For the last few days I’ve been having a debate over the following quote on a forum (the name has been changed):
“Jane Doe is black and angry, so truthfulness, House Rules and general Golden Rules don’t apply to her…”
That quote was just part of an ongoing (personal) feud between Jane, the author of that quote (let’s call him Archie), and a few other people who have had issues with Jane.
I took issue with that statement because to me it is a thinly veiled statement about any ‘angry Black’ person. The author of that quote, as well as (at least) one other person thinks that I am out of my mind for thinking that way. They claim that it’s just a statement about ‘Jane Doe’. My point is that Archie went out of his way to make it known that Jane is, according to him, an angry Black person. Couldn’t he have made his point without mentioning the fact that she’s Black? So the way I see it is that Archie’s assigning the characteristics of lying and nonconformance to rules (or the ‘system’ not applying to rules) to all angry Black people in general, not just Jane.
I’d like your feedback. Am I reading too much into that statement?
Nope. You are 100% right on.
The reasons given are because “JD is black and angry,” not because “JD said some things that pushed all my buttons,” or even, “because JD is an unreasonable jerk.” According to this person, blackness and anger in one package are all that it takes to lose the privilege of civil discussion.
I too am black and angry, so apparently, though I don’t even know this person, they would feel justified in being a creep to me too. Never mind that there is nothing I can (or would) do about my blackness, and my anger (especially in the face of such stupidity) is more than justified.
Bah.
It’s him.
Estoy de acuerdo.
why does it say “(Spam: 50%)” by my name? what’s up???
QuarterWit,
I’m using a Bayesian filter (http://tradermike.net/movethecrowd/archives/2003/10/james_sengs_bayesian_filter_for_fighting_blog_spam.php) to help me combat comment spammers. Often times it will mark a comment as 50% spam if it’s the first time it sees the author’s URL. (It also scans for certain keywords. And I think the length of your post may have been a slight problem too.) My actual spam threshold is 90%, at which point that comment won’t appear. Note that you’re now at 0%, as the filter has learned that you’re not a spammer.
You know the deal.
Archie and crew are looking to shut out racial commentary altogether in my opinion. Fact is, I think Jane could handle her business better…but the other fact is they’ve made me a LOT more sympathetic to her position.
oh! phew.