guy had presented himself before him... I suspect probably not, giving him the benefit of the doubt, but I'm certainly not trying to belittle racism or saying he's anything but a silly sausage, and probably a horrible swine in his 20s. I'd never heard of "Stamped From the Beginning" so thanks for the recommendation. 

[Otto Dem Wanz]

7 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

The fuck is I'm suggesting you should think twice about telling POC what they should think constitutes a heartfelt apology, and whether it goes far enough.

By the same token, is there a consensus that Black, South Asian, East Asian, and anyone else who isn't white appreciate being lumped under the "Person of Colour" (ugh) banner?

I'm mixed race and if anyone called my Asian father "coloured" I highly doubt he'd react well knowing the connotations of that word in Apartheid South Africa or the UK growing up.

Didn't we strive to move away from it and get rid of the term "coloured"? 

I like Zadie Smith's take on things: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/feb/02/zadie-smith-political-correctness-hay-cartagena 

[Brewster McCloud]

6 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

The fuck is I'm suggesting you should think twice about telling POC what they should think constitutes a heartfelt apology, and whether it goes far enough.

Woah! Steady on, fella. I was trying (unsuccessfully, it turns out) to make a point about apology culture in general, not dictating how any specific aggrieved group should accept an apology. 

[Carbomb]

2 hours ago, Otto Dem Wanz said:

By the same token, is there a consensus that Black, South Asian, East Asian, and anyone else who isn't white appreciate being lumped under the "Person of Colour" (ugh) banner? 

I like Zadie Smith's take on things: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/feb/02/zadie-smith-political-correctness-hay-cartagena 

I can't argue that there is; the only thing I can tell you is that neither I nor my family completely object to it, and it's frequently used by many of my acquaintances - at best, I've tended to treat it as just one of those wanky American terms they're always coming up with as the next new acceptable word. Either way, it's not my hill to die on: if I can think of a better term, I'll use it.

Thanks for the Zadie Smith article, it's definitely an interesting take, and I'll be incorporating that into my viewpoint.

 

[David]

1 hour ago, Carbomb said:

It matters now, and he knows it matters now. He didn't do that interview in the 70s, he did it in 2019, to publicise a film for a potential audience in 2019.

Let me just say, that if his sole reason for raising this issue is to try and publicise a movie, then he's an absolute prick. My reading of it is that he was asked a question by a reporter and mistakenly thought that he could use his own experiences to try and somehow help others going through something similar. That isn't to play down the woman who was actually raped, but I figured he maybe thought that his experience could help those loved ones of a rape victim to maybe not make the mistake he made.

1 hour ago, Carbomb said:

Race is an issue now, particularly now, it's not something that can be brought up as a throwaway.

As is murder and rape, which feature just as prominently in his recalling of what happened. All equally important.

1 hour ago, Carbomb said:

And I personally accept his clarification. I'm not, however, going to dismiss the concerns of those who simply feel he's engaging in damage control and trying to walk his comments back. 

This is the thing that I don't get though. Do those who think he's trying to "walk his comments back" think that he was stupid enough to raise the issue and not expect to get grief? It's for this very reason that I'm willing to accept his clarification of what he said.

If he actively thought that what he said was fine, then he's a fucking moron of the highest order. I don't think he is though, and the way he approached the situation tells me that he tried to make a point, but went about it badly.

Then again, if the incident affected him to such an extent back then that he wanted to actually commit murder, then it's understandable that when talking about it today he's probably still quite upset by it, and being clear, coherent and on-point wasn't possible.

That's why I think he'd have been better off just leaving it out. It did no one any good at all.

1 hour ago, Carbomb said:

Sorry, but that's bullshit. It was racist, he focused on the guy's race and no other aspects of the guy who raped his friend. There's nothing wrong with admitting it if he also admits he was utterly wrong and had to evolve past what he was, but don't make excuses for the guy.

I should probably clarify that my main point there is that I don't think the act was entirely motivated by race. If you read the rest of my comments on the matter you'll note that my overarching point is that there's more to this story than just racism (which has sadly been all but forgotten in the grand scheme of things). I apologise if that wasn't clear, and could probably have said that his act wasn't solely racist. It was based on a number of factors, some of which we probably aren't even aware of.

Did racism play a part? Absolutely. 

And I'm not making excuses for him. There's a difference between looking for a reason as to why a seemingly decent, law-abiding chap would turn into a murderous lunatic who wished for someone to try and harm him so he could kill them, and excusing his behaviour.

However, I think there's an important lesson here that's being widely ignored when it comes to how males react to a female friend or family member being sexually assaulted, and that's a shame. I've read of numerous instances where the woman involved not only has to deal with the trauma of the event, but then has to worry about their loved one doing something stupid and causing her more grief, as often the female blames herself for anything that happens to their loved one as a result.

Usually they find the best way to avoid such a situation is to not tell anyone, which is terrible. 

1 hour ago, Carbomb said:

Or maybe you can broach topics like this provided you understand the need to address it in a way that assuages all the concerns that usually generates a backlash like the one he's getting. He'd still get a bit of one, but not one this big.

Nah, I think the lesson is to leave it be. Regardless of the original intent behind the message, if it is what I think it is, it's probably not worth the hassle received as a consequence. 

Which is a shame, as I think the point I made above is important enough that it should be discussed, and you'd like to think that a high-profile individual like Neeson making it would help throw some light on it.

Then again, maybe it's not all that important? I've seen no one really talk about that aspect of his interview, so maybe I've got it wrong and no one gives a shit (not meaning on here, I mean in general)

[BomberPat]

I don't think you can say that a man, upon hearing that a friend was raped, asked "what colour was he?", then proceeded to go out willing a person - any person - of the same colour to provoke him, was in any way not motivated by racist thinking. It's practically the dictionary definition.

Quote

Yes, what happened to Trayvon Martin was terrible - that's the kind of thing that deserves a wider conversation, not someone's fantasies during a moment of trauma.

The point is that they're both motivated by the same impulse - to see the black race as responsible for the actions of any one black person, and to seek retribution against the race, not the individual. There's not as wide a gulf between Neeson's fantasy and Zimmerman's actions, because there's centuries of history that will show you how one the rhetoric leads to the actions, and how the actions lead to the rhetoric. You don't need to look far to see things so recent it feels like even calling it "recent history" is distancing ourselves too much, where racist/otherwise bigoted rhetoric being mainstreamed has led to violent actions from others.

 

In terms of POC, I see it as an Americanism more than anything. I have a multi-racial extended family, and my cousin uses "person of colour" or "woman of colour" as her preferred terms, and I've largely taken my lead from her. I don't see it as analogous to "coloured", but, again, it's not my place to dictate to someone far more affected by it than I am what their preferred descriptor should be.

[Otto Dem Wanz]

1 hour ago, BomberPat said:

In terms of POC, I see it as an Americanism more than anything. I have a multi-racial extended family, and my cousin uses "person of colour" or "woman of colour" as her preferred terms, and I've largely taken my lead from her. I don't see it as analogous to "coloured", but, again, it's not my place to dictate to someone far more affected by it than I am what their preferred descriptor should be.

Exactly, get fucking rid.

[gmoney]

1 hour ago, BomberPat said:

In terms of POC, I see it as an Americanism more than anything. I have a multi-racial extended family, and my cousin uses "person of colour" or "woman of colour" as her preferred terms, and I've largely taken my lead from her. I don't see it as analogous to "coloured", but, again, it's not my place to dictate to someone far more affected by it than I am what their preferred descriptor should be.

BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) is far more common in this country, at least that's what is used by my BME partner. 

[Carbomb]

I tend to use BAME or BME as a formal term for my work, but I was left with the impression, perhaps mistakenly, that it was insufficient for purpose in political or social discussion. Thanks for that added perspective.