Come to the Holiday Party! Except for White People

[TomC]

Apparently, WWII made Irish people officially white.

Any culture that makes whiskey has to be accepted eventually.

Heh...
My mom had a little framed painting thing. It depicted a four leaf clover and said, "God invented whiskey to keep the Irish from taking over the world."
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

Apparently, WWII made Irish people officially white.

Any culture that makes whiskey has to be accepted eventually.

What about brandy and cognac? The country that invented those should be nuked from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

 

[Elixir]

Apparently, WWII made Irish people officially white.

Any culture that makes whiskey has to be accepted eventually.

Heh...
My mom had a little framed painting thing. It depicted a four leaf clover and said, "God invented whiskey to keep the Irish from taking over the world."
Tom

Are you sure the Irish didn’t invent whiskey to keep (the Christian) god from taking over the world? Those Catholic/Protestant wars are effective warning to those enticed by their respective brokers.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[TomC]

Are you sure the Irish didn’t invent whiskey to keep (the Christian) god from taking over the world?

You don't understand the reality here.
Real Irish people(not those Brit heretics in Belfast) belong to Jesus's own church, the RCC.
God said it.
I believe it.
That settles it.
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

Are you sure the Irish didn’t invent whiskey to keep (the Christian) god from taking over the world?

You don't understand the reality here.
Real Irish people(not those Brit heretics in Belfast) belong to Jesus's own church, the RCC.
God said it.
I believe it.
That settles it.
Tom

I don't believe you.

 

[TomC]

I don't believe you.

Matthew 16:18
King James Bible
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Peter was the first pope.


And it's still true. There's no heretical, protestant, version of Christianity nearly as godly and God blessed as the church Jesus founded Himself. That's obvious.
Tom

 

[JohnG]

Without details of why this might be a problem, sounds a lot like people complaining about 'Black History Month', saying why isn't there a white history month, ignoring that pretty much all of history taught in the country centers around white people. Or maybe like a meme that I can't find now where group A is large and excludes group B, so group B creates a space for themselves, and group A complains that they are not included and forces their way into the new space.

Kinda what I was getting at but you did a much better job

 

[southernhybrid]

No Asians?
Mexicans?
Irish?

As 60ish, I'm too young to remember before Irish people were white. But my parents, from the mid-1920s, weren't. They remember signs in shop windows:
No niggers
No Jews
No Irish
No dogs
From the 30s and early 40s. Apparently, WWII made Irish people officially white.
Tom

Knowing that some of my background is Irish, I went looking for example of how the Irish were treated earlier in the 20th Century. I saw a photo of a sign on the outside of a business in Boston that read, "No dogs. No Blacks. No Irish". I told one of my friends, that I was pleased to be associated with two of my favorite groups of people. Okay. I'm not just Irish. I have some other European immigrants in my background, but the worst were the British. I was told they were pirates and after reading the book, "Poor White Trash", I'm sure that my British ancestors were poor white trash.

And, btw, "Blazing Saddles" is one of the best satirical comedies ever made. I watch it at least once a year and it still makes me laugh. Considering how sensitive people are these days, I doubt Mel Brooks would get away with making it, since it contains, the N word many times. Satire must not be well understood by the contemporary overly sensitive Americans. What were we talking about.....

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And, while the party in Boston isn't a big thing, wouldn't it be better to have their white peers join in a holiday celebration, instead of acting as if the minorities are too fragile to be around their white peers?

Was this the only Xmas party and whites were exluded, or was this just a smaller Xmas party for minorities to get together... an event that has been happening on the side for years? Based on the record of the alt-right and issues with truthiness... I'm not swallowing the bait.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Knowing that some of my background is Irish, I went looking for example of how the Irish were treated earlier in the 20th Century. I saw a photo of a sign on the outside of a business in Boston that read, "No dogs. No Blacks. No Irish". I told one of my friends, that I was pleased to be associated with two of my favorite groups of people. Okay. I'm not just Irish. I have some other European immigrants in my background, but the worst were the British. I was told they were pirates and after reading the book, "Poor White Trash", I'm sure that my British ancestors were poor white trash.

Immigrants have long been hated in America. It is America's true past-time.

And, btw, "Blazing Saddles" is one of the best satirical comedies ever made. I watch it at least once a year and it still makes me laugh. Considering how sensitive people are these days, I doubt Mel Brooks would get away with making it, since it contains, the N word many times. Satire must not be well understood by the contemporary overly sensitive Americans. What were we talking about.....

I hate that line, it'd be like saying you couldn't do Citizen Kane again. Blazing Saddles can't be done again, because it was already done. Also, Blazing Saddles worked the first time because the people putting it together were some of the best ever comics and comic actors in the business. Also, satire is a piece of its time, which is impossible to recreate. It is the same reason why Rent feels dated and not nearly as relevant now. So, no Blazing Saddles can't be done again... but not for the reasons people are thinking.

 

[southernhybrid]

And, while the party in Boston isn't a big thing, wouldn't it be better to have their white peers join in a holiday celebration, instead of acting as if the minorities are too fragile to be around their white peers?

Was this the only Xmas party and whites were exluded, or was this just a smaller Xmas party for minorities to get together... an event that has been happening on the side for years? Based on the record of the alt-right and issues with truthiness... I'm not swallowing the bait.

Supposedly, it was happening for years. The only issue I have is that the invitations were revoked and I think that's very rude. I think the minorities should have just put up with their white peers since they are the ones who fucked up the invitations. Still, I agree the whole thing is minor. It just got me thinking about how overly sensitive people have become these days. I think that's very sad. We should all learn how to put up with each other's shit and accept that we're all imperfect humans. Racists should be confronted, but leaving out a group of people based on their skin color certainly isn't going to solve any problems, especially when they were already invited to the party. What would be the reaction if an all white group of employees had mistakenly sent out invitations to the minority workers and then revoked them? Luckily, I've never worked in a place that had segregated parties.

What alt right group has said anything about this? Did I miss something?

 

[southernhybrid]

Knowing that some of my background is Irish, I went looking for example of how the Irish were treated earlier in the 20th Century. I saw a photo of a sign on the outside of a business in Boston that read, "No dogs. No Blacks. No Irish". I told one of my friends, that I was pleased to be associated with two of my favorite groups of people. Okay. I'm not just Irish. I have some other European immigrants in my background, but the worst were the British. I was told they were pirates and after reading the book, "Poor White Trash", I'm sure that my British ancestors were poor white trash.

Immigrants have long been hated in America. It is America's true past-time.

And, btw, "Blazing Saddles" is one of the best satirical comedies ever made. I watch it at least once a year and it still makes me laugh. Considering how sensitive people are these days, I doubt Mel Brooks would get away with making it, since it contains, the N word many times. Satire must not be well understood by the contemporary overly sensitive Americans. What were we talking about.....

I hate that line, it'd be like saying you couldn't do Citizen Kane again. Blazing Saddles can't be done again, because it was already done. Also, Blazing Saddles worked the first time because the people putting it together were some of the best ever comics and comic actors in the business. Also, satire is a piece of its time, which is impossible to recreate. It is the same reason why Rent feels dated and not nearly as relevant now. So, no Blazing Saddles can't be done again... but not for the reasons people are thinking.

You missed the point. The point is that some of the language in that movie would be unacceptable today due to the overly sensitive people. Still, do you realize that Mel Brooks finally did a new series, instead of a movie on History of the World? I've watched a few episodes and it's not as funny as the original. Again, the original had plenty of antisemite satire in it. Could that type of satire be created again these days without lots of criticism. I'm skeptical.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And, while the party in Boston isn't a big thing, wouldn't it be better to have their white peers join in a holiday celebration, instead of acting as if the minorities are too fragile to be around their white peers?

Was this the only Xmas party and whites were exluded, or was this just a smaller Xmas party for minorities to get together... an event that has been happening on the side for years? Based on the record of the alt-right and issues with truthiness... I'm not swallowing the bait.

Supposedly, it was happening for years. The only issue I have is that the invitations were revoked and I think that's very rude. I think the minorities should have just put up with their white peers since they are the ones who fucked up the invitations. Still, I agree the whole thing is minor. It just got me thinking about how overly sensitive people have become these days.

People got upset in the 60s too. They were beaten / murdered for it. They were fired. They were kept from voting. in the 19th century, workers got all uppity and sensitive... and the state guard was called in too shoot them.

I tire of people thinking things are all that much different. The actual change is we allow people to talk without grabbing them into the bushes and pounding them to a pulp.

I think that's very sad. We should all learn how to put up with each other's shit and accept that we're all imperfect humans. Racists should be confronted, but leaving out a group of people based on their skin color certainly isn't going to solve any problems, especially when they were already invited to the party. What would be the reaction if an all white group of employees had mistakenly sent out invitations to the minority workers and then revoked them?

Seeing that the minorities are getting together to celebrate access to political power in numbers never seen before in the US... it be a pretty fucking odd them for a bunch of white people. The party was about inclusion of people with a historically atypical experience in the US. Not a rag on white people bitch fest.

Luckily, I've never worked in a place that had segregated parties.

Or maybe they managed the invitations better.

 

[thebeave]

No Asians?
Mexicans?
Irish?

As 60ish, I'm too young to remember before Irish people were white. But my parents, from the mid-1920s, weren't. They remember signs in shop windows:
No niggers
No Jews
No Irish
No dogs
From the 30s and early 40s. Apparently, WWII made Irish people officially white.
Tom

Knowing that some of my background is Irish, I went looking for example of how the Irish were treated earlier in the 20th Century. I saw a photo of a sign on the outside of a business in Boston that read, "No dogs. No Blacks. No Irish". I told one of my friends, that I was pleased to be associated with two of my favorite groups of people. Okay. I'm not just Irish. I have some other European immigrants in my background, but the worst were the British. I was told they were pirates and after reading the book, "Poor White Trash", I'm sure that my British ancestors were poor white trash.

And, btw, "Blazing Saddles" is one of the best satirical comedies ever made. I watch it at least once a year and it still makes me laugh. Considering how sensitive people are these days, I doubt Mel Brooks would get away with making it, since it contains, the N word many times. Satire must not be well understood by the contemporary overly sensitive Americans. What were we talking about.....

If you haven't already, you should watch some youtube reaction videos where younger folks are watching Blazing Saddles. Many seem to be genuinely aghast with the language and jokes to the point where they can't focus and see the humor or satire in it. Like they're watching The Exorcist or something. Maybe you had to grow up in the era of All in the Family or Sanford and Son (one of my all time favorite shows) to enjoy the humor. Back then, Fred Sanford (and George Jefferson, IIRC) used the N-word occassionally on broadcast TV, which is something unthinkable today.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Knowing that some of my background is Irish, I went looking for example of how the Irish were treated earlier in the 20th Century. I saw a photo of a sign on the outside of a business in Boston that read, "No dogs. No Blacks. No Irish". I told one of my friends, that I was pleased to be associated with two of my favorite groups of people. Okay. I'm not just Irish. I have some other European immigrants in my background, but the worst were the British. I was told they were pirates and after reading the book, "Poor White Trash", I'm sure that my British ancestors were poor white trash.

Immigrants have long been hated in America. It is America's true past-time.

And, btw, "Blazing Saddles" is one of the best satirical comedies ever made. I watch it at least once a year and it still makes me laugh. Considering how sensitive people are these days, I doubt Mel Brooks would get away with making it, since it contains, the N word many times. Satire must not be well understood by the contemporary overly sensitive Americans. What were we talking about.....

I hate that line, it'd be like saying you couldn't do Citizen Kane again. Blazing Saddles can't be done again, because it was already done. Also, Blazing Saddles worked the first time because the people putting it together were some of the best ever comics and comic actors in the business. Also, satire is a piece of its time, which is impossible to recreate. It is the same reason why Rent feels dated and not nearly as relevant now. So, no Blazing Saddles can't be done again... but not for the reasons people are thinking.

You missed the point.

No I didn't. Your point was that the comedy couldn't be redone because it'd be too offensive, all the while musicals on Broadway include The Book of Mormon. In fact, the movie Blazing Saddles isn't remotely offensive, except to idiot bureaucrats and historical American treatment of blacks and potentially gassy people.

We've had historical comedy on the Holocaust by Benigni, we had Pulp Fiction, we have The Book of Mormon. These subjects are not easy, they require a lot of skill. But it has been done much more recently than Blazing Saddles.

The point is that some of the language in that movie would be unacceptable today due to the overly sensitive people.

What joke in the movie is offensive to anyone but racist old ladies and cowboys? The jokes are expertly crafted.

Still, do you realize that Mel Brooks finally did a new series, instead of a movie on History of the World? I've watched a few episodes and it's not as funny as the original. Again, the original had plenty of antisemite satire in it. Could that type of satire be created again these days without lots of criticism. I'm skeptical.

It can be done, if it is done well enough. Get the writers to Scary Movie together and let Will Ferrell go unchecked... and the result will be worse than Jerry Lewis's holocaust film.

 

[southernhybrid]

Knowing that some of my background is Irish, I went looking for example of how the Irish were treated earlier in the 20th Century. I saw a photo of a sign on the outside of a business in Boston that read, "No dogs. No Blacks. No Irish". I told one of my friends, that I was pleased to be associated with two of my favorite groups of people. Okay. I'm not just Irish. I have some other European immigrants in my background, but the worst were the British. I was told they were pirates and after reading the book, "Poor White Trash", I'm sure that my British ancestors were poor white trash.

Immigrants have long been hated in America. It is America's true past-time.

And, btw, "Blazing Saddles" is one of the best satirical comedies ever made. I watch it at least once a year and it still makes me laugh. Considering how sensitive people are these days, I doubt Mel Brooks would get away with making it, since it contains, the N word many times. Satire must not be well understood by the contemporary overly sensitive Americans. What were we talking about.....

I hate that line, it'd be like saying you couldn't do Citizen Kane again. Blazing Saddles can't be done again, because it was already done. Also, Blazing Saddles worked the first time because the people putting it together were some of the best ever comics and comic actors in the business. Also, satire is a piece of its time, which is impossible to recreate. It is the same reason why Rent feels dated and not nearly as relevant now. So, no Blazing Saddles can't be done again... but not for the reasons people are thinking.

You missed the point.

No I didn't. Your point was that the comedy couldn't be redone because it'd be too offensive, all the while musicals on Broadway include The Book of Mormon. In fact, the movie Blazing Saddles isn't remotely offensive, except to idiot bureaucrats and historical American treatment of blacks and potentially gassy people.

We've had historical comedy on the Holocaust by Benigni, we had Pulp Fiction, we have The Book of Mormon. These subjects are not easy, they require a lot of skill. But it has been done much more recently than Blazing Saddles.

The point is that some of the language in that movie would be unacceptable today due to the overly sensitive people.

What joke in the movie is offensive to anyone but racist old ladies and cowboys? The jokes are expertly crafted.

Still, do you realize that Mel Brooks finally did a new series, instead of a movie on History of the World? I've watched a few episodes and it's not as funny as the original. Again, the original had plenty of antisemite satire in it. Could that type of satire be created again these days without lots of criticism. I'm skeptical.

It can be done, if it is done well enough. Get the writers to Scary Movie together and let Will Ferrell go unchecked... and the result will be worse than Jerry Lewis's holocaust film.

Did you see the beave's recent reply? He claims that he's watched videos of younger people watching "Blazing Saddles" and being horrified by the language etc. That's my point. I didn't live 100 years ago and sure people likely reacted to all sorts of crazy things, but I've never seen so much overly sensitive reactions to some of the movies and things that happened in my lifetime, until recently. For fuck's sake, when TCM recently played "Blazing Saddles", they had to put up a warning that some of the language might be offensive. That's what I'm talking about. Maybe it's only because it's a comedy, but I hate that so many people have become so childish when it comes to things like this.

Anyway, we obviously aren't going to agree, so I'll leave at that. And, it's fine for people to disagree without any hard feelings. I assume you feel that way as well.

 

[ZiprHead]

The point is that some of the language in that movie would be unacceptable today due to the overly sensitive people.

Haven't seen Django Unchained, have you.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Knowing that some of my background is Irish, I went looking for example of how the Irish were treated earlier in the 20th Century. I saw a photo of a sign on the outside of a business in Boston that read, "No dogs. No Blacks. No Irish". I told one of my friends, that I was pleased to be associated with two of my favorite groups of people. Okay. I'm not just Irish. I have some other European immigrants in my background, but the worst were the British. I was told they were pirates and after reading the book, "Poor White Trash", I'm sure that my British ancestors were poor white trash.

Immigrants have long been hated in America. It is America's true past-time.

And, btw, "Blazing Saddles" is one of the best satirical comedies ever made. I watch it at least once a year and it still makes me laugh. Considering how sensitive people are these days, I doubt Mel Brooks would get away with making it, since it contains, the N word many times. Satire must not be well understood by the contemporary overly sensitive Americans. What were we talking about.....

I hate that line, it'd be like saying you couldn't do Citizen Kane again. Blazing Saddles can't be done again, because it was already done. Also, Blazing Saddles worked the first time because the people putting it together were some of the best ever comics and comic actors in the business. Also, satire is a piece of its time, which is impossible to recreate. It is the same reason why Rent feels dated and not nearly as relevant now. So, no Blazing Saddles can't be done again... but not for the reasons people are thinking.

You missed the point.

No I didn't. Your point was that the comedy couldn't be redone because it'd be too offensive, all the while musicals on Broadway include The Book of Mormon. In fact, the movie Blazing Saddles isn't remotely offensive, except to idiot bureaucrats and historical American treatment of blacks and potentially gassy people.

We've had historical comedy on the Holocaust by Benigni, we had Pulp Fiction, we have The Book of Mormon. These subjects are not easy, they require a lot of skill. But it has been done much more recently than Blazing Saddles.

The point is that some of the language in that movie would be unacceptable today due to the overly sensitive people.

What joke in the movie is offensive to anyone but racist old ladies and cowboys? The jokes are expertly crafted.

Still, do you realize that Mel Brooks finally did a new series, instead of a movie on History of the World? I've watched a few episodes and it's not as funny as the original. Again, the original had plenty of antisemite satire in it. Could that type of satire be created again these days without lots of criticism. I'm skeptical.

It can be done, if it is done well enough. Get the writers to Scary Movie together and let Will Ferrell go unchecked... and the result will be worse than Jerry Lewis's holocaust film.

Did you see the beave's recent reply? He claims that he's watched videos of younger people watching "Blazing Saddles" and being horrified by the language etc.

Who would be shocked by the language in the movie in todays 'swearing is common' culture?

That's my point. I didn't live 100 years ago and sure people likely reacted to all sorts of crazy things, but I've never seen so much overly sensitive reactions to some of the movies and things that happened in my lifetime, until recently.

No social media in the 60s, 70s, or 80s to be able to gauge it.

For fuck's sake, when TCM recently played "Blazing Saddles", they had to put up a warning that some of the language might be offensive. That's what I'm talking about. Maybe it's only because it's a comedy, but I hate that so many people have become so childish when it comes to things like this.

Anyway, we obviously aren't going to agree, so I'll leave at that. And, it's fine for people to disagree without any hard feelings. I assume you feel that way as well.

No! This is the Internet and no disagreement goes without unrelenting back and forth retorts! *retort*

 

[Politesse]

Did you see the beave's recent reply? He claims that he's watched videos of younger people watching "Blazing Saddles" and being horrified by the language etc. That's my point. I didn't live 100 years ago and sure people likely reacted to all sorts of crazy things, but I've never seen so much overly sensitive reactions to some of the movies and things that happened in my lifetime, until recently. For fuck's sake, when TCM recently played "Blazing Saddles", they had to put up a warning that some of the language might be offensive. That's what I'm talking about. Maybe it's only because it's a comedy, but I hate that so many people have become so childish when it comes to things like this.

Ah, yes, to avoid childishness, I watch many Mel Brooks movies. Keeps me mature, you know.

*fart*