Devil With A Red Vespa
Comments
-
MHA, I am sensing from your posts today a serious vitamin D deficiency.
Good God, get outside, man!
Hate to break it to you, but the blanket stuff up there ^^ does not apply to most white folks I know in this town.
Sure, race is out there, and a huge factor behind things...but not everything.
And sometimes (as http://www.blognigger.com was fond of joking about a while back) it actually produces the exact opposite of the effect you describe.
So man, give this piece a rest and get out and get some oxygen to your brain and some vitamin D pumping, because I think we see what happens (above) when you somehow fail to get out on a gorgeous day like this.
One might even consider it a day for planting trees. -
And yeah, I'm more on the puzzled side here with CTK and my fellow admin and mod Mamacita (hola, mi hermana!).
Even if you're going for a sarcasm angle, there was no need for the you-this and you-that and all the off-base speculation and projection. That's precisely the stuff that calls people back from prior detentes (as CTK mentioned) and is an open invitation for things to go downhill really fast. -
Okay Jeffrey. I respectfully disagree. There is projection, and maybe speculation, but neither dissuade the certainty of truth here.
CTK my friend isn't scoping out said white chick, and my own input here was to use this scenario as a prism through which reality is seen. What's weird is that conversations with my buddies (offline and off) echo the sentiment I have about how this thing panned out for him. But that's just me and my friends.
What bothers me about the majority reaction from people -- including you Jeffrey -- is NOT that you don't see it the way that I have envisoned it (and by default the way my buddy envisions it); let me repeat, you DON'T have to see it my way. What bothers me is that there is apparently NO ROOM in your mind to see it any other way than the way YOU envisioned it. At the beginning of this thread I said in response to those who presented plausible alternative perspectives that yeah, those ARE other ways of seeing this situation. You guys are saying that how my friend is seeing it is DEFINITELY NOT the way it went down! And what I am saying to you here, and what I said in the other threads now shut down, is that there are other ways of seeing reality out there, and if there is a continual denial of this way, then there is going to be constant conflict, and to a certain degree resentment. You have said in essence, that race is NOT a plausible explanation. I vigorously disagree. It is. The fact that you leave NO ROOM in your mind for race being a factor is WORSE than my friend's perspective, because at least he left room in his mind to see it differently. In essence, ironically, he's is more openminded than most of you.... Not what you expected, huh? That's because you're busy lookin' at me, and not looking at yourselves...
Believe me, I got my sun.
Okay Jeffrey, you can close it down. The lesson has been taught. -
you can envision it any way you want. It doesn't make it the truth . The only thing you proved is that you wanted to see it your way without knowing what the reality of the situation is.
-
MHA wrote: Okay Jeffrey. I respectfully disagree. There is projection, and maybe speculation, but neither dissuade the certainty of truth here.
CTK my friend isn't scoping out said white chick, and my own input here was to use this scenario as a prism through which reality is seen. What's weird is that conversations with my buddies (offline and off) echo the sentiment I have about how this thing panned out for him. But that's just me and my friends.
What bothers me about the majority reaction from people -- including you Jeffrey -- is NOT that you don't see it the way that I have envisoned it (and by default the way my buddy envisions it); let me repeat, you DON'T have to see it my way. What bothers me is that there is apparently NO ROOM in your mind to see it any other way than the way YOU envisioned it. At the beginning of this thread I said in response to those who presented plausible alternative perspectives that yeah, those ARE other ways of seeing this situation. You guys are saying that how my friend is seeing it is DEFINITELY NOT the way it went down! And what I am saying to you here, and what I said in the other threads now shut down, is that there are other ways of seeing reality out there, and if there is a continual denial of this way, then there is going to be constant conflict, and to a certain degree resentment. You have said in essence, that race is NOT a plausible explanation. I vigorously disagree. It is. The fact that you leave NO ROOM in your mind for race being a factor is WORSE than my friend's perspective, because at least he left room in his mind to see it differently. In essence, ironically, he's is more openminded than most of you.... Not what you expected, huh? That's because you're busy lookin' at me, and not looking at yourselves...
Believe me, I got my sun.
Okay Jeffrey, you can close it down. The lesson has been taught.
NOT
DON'T
NO ROOM
YOU
ARE
DEFINITELY NOT
NOT
NO
WORSE
That's actually poetic. :sunny: -
No. That's not what I've proved tsarina. I don't WANT to see it my way;; I just see it my way, as you see it YOUR way. There are many ways to see the same situation.
I am saying that my buddy's way of seeing the situation is just as valid as is YOUR way. Please, see my 2nd or 3rd post where I say something to the effect of my buddy (and me) being able to see other alternatives other than the one we envision. What I find troubling is that though he and I can see it an alternative way, you apparently do not, nor does Jeffrey, or CTK and others. In their mind, my friend's troubling perspective is wholly implausible. And I find that troubling. I admit that there is a tendency to view things through 'the prism of race', but to insinuate that race is never a factor is disingenious, and reeks of denial. Just look around you. Look at the other threads in this blog. Race runs throughout! The tendency from naysayers is to deny the race prism for denying sake, and no other reason. There has to be a medium, at the least. If CTK said, okay, 'I can see WHY your buddy MAY think that way, but how about this....' If our 'Mexican' friend said, 'okay senor, I see how one could think that way...' then sure. But to say, 'you can't always see everything as a factor of race is to deny reality. It truly is. Everything about Crown Heights is based on race. Do y'all not recall what happened some years ago? Do you not see who goes where and why? Race is a viable element of every experience. To deny it as an element in this scenario is not to look at the scenario objectively. In addition, to cast aspersions about me for making them -- yep, you guessed it Jeffrey -- ad hominem in disguise (your 'get some fresh air and sun,' comment dude -- totally inappropriate) is to in essence attack the man because you don't or can't refute the argument he makes. -
........
-
MHA wrote: Okay Jeffrey. I respectfully disagree. There is projection, and maybe speculation, but neither dissuade the certainty of truth here.
Projection and speculation have nothing to do with the truth. And the certainty of the truth is only known by the girl on the Vespa. And you certainly dont want to talk to her.
. -
I'm not saying "I'm right, youre wrong".
I'm saying that you dont know what the truth of the situation is, nor do you want to find out. You only want to present your views. -
Well, Tsarina, here's the thing. I am not gonna approach this young lady as the experience is not mine. I am a person removed from the whole thing. Also, it's not about hearing what she has to say at this point, but in a Buddhist fashion, I think it's more important to be aware of the journey we all took as a result of this situation. Look at all that thas been written about this. It's all food for thought. I think what's important is what we have all learned. In a sense, the scenario and how we have processed it is akin to looking at impressionist art: What's important is not the image the artist has painted, but rather our reaction to the painting. Observe your observations was the lesson I was trying to impart, and the lesson that I have learned because of the DWARV thread.
-
Okay Tsarina, whatever you say.
-
My comment about getting out referred to the fact that it's gorgeous out today and many folks I know were out for most of it, not online.
I think Mamacita said it best above...Mamacita wrote: (pulling all-caps quotes from MHA)
Such absolutes.
NOT
DON'T
NO ROOM
YOU
ARE
DEFINITELY NOT
NOT
NO
WORSE
That's actually poetic. :sunny:
There's a big difference between seeing and acknowledging issues of race, weighing them...and refusing to see any other point of view other than your own.
Oddly enough, it was actually you trying to make that very point that refused to even acknowledge (let alone weigh in) any other point of view other than your own.
And that's where this conversation is, at the moment. -
No, that's inaccurate Jeffrey. One of the first things I did say was that all of the alternate perspecives were wholly plausible. That's one of the first things I said. I said, something to the effect of thanking folks for alternate views. I kept on repeating the plausibility of my buddy's perspective however, because I kept on hoping that y'all could see that his way too is a valid/plaiusible way. But Jeffrey, you have yet to say, yeah, 'his way is also plausible'. What you have said in essence is that his viewpoint is not plausible.
-
MHA you haven't really explained to us how race could possibly have been a reasonable factor
I would say there's a 99% chance homegirl doesn't know who got her keys back to her
I would also say there's a 53% chance her parents got her that Vespa, and that she was afforded a lifestyle that could result in utter cluelessness about keeping property safe, etc., which would make her being totally unappreciative more reasonable.
Nearly all your speculations- from the proposed conversation to just the basic idea that somehow the chick even knows who returned the keys and is intentionally avoiding dude- don't seem to be based on anything more than baseless assumptions about white people and the intentions of removing any kind of missteps from your boy's reactions...
Again.... all I'm saying is... step back and really think about the actual importance of said events and if it's even worth your boy expending any energy thinking over. He did the right thing and his good deed went unanswered... what more is there to think or talk about? -
CTK has it, IMO.
Let me cut to the chase here...MHA wrote: Please, see my 2nd or 3rd post where I say something to the effect of my buddy (and me) being able to see other alternatives other than the one we envision. What I find troubling is that though he and I can see it an alternative way, you apparently do not, nor does Jeffrey, or CTK and others. In their mind, my friend's troubling perspective is wholly implausible. And I find that troubling. I admit that there is a tendency to view things through 'the prism of race', but to insinuate that race is never a factor is disingenious, and reeks of denial.
Total and utter conflation. That comment was never offered in the context or concerning the issues you just changed it to represent.MHA wrote: Just look around you. Look at the other threads in this blog. Race runs throughout! The tendency from naysayers is to deny the race prism for denying sake, and no other reason. There has to be a medium, at the least.
The initial parts of your statement above were never in question, so the resulting conclusions you attempt to make here make no sense and appear to be little more than merely self-serving diversions.MHA wrote: If CTK said, okay, 'I can see WHY your buddy MAY think that way, but how about this....' If our 'Mexican' friend said, 'okay senor, I see how one could think that way...' then sure.
You still don't get it. Until you have any actual information here about..
1) what was said to the Vespa owner
2) if she even saw the note on her Vespa
3) what (among a million valid or invalid things) may have run through her mind
4) several other key details critical to the leaps and assumptions you have made here
...then you have nothing here. Nothing. Just you and your buddy assuming the worst over several other possibilities, absent any additional information that might justify eliminating down to a single conclusion.
Sure, it could be race. But I'l give you several other instances where race was, to borrow your own words:
NO, DEFINITELY NOT, NO ROOM for consideration in what really happened.MHA wrote: But to say, 'you can't always see everything as a factor of race is to deny reality. It truly is. Everything about Crown Heights is based on race. Do y'all not recall what happened some years ago? Do you not see who goes where and why? Race is a viable element of every experience.
No, again you completely miss the point of the original statement made (and overall here). The point is that there are also several viable scenarios here where race has truly nothing to do with it. But it's impossible to know since no additional key details are available. There's simply no getting beyond that to narrow it down.
And you refuse to even acknowledge that. You say above that you acknowledge it, but then you continue to assert nonetheless that your buddy must be right (in spite of little information) and anyone that disagrees to this one projection of the situation is somehow blind to issues of racism that simply must be at the heart of everything, and anyone who says otherwise must be utterly flawed (<-- to put it far more nicely than was inferred above).MHA wrote: To deny it as an element in this scenario is not to look at the scenario objectively.
To deny it as a potential element in this scenario, yes. To deny it as an absolute element in this scenario since there's only a tiny bit of information to go on here to begin with, again...NO, DEFINITELY NOT.
That is what you are not getting when we talk about the many scenarios possibly in play here. You refuse to lend any equal weight to any possible scenario or mere opinion other than your own.MHA wrote: In addition, to cast aspersions about me for making them -- yep, you guessed it Jeffrey -- ad hominem in disguise (your 'get some fresh air and sun,' comment dude -- totally inappropriate) is to in essence attack the man because you don't or can't refute the argument he makes.
Okay, let's revisit the process there. I came back from a glorious afternoon spent all around Brooklyn to find that someone had spent much of the afternoon here, launching invectives directly at others.
Instead of issuing a more confrontational warning for personally-directed ad hominem stuff, I decided to take the edge off and say hey, it's a beautiful day, get out and enjoy it instead of staying in, digging in here.
Ah, irony of ironies, being taken for an ad hominem attack while trying to ease up on someone in issuing a reprimand for their ad hominem attacks.
I acknowledge here that I took the wrong approach above, since it was wide open to a completely different and unintended interpretation. I apologize for coming across as you mention above.
Let me instead be more direct here:
MHA, I have been clear throughout (often at pains) that all viewpoints are welcome here so long as people play fair and address the issues, not merely issue personal attacks against people of opposing viewpoints.
So I will say it again more clearly this time.
The whole "you people" thing is tired and weak and only regresses conversation.
Ditch it now and continue more well informed and mature conversation or move on.
Either way, cheap shots and mere, self-serving blanket statements are not welcome here.
I hope that is understood more clearly. -
Jeffrey, I disagree with you.
I NEVER said what alternative explanation you offer could not be truth.
I did say that an equally viable, alternative explanation, is the one offered by my friend.
Your statement -- to paraphrase -- 'until we know what SHE thinks then one cannot say race is what motivates her' is true. I agree with you!
But for whatever reason, not until YOUR LAST POST did you relent and state that the interpretation I offer is even on the table.
In my second and third post of this thread I agree with those who posted before saying -- to paraphrase -- 'Yes, those are ALL plausible explanations, and that there is value in also taking alternative perspectives into consideration.'
You state:
"To deny it as a potential element in this scenario, yes. To deny it as an absolute element in this scenario since there's only a tiny bit of information to go on here to begin with, again...NO, DEFINITELY NOT."
I have NEVER said that how my buddy interprets it is the ONLY explanation; I never said that his way was the ABSOLUTE truth. I said that it was a viable explanation, as viable as the one you offered, as viable as the interpretations others offered. So your quoted statement above doesn't negate anything I said. You are misreading. My point of contention has not been that 'all of you are wrong and I am right' -- to paraphrase Tsarina. My point is that because none of us know what DWARV thinks, none of us has a reading on reality. We only have how we see the world: Our own reality. And the normative gaze through the racial prism is just as valid as the ones you offer.
My 'invective' as you call it was no such thing. I called you no names. I simply pointed out a fallacy in your argument, and if you want to call it an invective, by all means do that. Dude, if you want to censor me because you don't like what I have to say, then go right ahead. YOU are overreacting here. When Hamilton was there showing imagery of Black Irishman and talking about 'Spittutsis' where was the harsh reprimand and the warning? SHOW IT TO ME. When he was making racialized jokes, none of you moderators gave him the kaibash you are giving me now.
Dude, I AM having an adult conversation. If you want to characterise my words as 'you people' then so be it. If you want to censor what I have to say just because YOU don't like it, then so be it. I have adhered to the rules of discourse here.
YOUR whole screed about me having no viable proof here is equally applicable to EVERYONE'S interpretation of what happened. None of us having any viable proof. We are all filling in the blanks with what we think happened.Just because you don't agree with what I think -- don't take that opportunity to focus on me.
My concern is with (as I said to Tsarina) how we CHOOSE to see the story, how we choose to fill in the blanks, and what we choose to see as plausible, and what we choose to see as implausible. It says more about US than anything about the accuracy of the story.
This is the last thing I said to Tsarina:
"Look at all that has been written about this. It's all food for thought. I think what's important is what we have all learned. In a sense, the scenario and how we have processed it is akin to looking at Impressionist art: What's important is not the image the artist has painted, but rather OUR REACTION TO THE PAINTING. 'Observe your observations' was the lesson I was trying to impart, and the lesson that I have learned because of the DWARV thread."
Where is the absolutism you accuse me of? Where is it??
Observe your observations dude. It is what YOU think it is, as well as what I think it is. I have given value to how others see the world, and it is my hope that you will do the same. You didn't until your last post; albeit reluctantly. And that is where your contradiction was. And I pointed that out to you. That's an invective? How so?
In the absence of knowing what motivated DWARV all interpretations are equally valid. To discount any of them because they are not palatable to you doesn't bring you any closer to ascertaining truth. You don't like the race perspective then fine, more power to you. I don't like it either, but I see what I see.
I have been adult, I have been mature. It's not cool to say that I wasn't Jeffrey, as immaturity has not occurred. Those are just words without backing. I could easily say that about you, but THAT wouldn't be very mature would it? I assume all who read these words will ascertain truth and maturity. -
It seems the whole thread was set up as a black vs white thing anyway, just from the title --setting up the woman as a white devil-- when all we know about her is that she didn't go out of her way to say thank you for the return of her keys.
from the urban dictionary:
"white devil white person who takes advantage of a minority. A thief. Often representing "The Man". An oppressor. This does not apply to the average person of caucasian descent.
That White Devil stole my land."
And by the way, yes, to answer your previous question, I was implying that posting about a neighbor essentially behind her back, calling her a devil and going on and on about her (probably with hundreds of views to this thread) is bad behavior. Maybe not against forum rules, but still kind of rude and thoughtless. Maybe even ruder and more thoughtless than someone neglecting to make a thank you phone call to a number that was taped on her vespa. -
MHA,
Your whole construct here is to get people to jump to conclusions on extremely limited, one-sided, second-hand info as you have jumped right to in your original post.
Right from the start in your first post about all this you even attempt by rhetoric to discredit a list of several possibilities before stating the following premature / foregone conclusion:MHA wrote: He looked me dead in the eye then said he wouldn't, because he knew that I knew that she knew the sorry deal.
And if folks want to skip reading the rest of this thread, here's how the rest of it plays out:
MHA gets upset at and injects the very same sort of discriminatory blanket treatment he and his friend decry of this Vespa person against anyone else that refuses to simply jump to a conclusion as he did.
He tries to change the playing field midway through the game by saying that all along here no one has said it might be racism.
But this was never a discussion. It was set up entirely differently. He set this up by knocking down all other explanations and arriving at his own conclusion in his very first post, in spite of insufficient info pointing any way.
All others here that followed were merely challenging his arrival at that conclusion, or any conclusion, for that matter, due to an extremely limited, one-sided account of things. Second-hand, no less.
But apparently for challenging this foregone, a priori conclusion due to complete and utter lack of information, anyone that would challenge his hasty, unsubstantiated verdict or any of his assumptions wiping out other possible explanations (again, right there in the original post) is labeled a "denier" or worse, race-wise.
He may try to change the conversation here, even claim himself to be a victim (in addition to his friend) or some other held-down archetype in the conversation here.
But he arrived at a steamy, seething (as he worded it) verdict in post one and would not be challenged on that, period.
And no amount of shuffling or redirecting words after the fact changes that. -
I don't see how the racial scenario is ANY more plausible than say the scenario I presented
The problem is when you look at EVERYTHING through the 'racial prism', you tend to jump to conclusions that don't exactly make sense
Has anyone denied that race can be a factor in interaction CH? Fuck no. But given the complete lack of info, I think it's pretty bold to say it should be considered as a factor here.... MHA your proposed convo between the DWARV and her landlord or whoever really speaks to how ridiculous the prospect of race being a factor is here- one would have to make some pretty wild assumptions about white people etc. to think it could factor in here.
We all have our own personal prisms through which we view the world.... yours may be primarily colored by race... I think a more productive prism to view through is one colored by knowledge of GENERAL human behavior and reason. Race is a factor in many aspects of American life, but it's DEFINITELY not as big a factor as you think, even in Crown Heights... -
jeffrey wrote: MHA, I am sensing from your posts today a serious vitamin D deficiency.
Of course to this MHA might still reply, race matters: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/painter/2009-04-19-your-health_N.htm
I'm just being silly ... -
Hah, oh man. :oops: :shock:
Double the "oh man" reaction if you read the comments in that article. :shock: :shock: :shock:
I was just playing upon the funny vitamin D comment in the mouse-over text of this past Wednesday's xkcd:
http://xkcd.com/748/
(hover over comic image there to see what I'm referring to, lol)
But yeah, thanks for some much-needed levity here. :P -
The reason for me using the word 'Devil' was an ode to history on many fronts.
Firstly, I thought of the usage the Chinese gave it when describing the hordes that made many attempts to storm the Great Wall of China. I thought that it would bring to mind the perspective of (yes) race, namely the gaze of the individual using the word. In this sense, the 'foreign devil' as used by the 'native' Chinese.
Secondly, I thought of the usage of the word that Walter Mosley employed for the title of his great book (and a great movie) 'Devil in a Blue Dress'. I fashioned my buddy as a latter day Easy Rawlins, and in it was an inside joke for he and I when he saw the title. After all, he had to do some lay investigation to find out where this young lady lives, and when he 'solved the case' so to speak, I said to him in jest, 'You're like a Walter Mosley character.' I liked the way 'Devil With A Red Vespa' sounds, and I thought it would attract readers.
Thirdly, I thought that the usage of the word would bring to the fore the Nation of Islam's use of the word 'devil' -- which I contend they get from the Chinese and I believe Islamic sources -- would be understood. As I said earlier, when I made explicit the use i.e. my 'white devil' comment, I did it in jest -- in the same way that Hamilton had frequently made racially charged humor a running theme (check out his 'Spitutsi' commentary for instance). I actually used the term 'white devil' not to defame the owner of the Red Vespa, but to parody MYSELF, in the same way that Mr. Wayan's usage of the term 'White Devil' in his many parodies of Minister Louis Farrakhan were jabs made at the minister, and NOT at white people; I guess y'all never watched 'In Living Color'. One of the moderators took issue with it, and I explicitly apologized, and made it clear that the attempt was humor. I think it interesting that the manner in which I was verbally reprimanded was inordinately greater than Hamilton's supposed own reprimand (I still can't find it), but that's another story...
CTK, I am not arguing that your perspective on what happened is any less plausible than what my buddy is saying. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean that what you say isn't truth. Many (Tsarina and Jeffrey -- and even myself) have said esentially, there is no way of knowing what motivated DWARV to act in the way that she did.... Again, I AGREE. There is no way to know. Believe it or not, I knew this going in. The point of me starting this thread was not to discern the TRUTH, but rather, the TRUTHS; please note the 's'. I think how we see a situation is determined by who we are. I just saw Avatar for the 6th or 7th time. There is something the female lead says to the Great White Hope who saves the Na'Vi. She says that you cannot teach someone how to see. They have to see for themselves. Her mother says soon after that 'it has proven difficult to teach the Skypeople as it is difficult to fill a cup already full'. I contend that our cups are already full. It is difficult to see the same situation through the eyes of another; let's just admit that there are alternate ways to see the same situation.
My buddy has his own way, you have your own way -- we all have our own way of seeing the same situation. His version is HIS version. Your version is YOUR version. We all have 'racial' prisms. Manning Marable's thesis in his book, 'The Prism of Race' is that we all have the prism, but we choose to either filter race in, or filter it out, the way our eye chooses to filter in certain light wavelengths, and to exclude others. The issue of contention is not that you have an alternate perspective that cannot be the truth. The issue of contention is that my buddy's contention is not considered as an option as well; you are choosing to fiter how he sees reality out.
What Jeffrey states as me positing myself and my buddy 'as victim' here is this sense that while we are asked to accept your perspectives as plausible, yet you cannot accept 'ours', even if it makes no sense to you; my buddy and I are willing to accept 'yours'...
It's my opinion that this lack of acceptance is emblematic of race relations in this country: The tension that exists between people who see race as a viable ingredient, and those eager to delete it as such.
Jeffrey, I will take my other issues with you offline henceforth. I will not respond to any of your other comments about me in this forum. -
Likewise, then I'm done with this here as well:
Again: you jumped to a seethingly-worded race-baiting conclusion (readyour own final sentences there) in your very first post based on only limited, second-hand information from one side. In your eyes here, every decision is merely a function of race and there is simply no other explanation, writing off other explanations right there in that same first post.
Then you criticized others (often with very colorful, pointed imagery) for refusing to make the same unsubstantiated jump to a very narrow, derisive conclusion, often lumping on other racial inferences about them and their race.
Folks said over and over there's no solid info one way or another.
In case you missed it, that means it could be anything, not just the negative conclusion you drew in post number one, we'll never know.
And in case you missed that, that means that it could be what you say or a million other reasons. How did you not get that.
Let it go man.
In spite of your claims at the end of your post above, there is no conspiracy of people afoot here here, be that
- "whitechicks" (preferring to give more to white beggars than black beggars, or preferring to defend fellow "whitechicks" merely on the basis of being "whitechicks"
- or anyone trying to delete the effect of race relations in everyday life
It all boils down to whether one wants to dwell in the problems of life (calling them inescapable), or in the solutions.
But it appears we are at an impasse there, so I see little need to continue repeating the same points. With that I, too am done here. -
It has been an exciting few weeks here at Brooklynian I must say
Though I don't know that anyone has really grown from it -
Again, you misunderstand.
I assume when you say, " It all boils down to whether one wants to dwell in the problems of life (calling them inescapable), or in the solutions," you are framing the race perspective (I offer)as dwelling 'in the problems of life' and the 'solutions' the non-race perspective (others and you offered) as not; Interesting.
Despite discussing the other issues you raise here in a private message to me,you decided bring it out publicly. I will not respond to those issues here, as - again - I do not think it's appropriate. I have responded to one of the issues to you in a private message, and I will continue to do so for the others. My fear is that the issue of the 'racial prism' as it pertains to the DWARV scenario will be overlooked, and lo, what will happen next is you lowering the boom on this discussion. I do not want that. This obfuscates the issue, and instead of limiting discussion to what MHA thinks, I want to broaden the discussion to what we all think.
Jeffrey has said that the truth cannot be wholly ascertrained. I agree with him. I said it, he said it (reluctantly I might add), others said it. My point is, what does our interpretation of the issue say about US? Not ME, but US. MAny seem to think that the way I see it is a way that it ought not to be seen; a way that so obviously CANNOT exist. Yet, at the same time it has been said that no one can know what the truth actually is. But many have adjudged that my way is so obviously not the way; Interesting. How can you admit to not knowing what the truth is, yet say with confidence, MHA, your way is definitely NOT the way? That's a contradiction.
Like an impressionistic painting, where the real conversation about what occurs on the canvas is an internal one, what we see here, I argue, is also an internal one. When we begin to look at someone's perspective of the painting and say 'no, that image is not there' then we devalue our own perspective.
This is the same point I attempted to make when we were vigorously discussing the spitters one the 'spitting thread'. I tried to bring to the fore, what the spitter sees, and that was considered something that one ought not to do. My point there was not justifying the spitter, but rather trying to UNDERSTAND the spitter; to see what the spitter sees.
Jeffrey can let it go if he wants to. I am glad I won't have to respond to his critiques anymore publicly. My assumption is that I can 'let it go' if I choose to.
And why is this important to me? It is important because race (i.e. DIFFERENCE) DOES imbue everything. Recently some variant of the Taliban terrorized the Ahmadi -- an ethnic group in Pakistan that has a belief about a particular Sufi/ Islamic prophet that the Pakistani government finds offensive. Girdling the issue is the fact that the Ahmadi are perceived as inglorious 'others'. In Israel the Israeli's are accused of unnecessary blodletting. This isn't happening between people who see each other as the same --- or even equals. This happens as a result of people perceivng each other as threat -- as 'the Other'. In Rwanda, the Tutsi government is becoming increasingly hostile against the Hutus, and an American law professor was imprisoned and is now undergoing interrogation by the Tutsi authorities because this professor is representing a Hutu politician who has the nerve to accuse the Tutsi government of crimes against humanity; here are people who view each other as different doing harm to one another because of it. In the Sudan, you have the so-called Arabists killing the so-called Animists over difference. The point of this is not to perpetuate difference, but to UNDERSTAND it, to see WHY people -- yes different people -- have different perspectives of the same thing. Jeffrey judges how I see the world. You might agree with him -- cool. But it doesn't change how I see the world. It's merely a judgement of it. I would hope that the objective beyond judgement would be to understand how 'the Other' sees the world in the manner that they do. That's my attempt when I read stated opinions of what I think.
The DEEPER our compassion
the GREATER our understanding
the LESSER our vexations -
MHA wrote: Again, you misunderstand.
Dude, for the last time, let it go.
I assume when you say, " It all boils down to whether one wants to dwell in the problems of life (calling them inescapable), or in the solutions," you are framing the race perspective (I offer)as dwelling 'in the problems of life' and the 'solutions' the non-race perspective (others and you offered) as not; Interesting.
Despite discussing the other issues you raise here in a private message to me,you decided bring it out publicly. I will not respond to those issues here, as - again - I do not think it's appropriate. I have responded to one of the issues to you in a private message, and I will continue to do so for the others. My fear is that the issue of the 'racial prism' as it pertains to the DWARV scenario will be overlooked, and lo, what will happen next is you lowering the boom on this discussion. I do not want that. This obfuscates the issue, and instead of limiting discussion to what MHA thinks, I want to broaden the discussion to what we all think.
Jeffrey has said that the truth cannot be wholly ascertrained. I agree with him. I said it, he said it (reluctantly I might add), others said it. My point is, what does our interpretation of the issue say about US? Not ME, but US. MAny seem to think that the way I see it is a way that it ought not to be seen; a way that so obviously CANNOT exist. Yet, at the same time it has been said that no one can know what the truth actually is. But many have adjudged that my way is so obviously not the way; Interesting. How can you admit to not knowing what the truth is, yet say with confidence, MHA, your way is definitely NOT the way? That's a contradiction.
Like an impressionistic painting, where the real conversation about what occurs on the canvas is an internal one, what we see here, I argue, is also an internal one. When we begin to look at someone's perspective of the painting and say 'no, that image is not there' then we devalue our own perspective.
This is the same point I attempted to make when we were vigorously discussing the spitters one the 'spitting thread'. I tried to bring to the fore, what the spitter sees, and that was considered something that one ought not to do. My point there was not justifying the spitter, but rather trying to UNDERSTAND the spitter; to see what the spitter sees.
Jeffrey can let it go if he wants to. I am glad I won't have to respond to his critiques anymore publicly. My assumption is that I can 'let it go' if I choose to.
And why is this important to me? It is important because race (i.e. DIFFERENCE) DOES imbue everything. Recently some variant of the Taliban terrorized the Ahmadi -- an ethnic group in Pakistan that has a belief about a particular Sufi/ Islamic prophet that the Pakistani government finds offensive. Girdling the issue is the fact that the Ahmadi are perceived as inglorious 'others'. In Israel the Israeli's are accused of unnecessary blodletting. This isn't happening between people who see each other as the same --- or even equals. This happens as a result of people perceivng each other as threat -- as 'the Other'. In Rwanda, the Tutsi government is becoming increasingly hostile against the Hutus, and an American law professor was imprisoned and is now undergoing interrogation by the Tutsi authorities because this professor is representing a Hutu politician who has the nerve to accuse the Tutsi government of crimes against humanity; here are people who view each other as different doing harm to one another because of it. In the Sudan, you have the so-called Arabists killing the so-called Animists over difference. The point of this is not to perpetuate difference, but to UNDERSTAND it, to see WHY people -- yes different people -- have different perspectives of the same thing. Jeffrey judges how I see the world. You might agree with him -- cool. But it doesn't change how I see the world. It's merely a judgement of it. I would hope that the objective beyond judgement would be to understand how 'the Other' sees the world in the manner that they do. That's my attempt when I read stated opinions of what I think.
The DEEPER our compassion
the GREATER our understanding
the LESSER our vexations
You picked a squabble with another Admin/Mod then called me out publicly to intervene on your behalf (very not cool) AND separately pm'd me privately, and I only responded in kind.
I left as completely confidential and private the items you sent to me in private.
I responded in public only to those things you stated in public.
Period. Enough doublespeak and misrepresenting what was said, and where to score cheap, dishonest points.
And yet again, with your duplicity above. Saying this is the last you will post, then pm'ing me, then pm'img me again, then posting again above full of actual cheap digs at me after I've said I've spoken my peace.
What you are missing is that it is not your politics, not your beliefs that has worn most peoples' patience with you very thin on these boards (based on many, many separate and individual conversations with various users and fellow Admins and Moderators to-date).
It is your behavior. Your doing. Nothing else. No other excuses.
Duplicitously and dishonestly throwing invectives out there, then shuffling back with the tired old "innoncent me? I was only joking" routine or just flat out denial of your own words.
Let me make this simple for you, and this is the last time I will do this for you (yet again):
Your beliefs are welcome here.
The disrespectful and merely provocative behavior you continue to exhibit here is not.
Now, you can run that up the flagpole of denial and blame the great big bogeyman of racism for this development as you have done with nearly everything else on these boards instead of looking within yourself for any personal responsibility, but at the end of the day, this world is what you make of it, and this warning is 100% about what you have made here, nothing else.
Please move on, or you will be moved on. -
^ =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>
-
Jeffrey my brother, it is obvious that I cannot respond to you point by point without you construing what I say in ways I did not intend -- and thusly censoring me. So I will not respond. You hold the power here.
To quote you, 'merely provocative,' (oxymoronic, but yes, I am a provocateur); disrespectful - I disagree. Disrespect was never intended. If someone construed my words as disrespectful, please, PM me, let me know what I said that was disrespectful to you, so that I can adjudge for myself, and if need be, I can express my apologies to you. I mean that.
I am surprised that Jeffrey has received critical PM's about what I have said, yet the persons from whom I have received PM's have been nothing but amiable, with whom I have had great discourse. I am wholly open to PM about issues with what I have said; please, let me know who you are.
Conflict is inevitable; but how you handle it is not. If you have issue with how I've handled conflict here, please, let me know. -
I have to post to agree with Jeffrey about this thread and MHA comments. this thread was initially a discussion on manners and behavior regarding the Vespa situation.
Excruciating effort has been used to try to get people to agree that this is a racial incident (or possibly a racial incident).
So much effort has been used to try to interchange "truth" with "opinion".
There has been alot of polite disclaiming and seemingly rational debate but what I remember most was the reply on Sat Jun 05, 10 3:09 pm when I realized that "objective" discourse wasn't going to be happening, and I erased my posted reply.
It reminded of the black panther dude on Nostrand who was displaying pictures of lynchings. I stopped to look and we had a conversation that I summed up to him as "So all black people are innocent , and all white people are guiltly?" and he said Yes.
Well that was his opinion, or his "truth" but I think that alot of people will discounting that theory and also the racially motivated vespa theory. And perhaps why you're not getting much validation from people on that theory isnt because we are all so prejudice, its because the theory is a little "out there" -
I think we need a few more novel-sized posts in the mix... just to clarify each others opinions once more...
Let's just assume she was an absent-minded hipster who wouldn't be friendly or thankful to anyone... she probably went home that night and left her keys in the front door... because she is just to cool and nonchalant to think about such trivial things...that's what I'm picturing here.
By the way... it was very nice of the guy to get involved and leave a note, but it is said that you shouldn't give something to get something... truly kind acts can/should be performed with anonymity.... Sanctimonious, I know. I'm definitely not on this level of kindness, I would want some freaking recognition too!
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds