Yuku free message boards

Katy Carney wrote:

---

Oh lawd.

Anyone who knows me knows that if I discriminate against anything it's the peen. All of my favorites are proactive strategic women of all colors who aren't afraid of making moves or taking on leadership roles. White girls Parvati, Candice, Jerri and Stephenie and non-white girls Peih Gee, Cirie and Stacy. It's ridiculous that I should have to defend myself against such nonsense, especially to people who don't even know enough about my preferences or opinions to know who my favorites actually are, which is why I usually don't.

I treat it like a joke because it's both funny and pathetic that people so often get accused of racism any time their opinion of any minority contestant isn't radiantly positive, especially considering that no one even knows what my ethnicity is. I could be sporting dreads and a Marcus Garvey t-shirt for all anyone knows. Dictatorship, craig, Wyldawg, all get accused of it all the time...the list goes on and on. It's just so easy and cheap to throw that out there when your favorite is attacked. It's embarrassing. If you call Eric Huffman from China a bore and a waste of a casting spot it's true, but if you call Becky a mute who contributed nothing to the season but propping up an alpha male like hundreds of other faceless women on this show, you're a "racist waahhh".

Get a grip. And stop being so annoying.

In the other thread, the whole racism thing came up, because you had talked inaccurately about the 2 situations involving a mostly white tribe versus a mostly ethnic one, and saying that twists gave the ethnic minority tribes an advantage which is disputable. The damning statement is when you called it "producer intervention," as if the Survivor producers rigged those games for the non-white groups and you say it without any kind of proof. That's taking things way too far, and I think even you can acknowledge that, since you edited that out of your original post. Accusing the Survivor production of "rigging" without any hard evidence for the purpose of manipulation for minorities is also "playing the race card"

I think what bothers people is the inaccuracy of that statement and then the way you reacted to those debating with you and chalking it up to the race card. There are times people use the race card, but sometimes it's legitimate racism. Just as it's easy to cry racism, it's easy to treat anything involving actual racism as "the race card". A common tactic racists use to be racist is to use the defense of "race card" to justify all their activities

Katy Carney wrote:

---

Skyline wrote:

---

In the other thread, the whole racism thing came up, because you had talked inaccurately about the 2 situations involving a mostly white tribe versus a mostly ethnic one, and saying that twists gave the ethnic minority tribes an advantage which is disputable. The damning statement is when you called it "producer intervention," as if the Survivor producers rigged those games for the non-white groups and you say it without any kind of proof. That's taking things way too far, and I think even you can acknowledge that, since you edited that out of your original post. Accusing the Survivor production of "rigging" without any hard evidence for the purpose of manipulation for minorities is also "playing the race card"

I think what bothers people is the inaccuracy of that statement and then the way you reacted to those debating with you and chalking it up to the race card. There are times people use the race card, but sometimes it's legitimate racism. Just as it's easy to cry racism, it's easy to treat anything involving actual racism as "the race card". A common tactic racists use to be racist is to use the defense of "race card" to justify all their activities

um. no. I didn't talk "inaccurately" about anything. Fang was saved by "producers intervention", in my opinion, but I never said it was because they were the "minority tribe". It was to prevent another Ulong. I didn't edit anything out of my original post, either. RobVanStraus is the one who said Aitu and Fang shared the same story because of the multiple ethnic makeup of their tribes, to which I replied that they were actually completely different save for the FACT that they were both helped by twists. Which was when it became "i have no legitimate response so you must be raacisstt!!" To which I rolled my eyes.

You didn't say it was because they were the minority tribe, but you were talking about the "2 minority tribes". RVS might have brought up the comparison, but then you went along with it, when it had nothing to do with the original point. And what is "inaccurate" is your assumption that there was any intervention by the producers at all for any reason: stop an Ulonging, let the help the minorities out, or whatever. If you have proof then it's 1 thing, but otherwise it demonstrates a fan bias for 1 particular group so strong that you're questioning the entire integrity of the game because you feel so strongly about what has occurred. Then of course people are going to look at the groups you are talking about and come to conclusions

1 thing that is inaccurate is that you say that the 2 groups were "helped by twists". Given how many twists happened in both those games, I think it's fair to say that none of us know for sure just how much those twists helped or hurt those groups. A twist by itself doesn't help anybody. It's the reaction to those twists with gameplay that determine whether an event becomes good luck or bad. Fang didn't even win. Bob did from Kota, so in terms of the final product they really weren't helped