"pete...@gmail.com" <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote in
news:a4c9c311-d9d1-4abd-85d3-5e4900e3f57en@googlegroups.com:

> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 6:22:46 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula
> Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> "pete...@gmail.com" <pete...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:674b8862-8125-4c72...@googlegroups.com:
>> > On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 4:23:43 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula
>> > Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> >> "pete...@gmail.com" <pete...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> >> news:922a3597-7352-43ca...@googlegroups.com:
>> >> > On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 11:55:11 AM UTC-4, Paul S
>> >> > Person wrote:
>> >> >> On Mon, 04 Apr 2022 10:59:13 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> >> >> Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Paul S Person <pspe...@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>> >> >> >news:hssg4hl2pbnqr26rd...@4ax.com:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Fri, 01 Apr 2022 09:53:43 -0700, Jibini Kula
>> >> >> >> Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>>Andrew McDowell <mcdow...@sky.com> wrote in
>> >> >> >>>news:342571b7-0a8a-4cb7...@googlegroups.com:
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>> On Friday, April 1, 2022 at 1:14:39 AM UTC+1,
>> >> >> >>>> Quadibloc wrote:
>> >> >> >>>>> I can't bring myself to have a lot of sympathy for
>> >> >> >>>>> Chris Rock. He should have realized that in this
>> >> >> >>>>> day and age, making jokes based on alopecia is
>> >> >> >>>>> something our society no longer accepts; it's
>> >> >> >>>>> viewed the same way we view making jokes about
>> >> >> >>>>> someone with a disability or an exceptionality.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> Thus, the movie Tropic Thunder was condemned for
>> >> >> >>>>> the frequent use of what is now called "the R-word"
>> >> >> >>>>> within it, with the intent to convey the same
>> >> >> >>>>> attitude towards the word in question as the phrase
>> >> >> >>>>> "the N-word" does.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> So if Chris Rock winds up being "cancelled", well,
>> >> >> >>>>> even if it is terribly unjust instead of serving
>> >> >> >>>>> him right, it's only to be expected.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> But what about Will Smith?
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> While it is true that it isn't really appropriate
>> >> >> >>>>> to approve of his reaction, waxing eloquent about
>> >> >> >>>>> how physical violence must never be condoned
>> >> >> >>>>> regardless of the provocation... would be
>> >> >> >>>>> hypocritical, at least on my part. Because I don't
>> >> >> >>>>> feel like waggilng my finger in the same way at Dr.
>> >> >> >>>>> Edwin Aldrin, who lost his temper at an advocate of
>> >> >> >>>>> the notion that the moon landings were a hoax who
>> >> >> >>>>> called him a liar.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> Edwin Aldrin and Will Smith are two unique human
>> >> >> >>>>> individuals. So it would be untrue to say that the
>> >> >> >>>>> only difference between them is that Edwin Aldrin
>> >> >> >>>>> is a real astronaut, and Will Smith only played one
>> >> >> >>>>> in the movie Independence Day.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> But I'm only going to note _one_ other difference
>> >> >> >>>>> between the two of them. And no points for guessing
>> >> >> >>>>> which one of those many differences it is going to
>> >> >> >>>>> be.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> Because while what Will Smith did wasn't an evil
>> >> >> >>>>> act, and it doesn't make him a bad man, it still
>> >> >> >>>>> will have evil consequences.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> Because, unlike Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin, Will Smith...
>> >> >> >>>>> doesn't have white privilege? Maybe _that's_ not
>> >> >> >>>>> the right way to put it; if Will Smith had been
>> >> >> >>>>> hauled away by the LAPD, _then_ that would be a
>> >> >> >>>>> sequence of events fitting that paradigm.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> But it's still something in that area.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> Because to a lot of the white people who either saw
>> >> >> >>>>> what transpired on the Oscars that night, or who
>> >> >> >>>>> just heard about it, the incident will only serve
>> >> >> >>>>> as confirmation to some of the most harmful racial
>> >> >> >>>>> stereotypes that have been floating around for
>> >> >> >>>>> hundreds of years.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> The conclusion that has been supported once again
>> >> >> >>>>> is this one:
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> You can put a suit and a tie on a black man, but
>> >> >> >>>>> you can't change his "real" nature, said nature
>> >> >> >>>>> being that of... an impulsive small child. A savage
>> >> >> >>>>> at heart, rather than a civilized adult.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> This is where a legitimate criticism of Will Smith
>> >> >> >>>>> needs to start; not with hypocritical sanctimony
>> >> >> >>>>> about physical violence, but with honestly facing
>> >> >> >>>>> the damage he has the potential of doing to the
>> >> >> >>>>> fragile progress being made by Americans of color.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> John Savard
>> >> >> >>>> We now know from sports that even very mild head
>> >> >> >>>> trauma can be dangerous, so we should be even less
>> >> >> >>>> tolerant of attacks than before, regardless of
>> >> >> >>>> excuse. As it happens, I find the reported joke
>> >> >> >>>> entirely unobjectionable
>> >> >> >>>> (https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/mar/27/will-sm
>> >> >> >>>> ith -pu nch- ch
>> >> >> >>>> ris-rock-wife-joke-gi-jane-video-oscars). I
>> >> >> >>>> find any culture that regards violence as the proper
>> >> >> >>>> reaction to perceived so-called disrespect much more
>> >> >> >>>> troubling.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>Every state in the US has some form of "fighting
>> >> >> >>>words" law, wherein it is recognized that there are
>> >> >> >>>things one can say that are *so* offensive that any
>> >> >> >>>reasonable person would respond with violence.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>Rock's joke did not rise to that level. It was,
>> >> >> >>>perhaps, in bad taste (but most comedy is), and
>> >> >> >>>perhaps not particularly funny, in context, but it
>> >> >> >>>certainly wasn't "fighting words."
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>Smith's lucky that Rock doesn't want to pursue it in a
>> >> >> >>>legal venue. I guess he's too busy booking more shows
>> >> >> >>>due to the massive increase in ticket sales for his
>> >> >> >>>concerts.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Exactly. The free publicity is worth more than
>> >> >> >> pursuing criminal action. Which might reduce the value
>> >> >> >> of the free publicity.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Plus, it was a slap. Technically, battery, but c'mon.
>> >> >> >Man up and don't whine. Which Rock did. (I suspect that,
>> >> >> >while he should have known that Smith's wife is bald due
>> >> >> >to a medical condition, he probably didn't concsiously
>> >> >> >realize it when he wrote the joke, which was apparently
>> >> >> >improved (if he'd rehearsed it, it's likely somebody
>> >> >> >would have say, "Hey, dude, remember . . .). In the
>> >> >> >moment, he was too surprised to react, and by the time
>> >> >> >he gave any real thought to police reports, I suspect he
>> >> >> >felt bad about the joke anyway.)
>> >> >> We are, of course, overlooking the obvious point that
>> >> >> these are /performers/ on /television/, meaning the whole
>> >> >> thing could have been rehearsed beforehand and written
>> >> >> into the script.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The entire 50s (?) gaming scandal (contestants being fed
>> >> >> answers when the audience was told they were not) could
>> >> >> have been avoided by simply admitting that they were
>> >> >> entertainment, and then scripting them. Basically, you
>> >> >> would have a "sitcom" where the "sit" was advancing
>> >> >> through the stages of a game show to the top prize.
>> >> >
>> >> > There used to be (maybe still is) a whole sub-genre of BBC
>> >> > radio game shows where the contestants each week were
>> >> > drawn from a small pool of well known entertainers and
>> >> > minor celebrities, and the entertainment value was not so
>> >> > much the competition, as in the sparkling bon mots and
>> >> > improv remarks of the players and MC.
>> >> Nobody watched Hollywood Squares to listen to the questions
>> >> and answers.
>> >
>> > Same idea.
>> >
>> For that matter, most "reality" TV is far more about the
>> personalities than whatever the contestants are doing.
>
> The difference is that the British contestants were reliably
> witty and entertaining, while most reality TV contestants
> are raging narcissists and sociopaths.
>
Which is to say, casting directors in both countries know their
audience.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.