typical liberal pu$$y. Rage quit from life too so the real men can be rid of you crying ass cowards.

Typical nutjob with the juvenile mind of a teenaged boy incapable of a mature, adult conversation. Off to bed, son - grownups are talking.

I have more to say later, but in the mean time, y’all don’t have to quote the ENTIRE post you’re replying to. It will save a LOT of scrolling and eye clutter. ;)

This is true. lol.

@Altaire. Haha. You are like the leafy greens to my irony deficiency. But you have a point, fighting the knights templar for centuries, cutting off your ring finger for a knife wrist thingy... save some ass for the rest of us plz, mr balls of steel.

@DRDMovieMusings said:

You make some valid point

I'm trying. And, hey, I appreciate your efforts and willingness to engage civilly.

In today's world, white supremacy is universally condemned,

There is some truth to this. Just, not enough.

except by the lunatic fringe

Fringe? Today, they don't hide under hoods, under cloak of darkness. Dylan Roof, the guy who kilked Heather Hayer, and others are acting in broad daylight. Neither are they clearly denounced by the White House; in fact, they've been coddled and cajoled and encouraged. And white supremacist groups have exponentially proliferated in today's new normalizing. In these respects, then, the pendulum has hardly swung to any equal opposite extreme - it has, in fact, further entrenched, so that KKK leaders can applaud the murder of a peaceful demonstrator in an open quote to the media. Fringe? I don't believe so.

If a certain race, religion, ideology, gender, etc., is saying something, would the same thing be acceptable coming from "the other side"?

No! Again, we must factor power, system and institution into this, and all those groups do not have equal power. The FBI documented an alarming rise in white supremacist infiltration of law enforcement. There is nothing equivalent for any of those other sides.

Besides, actions of one do not simply equate to others. The action of kissing your wife is fine, for you - but not your neighbour. You are in the ingroup, your neighbour is not. In society, as long as there are systemic, institutionalized groups, actions must be measured within that context.

False equivalence is a common, but fallacious, tactic. For the Chrishchun conservatives, this concept should not be difficult. There's an OT story of the Philistines returning the ark of the covenant to the Israelites. The Philistines touched the ark, no big deal. When the Israelites went out to retake possession, a guy from one of the tribes who were not supposed to touch it, touched it, and he dropped dead, which the Bible writer interpreted as his being struck down in judgment.

So, again, it's a lot to parse, but attempting to argue that, "if a white person can't do X, then a woman or a PoC shouldn't be able to do X either" isn't altogether true, since all the players are in a game rigged to create advantages and disadvantages amongst the players.

Consider the "right to bear arms". WHO enjoys that right? A group of white men can brandish semi auto rifles and have a casual conversation with cops; meanwhile, Philando Castille, calmly telling a cop he's got a licence to lawfully possess a gun, is shot to death, and a 12 year old child with a toy, in an open carry state, is shot to death.

These and so many other situations demonstrate clearly that rights are defended by power for those who fit their preference, and assaulted by power against those who don't.

but a lot of what is happening today exemplifies the pendulum swinging the other way

So, no, the pendulum has not swung to the other side, and society still disproportionately distributes power, access, centrality and privilege. Men still get paid more than women for doing the same job, if they even get considered for the job at all.

In this context, I submit for your consideration that these shows are not any kind of equivalent wrong against white men or white people that offsets truly racist content.

You made other comments I may address later, but this post is long enough for now.

I think your idea of lunatic fringe may be different than mine. To me it means people who have, extremist views that are far from mainstream, covertly or overtly. Some definitely don't operate under the cover of darkness (KKK, Antifa, etc.) but their views are (or should be) universally condemned. Also, what I meant by the pendulum swinging the other way and doing things that would be considered wrong by "the other side" are again, as examples with their counter points which would be unacceptable: Black Lives Matter - White Lives Matter. Black Entertainment TV (BET) - White Entertainment TV (WET lol). Congressional Black Caucus - Congressional White Caucus. United Negro College Fund - United Caucasian College Fund. Black Power shirts - White Power shirts, etc. See what I mean? What if a bunch of angry student ripped down a statue of MLK? Total outrage, yet in Black Lightning, students rip down a statue of someone who was alleged to be a racist a century ago and no one gets arrested or vilified. If people want stuff like that removed, there are legal ways (which have proven to be successful) to go about it but shows like this are telling us, if we don't like something, it's okay to break the law. All that stuff perpetuates racism and divides us. A kid was beaten almost to death for wearing a shirt that said "All Lives Matter"!! I mean WTF!?!?!

I get it that there are (and will always be) injustices of ALL kinds but myopia is killing us. Your examples of PoC being unjustifiably killed by police is a valid example but do you know lots of white (and other races) are unjustifiably killed by police and white people are killed by non-white police? You may not know, because these events are rarely in the news. School shootings too. As awful as it is, exponentially more school kids commit suicide due to bullying but what's on the news? School shootings. Why? Politics. Can't really use that for an anti-gun agenda even though WAY more people are dying. We hear about white on black crime ALL THE TIME even though black on black crime is again, exponentially greater? Why aren't our leaders addressing that? Because they can get more votes adding fuel to the racism fire.

If we want true equality, we have to act and treat others as equals. Grass roots is the only glimmer of hope we have.

@chilone

*What if a bunch of angry student ripped down a statue of MLK? Total outrage, yet in Black Lightning, students rip down a statue of someone who was alleged to be a racist a century ago and no one gets arrested or vilified. *

A: Martin Luther King was not a racist, so maybe if you have a counter-point that deals with Black people discriminating against and killing people of color, you'd have a point.

Your examples of PoC being unjustifiably killed by police is a valid example but do you know lots of white (and other races) are unjustifiably killed by police and white people are killed by non-white police? We hear about white on black crime ALL THE TIME even though black on black crime is again, exponentially greater?

A: Any time an affluent white child goes missing, it becomes breaking news on the headlines! If there were so many more white unarmed people being shot than Black people, the news would be the first to report it, especially Fox News. They would jump on that bandwagon real fast.

A: These are old arguments. Soo old. They have been addressed. It's been several years now and the same arguments are being pushed to this day? What does black on black crime have to do with cops killing young unarmed black men? You know there are different types of Black people, right? Just like there are different types of white people. There are the violent ones and the ones who just want to have a good life. Look at their stories, these are just kids doing dumb shit like stealing, as a kid of a different color would. But the moment that kid is black, that one moment defines that kid. He becomes a criminal. A white kid is just going through some emotional stuff; they just get a time-out. A black kid gets shot and killed. And every black kid his age has to live each day knowing that more than any other kid their lives could end the moment they step out the front door.

@chilone said:

Also, what I meant by the pendulum swinging the other way and doing things that would be considered wrong by "the other side" are again, as examples with their counter points which would be unacceptable: Black Lives Matter - White Lives Matter. Black Entertainment TV (BET) - White Entertainment TV (WET lol). Congressional Black Caucus - Congressional White Caucus. United Negro College Fund - United Caucasian College Fund. Black Power shirts - White Power shirts, etc. See what I mean? What if a bunch of angry student ripped down a statue of MLK? Total outrage, yet in Black Lightning, students rip down a statue of someone who was alleged to be a racist a century ago and no one gets arrested or vilified.

I can only suggest you re-read my comments on false equivalence and power. If I or anyone else must tell you that MLK was not a racist championing the subjugation of white people as inferior like those who were fighting to establish the CSA and, as such, is not an equivalent argument, then you really aren't getting this - but need to, in order to have a constructive conversation.

I get it that there are (and will always be) injustices of ALL kinds but myopia is killing us.

Perhaps.

Your examples of PoC being unjustifiably killed by police is a valid example but do you know lots of white (and other races) are unjustifiably killed by police and white people are killed by non-white police? You may not know, because these events are rarely in the news. School shootings too. As awful as it is, exponentially more school kids commit suicide due to bullying but what's on the news? School shootings. Why? Politics. Can't really use that for an anti-gun agenda even though WAY more people are dying. We hear about white on black crime ALL THE TIME even though black on black crime is again, exponentially greater? Why aren't our leaders addressing that? Because they can get more votes adding fuel to the racism fire.

You are right that politics and media aren't helping. But the other issues you raise are exactly that - other issues. We can address multiple issues independently. The issue of power in society and how it is used to create an unlevel playing field is an issue, even as other issues are issues. It's not all or nothing, we can address multiple issues. When talking about systemic institutionalized racism, the "yeah, but" diversion is a diversion. The "but" topics are their own issues, but the issue of systemic, institutionalized racism still needs to be addressed.

If we want true equality, we have to act and treat others as equals. Grass roots is the only glimmer of hope we have.

We, here, in this conversation, are a part of that grass roots! Thanks for your thoughts.

Been meaning to comment on this for a while, but not had time. I'd like to address the claim that only those in a position of (relative) power can be considered racist. This definition is gaining some traction, but it seems to be a "get out" clause for various people to be able to say that if person from Race B does/says something that is "their" version of what person from Race A has said, and is generally acknowledged to be racist, it can't be racist because Race B are the underdogs. In other words, people want Race B to be able to act as badly as Race A with impunity.

Looking at BP, I'd argue that the social setup in Wakanda itself is (if one was to take it seriously) pretty damn racist. They have all those tribes in a tiny area and each seems to have retained its own customs and a couple even looked ethnically different? Where is all the intermarriage?

IRL I totally agree that white people are generally more racist than black. I do find one thing in particular very odd, though: "Black" music dominates the charts and is listened to by millions of white people, but you hardly ever see black people in (for example) metal concerts or bands. I'd love to know why.

Heading to the original postulation of "All of the SJW posturing has put me off this film" I have to say this is happening more and more with all sorts of films, and it seems that the critics are doing their best to virtue signal. I've yet to read a review of "Crazy Rich Asians" that doesn't wibble on about how important it is in terms of the cast being all Asian. I can't remember reviews of "The Joy Luck Club" belabouring this point; they concentrated on the film. Simpler times? With BP I want to know if the film is as good as most of the rest of the MCU, with CRA I want to know if the film is funny; I don't want to know, nor do I care, how woke the reviewer is.

@M. LeMarchand "Black" music dominates the charts and is listened to by millions of white people, but you hardly ever see black people in (for example) metal concerts or bands. I'd love to know why.

Well, if you're just going off of personal experience, then you probably live in a place where that isn't the case. But there are plenty of Black and LatinX members of punk rock bands. And plenty of Black people listen to Rock music. I live in California, so we all listen to what we like, and usually no one cares.

With BP I want to know if the film is as good as most of the rest of the MCU, with CRA I want to know if the film is funny; I don't want to know, nor do I care, how woke the reviewer is.

Well, honestly that's what I would like, but a lot of the negative reviews are negative because of the political undertones in BP, not on the merits of the movie itself. CRA has gotten some backlash from Asians who are darker skinned, saying that is not an accurate depiction of Singapore, but I digress. I personally don't think CRA needs to tackle that because the premise is that they are upper-class and are inherently biased in the film.

Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU, especially because the mythology of Black Panther is so good. Not to mention, the soundtrack and visuals are awesome. I love Shuri, she's my favorite. lol.

@ajsmitty89 said:

@chilone

*What if a bunch of angry student ripped down a statue of MLK? Total outrage, yet in Black Lightning, students rip down a statue of someone who was alleged to be a racist a century ago and no one gets arrested or vilified. *

A: Martin Luther King was not a racist, so maybe if you have a counter-point that deals with Black people discriminating against and killing people of color, you'd have a point.

Your examples of PoC being unjustifiably killed by police is a valid example but do you know lots of white (and other races) are unjustifiably killed by police and white people are killed by non-white police? We hear about white on black crime ALL THE TIME even though black on black crime is again, exponentially greater?

A: Any time an affluent white child goes missing, it becomes breaking news on the headlines! If there were so many more white unarmed people being shot than Black people, the news would be the first to report it, especially Fox News. They would jump on that bandwagon real fast.

A: These are old arguments. Soo old. They have been addressed. It's been several years now and the same arguments are being pushed to this day? What does black on black crime have to do with cops killing young unarmed black men? You know there are different types of Black people, right? Just like there are different types of white people. There are the violent ones and the ones who just want to have a good life. Look at their stories, these are just kids doing dumb shit like stealing, as a kid of a different color would. But the moment that kid is black, that one moment defines that kid. He becomes a criminal. A white kid is just going through some emotional stuff; they just get a time-out. A black kid gets shot and killed. And every black kid his age has to live each day knowing that more than any other kid their lives could end the moment they step out the front door.

You clearly didn't get, or chose to ignore my MLK example (which I just pulled out of thin air. It could be a statue of anyone). What you seem to be saying is if the statue is of someone who was a racists or is perceived to have been one (I don't even know who the statue was), it's okay and even encouraged to take the law into your own hands. That's called vigilante justice. You support that?

"Any time an affluent white child goes missing, it becomes breaking news on the headlines!" Really? I'm sure if Will Smith's child or another affluent child "of color" went missing it'd be all over the headlines, including Fox News, which despite what you may think, is not a bastion of conservatism. What about the non-affluent white children? We don't hear about them because it's not making the news and I listen to liberal and conservative news daily. By the way, you maybe should read up on the actual statistics of this stuff because, like I'm saying, the media coverage ignores the stuff that doesn't fit their agenda. Here's an article from the liberal, Washington Post that will maybe give you some perspective.

How does an argument being old make it invalid? The theory of relativity is an old argument but it's still valid. Black on black violence has nothing to do with cops killing unarmed people of color. Did you actually read what I wrote? My point was a LOT and I mean a LOT more black people die at the hands of other black people than from unjustified shootings by police officers of any ethnicity but no one talks about that, including the phony liberal politicians who lie about caring about minorities. Look, in simple terms, if there are two diseases and one kills 100 people a year and the other kills 10,000 a year, shouldn't the one that kills 10,000 get AT LEAST equal the attention as the one that kills 100? This is common sense stuff. Same with the school bullying. Are the thousands of kids who kill themselves every year of less value than the less than 100 who die in school shootings? I agree that these are both horrible tragedies but compare the outrage and attempts at legislation that the school shootings get to the absolute media and political silence on the school bullying. Logic tells me, follow the bodies but conservatives can't be blamed for the suicides. It truly is the elephant in the living room.

@chilone

How does an argument being old make it invalid? The theory of relativity is an old argument but it's still valid.

the theory of relativity has passed from an argument into theory through a series of tests... But to your point, these examples are not just old, they are filled with logical fallacies - the main one being a false equivalence. Your opposing argument may appear to be logically equivalent, but it is not. You cannot equivocate Black on Black violence with police brutality. Too many variables involved. Why is the media talking about one thing over the other? Because these people are paid by our tax money to protect and serve. How are they doing that by gunning down unarmed kids? Black on Black violence occurs mainly in poor communities because they don't have as much access to upward mobility as their white counterparts (on average). To talk about Black on Black crime is to also have to address the issue of uneven distribution of wealth here in the US.

@ajsmitty89 said:

@chilone

How does an argument being old make it invalid? The theory of relativity is an old argument but it's still valid.

the theory of relativity has passed from an argument into theory through a series of tests... But to your point, these examples are not just old, they are filled with logical fallacies - the main one being a false equivalence. Your opposing argument may appear to be logically equivalent, but it is not. You cannot equivocate Black on Black violence with police brutality. Too many variables involved. Why is the media talking about one thing over the other? Because these people are paid by our tax money to protect and serve. How are they doing that by gunning down unarmed kids? Black on Black violence occurs mainly in poor communities because they don't have as much access to upward mobility as their white counterparts (on average). To talk about Black on Black crime is to also have to address the issue of uneven distribution of wealth here in the US.

and not just wealth, but access to prosperity. Your connections to each other are a privilege in themselves. What happens when all the access you have is to more poor people? You'd do anything to get somewhere in this life. It's not a choice anymore. Look at the Stanford Prison experiment. When presented with an environment that is hostile, you do what you can to adapt. Post-slavery, the US has put its black citizens in its own Stanford experiment and over time more and more Black people are able to escape that environment, but a lot are still trapped, waiting on the next generation to do better. This is the story of generations of persecution.

@chilone You clearly didn't get, or chose to ignore my MLK example (which I just pulled out of thin air. It could be a statue of anyone). What you seem to be saying is if the statue is of someone who was a racists or is perceived to have been one (I don't even know who the statue was), it's okay and even encouraged to take the law into your own hands. That's called vigilante justice. You support that?

The US was founded on Vigilantism. Also, maybe don't pull references out of thin air. It was called the Declaration of Independence. Colonists came here under false pretense and broke free from the bondage of the Church of England in hopes of a better life. So I can't condemn those who tear down icons of racism in hopes for progress. It is a slap in the face of history, of slavery and segregation. As a person who is self-aware, you should also be offended by these monuments.

@ajsmitty89 said:

@chilone

How does an argument being old make it invalid? The theory of relativity is an old argument but it's still valid.

the theory of relativity has passed from an argument into theory through a series of tests... But to your point, these examples are not just old, they are filled with logical fallacies - the main one being a false equivalence. Your opposing argument may appear to be logically equivalent, but it is not. You cannot equivocate Black on Black violence with police brutality. Too many variables involved. Why is the media talking about one thing over the other? Because these people are paid by our tax money to protect and serve. How are they doing that by gunning down unarmed kids? Black on Black violence occurs mainly in poor communities because they don't have as much access to upward mobility as their white counterparts (on average). To talk about Black on Black crime is to also have to address the issue of uneven distribution of wealth here in the US.

Okee dokee. Like I said, do your research. Blacks, whites, Asians, Hispanics, etc.? They can all become incredibly successful and rich in the US. A lot of people, though, will not because they spend all their time blaming anything and everyone for their failure. I feel you would be happier in a socialist or communist country.

@ajsmitty89 said:

@chilone You clearly didn't get, or chose to ignore my MLK example (which I just pulled out of thin air. It could be a statue of anyone). What you seem to be saying is if the statue is of someone who was a racists or is perceived to have been one (I don't even know who the statue was), it's okay and even encouraged to take the law into your own hands. That's called vigilante justice. You support that?

The US was founded on Vigilantism. Also, maybe don't pull references out of thin air. It was called the Declaration of Independence. Colonists came here under false pretense and broke free from the bondage of the Church of England in hopes of a better life. So I can't condemn those who tear down icons of racism in hopes for progress. It is a slap in the face of history, of slavery and segregation. As a person who is self-aware, you should also be offended by these monuments.

Jeez! You have a hard time with context! I just said MLK was arbitrary but I stand by the example because there are people who (wrongfully) would like his statue ripped down and his history erased. I'm not saying it was a bad choice. I am against trying to erase history. Should Auschwitz be demolished or should it be left as a memorial to not ever let something like that happen again and for education? The truth and history about these historic figures should be told.

If you can't condemn people flagrantly taking the law into their own hands, I don't really see the sense of continuing this discussion. With all due respect, you're part of the lunatic fringe.