|
|
 Originally Posted by wufwugy
How is it insensitive when we don't know if he even meant it that way.
It has nothing to do with him being a jerk on purpose or not. It has to do with the fact everyone knows that stereotype about black people and watermelon and he should have realized he would LOOK like a jerk and at least some of those black people would THINK he did it on purpose. That's why it's insensitive.
If you don't agree it's insensitive you have to at least agree it was thoughtless and not in his own best interests. Still, getting fired for that is a bit much.
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Even if you think in terms of the stereotype of watermelon and black people, how is it insensitive to try to get something you think they'll like?
Because you should realize there's a very large chance that's not how it will come across. See point above.
Originally Posted by wufwugy
TIL if I go to a married man's house, I'm being insensitive by not trying to bang his wife since I'm assuming the stereotype that most married men aren't cucks.
Reducto ad absurdum.
Originally Posted by wufwugy
This whole insensitive thing is the microaggression nonsense in more pleasant wrappings. The silliest thing about all this is that if you go up to a white guy in Tennessee with a straw in his mouth and hand him a six-pack of Bud Light and say "you look like a hillbilly and I know hillbillies like Bud Light so here" he'll just say "hot damn thanks fer dat dere beer fella" or whatever the fuck. But if you bring fried chicken to a party full of black guys because every single black guy you've ever heard opine on fried chicken has said they love it, your white ass is being insensitive.
Haven't tried this with hillbillies, but I'm guessing that if a black person did it, it would not go down well.
Originally Posted by wufwugy
I'm saying that when the motivation for why to do that is wrong, it's wrong.[/FONT][/COLOR]
Agreed.
|
Reply With Quote