Serena Williama meltdown

[noonereal]

I didn't defend her actions. I just defended her from the reaction.

i think she is a wonderful women and role model who was not perfect on one day

just let it go all is my advise

 

[holbritter]

What does it say about Ramos? After all, the dialogue is about whether Ramos’ conduct was based on sexism.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It says either he is guilty of sexism, or he doesn't have the spine to penalize the men, just the women. BTW, the OP is about Williams, not Ramos.

 

[Sweden]

https://youtu.be/uiBrForlj-k

Notice*how she starts losing when she becomes a SJW instead of focusing on the game.

And it becomes everyone elses fault for her blowup and poor play

Thats sad but true form to modern day SJWs

it's everyone elses fault when you aren't able to focus on the tasks at hand

Here is the best comment I've seen on this spoilt rich woman's tantrum.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/cheats-never-prosper-in-tennis-they-do/

 

[NotreDame]

It says either he is guilty of sexism, or he doesn't have the spine to penalize the men, just the women. BTW, the OP is about Williams, not Ramos.

The OP may be about Williams, but in case you haven’t noticed, what’s also being discussed in the thread is whether Ramos acted on the basis of sexism. Hence, my use of the word “dialogue,” I didn’t say “OP.” So, thanks for the needless clarification, which I had already taken into account by my use of the “dialogue.”

And your false dilemma of X or Y isn’t persuasive, as there are other possibilities, such as Ramos penalizing the men. Indeed, I posted a link to an article in which Ramos has infuriated and annoyed males stars with penalties or warnings, such as Murray, Nadal, and Djokovic. So, maybe he wasn’t being sexist at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[calamity]

Here is the best comment I've seen on this spoilt rich woman's tantrum.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/cheats-never-prosper-in-tennis-they-do/

Yeah, because whatever garbage "conservativewoman" has to say is going to be really valuable information :roll:

 

[Sweden]

Yeah, because whatever garbage "conservativewoman" has to say is going to be really valuable information :roll:

It what way is Margaret Ashworth's article "garbage"? I would be interested in your opinion.

 

[Ouroboros]

And your take on the little blonde?

I didn't watch footage of the game, but I heard (on Shapiro, I think) that Naomi Osaka had dyed her hair blonde at the time. Given how small the figure is, I don't think there's any racist intent in the cartoonist (or maybe a separate colorist) having rendered her Caucasian. In any case, Osaka was not the target of the satire, so the accuracy of her depiction is not pertinent.

 

[Ouroboros]

Didnt know he was considered a SJW. But yours was not the only post mentioning SJW in sort of a negative light. I am beginning
to think I misunderstand the term, as my entire career of 40+ years involved some sort of social justice, community organizing, etc. Can anyone out there provide a working definition for us lefties?

I may be the only one who's called LF a SJW, but I think the term applies. SJW extremists are not interested in making things better, only at perpetuating an endless cycle of victimhood.

 

[Anarchon]

I may be the only one who's called LF a SJW, but I think the term applies. SJW extremists are not interested in making things better, only at perpetuating an endless cycle of victimhood.

Careful, ya get dinged around here for calling a spade a spade.

 

[Nickyjo]

Careful, ya get dinged around here for calling a spade a spade.

So let me get this straight from you guys: work that I did and observed in making farmworkers lives better, investigating discrimination claims that got people’s jobs back or back pay for underpaid wages, helping hundreds of refugees get protection, while being interesting and lots of fun for me, only perpetuated a cycle of victimhood? My work was a smidgen compared to theirs, but does this mean that Mandela, MLK, suffragettes, etc. worked in vain?

Sometimes name calling is a way not to even give an opinion on an issue. Why not, as an alternative, examine the issues and get involved to make things better, or fighting on the other side. Pro-life and pro-choice people are SJW’s, so are those agitating for equal pay, or on the border helping refugees. When I worked on asylum issues, I came across immigration officials who made sure the people they deported got wages due them, not part of their job description as far as I knew. Were they SJW’s?

But you are right: there were idiots and extremists involved in the work, much as you might find in the Tea Party. Doesn’t invalidate the message.

By the way, who’s LF?

 

[calamity]

I didn't watch footage of the game, but I heard (on Shapiro, I think) that Naomi Osaka had dyed her hair blonde at the time. Given how small the figure is, I don't think there's any racist intent in the cartoonist (or maybe a separate colorist) having rendered her Caucasian. In any case, Osaka was not the target of the satire, so the accuracy of her depiction is not pertinent.

Shapiro, now there is an unbiased source. :roll:

 

[calamity]

I may be the only one who's called LF a SJW, but I think the term applies. SJW extremists are not interested in making things better, only at perpetuating an endless cycle of victimhood.

Ironic you bringing up Shapiro in the previous post and getting who it is that really plays the victim so wrong. Between he, Carlson and Hannity, the victim card is full.

 

[Ouroboros]

Shapiro, now there is an unbiased source. :roll:

It's either true or not true as to whether Osaka had dyed her hair blonde, no matter who said it.

 

[Ouroboros]

Ironic you bringing up Shapiro in the previous post and getting who it is that really plays the victim so wrong. Between he, Carlson and Hannity, the victim card is full.

Conservatives have been known to play the victim card, and one could make an argument that there are SJW conservatives, even though the term is usually applied to liberals. My own example of "conservative victimhood" would be the silly "war on Christmas" meme that (possibly) Bill O'Reilly started.

Still, there are good reasons why the SJW term has been more applied to liberals than to conservatives. Liberals by the definition of the word are all about "liberating" people. When they direct themselves to real examples of injustice, then they're not being politically correct extremists. But when they bitch about whether or not a cartoonist has the right to caricature a black celebrity, that's just exploiting the *idea* of victimhood, rather than its reality.

 

[Ouroboros]

So let me get this straight from you guys: work that I did and observed in making farmworkers lives better, investigating discrimination claims that got people’s jobs back or back pay for underpaid wages, helping hundreds of refugees get protection, while being interesting and lots of fun for me, only perpetuated a cycle of victimhood? My work was a smidgen compared to theirs, but does this mean that Mandela, MLK, suffragettes, etc. worked in vain?

Sometimes name calling is a way not to even give an opinion on an issue. Why not, as an alternative, examine the issues and get involved to make things better, or fighting on the other side. Pro-life and pro-choice people are SJW’s, so are those agitating for equal pay, or on the border helping refugees. When I worked on asylum issues, I came across immigration officials who made sure the people they deported got wages due them, not part of their job description as far as I knew. Were they SJW’s?

But you are right: there were idiots and extremists involved in the work, much as you might find in the Tea Party. Doesn’t invalidate the message.

By the way, who’s LF?

I used "LF" as shorthand for the earlier mentioned Louis Farrakhan. (The shorthand didn't save me from typing his name, did it?)

My earlier response to Calamity re: realistic and unrealistic applications of SJW activity may address some of the distinctions you mention here.

 

[calamity]

Conservatives have been known to play the victim card, and one could make an argument that there are SJW conservatives, even though the term is usually applied to liberals. My own example of "conservative victimhood" would be the silly "war on Christmas" meme that (possibly) Bill O'Reilly started.

Still, there are good reasons why the SJW term has been more applied to liberals than to conservatives. Liberals by the definition of the word are all about "liberating" people. When they direct themselves to real examples of injustice, then they're not being politically correct extremists. But when they bitch about whether or not a cartoonist has the right to caricature a black celebrity, that's just exploiting the *idea* of victimhood, rather than its reality.

There is an ugly history of caricaturing black people in the US. You may want to read about it sometime.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Prima donna lost her temper because she lost, simple as that, then pulls the race and women card. No matter she lost fair and square to an Asian women.

Not as though a white Trump voting man, knocked her off her perch!

She definitely pulled the sexist card. How did she pull the race card? Why does it matter if she lost to an Asian woman?

 

[Ouroboros]

There is an ugly history of caricaturing black people in the US. You may want to read about it sometime.

What's past is not always prologue to the present.

 

[Ouroboros]

She definitely pulled the sexist card. How did she pull the race card? Why does it matter if she lost to an Asian woman?

I don't think Serena pulled the race card, and one account says that she even embraced Osaka after the latter got the win.

The people pulling the race card are those who insist that any cartoon depiction of a black person that is in any way unfavorable must be racist in nature.

 

[Hari Seldon]

I don't think Serena pulled the race card, and one account says that she even embraced Osaka after the latter got the win.

The people pulling the race card are those who insist that any cartoon depiction of a black person that is in any way unfavorable must be racist in nature.

I don't care for Serena. Thinks she is entitled and is a poor sport when things don't go well for her. Osaka was all class and Serena made it about herself rather than the fantastic tournament played by Osaka. That said I didn't see race as a factor.

 

[calamity]

I don't care for Serena. Thinks she is entitled and is a poor sport when things don't go well for her. Osaka was all class and Serena made it about herself rather than the fantastic tournament played by Osaka. That said I didn't see race as a factor.

lol....Ironic post of the month.

You blew the bonus points though by not typing "uppity." :roll:

 

[Hari Seldon]

You have a problem with my post? Nothing to do with race. She has had issues at the open before when she was losing. Why is it ironic? I'm not allowed to call her entitled because she's black? Please explain.

lol....Ironic post of the month.

You blew the bonus points though by not typing "uppity." :roll:

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[Ouroboros]

You have a problem with my post? Nothing to do with race. She has had issues at the open before when she was losing. Why is it ironic? I'm not allowed to call her entitled because she's black? Please explain.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

Calamity's post supplies proof of my contention that it's now impossible to critique any black person without having the criticism deflected into supposed racism.

On a side point, that may be the main reason the press was so generous to Barack Obama.