Episode 2 - Fathers and Suns

Discussion in 'RED DWARF UNIVERSE' started by Urgamanix, Oct 11, 2012.

  1. bedfordfalls

    bedfordfalls Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    1,858
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    No. I wouldn't. Would you like some more straw for that flimsy looking man you're building?

    Wrong. Do try to keep up with the main arguments, won't you.

    Not really.

    There's nothing actually wrong with being P.C. You do know that, right? It's an ideology based around minimizing unnecessary hurt and displaying sensitivity and awareness where offense could be caused. It's just that you appear to keep confusing political correctness for over sensitivity and worrying about nothing. They aren't the same thing. At all. Rather the term has been hi-jacked by...well...I think we know by whom, don't we. Or do you? I wonder...

    Well I've certainly no comeback to in-depth scientific research such as this. One thing though, you forgot to point out that you once owed some Bob Marley records and stuff.

    Also, I don't remember filling in your survey about why I was offended. I assume everyone else did though.

    Don't worry I'm sure they all started to regard you as a cartoon character long ago, dear boy.
     
  2. Slainmonkey

    Slainmonkey Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    1,307
    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Location:
    Australia
    To be honest, I think the fact the Taiwan Tony gag while not funny was very clearly a gag about ignorance, it was set up Rimmer saying Chinese Whispers is racist while showing his own ignorance by commenting on "those funny little hats" (this IMO was the only part of the joke that was funny), then Lister commenting on the Fu Manchu beards and saing that Taiwan Tony is kinda Chinesey (showing ignorance of his own), which then leads to Cat asking Taiwan Tony (who is a racist stereotype himself) if something is racist. To me the jokes seems to me that people who throw around accusations of racism are often ignorant to what really is and this is made more evident with the appearance of Taiwan Tony. Getting the gag however doesn't stop it from being weak, it feels stupid that the JMC would make stereotypical vending machines like that and further more it feels completely out of place in the Red Dwarf universe.
     
  3. Fairfax

    Fairfax Catering Officer

    Messages:
    362
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    I think that you could look at the tone of your posts sometimes. Another poster has mentioned it and I would agree that you do seem to be very intolerant of other opinions. Earlier in the thread I believed that you claimed that some people on the board were, `defending racism`. That in itself could be considered to be a pretty offensive accusation to level against people.
     
  4. Fairfax

    Fairfax Catering Officer

    Messages:
    362
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    I think that sums it up very well.
     
  5. simulant37

    simulant37 Science Officer

    Messages:
    11,946
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Don't be so stupid, how dare you say a "real Thai accent would have got the same negative reaction but less laughs"?!? Is there something inherently funny about a Thai accent? & stop throwing around the PC term, its a misnomer.

    PS - I'm not white, not that that is relevant really.
     
  6. Seymour_Clufley

    Seymour_Clufley First Technician

    Messages:
    197
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    I don't think that's true. There have always been social "rules" about politeness, but political correctness is something new, something that came with the late 20th century.

    It can be defended as a way of minimising offence caused, but I think it is more than that. It designates victim groups who can then get away with murder while the "victimising" group (ideally white, heterosexual men) are watched for the slightest error.

    An example would be Yasmin Alibhai-Brown saying the following about white men: "I don't like them. I want them to be the lost species in a hundred years". Imagine if I (a white guy) said on TV: "I don't like black men. I want them to be the lost species in a hundred years." Does anyone seriously think I would get away with that? More likely I would be a national hate figure. She can get away with wishing extinction upon a race - while we worry about a vending machine having a stereotypical voice.

    I would also say the BBC's obsession with the police bungling of the Stephen Lawrence case, while they turn a blind eye to the gruesome racist murder by Asians of white teenager Kriss Donald, is another example of PC. Also an example of PC is that Kriss Donald may have been saved his fate had police not been afraid of offending Asians. PC may start out as a nice idea, but it leaves you completely naked to people who aren't as toe-curlingly self-conscious about their prejudices.

    I previously mentioned Charlene Downes. Comparing the BBC's coverage of her story (complete with bungled police investigation) with that of Stephen Lawrence... there are 23 mentions of her on the BBC website, and 1660 of Stephen Lawrence. Statistically, the BBC considers a black guy getting killed by white thugs 72 times more newsworthy than an underage white girl getting raped, murdered and ground into kebab meat by a middle-aged Muslim man.

    What about the insistence by border control of painstakingly scanning every passenger, rather than use (offensive) profiling to target the people who are likely to be bringing bombs on to aeroplanes? Disaster at Heathrow for the sake of not offending trouble-makers.

    What about this story (reported by the BBC, therefore more trustworthy) about a job advert being rejected by the JobCentre because it requested a reliable candidate, and therefore discriminated against the unreliable? Do you really think PC isn't going too far? I think it is turning priorities on their heads.

    Again with Muslims, a group of them demonstrating against Britain by burning a giant poppy on Remembrance Day were given a police escort to assist them and keep them safe while they exercised their free speech (which, of course, they would not have in Iran, Pakistan, Somalia, etc.).

    A similar story: Rhea Page was beaten up by 4 Muslim girls whom the judge spared jail time on the grounds that, being Muslim, they were not used to being drunk! Great stuff this political correctness, eh?

    Another example would be, as I said before, several police forces around Britain deliberately neglecting Asian paedophile rings for many years because they didn't want to appear racist. Thousands of white girls got raped for the sake of political correctness. I don't know how you can defend that, or pretend that it is not a problem, or pretend that it is just about politeness.

    At the more trivial (but insidious) end, PC leads to things like this: an early years "expert" saying to avoid use of white paper, and to avoid representing witches as wearing black, so as to avoid racism!

    These things are not exaggerated. They have not been blown out of proportion by the right-wing press etc. They are real, and PC stops us from dealing with them. Personally I would be deporting every one of the people involved in the above stories - including Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. If she doesn't like Britain and the men who built it, she should go back to Uganda. But we just sit and take her insults, because of political correctness.

    I don't know how you can defend it, BedfordFalls.
     
  7. Laporbo

    Laporbo Second Technician

    Messages:
    52
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    Great NW
    Just read through this entire thread and I can sum it up with one word.... Throbbo. :-)

    Finally got to see Ep 2. Liked it.
     
  8. dodgebizkit

    dodgebizkit Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,321
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    As I said, it would have gotten less laughs. Therefore, no.
     
  9. dodgebizkit

    dodgebizkit Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,321
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
     
  10. bedfordfalls

    bedfordfalls Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    1,858
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    You really need to stop getting all your evidence from the Daily Mail and other notoriously right wing elements of the Murdoch empire, Seymour, and, yes, I'm including Metro, one of the worst offenders for anti-muslim agenda articles and inane "you can't do anything anymore because of health and safety laws" stories.

    Typical examples: Metro recently ran a photograph showing a Muslim child "celebrating" the beginning of Ramadan by playing in the street with a toy gun and, just in case the picture hadn't planted the seed of "muslim = terrorist" into their readers heads they reinforced the fact with their caption.
    That editorial choice alone should leave you with little doubt that there is some kind of agenda at that newspaper.

    Similarly (and hilariously) they also ran a picture of a Russian electrician, balanced precariously on a TV receptor without support on the outside of a tower block with the headline: "you wouldn't see this in health and safety mad Britain!"
    Mad? What? We've reached the point where we are "mad" because we no longer want workers risking life and limb to perform mindbogglingly dangerous things that might jeopardize their health and or life?

    It's an article that aptly demonstrated how journalists have lost the plot. They've stopped reporting news and instead settled into a strange normality of inventing it based on the long term agenda of the papers they work for. That vast quantities of the country buy it all shows just how brainwashed and subservient to the press people have become.
    You think They Live is a film written by a foolish liberal hippy all you like, mate. It's massively relevant to the times we are living in which is partly what gives it its enduring popularity.

    Seriously, it completely cheapens any argument you may have when this is the kind of stuff you quote as evidence. Anyone with an inch of objectivity in them can see beyond those hate filled headlines. Hell, even some of the Mail's more intelligent readers have pointed out the jarring inconsistency between the political sensationalism you seem to have bought into and the actual content of the report.

    Take the 'white paper' story you insist on bringing up time and again. This is a great example of how a simple suggestion rooted in human psychology has been distorted and sensationalized by agenda driven newspapers who want to paint the illusion that we live in a PC distopia of crazy liberal lunatics. It's simple fear-mongering to a political end of the kind that's been going on for hundreds of years.
    In this instance, when you actually read the story in question, nobody is "banning" white paper because its "racist". The basis for the suggestion is twofold. We live in a society where negative opinions of race and attitudes to skin colour are often formed at an early age and are then very hard to remove because they become rooted in the sub-conscious.
    That's not falicy, you only have to have studied psychology to a very moderate level to have seen the evidence for this.
    The education consultant isn't suggesting that the use of white paper will cause children to grow up into card carrying members of the Klu Klux Klan. She's suggesting that if children are exposed to other colours from a young age and not given the idea that white is the "best" and superior to other tones then this attitude is less likely to transfer, or even occur, to them in their formative ideas about skin tone.
    It's a very logical, psychologically sound thesis and she shouldn't be pilloried for suggesting it...which is her job.

    It's a simple suggestion backed up by studies into human psychology. There is literally NO harm in its practice and no negative consequence to it. Yet here the Mail and other newspapers are reporting it as if it's an outrage because, sadly, their own journalists have been conditioned for many years now to believe that angrying up the blood of conservative little-Englanders is somehow what passes for journalism in this day and age.

    This on the other hand just comes across like persecuted whining. Who are all these nasty non-white homosexual folk who are having there way with you and leaving you "at their mercy", Dodge? :roll:

    Have you ever wondered why those you brand "PC" don't have this persecution complex?
     
  11. Freeborn

    Freeborn Flight Co-Ordinator

    Messages:
    8,313
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Location:
    The Land of Freebornia
    Indeed. Simulant37 makes a very good point here. And I wont allow it to pass by unnoticed.

    This whole notion that it's only white people "being offend on behalf of others" is a massively misguided myth. A very insulting one at that. Fact is, some (but certainly not all) of my non white friends and family tend not to be very outspoken about the things they're offended by, in fear of ignorant fools accusing them of being overly sensitive. Or in a worse case scenario being told to "Go back to where you came from! If you don't like this country, leave!".

    This is very upsetting to me.

    Oh and for anyone who thinks it makes a difference for whatever reason, my extended family is of mixed heritage. So yes I have and do see both sides quite easily.

    Aaaanyway...

    After watching the episode again I must say that I really do like it. A lot...Well, most of it.. ;-) Speaking of which I will say this very briefly, I have since asked two of my Chinese friends if they were offended by that scene. And it would seem that their reaction was pretty similar to my own really. Although one of them was much less bothered by it than the other. To paraphrase: "yeah, bit dodgy really wasn't it? But not a massive issue to me personally. I don't think it meant to racist"

    But hey, news flash! People have different opinions, regardless of race, culture, nationality, etc. My other friend's reaction was more along the lines of feeling that it was a little misguided/poorly executed, as opposed to purposely racist and outright offensive. But the point is it did cause him some concern.

    However, and this is important, the afore mentioned friend's grandmother, who was in the room at the time that scene was being aired, was indeed rather upset by it (for obvious and understandable reasons). As has been mentioned by many now, there is a rather unsavoury history to the mocking of the Chinese culture and accent specifically.

    But my friends (both of whom are in their mid twenties) were able to take it as it was intended, even though it did concerned them (one much more so that the other) as it was recognised that the ironic intentions were not made very clear.

    And in the words of Forrest Gump "that's all I have to say about that".


    I personally feel that if the TT part was revised and re-cut - or preferably for me personally, cut out altogether, then this would be pretty tight episode really. I mean, the TT scene only takes up about a minute (I think) and the entire Chinese whispers part around 3 or 4 mins of the episode - valuable minutes that perhaps could've been used more effectively...although the "Do Chinese knickers have braces" line did make me chuckle. :-)

    The way the two main plots work separately at first and then come together in the end is classic Doug...actually GrantNaylor writing in my opinion. I'm not so sure about the medibot/Dentibot (although the Dentibot doesn't bother me so much) the character seems a little too wacky for my personal taste.

    But having said that I was able to enjoy those scenes a little more on the third viewing. I still strongly feel that Chris performed the voice sooo much better on the night of the recording though. In a sense it's a shame they didn't create some magic in the make up and costume department and get Chris to play the part.

    But yeah, more importantly than all that tot, the Pree story line and the Lister-being-his-own-father plot make this a very enjoyable and re-watchable episode for me personally.

    I'm not sure how I'd rate it out of 10 to be honest, but for now I'm gonna' go with 7/10, as I really do love certain elements of this episode. Oh and I'm loving the Lister-waking-up-in-a-shopping-trolly scene too (apparently we have Mr. Andrew Ellard to thank for that script note suggestion) 'twas nice throw back and/or alternative take on the whole waking-up-with-a-traffic-cone scene in series two. It certainly gave me a hefty chuckle anyway. As did much of the on-screen Father/son sequence :-)
     
  12. Seymour_Clufley

    Seymour_Clufley First Technician

    Messages:
    197
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    My favoured newspaper, the Daily Telegraph, is not part of the Murdoch empire. However, I take your point that one should read a good range of material.


    That's a good example. I actually wasn't aware that the Metro was right-leaning. I haven't read it for years and it always seemed to be a very bland thing devised to offend no commuter who could possibly read it. Perhaps in recent years it has become more right-wing.

    However, I am dubious as to how papers, no matter how right-wing, could twist or exaggerate the stories I cited. I could go through each one and point out the "factual" statements, which could be openly contested as lies if they were not factual...

    Were all passengers being screened at Heathrow or not? It's simply true or not, and the claim was not contested.

    Same with the Muslim poppy-burning debacle: did it happen or not? It's yes or no. Did they get a police escort or not? It's yes or no.

    Same with Rhea Page: were her attackers let off because they were Muslim, or not? Yes, they were! The judge specifically referred to their religion! (Can anyone imagine what would have happened to 4 white Atheist girls who beat up a Somalian, shouting "kill the black slag"? Somehow I think it would be a racial hate crime and they'd be in jail for years.)

    If these things were not true, the papers, having printed them, would either have updated the articles online later on or they would have been taken to the cleaners. I accept, of course, that things can be worded manipulatively, but in the case of these stories we are talking about true/false facts, not ambiguities.


    Again, that's a good example, and I agree it sounds hilarious. However, it seems to me that the headline is double-edged. On the one hand it's acknowledging the insanity of such reckless behaviour, while on the other it's saying that Britain is "healthy and safety mad". I don't think it is advocating such recklessness, merely pointing out that such recklessness - and things much less reckless - are illegal in Britain.

    Either way, I agree with you that the antics of the Russian electrician are not admirable.


    I don't want to criticise a film you clearly like and enjoy, because that seems rather an unfriendly thing to do. But They Live seemed to me like something a 15 year-old would write. Its message was so simplistic, cliched and obvious that I can't believe grown adults find it either persuasive or interesting. It is ridiculous to suggest that "people" (ie people less clever than you and me) are led like cattle by media messages. It is a grossly simplistic and disrespectful view of people in general. I'm not accusing you personally of being disrespectful; I just think that it is surprising, given your obvious intelligence, that you are intellectually satisfied by such a silly film as They Live.

    Escape From New York is hardly a PhD thesis, but it's a hell of a lot more subtle than They Live. Also The Thing is excellent.


    It does not cheapen my argument. You are asserting that, if one thing I said can be devalued, then every other thing I said must also be valueless. That is neither fair nor true. It is the mentality of the lynch mob, which I think is beneath you, to say the least.

    If we return to the main point of my previous post, which was that political correctness is not always a good thing, then all the examples I cited are absolutely true and support my argument.

    It is true that the BBC have made a meal out of the Stephen Lawrence investigation which the police bungled.

    It is true that the BBC didn't want to report on the murder of Kriss Donald, and only relented because of public pressure to report it.

    It is true that there are 1660 mentions of "Stephen Lawrence" on the BBC website, yet only 23 mentions of "Charlene Downes". Anyone can check that. She disappeared in 2003, her body has never been found, she was known to associate with a Muslim takeaway shop owner, and that man was recorded boasting about how he turned her into kebabs. These are facts. You cannot suggest that any right-wing journalist has twisted them.

    Away from race issues, it is true that the JobCentre rejected an advert because it discriminated against "the unreliable". Even the BBC reported it - so it must be true, right?

    As for the Asian/Muslim paedophile rings which are now being exposed around England, they are real. No right-wing journalist has twisted them into something they are not.

    These are real things. And political correctness caused their mishandling, and then caused the denial of their mishandling. Political correctness, which may have started out with good intentions and may not be completely a bad thing, nevertheless is directly responsible for thousands of young girls being raped. On that basis, if no other, I am against political correctness.

    Finally, I would bring your attention back to the racist comment made by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. Do you deny she said it? Do you assert that right-wing xenophobic media outlets somehow twisted what she said? Do you believe that she did say it, but it was all in good humour, and if a white person said it about black people it would also be treated as a bit of light-hearted banter?


    Let's be accurate, BF: I have brought it up twice in total.

    Horses for courses. I think it is sinister. It's the kind of idea that I associate with paranoid, self-hating, middle-class liberals who are paid to sit in a room and come up with ridiculous ideas. Who but a professional academic could think that using white paper and not black paper makes a child more likely to hate black people? This is exactly the kind of anal, "OMG is there the slightest chance I might be racist?!" attitude I was talking about earlier.

    Which is part of the problem. I think it is ridiculous that, in times like these, we are paying someone to do such a pointless job.

    Well it is harmful, really, because it encourages the self-obsessed "OMG am I racist?!" paranoia that inspired it.


    The perpetrators of the crimes which go un-reported by the mainstream media. You can start


    That's easy: they're the ones doing the persecuting. They have an aura of self-satisfaction about them because they are convinced they've "sussed it out" and everyone else is a sleep-walking bigoted fool. (That comment is not aimed at you personally, BF.)
     
  13. bedfordfalls

    bedfordfalls Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    1,858
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Ah but it isn't is it? Because it's not as straightforward as all that. These things never are.

    Here's how your favoured newspaper, The Daily Telegraph, reported the same incident as that which you linked to via the sensationalist Daily Mail article. It paints a much clearer reason for a police presence on that day.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8126357/Muslims-clash-with-police-after-burning-poppy-in-anti-Armistice-Day-protest.html

    Do you see what's missing from the Mail's almost Short-story approach to sensationalizing sensible police protocol? In fact do you see the mention of the other extremist group that the Daily Mail omits in its entirety in its neat little comparison of raving Muslim fanatics with proud little English schoolboys. That's right; it's England's very own home grown hatemongers the EDL.
    The police were there, not out of a namby-pamby desire to give lunatics their right to inflame hatred but to prevent TWO opposing groups of lunatics from turning the streets into a mini-warzone.
    The Telegraph would not be my newspaper of choice as its editorial stance is still openly right wing and, obviously, I don't lean politically in that direction but the completely about face way that it reports on the same story should tell you all you need to know about what's going on with the agenda of newspapers like the Daily Mail...and I'm pretty sure you can't be blind to those agendas, Seymour, so it seems strange to me that you are apparently content to dismiss them and worse use them to validate your arguments.

    Off hand, I genuinely don't know anything about this case, as I'm sure could be said for both of us about dozens of potential examples. I'll maybe look at the article and come back to you when I have a little more time, but I am concerned that you or anyone for that matter think newspapers operate in the way I've bolded above.
    Apologies for life-destroying front page lies are indeed issued all of the time, usually at a much later date with a tiny little comment buried away on page 16 under an article about shoes. This is even the case with things like the Craig Charles case where I certainly don't remember any front page apologies from those happy to scandalise him with rape accusations.

    I'm fairly sure I could go through all of your given examples as I did with the "police escort" one and find alternate reports that throw an entirely new light on them but I'm not here to do that. My point of argument has been that the media simply cannot be trusted to factually report from a neutral standpoint anymore and although you say you recognise this its rather alarming that you still seem to take their word as gospel.


    As they surely should be. The problem with "acknowledging that Britain is Health and Safety mad" is that it's only acknowleding the opinion of the same sort of newspaper agenda that creates that idea in the first place.
    Health and safety laws wern't implemented because mad people in "Brussels" thought we all ought to have a bit more red tape in our lives, they were introduced to combat injuries, maimings and DEATHS in the workplace. That anyone can be against people dying as an it interferes with the civil linerty to act like that Russian electrician is simply extraordinary!
    It's the same argument with the introduction of political correctness, the same reason the Germans's have a strict ban on Nazi iconography. It's an acknowledgement that segments of human race were, not too long ago, really, extraordinarily horrible to other members of the human race and that we want to do all that we can to prevent that reoccuring; something that it has done with alarming frequency throughout the history of civilisation.
    As Douglas Adams memorably pointed out, there was a chap who once got nailed to a tree just for saying how nice it would be if we all went around being pleasant to each other for a change. Two thousand years later and people are, for some reason, still convinced it's a dreadful idea, probably thought up by the EU! :-(

    I think They Live is a very silly film...but then its intentionally so. It stars Rowdy Roddy Piper and has a ridiculous ten minute long fight sequence. But in a strange way that fight sequence illustrates a neat point: just how difficult it is to make people to put on the sunglasses and have a look at how they're being controlled.
    The message is very clear and, I think, very relevent in an age of agender-driven media saturation (something you don't have to be a PhD student to know exists:-( It may be uncomfortable to snap out of the dream that all is well, but all is not well, and people need to wake up.

    And yes, The Thing is a masterpiece. ;-)


    I don't agree that "political correctness caused their mishandling". Institutional racism in the police force caused the mishandling of things like the Stephen Lawrence case and led to the Police having a huge problem in shaking of their image as institutionally racist. THIS is what leads to all the problems you mention (and don't mention) from recruitment policy to playing the numbers game and not wanting to look racist by ignoring crimes committed by asians.

    None of this was "caused by political correctness" which, as I've pointed out, is a fundamentally good-natured idea based on trying not to offend simply so as not to be horrible and hurtful (intentionally or otherwise) to other members of the human race.

    What the Police did in the cases you cite was done to protect their own backs and to try and shrug off a reputation they built for themselves.

    It doesn't cause that reaction in me, for the same reason that Freud talking about the Ego doesn't. Calling the study of human psychology "self obsessed paranoia" is really quite silly. Psychology has lots to teach us about ourselves as human beings. So much happens on a subconscious and unconscious level that we can benefit greatly from academic input. The argument that money shouldn't be spent on "pointless" jobs like this, in whatever economic climate is really a poor one for too many reasons to go into. One of the most important things we can come to understand, as a species, is ourselves and this does, often, involve looking at the things that influence us from an early age internally and without our noticing.
     
  14. simulant37

    simulant37 Science Officer

    Messages:
    11,946
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    The Daily Tory-grah :x
     
  15. Freeborn

    Freeborn Flight Co-Ordinator

    Messages:
    8,313
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Location:
    The Land of Freebornia
    'tis a good point. Rimmer does indeed have some great lines and gets some of biggest laughs in this episode. Reading your post has just made me realise that I haven't personally given Chris the credit he deserves for his part this episode (in my posts at least) Quite possibly because I've always been a big Lister fan and so was focusing on him more in this episode. But yeah, even though it leans more towards being a Lister-based ep (so far as the main characters), some of the Rimmer stuff is pretty darn impressive too.

    Oh and as for your longer post? Well said, sir. Every word. Couldn't have put it better myself (probably quite literally).
     
  16. Androidsandbeingasleep

    Androidsandbeingasleep Third Technician

    Messages:
    30
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Didn't think this one was as good as Trojan, but still had some good bits (Pree, Lister speaking to his 'Dad') although it also had some bad bits (Taiwan Tony and the medi-bot). Probably a 6/10 overall.
     
  17. dodgebizkit

    dodgebizkit Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,321
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v260/justdodgeme/F07EED9B-206F-4123-863A-328F2D9C8091-3065-000004DD28E289CF.jpg

    From the mouth, or fingers of someone "a bit chinesey", well, a chinese girl, the joke only suggests that westerners are bad at passing on the message, and so as westerners, simulant and bedfordfalls were correct to be offended. Asians, however, were not offended.

    And to clarify - I think that the notion that something that doesn't attack a race could be racist and offensive is stupid.
     
  18. simulant37

    simulant37 Science Officer

    Messages:
    11,946
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    How do you know Asians were not offended? From this one persons reaction? Anyway you are ignoring the major offensive element of the show that people are on about Taiwan Tony, it was like something out of Mind Your Language!! You are totally missing the point! :roll:
     
  19. dodgebizkit

    dodgebizkit Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,321
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    That suggests that being black is a negative thing, RD never said that being Asian is negative. However my wife often says that she wishes she was white despite me telling her that her choccolate colour is way more attractive than a white girl's skin (am I offensive to either white or latinamerican people? Is she?) That suggests that that is a way that some black people may have felt in that day and age, and some still do, and therefore I wouldnt see anyone being offended by it - Thpugh if the writer was to say "Now he looked good and was worthy of her love, because he was white", the case would be different.
     
  20. dodgebizkit

    dodgebizkit Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,321
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    If in a Chinese show there was a guy named "English Edward" with a stereotypical English accent, saying how do you do, drinking tea and being overly polite, being voiced by a chinaman, would that be offensive? I can tell you that in every country of the world there are such characters, maybe not called English Edward or British Ben, but they exist in many shows. Why aren't you offended by them?
    There is an ENGLISH AND BLACK servant in fresh prince. Very stereotypical, AFAIK played by an american actor.

    Are you saying that Chinese/ Thai arent worthy of your comedy in this way either? That, my friends, is an offensive implication.
     

Share This Page