Asked by Anonymous
I can only assume you haven’t been following me all that long, because it’s really only recently that I’ve been talking a lot about Jen Lawrence, and the usual targets of my internet rage tend to be more in the “Steven Moffat and his gang of cronies” area.
The thing is, I can think of exactly four celebrities who are white women who I think are assholes: Jen Lawrence, Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift, and Amanda Palmer.
And I can’t even count the number of white male celebrities who I think are assholes: Mel Gibson, Jared Leto, Sean Penn, Roman Polanski (and anyone who defends him), Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Robert Downey Junior, Woody Allen, Steven Fry, Chuck Lorre, Orson Scott Card, Martin Freeman, Gary Ross, Steven Moffat, Adam Baldwin, Chuck Norris, Charlie Day, Taran Killam, Michael Fassbender, David O. Russell, Daniel Tosh, Anthony Jeselnik, and those are just the ones I came up with in the last minute.
Now, I try to bring up criticisms of these guys whenever I see someone trying to defend them (except Taran Killam, my hatred for him is not grounded in any objective reason). The thing is, I don’t see people defending these clowns nearly as often as I see people defending Jen Lawrence’s nonsense.
Maybe that means I’m just following the right people, or that I’m just ignorant to the people who are defending them, but the reason it seems like I post more often about Jen Lawrence is because in the last few weeks, people have been reblogging things ad nauseam about how her problems aren’t an issue, don’t exist, or should simply be disregarded.
While I’ve seen tons of people acting like Jen Lawrence isn’t an asshole, the only defenders I seem to see of the white men listed above are the people who send me death threats when I mention their problems apropos of nothing.
As for the superheroes thing, I’m not sure what exactly you’re getting at here. I have two favorite superheroes, Batman and Superman, and I maintain that the only reason I like them is because they’re not real, and that if they were, I’d want Batman locked up and I’d need Superman to publicly divulge his identity and for there to be checks on his power or else I would never feel safe.
However, with the Oscar dust settling, and some of those other dudes coming back to relevance soon, I’m sure you’ll be seeing more criticisms of them in no time. However, I’ll be sure to keep this in mind for future posts, and I’m glad you brought it to my attention so I can make sure to correct in in the future.
Also, I don’t know anything about Ben Affleck, but if he’s got some problems, can someone let me know so I can adjust my opinions of him accordingly? I’m turning off anon because that list of white dudes I think are assholes is practically inviting death threats into my inbox, so be forewarned, you’ll have to sign your name to your response.
Asked by Anonymous
I really shouldn’t get any sort of praise for meeting the minimum standard of decency, especially since I know women who’ve been saying the exact same thing and being ignored at best and met with hostility at worst.
Asked by Anonymous
It’s like, imagine you’re going to order a pizza. You tell your friends that you hate anchovies, so you don’t want them on your pizza. Your friend is like “you can’t act like all pizza has anchovies!”
Of course, you respond “I know, but some pizza does, and I want to make sure there aren’t any anchovies on mine.”
Then they’re like “okay, so you hate anchovies, and I agree, they’re gross, but it’s not fair to single out pizza! Pizza isn’t the only food that can have anchovies, lots of other foods have anchovies!”
And you respond, “right, but we’re talking specifically about pizza here, the fact that other foods have anchovies too is irrelevant.”
Your friend replies, “well, I never hear you bring up anchovies when we order other foods, like hamburgers or chicken wings!”
Naturally, you say “right, but statistically speaking, those foods are less likely to contain anchovies, and there isn’t really widespread acceptance of anchovies on those foods that makes people act like I should just let it slide when people put anchovies on them despite my distaste for them. Now can we PLEASE just order the pizza with ANY other topping?”
Your friend’s reply: “Ugh, with such high standards, you’re NEVER going to get any pizza, let alone pizza you LIKE.”
Your response: “Fine, if I can avoid the likelihood of anchovies, I’ll just get something else.”
Your friend: “Wow, why do you hate pizza so much?”
Asked by Anonymous
On one hand, I don’t care for making fun of people with mental illnesses or disorders.
On the other, you can’t subscribe to a “religion” that preaches that mental illnesses and disorders aren’t real and that any treatments other than giving money to their “church” is a scam, and claim that scientology cured you of the disorder you thought you had, but then turn around and say “I couldn’t help it, I’m dyslexic” when people criticize you, as a professional performer, for flubbing your lines during a performance.
Either the “church” of scientology cured his dyslexia or it didn’t. You can’t have it both ways. Either he has to admit that the “church” of scientology is selling snake oil to the mentally ill in an attempt to scam them out of money, or he has to maintain the claim that their cure isn’t unabashed quackery and keep silent about the jokes.
Asked by Anonymous
Uh, because I’m not required to pick the one person who’s the biggest asshole and dislike them exclusively? I talk plenty about all of those guys, and they’re all way bigger dirtbags than Jennifer Lawrence, but since there’s more overlap between “media I consume” and “media that contains Jennifer Lawrence” than there is with any of those clowns, so I tend to have more opportunity to complain about her.
Luckily, it doesn’t matter who I complain about, because I’ve gotten death threats over Fassbender, Leto, and Lawrence, and if I was a gambling man, I’d bet I’d have gotten death threats about Russell too if I’d known who he was before last night.
The reason for this is simple: Tumblr is a terrible place full of terrible people and the only reason I haven’t moved this blog to wordpress and washed my hands of this cesspool of a website is because there are a handful of cool people for whom I have no other means of communication.
Asked by Anonymous
“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races” that’s straight from your boy AL
You’re right, Lincoln was a racist. However, you’ve taken that quote 100% out of context, and I feel it’s important, having read the transcript of his debates, having pored over Lincoln’s speeches and letters and writings on race, to put that quote in context.
What Lincoln was saying there was an admission that he was a racist. Even he would not challenge you on that point. However, that admission was only the preamble to a larger argument.
That quote is taken from the fourth installment of the debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas. Through the subsequent debates, and in most of his other writings outside of his political campaign (when he needed to bridge the gap between his own abolitionist philosophy and his even-more-racist voter base), Lincoln would explain that his own views on the equality of white and black people were irrelevant.
The point Lincoln was making with that quote was that he was a racist, but that his opinion on black people doesn’t give him the right to hold them in bondage, or restrict rights from them.
In fact, later in the same debate series, Lincoln would deliver the following quote:
[The founding fathers] meant to set up a standard maxim for free society which should be familiar to all, constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and even, though never perfectly attained, constantly approximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its influence, and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people, of all colors, everywhere.
Lincoln was essentially saying “my opinion on black people should not be taken into account when making policy for black people, because I’m a white dude, and I don’t really have a right to deny rights to black people no matter what I think of them.”
Which is, incidentally, very similar to Joe Biden’s views on the subject of abortion. He believes it to be wrong, but since he is incapable of pregnancy, he also doesn’t think his opinion on the matter means jack shit and won’t restrict the freedom of people who can get pregnant.
Don’t take my word for it, though! Here’s Abraham Lincoln making exactly that point, in his own words:
When the white man governs himself, that is self-government; but when he governs himself and also governs another man, that is more than self-government — that is despotism. If the negro is a man, why then my ancient faith teaches me that “all men are created equal,” and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man’s making a slave of another…
There’s also this one, almost immediately after, in reply to an objection by Mr. Douglas:
…What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
I have quoted so much at this time merely to show that, according to our ancient faith, the just powers of governments are derived from the consent of the governed. Now the relation of master and slave is pro tanto a total violation of this principle. The master not only governs the slave without his consent, but he governs him by a set of rules altogether different from those which he prescribes for himself. Allow all the governed an equal voice in the government, and that, and that only, is self-government.
So, since you clearly have some trouble parsing context, I’ll explain what he’s saying here:
He’s essentially saying that no matter what he thinks of black people, he does not have a right to give consent to be governed on their behalf, and even if he does not consider black people to be his equal, he believes that if they are to be governed in America, then they deserve an equal voice to all other citizens in their governance.
Of course I’m aware that Lincoln was racist by the standards of the modern day. I’m also aware that his views were, for a United States politician, about 20 years ahead of his time. That would put them about 130 years behind the time now, but in his time, he was considered something of a radical progressive.
Now, I have to raise an objection to one further point, and that’s the implication that the post I wrote about Lincoln was intended to say he wasn’t a racist, or that he was somehow apt at dealing with race issues.
Lincoln most certainly was a racist, and he was incredibly incompetent when it came to doing good things for people of any race other than “white.” He was, like all of his predecessors and most of his successors, a white man’s president.
That was one of the central criticisms of Lincoln in that post, but I’m beginning to suspect that you didn’t read past the beginning part where I said that I found Lincoln fascinating and that he’s my favorite president to study.
Like all of my writings on Lincoln, it comes back to one point: Lincoln didn’t know what he was doing when it came to black people, so he just asked Frederick Douglass what he should do every time. If you’re wondering who should get credit for just about any good thing Lincoln ever did for black people, it’s almost certainly Frederick Douglass. There is like a 99% chance that he told Lincoln to do it.
In fact, it was the very attitudes you’ve just expressed that caused Douglass to publicly tell Lincoln that he had to cut out his white supremacist shit, stop blaming everything on black people and trying to put them into a subordinate position, and actually take a firm stand in favor of abolition.
There was a brief rift in their friendship as a result, before Lincoln realized Douglass was right, and promptly actually started to do those things. Douglass began advising him again, Lincoln started listening to Douglass, and shit started getting done.
Of course, Lincoln was, as Douglass himself would say, a “white man’s president.” He was racist, but he was also an abolitionist, and I don’t think it would be fair to call him “no different” from the racist presidents before him, because the assertion that black people should have as much say in the government that represented them was a radically progressive idea in its time.
Now, it’s absolutely tragic that “I don’t like black people but we don’t have any right to subjugate them or deny them basic human rights” was ever a progressive idea, but the fact remains that this idea was, at one point, the least racist attitude towards black people in the United States government.
So, just to summarize a bit, Lincoln was a racist, but he was also an abolitionist, and the credit for any good things he ever did for black people should go to the actual black abolitionists whose advice he was following, such as Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman. Without them, Abraham Lincoln would have been a lukewarm president that didn’t have the backbone to actually follow through on his hatred of slavery.
However, if you want an example of a historical white dude who refused to remain passive on the issue of abolition, acknowledged that slaveholders would never liberate their slaves of their own free will and that the only way to abolish slavery was by force, and believed in the inherent, absolute equality of the races, John Brown is your man.
That dude was really the only white anti-racist of the 19th century whose attitudes toward race haven’t become antiquated. Of course, whether or not you agree with his violent methods is an entirely different discussion, but he’s pretty much the only exception I can think of, if I’m trying to come up with historical forward-thinking white people whose views have not changed from progressive to regressive since their time.
On a personal note, did you think I was stupid, or just that because you know jack shit about Abraham Lincoln, I must also be completely ignorant about him and did no research beyond watching the movie where he killed vampires? I’ll take my response off-anon.