S39.E06: Suck It Up Buttercup

[fishcakes]

19 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

Isn't it though?  I was hoping the 21st Century would be a time of giving up defining people by "race" and  moving into complete, color blind equality, but instead it looks like  we've moved into a new and stronger division with highly educated people like Jamal elevating the falsehood  of separate races into  pillars of identity,  and giving us all "teaching moments" about What White People Think, even pretending to be able to read their  subconscious to warn us that,   "White people think black people are thugs, wife beaters and murderers."  If enough people listen to the Jamal's of the world they'll soon believe every white person is a racist, even the ones who seem nice on the surface are subconsciously bad -- and another century of division will pass.

🤣

Edited November 3, 2019 by fishcakes

[Eolivet]

1 hour ago, peachmangosteen said:

I forgot about that. Tommy is really shaping up to be a bit of an asshole.

Survivor Tommy is like six-drink Amy from Brooklyn Nine-Nine: Just sad.

(Hopefully we get to the part where he speaks French. It would be an improvement.)

[mythoughtis]

I deleted the episode from my DVR already, so I can’t go back and review it. Does anyone remember how Jamal has been wearing his buff?  Around his neck  like a bandanna? Over his hair like a do-rag?   On his wrist or hair like a sweatband?  Could that have factored into Jacks’ referring to it that way? 
Even so, no one has ever even referred to the buffs In any capacity on any episode in any season other than when Jeff tells people to pick or drop their buffs. 
I am white, so probably clueless about this - but I place no negative connotation on the word do-rag.  To me it’s just a description of the article of  clothing that men ( of any race)   wear that way as opposed to a woman’s headband or scarf or bandanna. To me, It’s actually Jamal that places a negative connotation on it, so it’s stereotyping of  men that wear it that Jamal brought  to play here.

I love Elaine.  I hope she got the adventure she wanted. 
 

Edited November 3, 2019 by mythoughtis

[Bryce Lynch]

2 hours ago, mythoughtis said:

I deleted the episode from my DVR already, so I can’t go back and review it. Does anyone remember how Jamal has been wearing his buff?  Around his neck  like a bandanna!  Over his hair like a do-rag?   On his wrist or hair like a sweatband?  Could that have factored into Jacks’ referring to it that way? 
Even so, no one has ever even referred to the buffs In any capacity on any episode in any season other than when Jeff tells people to pick or drop their buffs. 
I am white, so probably clueless about this - but I place no negative connotation on the word do-rag.  To me it’s just a description of the article of  clothing that men ( of any race)   wear that way as opposed to a woman’s headband or scarf or bandanna. To me, It’s actually Jamal that places a negative connotation on it, so it’s stereotyping of  men that wear it that Jamal brought  to play here.

I love Elaine.  I hope she got the adventure she wanted. 
 

Jamal wore his buff around his neck at the reward challenge.  When he was teaching dance, he wore it like a headband.

During his confessional before "d-word" scene, Jack was wearing his own buff like a "d-word".  Jack also wore it that way in episode 5.

So, Jack, may have been describing the buff, based upon how HE used it, not based upon his "deep-seated" racism, as Jamal immediately accused.  

Edited November 3, 2019 by Bryce Lynch

[Ellee]

I like Elizabeth too. 

To me it will be interesting to see what she and Elaine say to each other after the last tribal.   It didn’t escape either’s notice that OldVokai were in Missy and Aaron’s ear after the block the vote announcement.  Easy enough for Aaron/Missy to explain but will the two girls buy it.

Kind of rooting for Elaine and Elizabeth to teach all Volkain a lesson. 😁

[Bryce Lynch]

I think it would make sense for Elizabeth, Elaine, Missy and Aaron to throw the next couple of immunity challenges (which is something I hate).

I wonder if Aaron and Missy would be willing to do that.  They both seem extremely competitive, which might make it hard for them.  On the other hand they are both hyper strategic, which might make them love the idea.

[Rachel RSL]

15 hours ago, Brookside said:

"Let it roll off my shoulders for my own social mobility" says Jamal.  Is English his first language?

Yes. I’d put him up there with Zeke as one of the most eloquent people to be on the show.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Rachel RSL

[Nashville]

12 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

Isn't it though?  I was hoping the 21st Century would be a time of giving up defining people by "race" and  moving into complete, color blind equality

Closest we ever got to that was at the height of the flower power generation, and we’ve been moving in the other direction ever since.  😐

[Bryce Lynch]

9 hours ago, Nashville said:

Closest we ever got to that was at the height of the flower power generation, and we’ve been moving in the other direction ever since.  😐

I disagree.  I think great progress was made right up until about the mid 2000's.

[IslandGirl]

On 10/30/2019 at 8:18 PM, Bryce Lynch said:

The Botham Jean shooting was about a nervous, confused, incompetent cop, who didn't know she was in someone else's apartment and shot the "intruder" she foolishly perceived to be in "her" apartment.  It is highly unlikely race was a factor.

But, it is certainly racist to assume Jack (who showed nothing but admiration and affection toward Jamal) was racist because of what some other white person did a year earlier, thousands of miles away.

Yeah, some real racism still exists.  But, convincing yourself something that obviously wasn't racist, was, is foolish and destructive.

BRYCE LYNCH, that female cop was actually said to be racist by those who knew her personally. While you're correct it can't be "proven" she shot him out of racism, since he was just sitting on the couch (not pilfering!) I highly suspect if he'd been blonde haired & blue eyed she'd have asked questions before resorting to immediately shooting her gun.

I say this because I & my son are of color. I was in a department store with him & his blonde haired friend. To my dismay, they both started playing & running through the racks of clothing. Before I could collect them, a white woman commented on how cute the white boy was, & then said what a wild animal my son was when they were BOTH DOING THE SAME EXACT THING.  So I know first hand how these things go...

And Bryce Lynch (LOL your name is a bit ironic in this particular conversation!), I have to agree with you that even I as a woman of color was a bit put off by Jamal's initial offense at Jack's use of do rag because I believe he meant no harm whatsoever, but I really like the way the two men handled it & Jamal has lived a life full of macro & micro offenses, so it's certainly understandable why he was offended...

[fishcakes]

I wonder what happened in the 2000s that made people unhappy about the state of racial equality in the U.S. What could it have been? Welp, it's a mystery, I guess.

[amazingracefan]

On 10/31/2019 at 9:40 PM, nlkm9 said:

See i was surprised because i have only heard the term doorag used to describe “ rednecks” or “ hillbillies”. Never have I heard it used to describe a person of color. That’s why that surprised me. 

On 10/31/2019 at 9:15 PM, Fallacy said:

Jack called Jamal’s buff a durag because Jamal is black. Plain and simple. Jamal calmly explained why that’s an issue, and Jack understood. I thought they both handled it beautifully. It’s a perfect example of the kind of stuff people of color experience all the time that white people will often claim is no big deal. I’m a white person so I acknowledge that I don’t get to tell a person of color what is and what is not offensive.

Rednecks and hillbillies are much more known and insulting things to call people who are thought to be part of a particular 'race'?  Durag sounds like it may be considered an insult in some areas, in other areas they likely don't even know what it refers to.

[Ms Blue Jay]

2 hours ago, IslandGirl said:

BRYCE LYNCH, that female cop was actually said to be racist by those who knew her personally. 

We can go even further than that. Her social media posts are both violent and racist.  

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/special-reports/botham-jean/racist-and-violent-messages-social-media-posts-shown-during-sentencing-phase-of-amber-guyger-trial/287-c1afb7ab-255c-444f-ac25-e3ba14b2f337

2 hours ago, IslandGirl said:

While you're correct it can't be "proven" she shot him out of racism, since he was just sitting on the couch (not pilfering!) 

I think he was eating ice cream.  No intruder goes into your house, takes off their shoes, and eats ice cream calmly on the couch.  She was obviously in the wrong apartment and none of the decor of the hallways or rooms matched.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Ms Blue Jay

[Special K]

On 11/1/2019 at 8:03 AM, JudyObscure said:

 This is the ultimate sort of divisiveness where white people will no longer be comfortable around black people and will start avoiding them and, just like that,  we're back to social segregation.

This is the parallel argument that men have starting making that you just shouldn't hire women in the workplace because it's too difficult for men to not sexually harrass them.

[JudyObscure]

4 hours ago, Special K said:

This is the parallel argument that men have starting making that you just shouldn't hire women in the workplace because it's too difficult for men to not sexually harrass them.

 Although I was talking about social segregation, I can see where it might effect hiring, too, if the factory line has to stop every time someone says a common word that someone else considers a subconscious micro-aggression.  That's why I think being overly sensitive about  words could make things harder all around.  It would be great if no one ever hurt anyone's feelings or made anyone else uncomfortable but we're talking about jobs in the real world, not kindergarten.

In any case sexual harassment at its worst is very different from saying a word like "durag."   Being told that you have to have sex with someone or lose your job is not the same as putting up with words you don't like. Women shouldn't have to work around men who are using vulgar sexual language and men shouldn't have to work around people who are using directly insulting or  racist language.  But policing every. single. word  is just too subjective and  too hard for any manager to control.  

I know white privilege is a real thing and that it provides an advantage for white people -- all things being equal.  But it seldom is all equal and I know people who live with disadvantages much worse than having any particular skin color. 

Edited November 5, 2019 by JudyObscure
TMI

[Special K]

46 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

I know white privilege is a real thing and that it provides an advantage for white people

Thank you for your post.

IMO, privilege in this context does not mean that everyone (or even anyone) in the group has a privileged life by our normal definition or ease, wealth, etc.  It means that the group has the social privilege of being the default.  And everyone else is the "other."

Edited November 4, 2019 by Special K

[Nashville]

9 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I disagree.  I think great progress was made right up until about the mid 2000's.

Personally, I place the divergence at/around the mid-80s, when the ideology of political correctness/PC first started gaining traction - and what first started out with the laudable goal of reducing hurtful speech went so far to the extreme that by the early/mid 90s, virtually any disparaging comment (race-related or not) would be spun as evidence of racial prejudice if the involved parties were of different races (remember the University of Pennsylvania “water buffalo” incident?).  

Like with anything taken to an extreme, the result was that what started out as an attempt to temper hateful/hurtful speech ended up creating a backlash - in this case, with conservatives against what they considered an attack upon free speech.  IIRC that may have been one of the primary-but-unofficial talking points in conservative candidates’ 2000 election stump speeches - which may be what you’re referring to - but IMHO its roots went back a good deal earlier.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Nashville
University of Pennsylvania, not Penn State

[fishcakes]

I was told this was a Wendy's.

[PhilMarlowe2]

On 10/30/2019 at 8:18 PM, tvgoddess said:

😊 My hardcore crush on Rob from Day 1 has never really gone away. I wish I knew how to quit him.

Same here. And when they flashed back to him on All-Stars, it all came rushing back how gorgeous he was back in the day. Those pretty eyes. His fierce protection of Amber. It was all too much. He's still sexy, but damn, he was smoking back then.

[PhilMarlowe2]

On 10/30/2019 at 9:26 PM, deirdra said:

"Durag" made me think of Hulk Hogan, Sam Kinison & Kid Rock, not black thugs.

I don't think the crux of the conflict was whether only black men wear durags out in the world.

It was more that those items are always called "buffs" on Survivor and yet, when speaking in reference to a black man on the cast, Jack changed it to "durag."

Would Jack have called it a "durag" if speaking about Elaine or Elizabeth? Probably not. Though unintentional, Jack was stereotyping. That was the crux of the issue.

[tvgoddess]

8 minutes ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

Same here. And when they flashed back to him on All-Stars, it all came rushing back how gorgeous he was back in the day. Those pretty eyes. His fierce protection of Amber. It was all too much. He's still sexy, but damn, he was smoking back then.

I didn't even need to look at the flashback, since I shamefully own Survivor All-Stars on DVD. Every now and then I will pop them in to get my fix. He was also a team challenge monster and I loved watching him control the game as much as he did.

Back to this season: I don't know how much longer Dean can coast. Kellee might know him through his previous ex or whatever, but that's not a strong enough tie to hold.

[Nashville]

4 hours ago, fishcakes said:

I was told this was a Wendy's.

Sure da fuck ain’t Chick-fil-A.

[BK1978]

On 10/31/2019 at 5:46 PM, nlkm9 said:

i also thought Elaine announced her advantage a bit early but glad it all worked out .

I am not sure I missed it, but did she have to reveal her advantage at TC?  Or did she do so as a shock tactic?  I cannot remember if it said she had to announce it in her clue.

On 10/31/2019 at 6:31 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

So, people deal with these microaggressions all day and pretty much say nothing.  That's reality.

I had a boss once who would make racist comments or "jokes" frequently about one of my coworkers.  I'm very close with that coworker so I expressed my sympathy and anger towards him about it.  I said, doesn't this stuff make you mad?  His response was, if I got mad about stuff like that, I would be a ball of rage every day of my life.  Also, I mean at the workplace we don't really have a choice.  

I don't think what your boss did was anything that could be thought of as a microaggression.  He was just being an outright asshole.

On 11/1/2019 at 8:03 AM, JudyObscure said:

Unfortunately  I think the main lesson was that white people can no longer relax enough around black people to have a real friendship.  They must constantly walk on egg shells and weigh every word because the hostility coming from the other side is just what Jamal was expressing, that white people can't be trusted and if you wait and watch they will always say something wrong, even if it's code, and then you will be allowed to express what you really feel about them.

 This is the ultimate sort of divisiveness where white people will no longer be comfortable around black people and will start avoiding them and, just like that,  we're back to social segregation.

I once had a black co-worker who I was friendly with at work,  I say at work because we never hung out outside of work.  That is more a me thing as I never hang out with any co-workers outside of work because I am anti-social.

Anyway the dude was a dead ringer for Dave Chappelle and one time another co-worker brought it up by saying, "Hey Rick you look like Dave Chappelle!"  Then the co-worker asked me if I thought Rick (not his actual name) looked like Dave Chappelle and I said yes.  Well Rick was pissed off and said that not all black people look alike and that we were racists.

I thought Rick was just joking as that is a joke I have heard people from every race make.  But then I realized he was not.  He would not talk to me for the rest of the shift.

The next day I saw him and I wanted to see where he was coming from.  He said he was sick of people saying all black people look alike.  I then said no, you and Dave happen to look alike.  If you and James Earl Jones looked alike people would probably bring that up as well.  

I then told him how I would always get, "You know you kind of look like Marlon Brando."  Mind you not the young and fit Marlon, no people thought I looked like the old and fat version.  Never once did it cross my mind that they were thinking all white people look the same.  No I was thinking I do look something like him and unfortunately I am fat so I look like the fat version of him.

After that interaction I never felt right even having any sort of lengthy conversation with Rick because I did not know what would piss him off.  I never made any racist jokes or anything like that, all I did was say he looked like a famous comedian which is not insulting in the least bit.

For me I truly do not care about the color of your skin (or your gender, religion, sexual preferences, etc.), if you are cool with me I will always be cool with you.  I just do not deal with eggshell people (of any skin color) very well.  I do not have time to deal with people who are going to get offended by stuff.  Even if it is something that I am not willingly doing to offend.

Hell my own uncle is an eggshell person and I stay away from him because I never know what will set him off.  My uncle once called me every cuss word in the book because I walked by his crazy cat and it hissed at me.  I did not step on it or do anything to taunt it or make it think I was going to attack it (Maybe cats believe in microaggressions).  The cat was just nuts and hissed at me for no reason.

Well my uncle went off on me saying I was disrespectful to his cat and all that jazz.  Yeah me and eggshell people do not do well.

[blackwing]

9 hours ago, BK1978 said:

I am not sure I missed it, but did she have to reveal her advantage at TC?  Or did she do so as a shock tactic?  I cannot remember if it said she had to announce it in her clue.

I was wondering the same thing and asked the same question a few pages back, but I think it's still unclear.  The instructions said something like "before you vote, announce whose vote you will block".  I am unclear if she could have just announced this in the voting booth.

If so, I think she made a bad move by doing it publicly.  It's still early in the game.  If it was later and people are concerned about the vaunted "resume builder" then yeah maybe public would be a ballsy move.  But early on, I think it would just invite resentment.  Even if she wanted to build her resume there's no reason why she couldn't have blocked secretly and then just announced at final tribal if she made it to the end that this was her big move.

Of course, this assumes that she had not been given instructions off camera that the block had to be announced publicly before everyone voted (and not just "you" the individual).  And I suppose if she hadn't announced publicly we would have been deprived of the overwrought tears of Jason ("you never know when every day on Survivor is going to be your last"), Tommy ("I'm going to remember this night for the rest of my life") or Lauren (just all around inexplicable tears).

For one of them, yeah, the game ended.  But there's no reason why the remaining people couldn't try and form new bonds, or hope for a merge, or whatever.

[PhilMarlowe2]

On 11/1/2019 at 5:03 AM, JudyObscure said:

Unfortunately  I think the main lesson was that white people can no longer relax enough around black people to have a real friendship.  They must constantly walk on egg shells and weigh every word because the hostility coming from the other side is just what Jamal was expressing, that white people can't be trusted and if you wait and watch they will always say something wrong, even if it's code, and then you will be allowed to express what you really feel about them.

 This is the ultimate sort of divisiveness where white people will no longer be comfortable around black people and will start avoiding them and, just like that,  we're back to social segregation.

But that clearly and decisively wasn't the main lesson from the show: 

By the end of the exchange, there was actually very little division - in fact, both Jack and Jamal very clearly expressed that they felt closer to one another than before, that their friendship felt more real than ever, and that the whole incident gave them both a chance to heal something inside themselves - Jamal said Jack's willingness to hear him was a healing experience and Jack said he learned something about his own privilege that he never would have otherwise understood. I think the main lesson here is quite the opposite of what you're saying - everyone should be free to express themselves and to hear others, and by Jamal expressing his hurt feelings to Jack, and by Jack being willing to listen to him, and by Jamal being willing to listen to Jack's remorse, they now feel more comfortable than ever with one another.

The real "walking on eggshells" would have been if Jamal had never said anything - held in his hurt, held in his disappointment and then grew distant from Jack (which Jack would of course feel/sense on some level). This whole sequence was an example of people willing to stomp on the eggshells, get into some respectful conflict and come out the other side closer for it. And I also find this idea of "white people having to walk on eggshells" a bit ironic as minorities of all types have had to keep very very silent in response to subtle digs, unintentional slights and microaggression for ages - is that not a form of walking on egg shells? And, as you have pointed out, it hasn't gotten us anywhere.

Last week, Survivor in fact showed us no one has to walk on eggshells - if we're willing to listen to one another, even in disagreement, there can actually be deeper unity than when we're all sweeping things under the rug for the sake of not rocking the proverbial boat.

Edited November 5, 2019 by PhilMarlowe2

[PhilMarlowe2]

4 minutes ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

Edited November 5, 2019 by PhilMarlowe2

[JudyObscure]

2 minutes ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

And I also find this idea of "white people having to walk on eggshells" a bit ironic as minorities of all types have had to keep very very silent in response to subtle digs, unintentional slights and microaggression for ages - is that not a form of walking on egg shells?

I agree with this part absolutely and the years of walking on eggshells and sucking up terrible examples of racism that black people have had to endure, has been horrible -- and no it didn't suddenly get worse after 2000, there were just some well reported incident.  As you say it's been going on for centuries, but I think it has slowly getting better since the civil rights movement of the 1960's.

I just don't agree that the recent movement about white privilege and coded words is helping.  I see it more as a tit for tat thing where black people are seeking a sort of punishment against whites.  I don't blame them, but I don't think it's the best way forward.  Making nice people like Jack feel like scum usually doesn't work as well as it did on Survivor.  Yes after Jamal gave his lecture to Jack, and Jack responded with more apologies and humbled himself for a while, it was all very warm and cuddly.  Everything had gone Jamal's way so of course he was happy and Jack had listened with awe to his hero  and agreed with everything he said, so he was ready to take the blame for five centuries of bad white people.  

Now Jack is ready to walk the egg shell walk.  Making atonement for everything that went before and so are lots of nice white people.  It just doesn't have the ring of truth or justice to me.  I believe that each person is only responsible for his own actions and that Jack was not responsible for the durag stereotypes in Jamal's head.

[Cornhusker12]

I can't believe that wonderful moment of explanation and learning and mutual understanding has been seen by so many as an example of how white people have it hard in this world.

[JudyObscure]

3 hours ago, huskerj12 said:

I can't believe that wonderful moment of explanation and learning and mutual understanding has been seen by so many as an example of how white people have it hard in this world.

Not one person has said that. Where exactly is the "mutual" understanding in the Jack/Jamal talk? Jamal lectured and Jack listened.  For mutual understanding Jamal would have listened and learned something from Jack, too.

Jamal says in hi bio that Obama is the person he admires most in the world.  Here's something Obama said recently:

Quote

"This idea of purity, and you're never compromised, and you're always politically woke, and all that stuff, you should get over that ... "The world is messy. There are ambiguities. People who do really good stuff have flaws.".

That's all I've been saying, not that white people have it hard, but that expecting perfection from us right down to a subconscious level is just going to slow down progress, because we are and always will be messy.

Edited November 5, 2019 by JudyObscure
Tried to get my comment out of Obama's quote box--couldn't do it.

[Ms Blue Jay]

I think a problem here might be seeing some kind of criticism or being checked or being taught something as catastrophic or the end of the world.

It might be hard the first time, but if I'm interested in learning, it gets easier and easier and less embarrassing.

Jack heard what Jamal had to say and was momentarily ashamed and embarrassed.  He didn't throw himself into the ocean.  He handled things pretty well, the men both got some space, then the men both discussed it after.  Like many here I thought it was a very cool, actually beautiful moment and something we don't often get to see on television - making it extra special because this is "reality television" and not scripted.

I don't think the word "code" is a good analogy.  A code is kept secret deliberately.  A code is something you're not supposed to find out.  If someone teaches me something new, it's the opposite of coded.  It's being revealed.  

Edited November 5, 2019 by Ms Blue Jay

[Nashville]

1 hour ago, huskerj12 said:

I can't believe that wonderful moment of explanation and learning and mutual understanding has been seen by so many as an example of how white people have it hard in this world.

This comment depresses me more than a little.  I can’t speak for anybody else - but I posted my comments not as a defense of white privilege, but simply to present an alternate consideration to the notion that ALL whites are racially prejudiced bigots who will take every opportunity to cast aspersions upon those of different races.  It saddens me that, given the possibility that Jack’s statement may have had racial bias, so many (including Jamal) immediately assume the position his comments were definitely racist, and vociferously defend this stance against any/all alternate considerations.  

I would like to think I’m wrong, but I’m getting a mightily reinforced impression that giving your fellow man the benefit of the doubt is an absolute non-starter in today’s climate; if there’s any leeway whatsoever in considering a statement might be indicative of racial prejudice, then prejudice is the automatic assumption.  IMHO though, such automatic assumption of malice flies directly in the face of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream - by judging a person by the color of their skin, and not by the content of their character.  

If no dialogue can take place without automatically assuming the worst of your counterpart, then how can any meaningful dialogue occur?

[Cornhusker12]

I think some viewers just saw it wildly different than my wife and I did. I thought both guys handled it great. I genuinely didn't see any ill will from either one toward the other. Jack didn't say he thought of Jamal as a thug, they both knew that, but he simply didn't know or think about the context of what he thought was an innocent comment. Jamal didn't "automatically assume the worst of his counterpart," the entire segment was him NOT assuming the worst of Jack! Instead he was taken aback and then took some time to gather his thoughts and then calmly and respectfully explained the context of why it made him feel uncomfortable, which helped Jack understand why it came across the way it did, and then they both said they came away with a greater understanding and appreciation of each other! How in the world is that NOT a best case scenario when it comes to a situation like this?

If you can't wrap your head around it for some reason, just take it from the two people who were actually involved who both agreed on the positivity of the outcome! haha

Edited November 5, 2019 by huskerj12

[DEL901]

43 minutes ago, huskerj12 said:

I think some viewers just saw it wildly different than my wife and I did. I thought both guys handled it great. I genuinely didn't see any ill will from either one toward the other. Jack didn't say he thought of Jamal as a thug, but he simply didn't know or think about the context of what he thought was an innocent comment. Jamal didn't "automatically assume the worst of his counterpart," the entire segment was him NOT assuming the worst of Jack! Instead he was taken aback and then took some time to gather his thoughts and then calmly and respectfully explained the context of why it made him feel uncomfortable, which helped Jack understand why it came across the way it did, and then they both said they came away with a greater understanding and appreciation of each other! How in the world is that NOT a best case scenario when it comes to a situation like this?

If you can't wrap your head around it for some reason, just take it from the two people who were actually involved who both agreed on the positivity of the outcome! haha

Well said. People who are not racist may sometimes say or do something that is hurtful without realizing how it may come across.   It is a chance for learning/teaching, not an attack against someone who didn’t understand they might be giving offence or being hurtful with what they thought was a “cute” term for the buff.  
 

And then there is Aaron.    What was he thinking, flipping and rhen flipping back and lying instead of owning it....after all, what was the other side going to do at that point?

[LanceM]

9 hours ago, blackwing said:

I was wondering the same thing and asked the same question a few pages back, but I think it's still unclear.  The instructions said something like "before you vote, announce whose vote you will block".  I am unclear if she could have just announced this in the voting booth.

If so, I think she made a bad move by doing it publicly.  It's still early in the game.  If it was later and people are concerned about the vaunted "resume builder" then yeah maybe public would be a ballsy move.  But early on, I think it would just invite resentment.  Even if she wanted to build her resume there's no reason why she couldn't have blocked secretly and then just announced at final tribal if she made it to the end that this was her big move.

Of course, this assumes that she had not been given instructions off camera that the block had to be announced publicly before everyone voted (and not just "you" the individual).  And I suppose if she hadn't announced publicly we would have been deprived of the overwrought tears of Jason ("you never know when every day on Survivor is going to be your last"), Tommy ("I'm going to remember this night for the rest of my life") or Lauren (just all around inexplicable tears).

For one of them, yeah, the game ended.  But there's no reason why the remaining people couldn't try and form new bonds, or hope for a merge, or whatever.

Everytime they have had the vote blocker the player has to announce publicly who they are blocking. I am guessing it is a rule.

[Bryce Lynch]

20 hours ago, huskerj12 said:

I can't believe that wonderful moment of explanation and learning and mutual understanding has been seen by so many as an example of how white people have it hard in this world.

Nobody is talking about how hard white people have it.  People are talking about Jamal making a mountain out of what was not even a molehill, based upon his own bigoted generalizations about white people and black people.

Jack didn't associate "d-words" with black men who were gang members, thugs and deadbeat dads, JAMAL does.

And, because Jamal is bigoted against white people (especially against straight, male ones) he assumes they are all racists and that they share his negative stereotypes about black men.

The projection is strong with this one.

Jamal should stop obsessing about race and "pillars of identity", and just be Jamal.  He is an intelligent, well educated man, with a good job.  He isn't responsible for what less honorable black men do, any more than Jack is responsible for the bad things other white men do 

All this intersectionality and victimhood mentality crap is toxic to him.  

Think about it.  When you make all these divisions, you alienate yourself from a large portion of the population.  This is especially true if you are a minority.

About 12% of the population is black and half is male, so right there Jamal is separating himself from 94% of the population.  Depending upon whether he is gay or straight, and what his religion is, he is pushing even more people out of his circle of identity.

The fact is, most people, and all people who matter, don't give a damn about what "pillars of identity" apply to you.   Jamal is building walls, not bridges with this crap.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Bryce Lynch

[Carolina Girl]

On 10/30/2019 at 6:27 PM, FlyingEgret said:

I figured Aaron was sticking with his four when he wouldn't return Jason's fist bump...

I figured he was when he didn't give Jason the head's up on Elaine's vote block.  

[Bryce Lynch]

3 minutes ago, Carolina Girl said:

I figured he was when he didn't give Jason the head's up on Elaine's vote block.  

Great point.  I hadn't thought about that.  If Aaron and/or Missy had flipped, Jason, Tommy, Lauren and Dan wouldn't have been shocked and crying when Elaine whipped out the vote blocker.   

[tvgoddess]

9 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

The fact is, most people, and all people who matter, don't give a damn about what "pillars of identity" apply to you.   Jamal is building walls, not bridges with this crap.

What a condescending slap in the face. 

[Bryce Lynch]

2 minutes ago, tvgoddess said:

What a condescending slap in the face. 

It is a "slap in the face" to racists and bigots who care about the color of people's skin as opposed to the content of their character.  If you are a racist, you and your opinions don't matter to me,

[tvgoddess]

Racism and prejudice are two different things with two different definitions.

[Carolina Girl]

22 hours ago, LanceM said:

Everytime they have had the vote blocker the player has to announce publicly who they are blocking. I am guessing it is a rule.

I should think that would be the case.  That way the individual doesn't vote at all.  If you did it right before you cast YOUR vote, there's always the possibility that the "blockee" would have already voted and the producers would have some difficulty extracting it.  And might not get it right.  I've always wondered how they were able to manipulate the order of votes in the urn to provide the highest level of suspense without everyone at TC watching them.  

[Whimsy]

I am calling cease fire on discussion of the Jamal/Jack situation.  It's degraded to personal attacks.  Future discussion will result in removal of posts and/or warnings. 

[cherrypj]

11 hours ago, Whimsy said:

I am calling cease fire on discussion of the Jamal/Jack situation.  It's degraded to personal attacks.  Future discussion will result in removal of posts and/or warnings. 

Thank you. For others, here's how to ignore users:

1. Hover over the member's avatar and select 'ignore user', then follow the on-screen directions. OR
2. Click on your name in the top right-hand corner, then selected Ignored Users from the dropdown menu.