NitaX, was it the AARP commercial where the woman is running in heels? that one pisses me off. almost as much as all the AARP women in the new viagra commercials
No, it was one with a guy. But, the you don't know AARP (arrrpp) was funny. I didn't know you actually pronounced AARP. Because, who has ever done that?
Wait, AARP is actually supposed to be pronounced? Because it sounds like a belch. Appropriate, I suppose.
Ok, you know what - benefit of the doubt - I'm going t respond to this as if you said what a normal person would have said - I'm really glad you understand why what you said sounded dismissive.
Because I take from this that when you said, "I'm not aware that white people see natural hair as threatening in any way though. If anything, it's the opposite. Has there been some kind of study done as to hairstyles and preconceptions?"
what you meant was "wow, I never knew that this was an issue for you. For me personally, I think my bias is actually the opposite because I have good associations with natural styles from various pop culture stuff from the 70's. I didn't realize I wasn't the norm. Are there any studies or anything so I can learn more about this?"
Yes, that's what I mean/thought I said. Thank you for clarifying
Sent from my SM-G900T using proboards
Honest question, do you see the difference in what you said and what wawa said? Do you understand why people are frustrated?
If the answer to either of those questions is no, I encourage you to also Google effective communication, in particular written forms of communication. When your intentions do not match the perceptions the audience has of what you are communicating, then you have failed at effectively communicating your point.
Yes, that's what I mean/thought I said. Thank you for clarifying
Sent from my SM-G900T using proboards
Honest question, do you see the difference in what you said and what wawa said? Do you understand why people are frustrated?
If the answer to either of those questions is no, I encourage you to also Google effective communication, in particular written forms of communication. When your intentions do not match the perceptions the audience has of what you are communicating, then you have failed at effectively communicating your point.
Did you miss where she said the Google Fu failed her? That's why I posted links. Bless her heart.
the board, click the link and it'll take you to the discussion we had when Giulianna Rancik made a bad comment about a lovely WOC wearing dreds to the Oscars.
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at, and I don't want to make presumptions. Who is Giuliana Rancid anyway?
Yes, that's what I mean/thought I said. Thank you for clarifying
Sent from my SM-G900T using proboards
Honest question, do you see the difference in what you said and what wawa said? Do you understand why people are frustrated?
If the answer to either of those questions is no, I encourage you to also Google effective communication, in particular written forms of communication. When your intentions do not match the perceptions the audience has of what you are communicating, then you have failed at effectively communicating your point.
Obviously. Honest answer is no, those two paragraphs read the same to me, just slightly different wording. I wish I could see th r difference. I wouldnt have so many people hating me here.
I wish Google could teach me to write and read more effectively, but I honestly doubt that's possible or even what it was intended for. I hope i get a tax refund next year, maybe I'll be able to afford a writing course at the community college. I think that would be a good idea because there's obviously something I need to correct. It's really depressing to me that my writing skills have eroded so badly. It's something I used to take a small measure of pride in.
In re-reading wawa's, I'm still simply blown away by the fact that most eveyone is threatened by natural hair. I mean, I knew it was a thing, but never knew it even approached being the norm. I would never have guessed most people feel that way in 2015! I'm not debating the veracity, because more learned people than me say its true but it's still shocking to me. I guess I should have expressed it more like that rather than coming off like I disbelieved the poster.
It's like when someone you know does something heinous and all the evidence is there that they are guilty, so you believe it intellectually ...BUT YOU CAN'T SIMPLY BELIEVE IT of them. Now thats just one person - It's really tough to wrap my head around the fact that I've been fooled by the majority of people I know, who would judge someone as a threat for wearing an afro. Is this something most people feel intuitively or are they trained, I wonder? And who is training them that way?
Linked words and phrases don't show up in blue or with a squiggly line or in any other way that indicates it is a link, here on GBCN. You have to hover your mouse over the words in a sentence to see something is linked.
Oh, thanks, but I understood that. I just wasn't sure how the poster was connecting that thread to this thread. Or who Giuliana Rancik is.
I think maybe she meant to point out that hair has been discussed on this board before, but I didn't want to make that assumption. I did read the link, don't think I ever read that post before. I don't read every post. That woman just sounds like a bitch and she associates dreads with hippies.
I really don't get involved in the using age to make fun of sandsonik thing (mostly because I have a little second-hand embarrassment because I really don't think she gets that people are joking, but also, there are so many bigger issues to tackle with her), but I am literally crying that she didn't understand that there was a link in that post. My face is wet. I can't.
I understood that there was a link in the post. I don't understand why you think I didn't. I clicked the link and read the article, but I was asking the poster If she meant she and I had discussed the issue or the board in general. And I was asking for more clarification on how she thought that thread related to this one because she didn't say anything beyond the link.
I don't think the age thing is joking. I think people are insulting me when they say that stuff.
I don't know how old they think I am, but I think it must be much, much older than it really is.
In either case, I find it tremendously rude - if not to me, than to old people who might post here (or be afraid to post here). Also to people who are dying. There should probably be trigger warnings, so people don't have to encounter that stuff by accident.
Post by cattledogkisses on Mar 26, 2015 10:04:19 GMT -5
I wonder if the hangup is on the word "threatened." Sands, when people are saying that whites are threatened by natural hair, they don't mean that white people suddenly feel physically unsafe when they see an Afro. Someone in this thread already made a great post explaining the context of the word "threatened" in this discussion; let me go back and see if I can find it.
Post by cattledogkisses on Mar 26, 2015 10:06:04 GMT -5
Here we go, it was cville. Reread this:
1. Your "evidence" is irrelevant and offers no proof of your purported point. Reaching out and touching something (you know, hair) unbidden does not mean that those reachers and touchers aren't "threatened by" it. Being "threatened by" something means you are concerned about what it means for you and your view of the world and how it may or may not affect you. It doesn't mean you literally QUAKE IN FEAR when you are confronted by it. (A) EX: sexist men are "threatened" by assertive women because it upends their notions of what women are supposed to be/are like. (B) Analogous point: some white people (you know, generally, not you, Sandonick individually--and, FYI, you don't speak for THIS white person) are "threatened by" people of color, and black women in particular, not conforming to white standards of beauty via their hairstyles because it upends their notions of what black women "should" be like.
Honest question, do you see the difference in what you said and what wawa said? Do you understand why people are frustrated?
If the answer to either of those questions is no, I encourage you to also Google effective communication, in particular written forms of communication. When your intentions do not match the perceptions the audience has of what you are communicating, then you have failed at effectively communicating your point.
Obviously. Honest answer is no, those two paragraphs read the same to me, just slightly different wording. I wish I could see th r difference. I wouldnt have so many people hating me here.
I wish Google could teach me to write and read more effectively, but I honestly doubt that's possible or even what it was intended for. I hope i get a tax refund next year, maybe I'll be able to afford a writing course at the community college. I think that would be a good idea because there's obviously something I need to correct. It's really depressing to me that my writing skills have eroded so badly. It's something I used to take a small measure of pride in.
In re-reading wawa's, I'm still simply blown away by the fact that most eveyone is threatened by natural hair. I mean, I knew it was a thing, but never knew it even approached being the norm. I would never have guessed most people feel that way in 2015! I'm not debating the veracity, because more learned people than me say its true but it's still shocking to me. I guess I should have expressed it more like that rather than coming off like I disbelieved the poster.
It's like when someone you know does something heinous and all the evidence is there that they are guilty, so you believe it intellectually ...BUT YOU CAN'T SIMPLY BELIEVE IT of them. Now thats just one person - It's really tough to wrap my head around the fact that I've been fooled by the majority of people I know, who would judge someone as a threat for wearing an afro. Is this something most people feel intuitively or are they trained, I wonder? And who is training them that way?
Sent from my SM-G900T using proboards
Words have meanings. Combinations of words can influence the subtle meanings. So when you say they say the same thing, just worded different, then they cannot possibly mean the same thing. It blows my mind that you considered yourself a good writer at one point and don't understand that fundamental rule.
As for your 'most people feel that way'. It's called an unconscious bias. Most people don't overtly think this way, and instead do think black people are scary without consciously thinking it. The media has a big influence in 'training' all people to view black people as scary. The more different their hair, the more 'other they are viewed' and thus the more scary. Have you not read and understood ANY of the discussions we've had here?
Google active listening while you're at it. If you really want to keep people frustrated, then listen more. Ask questions, but refrain from offering opinions until you are more informed beyond your own personal experience.
Linked words and phrases don't show up in blue or with a squiggly line or in any other way that indicates it is a link, here on GBCN. You have to hover your mouse over the words in a sentence to see something is linked.
Oh, thanks, but I understood that. I just wasn't sure how the poster was connecting that thread to this thread. Or who Giuliana Rancik is.
I think maybe she meant to point out that hair has been discussed on this board before, but I didn't want to make that assumption. I did read the link, don't think I ever read that post before. I don't read every post. That woman just sounds like a bitch and she associates dreads with hippies.
No. Go read the ENTIRE thread and learn why she doesn't associate dreads with hippies. That was the what the whole discussion was about.
I really don't get involved in the using age to make fun of sandsonik thing (mostly because I have a little second-hand embarrassment because I really don't think she gets that people are joking, but also, there are so many bigger issues to tackle with her), but I am literally crying that she didn't understand that there was a link in that post. My face is wet. I can't.
I understood that there was a link in the post. I don't understand why you think I didn't. I clicked the link and read the article, but I was asking the poster If she meant she and I had discussed the issue or the board in general. And I was asking for more clarification on how she thought that thread related to this one because she didn't say anything beyond the link.
I don't think the age thing is joking. I think people are insulting me when they say that stuff.
I don't know how old they think I am, but I think it must be much, much older than it really is.
In either case, I find it tremendously rude - if not to me, than to old people who might post here (or be afraid to post here).
No. They do it because it irks the shit out of you and you irk the hell out of them. The OLDZ is a long-standing joke on the board as it refers to the policies triggered by Boomers and the fallout - specifically the fact that Social Security may not be around when WE (Gen X and later) retire.
It's not because we dislike the old folks and pledge allegiance to death panels.
I'm only explaining this because this entire thing has made me tired.
the board, click the link and it'll take you to the discussion we had when Giulianna Rancik made a bad comment about a lovely WOC wearing dreds to the Oscars.
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at, and I don't want to make presumptions. Who is Giuliana Rancid anyway?
Sent from my SM-G900T using proboards
GR is a presenter on E! My point is a young woman of color couldn't even wear nicely done and lovely looking dreds to the Oscars without getting a negative comment and you really think how POC wear their hair isn't being scrutinized at a different level? For reference GR called dreds on a white girl of a similar age bold/daring the week before.
1. Your "evidence" is irrelevant and offers no proof of your purported point. Reaching out and touching something (you know, hair) unbidden does not mean that those reachers and touchers aren't "threatened by" it. Being "threatened by" something means you are concerned about what it means for you and your view of the world and how it may or may not affect you. It doesn't mean you literally QUAKE IN FEAR when you are confronted by it. (A) EX: sexist men are "threatened" by assertive women because it upends their notions of what women are supposed to be/are like. (B) Analogous point: some white people (you know, generally, not you, Sandonick individually--and, FYI, you don't speak for THIS white person) are "threatened by" people of color, and black women in particular, not conforming to white standards of beauty via their hairstyles because it upends their notions of what black women "should" be like.
Ok, thanks for finding that. The notion is still pretty foreign to me, that anyone has a notion of what anyone "should" be like. I would think that such people would be more threatened by black people straightening their hair to fit in with what white people look like, know what I mean?
And I think the original article was more in the line of threatened, as in physical danger. According to her, her son would be in more danger when he got older because his hairstyle would make him a scary black man.
1. Your "evidence" is irrelevant and offers no proof of your purported point. Reaching out and touching something (you know, hair) unbidden does not mean that those reachers and touchers aren't "threatened by" it. Being "threatened by" something means you are concerned about what it means for you and your view of the world and how it may or may not affect you. It doesn't mean you literally QUAKE IN FEAR when you are confronted by it. (A) EX: sexist men are "threatened" by assertive women because it upends their notions of what women are supposed to be/are like. (B) Analogous point: some white people (you know, generally, not you, Sandonick individually--and, FYI, you don't speak for THIS white person) are "threatened by" people of color, and black women in particular, not conforming to white standards of beauty via their hairstyles because it upends their notions of what black women "should" be like.
Ok, thanks for finding that. The notion is still pretty foreign to me, that anyone has a notion of what anyone "should" be like. I would think that such people would be more threatened by black people straightening their hair to fit in with what white people look like, know what I mean?
And I think the original article was more in the line of threatened, as in physical danger. According to her, her son would be in more danger when he got older because his hairstyle would make him a scary black man.
These people are uncomfortable (threatened) by what is different, a POC with natural hair is different which makes them uncomfortable and to address that discomfort they have to justify it by othering the person as less then.
1. Your "evidence" is irrelevant and offers no proof of your purported point. Reaching out and touching something (you know, hair) unbidden does not mean that those reachers and touchers aren't "threatened by" it. Being "threatened by" something means you are concerned about what it means for you and your view of the world and how it may or may not affect you. It doesn't mean you literally QUAKE IN FEAR when you are confronted by it. (A) EX: sexist men are "threatened" by assertive women because it upends their notions of what women are supposed to be/are like. (B) Analogous point: some white people (you know, generally, not you, Sandonick individually--and, FYI, you don't speak for THIS white person) are "threatened by" people of color, and black women in particular, not conforming to white standards of beauty via their hairstyles because it upends their notions of what black women "should" be like.
Ok, thanks for finding that. The notion is still pretty foreign to me, that anyone has a notion of what anyone "should" be like. I would think that such people would be more threatened by black people straightening their hair to fit in with what white people look like, know what I mean?
And I think the original article was more in the line of threatened, as in physical danger. According to her, her son would be in more danger when he got older because his hairstyle would make him a scary black man.
priv·i·lege
ˈpriv(ə)lij/Submit
noun
1. a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people.
I understood that there was a link in the post. I don't understand why you think I didn't. I clicked the link and read the article, but I was asking the poster If she meant she and I had discussed the issue or the board in general. And I was asking for more clarification on how she thought that thread related to this one because she didn't say anything beyond the link.
I don't think the age thing is joking. I think people are insulting me when they say that stuff.
I don't know how old they think I am, but I think it must be much, much older than it really is.
In either case, I find it tremendously rude - if not to me, than to old people who might post here (or be afraid to post here).
No. They do it because it irks the shit out of you and you irk the hell out of them. The OLDZ is a long-standing joke on the board as it refers to the policies triggered by Boomers and the fallout - specifically the fact that Social Security may not be around when WE (Gen X and later) retire.
It's not because we dislike the old folks and pledge allegiance to death panels.
I'm only explaining this because this entire thing has made me tired.
If they do it to irk me, then it's not joking. They're trying to hurt me. They're talking about me as if I'm not even here, not even human.
And then they all pat themselves on the back at how clever they all are. They should ask themselves - and they can go search if they don't believe me - when have I ever said a bad word about any of them, called them names or sworn at them.
And I don't see how it's baby boomer's fault that politicians keep raiding social security funds. All baby boomers did was work and pay into it all their lives.
Ok, thanks for finding that. The notion is still pretty foreign to me, that anyone has a notion of what anyone "should" be like. I would think that such people would be more threatened by black people straightening their hair to fit in with what white people look like, know what I mean?
And I think the original article was more in the line of threatened, as in physical danger. According to her, her son would be in more danger when he got older because his hairstyle would make him a scary black man.
priv·i·lege
ˈpriv(ə)lij/Submit
noun
1. a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people.
"education is a right, not a privilege"
synonyms: advantage, benefit; More
I know what privilege means, but what's your point? Are you saying I didn't know the rules because I have white privilege?
Because I thought the other person was saying it's whites who establish the rules of what people should look like.