Kyle Capener: "Geometry" Just Isn't His Strong Suit.

[Halting Hex]

Ugh.  I may have defended Kyle against one specific charge, but he was never a favorite of mine, and right now he's pretty much at the bottom of my personal barrel.

But if he's going to spoon-feed me a thread title that way, he gets to cut the line.  Bastard.

I do really loathe him.  You can't do your "I'm such a badass, I've betrayed every alliance I've been in, I'm only in this for myself" posturing…and then do that "except for my showmance" lame follow-up.  Either you're willing to cut anybody, or you're not.  No Medals for Trying, to quote the Jerry Izenberg book.

BTW, Kyle, a "showmance" is something that's just for purposes of the show; that's what the name means.  If you have deeper feelings, if you're willing to tank your game for Botox Barbie (nasty nickname for Alyssa that I've seen elsewhere). that's your business.  But that's not a "showmance", then.

Ah, well.  Clearly expecting Kyle to understand vocabulary is as hopeless as expecting him to understand "geometry".  (Or "loyalty", or…)

I stand by my previous opinion, though.  Kyle is not a racist, IMO.

He's just a worm.

Edited August 29, 2022 by Halting Hex

[Runningwild]

Yeah, I don’t think he’s racist, but he’s sure not very smart. Ugh. Alyssa either. 

[DEL901]

Not everything is shown in the episodes.  I trust the intel from the feeds watchers.  

Here’s a link to an article that covers just a tiny bit of what Kyle has said/done to make people believe he is racist.  
https://www.tmz.com/2022/08/29/big-brother-housemate-contestant-kyle-capener-racist-fans-cbs/

[Halting Hex]

5 hours ago, DEL901 said:

Not everything is shown in the episodes.  I trust the intel from the feeds watchers.  

Here’s a link to an article that covers just a tiny bit of what Kyle has said/done to make people believe he is racist.  
https://www.tmz.com/2022/08/29/big-brother-housemate-contestant-kyle-capener-racist-fans-cbs/

Obviously not everything is shown on the episodes.  However, that particular issue was covered in the episodes.  Again, being concerned that you might be targeted because of your race does not automatically make you a "racist".  JMO.

And the only other thing even mentioned in that article is that Kyle is said to have committed unenumerated alleged "microaggressions".  "Micro" as in "too small be seen with the naked eye", I suppose. 

Maybe some people (of every race) just enjoy attacking other people over nothing and making themselves feel morally superior.  Kyle's an ignorant weak-willed weasel.  I don't need to invent "racism" as a reason to despise him.  Again, JMO.

[DEL901]

Sorry I can’t elaborate on what else he did because that is in the feeds thread which is spoilery.  

[pennben]

Nope. Nothing amusing about Kyle. Full stop. He got his 10 seconds of fame. Enough. 

[HurricaneVal]

Oh dear....  (riffing off the above)

Spoiler

Poor Alyssa.  It's going to take a looooong time for Kyle to add up to a full Andy Warhol unit.

Edited August 30, 2022 by HurricaneVal
Didn't want to be too provocative in my spoiler

[BK1978]

Full disclosure, I have not watched any of this season.  After having ditched last season due to the Cookout Alliance, which was totally a racist alliance.  Tiffany and Derek F. even said they would refuse to vote for a white person to win  (I believe it was the two of them who said that), nobody can tell me they were not racist not matter what excuses people want to throw out for them. 

I also grew sick of watching season after season of big alliances running the game and having the end be something of a forgone conclusion nearly every single season.  Plus the racism from other seasons like that from Aryn, Jack and Jackson and the just horrible bullying from Paul and his crew.

On to the topic of Kyle.  I honestly do not know what has gone down in the house in regards to comments that has been said he made.  However, I have read a few articles about the main reason why it has been said he is racist (Big Brother stuff still pops up for me) and I honestly I struggle to understand why he is being called racist.  As I said I don't know any comments he made, I am just going by the fact that I read he felt as if there was a secret alliance being formed by the remaining black players in the house with their goal to do what the Cookout Alliance did last year.  So he wanted to form an all white players counter-alliance to stop them. 

Where is the racism in this, even if he was wrong in his assumption?  Last season there was such an alliance and two seasons ago on Survivor there was also an alliance of black contestants whose goal was to vote out anyone who did not look like them. 

To me it is reasonable to think it could happen again and therefore a counter-alliance to stop that would be perfectly reasonable.   Much like an all-male alliance forming to stop an all-female alliance from voting out all of the men, or vice versa, would be perfectly reasonable.

In the Yahoo article I read on the topic it said, Kyle also recognized that he "needs to look at the core reason at why that was even a thought or a concept" in his mind.  What does that even mean?  The core reason for thinking of such a concept is that two such alliances have formed on two different shows within the last year.  That has nothing to do with racism or unconscious bias, it has to do with a fact that it has happened twice already. 

To me that would be smart gameplay to think of every possible scenario that could happen.  If you think it is actually is happening, and not game paranoia setting in, you should make plans to stop it regardless of the optics.  The members of the Cookout didn't care about the optics when they did what they did and they were praised for doing it.

I said it last year, what the Cookout alliance did would probably lead to people being paranoid it would happen again.  From what I read that is what happened in this situation.

Therefore, I would like to ask, especially anyone who supported the Cookout alliance last season and told me I was not allowed to call such an alliance racist.  Without me knowing any comments that he may of actually made that are racist (I mean actual racism, not microaggression or unconscious biases.  If you are not actively trying to do something to harm or bother others, or if you are not aware that something you are doing might be offensive.  How can you be held accountable for it?), what part of him proposing an all white-alliance person to combat an all-black person, is racist?

After all, I was told time and time again last year I was wrong to think of the Cookout alliance as a racist alliance.

[Jel]

On 8/29/2022 at 6:31 PM, Halting Hex said:

Obviously not everything is shown on the episodes.  However, that particular issue was covered in the episodes.  Again, being concerned that you might be targeted because of your race does not automatically make you a "racist".  JMO.

And the only other thing even mentioned in that article is that Kyle is said to have committed unenumerated alleged "microaggressions".  "Micro" as in "too small be seen with the naked eye", I suppose. 

Maybe some people (of every race) just enjoy attacking other people over nothing and making themselves feel morally superior.  Kyle's an ignorant weak-willed weasel.  I don't need to invent "racism" as a reason to despise him.  Again, JMO.

I had this conversation with my husband the other day. He didn't see that it was anything out of the ordinary to suspect an alliance amongst people who seemed to have close ties in the game. I pointed out that the problem, as I saw it, was the assumption that PoC are automatically going to work together because they did last year, and that these kinds of assumptions are unfair and unjust. And that no one ever worries about alliances repeating themselves from year to year, only this year. What about that!? 

Then hub said, well don't the dudes worry about an all female alliance every year? "SEXISM!" I replied.

What about the times when people think someone is like another Dan or Derrick or a new Chilltown? Seriously, doesn't someone, at least once per season, mention something about an alliance from another season potentially being repeated, he asked, rather smugly I thought.

I then told him I heard the dryer ding.

I didn't.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Jel

[BK1978]

On 9/3/2022 at 2:43 PM, Jel said:

I had this conversation with my husband the other day. He didn't see that it was anything out of the ordinary to suspect an alliance amongst people who seemed to have close ties in the game. I pointed out that the problem, as I saw it, was the assumption that PoC are automatically going to work together because they did last year, and that these kinds of assumptions are unfair and unjust. And that no one ever worries about alliances repeating themselves from year to year, only this year. What about that!? 

Then hub said, well don't the dudes worry about an all female alliance every year? "SEXISM!" I replied.

What about the times when people think someone is like another Dan or Derrick or a new Chilltown? Seriously, doesn't someone, at least once per season, mention something about an alliance from another season potentially being repeated, he asked, rather smugly I thought.

I then told him I heard the dryer ding.

I didn't.

But to counter that, the Cookout automatically assumed none of them would have a chance if they did not form an alliance to get out all of the people who did not look like them.  Would that not be unjust and unfair to assume what happened in previous seasons were going to happen in their season?  There was nothing that should have made them think such a thing would happen with the cast they had.

I mean I took one look at Xavier in the first episode and I knew the dude was either going to win or get very close to the end.  After all he is a good looking guy (I am straight and I am saying that), smart, and a lawyer (Which means he could probably speak circles around most of the people they cast on this show).  The guy was out of central casting.  If he did not win or at least have a very good shot at winning, I would have been shocked. Obviously there can always be something that happens along the way where he might have gotten voted out, but barring that I just knew he was going to win.

I also called Derek F. being in the final two by like week three.   Because the dude did nothing and was not a likable person in the least bit.

I just find it funny that I read over and over again last year that it was not racist to vote someone out that was not your skin color.  The same people who said that are now saying this guy is a racist for even thinking of doing such a thing.  Mind you, he was not able to implement it, he just thought it and that was enough to brand him racist. 

I honestly would love to understand what mental gymnastics those people have to do, to come to that conclusion after what they said last year.  Or was it what I said all along, just one big game of virtue signaling?

[peachmangosteen]

7 hours ago, BK1978 said:

But to counter that, the Cookout automatically assumed none of them would have a chance if they did not form an alliance to get out all of the people who did not look like them. 

Based on 22 seasons of evidence lol.

[BK1978]

18 hours ago, peachmangosteen said:

Based on 22 seasons of evidence lol.

But I would argue with that cast there is no way history would have repeated itself. Sure if the Cookout had not formed things might have turned out a little differently.  Maybe some members would have not made it as far. some might have even made it further in terms of final placement.  But with the cast they had and what happened the previous summer IRL, I highly doubt a lot of them would be cannon fodder either.

Edited September 6, 2022 by BK1978

[Jel]

On 9/4/2022 at 10:49 PM, BK1978 said:

But to counter that, the Cookout automatically assumed none of them would have a chance if they did not form an alliance to get out all of the people who did not look like them.  Would that not be unjust and unfair to assume what happened in previous seasons were going to happen in their season?  There was nothing that should have made them think such a thing would happen with the cast they had.

I mean I took one look at Xavier in the first episode and I knew the dude was either going to win or get very close to the end.  After all he is a good looking guy (I am straight and I am saying that), smart, and a lawyer (Which means he could probably speak circles around most of the people they cast on this show).  The guy was out of central casting.  If he did not win or at least have a very good shot at winning, I would have been shocked. Obviously there can always be something that happens along the way where he might have gotten voted out, but barring that I just knew he was going to win.

I also called Derek F. being in the final two by like week three.   Because the dude did nothing and was not a likable person in the least bit.

I just find it funny that I read over and over again last year that it was not racist to vote someone out that was not your skin color.  The same people who said that are now saying this guy is a racist for even thinking of doing such a thing.  Mind you, he was not able to implement it, he just thought it and that was enough to brand him racist. 

I honestly would love to understand what mental gymnastics those people have to do, to come to that conclusion after what they said last year.  Or was it what I said all along, just one big game of virtue signaling?

I was making fun of myself a little in the post (the one you replied to). I don't think Kyle's a big, pernicious racist, I think he's more of an insensitive person, maybe sheltered, never experienced being "othered", so he doesn't think about how things might be for people who have been.

What was unjust about it is the assumption that the PoC were going to band together against the white people, especially when, knowing what we know as viewers, nothing could be further from the truth. There was nothing like that happening or even hinted at, with the sole exception of Taylor saying she, individually, wouldn't vote out/nominate a Black woman.  She didn't ask anyone else to join her, she just stated her own personal stance.   So it's the very definition of unfair to assume that because, in another season, one group of people organized around race, and that going forward, all non-white people will do the same thing, because they are PoC.  They don't get the respect of being regarded as individuals, and are seen as just "members of a group" based on some immutable characteristic.  It seems, imo, to suggest that he saw  the White people as individual players, and the Black people as automatic group members.   

And as I recall, a key part of the Cookout strategy was to have a "ride or die" outside the group. We didn't really see that with this group, so frankly, I don't see Kyle being very thorough in his comparison.  He just kept it at the PoC component. Doesn't that say enough?

[peachmangosteen]

And he used a lot of microaggressive language/dog whistles when discussing the BIPOC players, which I think is the bigger issue.

[HartofDixie]

[BK1978]

On 9/6/2022 at 11:54 AM, Jel said:

They don't get the respect of being regarded as individuals, and are seen as just "members of a group" based on some immutable characteristic. 

Sadly, that is how black people are often viewed.  People seem to think all black folks think alike or they should all think alike.  Obviously it is not true, but you see it all of the time in politics. 

On 9/6/2022 at 1:59 PM, peachmangosteen said:

And he used a lot of microaggressive language/dog whistles when discussing the BIPOC players, which I think is the bigger issue.

Microaggressive language is not a real thing.  How can you be held accountable for something you are not intentionally doing?  What is next, thought crimes?  Like that Tom Cruise movie.

[dizzyd]

16 hours ago, BK1978 said:

Microaggressive language is not a real thing.  How can you be held accountable for something you are not intentionally doing? 

It’s called unconscious bias and it’s definitely a real thing. All corporations and some small businesses have a course on it for all new hires because it’s not tolerated at the work place. There’s plenty of information about it online for those who haven’t had the opportunity to attend a class. Like Indy said to Kyle: “We have Internet, educate yourself “. 

[peachmangosteen]

13 hours ago, dizzyd said:

Like Indy said to Kyle: “We have Internet, educate yourself “. 

Yea, that's the thing. Like it's 2022. Read a book lol.

[Joimiaroxeu]

Quote

the Cookout automatically assumed none of them would have a chance if they did not form an alliance to get out all of the people who did not look like them. 

No, they believed they all would have a better chance of winning if they formed an alliance. Not quite the same thing.

Based on the history of BB, the United States, and most of the world, Black people are generally going to be taken out or otherwise disadvantaged before any other race. So CBS set it up for the Black houseguests to have a lead just based on numbers and those houseguests ran with it. The White houseguests have never needed that kind of help because up until last season they've always had the majority in numbers.

Maybe Xavier would've won anyway without the Cookout but I don't think it was as much of a certainty as CBS seemed to want. At this point I don't think it matters because what's done is done and IMO the likelihood of there ever being another Cookout is close to zero.

I still believe Kyle was used to give voice to the Cookout naysaysers and even if he's not a racist, his words and actions were.

[Ms Blue Jay]

55 minutes ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

So CBS set it up for the Black houseguests to have a lead just based on numbers and those houseguests ran with it. 

There were 16 cast members last season, and only 6 were Black.  They were not set up to have a lead.

57 minutes ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

The White houseguests have never needed that kind of help because up until last season they've always had the majority in numbers.

They had the majority last season, with 8.

58 minutes ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

I still believe Kyle was used to give voice to the Cookout naysaysers and even if he's not a racist, his words and actions were.

Used by who, and how?  

[Joimiaroxeu]

Quote

There were 16 cast members last season, and only 6 were Black.  They were not set up to have a lead.

Quote

They had the majority last season, with 8.

Like Barbie says, math is hard (for me). 😉

With the addition of a non-Cookout player each Cookout player was attached to (and whose vote they were steering against non-Cookout members), The Cookout controlled the majority of the houseguest votes.

Quote

Used by who, and how?  

Used by CBS and BB production. He was voicing the perceptions of many if not most of the viewers who saw The Cookout as problematic (reverse discrimination, wokeness, unfair affirmative action, etc.). I think he was probably chosen because they knew he likely had not had much exposure to POC, in particular, Black people. They bet he would be inclined to jump to the conclusions he did about certain non-White players this season and then try an ill-advised strategy to counter them.

[Ms Blue Jay]

How do you think they did that?  Whispering in his ear, feeding him lines to say?  Giving him inside info about the cast?

[Nashville]

8 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

How do you think they did that?  Whispering in his ear, feeding him lines to say?  Giving him inside info about the cast?

In the broadcast show there were were strong indications Kyle was spending a LOT of time in the DR after being outed by M/B - plenty of opportunities for off-camera (or camera-discretionary) whispering there.

[Ms Blue Jay]

If it was after being "outed by M/B" how would that help?  Kyle did all of the damaged before being outed.

Or are you saying he spent the time in the DR before being outed?

I don't understand the desire to absolve Kyle of what he said and place blame on other phantom parties, when we have no evidence for it.  Kyle said what he said.  Even if someone believes him to be a puppet, there's no way he had to say any of that.  He could have not.

Do people think Kyle was under threat or something?  Because that is quite the conspiracy that is being talked about then.  If not, he could have simply said "Uh, that's racist and stupid, and I'm not saying it?"

People also keep saying Kyle is sheltered, but it's 2022, and he's like 30.   And he was about to go on television.  I really don't see any of this as an excuse.

Edited September 12, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Nashville]

59 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

If it was after being "outed by M/B" how would that help?  Kyle did all of the damaged before being outed.

Or are you saying he spent the time in the DR before being outed?

I don't understand the desire to absolve Kyle of what he said and place blame on other phantom parties, when we have no evidence for it.  Kyle said what he said.  Even if someone believes him to be a puppet, there's no way he had to say any of that.  He could have not.

Do people think Kyle was under threat or something?  Because that is quite the conspiracy that is being talked about then.  If not, he could have simply said "Uh, that's racist and stupid, and I'm not saying it?"

People also keep saying Kyle is sheltered, but it's 2022, and he's like 30.   And he was about to go on television.  I really don't see any of this as an excuse.

After being outed, DR coaching in terms of what Kyle could/should say in terms of post-revelation damage control, and whodafuck said anything about “absolving” Kyle for shit?

The only reason I mentioned DR involvement at all was because(a) many of Kyle’s post-reveal remarks come across like canned sound bites - as if he’s reciting from a memorized script - and (b) personally I don’t think the stupid shit is smart enough to come up with some of these forgive-me apologies on his own.  Sorry if you took it any other way, but that ain’t on me.

[BK1978]

On 9/11/2022 at 8:20 PM, dizzyd said:

It’s called unconscious bias and it’s definitely a real thing. All corporations and some small businesses have a course on it for all new hires because it’s not tolerated at the work place. There’s plenty of information about it online for those who haven’t had the opportunity to attend a class. Like Indy said to Kyle: “We have Internet, educate yourself “. 

Oh I know and fully understand what people try to say are microaggressions, it does not mean I have to agree with it or think it is real.  I just have not been indoctrinated into that way of thinking.  The concept itself has only been around for about fifty some odd years.  

A lot of times what people call microagressions are just other people being jerks and the people being jerks are oblivious about what they are doing.  That's just being a jerk, there is nothing microaggressive about it.  Then you have people who honestly do not know or are not actively trying to be a jerk, who might say something that offends you (Not actually you Dizzy, just the general you.). 

How can anyone hold someone accountable for that?  Also, just because something offends you, does not mean anyone else is aware of it.  Where does it end?  If you find something offensive, but the person who said something to you or did something to you had no malice in their action or thought.  How can that person be held accountable?  How can you lecture that person?

Once again, thoughts are not a crime and I would not want to live in a society were people are punished for them.

I will say, I always get a laugh out of how people who consider themselves to be enlightened on a subject, always feel the need to tell people who disagree with them or do not think like them, "Hey educate yourself so that you can think like me."  It always comes across as very holier than thou, or condescending.

Also, just because corporations bought into that line of thinking (Probably not due to them actually believing in it and more because they probably think it might hurt their bottom line if they do not.  Which is how most corporations operate.), does not give it any sort of validity.  Are you telling me that just because companies, many of which have caused this country more problems from the stuff they sell (Like products that can give you cancer, cause obesity, and other problems), have implemented these courses; therefore, this line of thinking is totally valid and should be respected as such? 

I vehemently disagree with that line of thinking.  A corporation is the last entity I would look at to tell me how to think and what is or is not moral. 

Also, I am opposed to the Robin DiAngelo way of thinking about race, which is tied into those courses you are taking about.  She is an admitted racist saying how she would be uncomfortable being the only white person at an all black person cookout.  If that was me, I would not be uncomfortable to be there, I would be thrilled to be invited and meet some new people.  Also, the free food would be cool as well.

Now I am not saying you are wrong, I am just saying that I disagree with your line of thinking and I do not believe in a concept that has only been around for fifty years.  No amount of being "educated" towards how you think, is going to convince me to see things your way and to agree with you.  That's perfectly fine, because diversity of thought makes the world a better place, not everyone needs to think the same. 

15 hours ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

Based on the history of BB, the United States, and most of the world, Black people are generally going to be taken out or otherwise disadvantaged before any other race. So CBS set it up for the Black houseguests to have a lead just based on numbers and those houseguests ran with it. The White houseguests have never needed that kind of help because up until last season they've always had the majority in numbers.

First off as I said in the Survivor thread, there have been entire seasons where there were no players of Hispanic or Asian decent on Big Brother. There seems to be only one BB season, which was 12, where there was no black contestants.  Nobody complains about the lack of Hispanic and Asian players or the disadvantages they might have.  Which is probably greater because they are not usually cast to be on the show or if they are there is usually just one of them.

Does Jun winning season four erase that line of thinking?

Also, I did a breakdown of the first voted off (I did not count people who walked, or were kicked out of the show, I did not do this current season because I am not watching it, I did add season one because of America's vote and I left off any contestant who I was not sure if they were white or black.).  It turned out to be a tie between white men and white women as to who got voted out first with eight contestants each.

In regards to black contestants that was a tie as well, with two black men and two black women being the first contestants to be voted out.  Now granted there were more white contestants, so that skews the numbers greatly.  It would seem, I did not count any further, that for the most part black contestants seemed to be voted out anywhere from week three until the middle of the game.  As a side note, I was shocked to see that the older male contestants were not usually first.  There were far more older women (I mean age compared to the rest of the cast, I refuse to consider 42 to be old) who were voted out first. 

I am not naive enough to make a blanket statement saying that black contestants did not face an uphill battle due to most seasons where there were only usually at max two black contestants, often times just one black contestant in the house.  I remember back when I would watch those seasons I would tell my friend that I wish their casting had more Asian, Black, and Hispanic contestants and I always hope they cast more older contestants (Over the age of say 55 or so.).

I also would not be comfortable saying that race was the factor in every season.  Most people on this site feel very comfortable saying that race was the only reason why any black contestant did not win. I think it is a factor, but I also think casting has a part in it as well.  Meaning they tend to cast people as stereotypes (The dumb white himbo jock, the nerd, the angry black woman, the bimbo who is looking for a showmance.) and that could be a factor as well.  Also, maybe someone just flat out sucks at the game and that is the reason why they were voted out (see Frenchie last year or Cowboy who might very well be the worst player ever.).

Plus, saying that skin color was the only or major factor could lead one to the conclusion that all white people think alike and that is something that is simply not true.

I remember having this conversation last year.  Danielle from BB3 did not lose because of the color of her skin (I mean maybe that was a factor. There was no evidence that I am aware of that, that statement is true.).  She lost because she came across nice to other contestants' faces and an asshole in her confessionals and I do have to wonder if the way Marcellus was voted out was also a factor.  Also, I wonder what might have happened if it was Monica in the final two over Nicole.  Would Will have won?  We have no way of knowing, but part of me thinks she would have had a better shot than Nicole.

Just my two cents on this whole deal.  I am not going to respond anymore, unless someone specifically asks me to do so, because I am not a huge fan of going back and forth with someone on the internet for days on end.  I find that it is not a very productive way to spend time and I often do not care enough about my opinion on the topic to spend more than a handful of posts talking about it.  Now writing War and Peace length posts I am perfectly fine with though...

[Callaphera]

2 hours ago, BK1978 said:

<snip for length because holy length, Batman>

I thought you said in another thread that you aren't even watching this season. Did you just come to argue or something? Defend the bland Mormon kid who can't fuck for longer than 20 seconds because that will never not be funny? I'm confused.

[Ms Blue Jay]

5 hours ago, BK1978 said:

Now I am not saying you are wrong, I am just saying that I disagree with your line of thinking and I do not believe in a concept that has only been around for fifty years. 

The school of thought where you reject anything that's only been around for 50 years.  That's a new one.  I haven't heard that one before.  I hate to break it to you but the internet hasn't even been around that long so you might have to reject that too.

Edited September 13, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[BK1978]

19 hours ago, Callaphera said:

I thought you said in another thread that you aren't even watching this season. Did you just come to argue or something? Defend the bland Mormon kid who can't fuck for longer than 20 seconds because that will never not be funny? I'm confused.

I will respond to you just because you were always one of my favorite posters and could always make me laugh.

That meme above made me laugh and to be honest, I agree my previous post is far too long. This probably will be as well.

You are correct, I am not watching the current season.  After all of the racism from previous seasons (actual flipping bed racism, not mico-level stuff) and Paul and his crew's bullying, I just could not watch this crap anymore.  It is just not entertaining to me, it is pretty much the same shit over and over again every season.  I was going to give up after All-Stars but thought I would stick around for one more season, which I did not end up doing.  Not watching the show made me realize how much I did not miss watching it.

I read an article talking about Kyle and this whole situation and I wanted to see the reaction people had.

I did not come on here to argue or troll (even though I knew people would probably think I did), I was mainly curious how people viewed this situation due to how they acted last year.

Last year I was told frequently that having an alliance based on skin color, whose objective was to vote out anyone who did not look like them, was in no way racist.  Then I checked out the live feeds thread out of curiosity and the same people who said that to me last year, were the same people calling this guy a racist because he just thought such an alliance could be possible again and therefore he wanted to counter it with an alliance of people with the same skin color whose objective it would be to vote out anyone who did not look like them.  

I wanted to see they type of mental gymnastics people had to go through to justify one form or racism (the Cookout), only to condemn the exact same thing a year later, even if nobody ever took this guy up on his offer to make such an alliance. Basically, I just wanted to see if people could or even would justify their hypocrisy.

The word racist gets thrown around far too much nowadays.  Hell some people even think it happens on a mico-level, one which only Ant-Man and the Wasp can see I suppose. 

I try to save the word for people who are actually racist, you know like Mel Gibson, Robert Byrd, Jackson, Gina Marie, Aryn, Nick Cannon.  I am not going to call a person racist because they wrongfully thought something was possible (From what was said in this thread.) and took steps to try to counter it.  The guy might be dumb as the day is long (once again from what I have read about him) and misread what was actually going on, but I fail to see what is racist about him.  Unless he said something actually racist, not something on the Ant-man level mind you.

Callaphera you can stop reading above this line, if you have read any of it.  The following has nothing to do with your post...

I will say I found it interesting that two seasons ago on Survivor, a Cookout alliance was sort of formed and from what I could tell, it seemed like the people who posted over in the Survivor section of this site, were more against such an alliance (That being a race based alliance. Or maybe it seemed like that to me, I could be mistaken.).  Which is odd because I always assumed that it was nearly the exact same audience and I guess I was wrong in thinking that. 

I also noticed that the people who defended the Cookout in the BB threads that also posted in the Survivor threads, did not really defend the alliance on Survivor when anyone talked negatively about it.  You might see a post here and there, but nothing like here were you would get shouted down and then given a history lesson as to why you were wrong.

Why defend one and not the other?

Was Shan and her humming so annoying that people where like, Fuck that noise that chick is annoying as fuck, I am not going to defend her.

Could it have been group think over here?  Or perhaps people were just virtue signaling over here to get those heart emojis on their posts? 

Or maybe none of it is true, it is just something I found odd.

[Callaphera]

38 minutes ago, BK1978 said:

hen I checked out the live feeds thread out of curiosity and the same people who said that to me last year, were the same people calling this guy a racist because he just thought such an alliance could be possible again and therefore he wanted to counter it with an alliance of people with the same skin color whose objective it would be to vote out anyone who did not look like them.  

See, I don't think you did much reading on the live thread because there was plenty of discussion about how it wasn't just the fact that he speculated about The Cookout 2.0. However, the events of all this happened in the past 50 years and well, we know your view on that so I won't bother repeating what's been in said in the Live Feed thread and the episode thread and this thread and I think it even made it in the Episodes v Live Feed thread. It's all still there if you want to dig but Primetimer didn't exist back then, either sooo... 🤷‍♀️

If 50 years is your cut-off, does that mean the Queen isn't dead? Man, I hope she makes it to 100 so she has to send herself a birthday telegram. That would be probably tickle her funny bone. Oh shit, wait, I'm not 50. How am I posting this?

[BK1978]

On 9/14/2022 at 7:17 AM, Callaphera said:

See, I don't think you did much reading on the live thread because there was plenty of discussion about how it wasn't just the fact that he speculated about The Cookout 2.0. However, the events of all this happened in the past 50 years and well, we know your view on that so I won't bother repeating what's been in said in the Live Feed thread and the episode thread and this thread and I think it even made it in the Episodes v Live Feed thread. It's all still there if you want to dig but Primetimer didn't exist back then, either sooo... 🤷‍♀️

If 50 years is your cut-off, does that mean the Queen isn't dead? Man, I hope she makes it to 100 so she has to send herself a birthday telegram. That would be probably tickle her funny bone. Oh shit, wait, I'm not 50. How am I posting this?

Come on you need better material than that.  The whole fifty years thing does not work.  Granted humor is subjective.

You are correct, I did not read much in the live feed thread.  I could not bring myself to read, what was then, seventy some odd pages of a season I am not watching.  I just read some of the comments from people who kept on saying the Cookout was not a racist alliance and now those same people are saying this kid is.

I do find it funny that people just want to harp on the fifty years thing. Or I am told to educate myself on the subject, I already know enough about this pseudoscience to form an opinion that it is bull.  With me saying it has been around for fifty years, I was trying to say it is a newer philosophy (One that has its critics in academia, so it is not like I am an outlier in thinking it is bull).  One that lacks any sort of scientific evidence it is real and is based on feelings alone.

A microaggression is something only one person can experience (Possibly more if people have a similar mindset).  There is no proof that it is actually real, it is just how a person feels towards what is being said to them.  It is totally a one-sided affair.  What might offend one person, may not offend another. 

Does that mean all perceived slights are microaggressions? Or are just some?

Microaggressions sound a lot like ghosts.  I do not believe in them either.

Anyway, I hope everyone is enjoying this current season and I think this truly is all I will say on this whole thing. 

[Callaphera]

7 hours ago, BK1978 said:

Come on you need better material than that.  The whole fifty years thing does not work.  Granted humor is subjective.

I put in exactly as much effort into that joke as you did to "read" about what happened in the house before coming in to demand to be educated and tell us all about how we're wrong despite us being the ones who actually watched this season. It seemed fair.

[jsm1125]

I think what irritates me about Kyle’s brand of ignorance is that he’s made a living off of TikTok videos. You’re telling me that someone with that level of social media acumen can’t be bothered to have more awareness or knowledge of anything outside of his Mormon bubble?