4 ms·

> […] since her sexuality was outed by a Western journalist […] South Korean journalist, self declared [supposed] “feminist”, and anti white racist - Sarah Jeo

> […] since her sexuality was outed by a Western journalist […] South Korean journalist, self declared [supposed] “feminist”, and anti white racist - Sarah Jeong - working for Western media outlet Vice. I hope she’s satisfied with her handiwork!…

reducesuffering 3y ago
You’re refuting her being a Western journalist because of her ethnicity? She’s been in the US since she was 3 years old, raised Southern Baptist, attended Ivies, and is a US citizen…
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  Paleface is citing her as an example of such a western journalist...
  - jrflowers 3y ago
    This makes sense. “South Korean journalist” is a very clear way of saying “western journalist” also I’m sure “anti white racist” isn’t any sort of culture war word salad.
    - w5uq35yuq 3y ago
      Explanation requested. I guess it's missing a hyphen but "anti white racist" is a pretty thin salad at three words and not especially ambiguous in terms of the politics it implies.
      - jrflowers 3y ago
        > not especially ambiguous in terms of the politics it implies. What politics are those?
        paleface 3y ago
        Yes, I’d also like to know what politics I’m supposed to be implying?! For the record, and despite the handle, I’m not “white”. A “quadroon”, if you must!… Furthermore, I’m politically neutral - abstaining from voting, fully. I’m not American, either…
    - mcpackieh 3y ago
      A South Korean working for an American media organization, specifically called out as western, is a western journalist as I see it. The term "Western" is imprecise and should usually be avoided for this reason, but South Korea itself is often ranked among the Western nations in the economic and geopolitical alignment senses of the term. And it's fair to say that any journalist working for an American media organization is a western journalist, in any sense of the term. Mentioning that somebody is from South Korea does not constitute a refutation of that person being a western journalist, nor do I believe that was the intention. In any case, the rest of palefaces's comment plainly criticizes Sarah Jeong for doing the thing quoted: "since her sexuality was outed by a Western journalist" by sarcastically suggesting that Sarah Jeong should feel satisfied. Sarcasm is problematic, particularly in text, but I think in this case the sarcasm is clear. paleface's comment provides details which substantiate the claims, they aren't refuting it. Incidentally, I think your comment employs sarcasm too. But just to be safe, "This makes sense" is you being sarcastic, right? You think this actually doesn't make sense? > I’m sure “anti white racist” isn’t any sort of culture war word salad. I am virtually certain that claim refers to this [quoted from wikipedia]: > "In August 2018, Jeong was hired by The New York Times to join its editorial board as lead writer on technology.[18][19] The hiring sparked a strongly negative reaction in conservative media, which highlighted derogatory tweets about white people that Jeong had posted mostly in 2013 and 2014.[20][21][22] Critics characterized her tweets as being racist; Jeong released an apology,[23][24] saying that the tweets were meant to satirize online harassment toward her as a woman of color.[20][25]" Whether or not you find the satire excuse credible, this incident is plainly the basis for the accusation of Sarah Jeong being racist. It may not be a perspective you agree with, I haven't bothered to look up the tweets and their context so I don't have an opinion one way or the other concerning Sarah Jeong actually being a racist or merely satirizing racism. But regardless of whether you agree with the claim it's not 'word salad' e.g. the incoherent speech of a schizophrenic. She would not have said her statements were satire of racism unless her statements could be reasonably construed as resembling racism. Satire of a thing will inherently resemble the thing, so teasing out the difference will be an exercise in subjective judgement. Tacitly accusing somebody of mental illness because you disagree with their subjective interpretation of ostensible satire is inappropriate.
      - 3y ago
- hwillis 3y ago
  No, I'm pretty sure they're just saying she should have known better. Vice were the ones who outed Naomi.
- paleface 3y ago
  I’m providing context, to the parent comment. My reasoning is multi faceted. You’re welcome to read whatever you like, into why I provided the aforementioned context - but it’s probable, you’d be wrong. > […] and is a US citizen […] From 2017, according to Wikipedia. I’ve been following the rise of Naomi Wu, for a long time. I’ve seen her skills, and abilities, called into question by Dale Dougherty, of Make Media/Magazine - simply because she was a woman, who didn’t fit the dowdy/frumpy stereotype, en vogue with the supposed “community”. In fact, they went so far as to claim, there was a hidden man/husband, controlling her, behind the scenes. Now it transpires she’s gay, they have even more to answer for - in their quest, in trying to gatekeep, who does, and doesn’t, fit the approved imagery of hackerdom.
  - reducesuffering 3y ago
    > My reasoning is multi faceted. You’re welcome to read whatever you like, into why I provided the aforementioned context - but it’s probable, you’d be wrong. Your reasoning is multi faceted, but instead of explaining your reasoning you waste your breath telling me I'm probably wrong? Good explanation. I don't really care why you did it. Just that you're incorrect in adding "South Korean journalist" as a follow-on to her being labelled a "Western journalist."
  - Chris2048 3y ago
    > I’ve seen her skills, and abilities, called into question by Dale Dougherty, of Make Media/Magazine - simply because she was a woman.. Did he say that? because many have said the same for other reasons. > they went so far as to claim, there was a hidden man/husband, controlling her, behind the scenes They did. Any refutation, beyond moral outrage?

reducesuffering 3y ago

You’re refuting her being a Western journalist because of her ethnicity? She’s been in the US since she was 3 years old, raised Southern Baptist, attended Ivies, and is a US citizen…

mcpackieh 3y ago
Paleface is citing her as an example of such a western journalist...
- jrflowers 3y ago
  This makes sense. “South Korean journalist” is a very clear way of saying “western journalist” also I’m sure “anti white racist” isn’t any sort of culture war word salad.
  - w5uq35yuq 3y ago
    Explanation requested. I guess it's missing a hyphen but "anti white racist" is a pretty thin salad at three words and not especially ambiguous in terms of the politics it implies.
    - jrflowers 3y ago
      > not especially ambiguous in terms of the politics it implies. What politics are those?
      - paleface 3y ago
        Yes, I’d also like to know what politics I’m supposed to be implying?! For the record, and despite the handle, I’m not “white”. A “quadroon”, if you must!… Furthermore, I’m politically neutral - abstaining from voting, fully. I’m not American, either…
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    A South Korean working for an American media organization, specifically called out as western, is a western journalist as I see it. The term "Western" is imprecise and should usually be avoided for this reason, but South Korea itself is often ranked among the Western nations in the economic and geopolitical alignment senses of the term. And it's fair to say that any journalist working for an American media organization is a western journalist, in any sense of the term. Mentioning that somebody is from South Korea does not constitute a refutation of that person being a western journalist, nor do I believe that was the intention. In any case, the rest of palefaces's comment plainly criticizes Sarah Jeong for doing the thing quoted: "since her sexuality was outed by a Western journalist" by sarcastically suggesting that Sarah Jeong should feel satisfied. Sarcasm is problematic, particularly in text, but I think in this case the sarcasm is clear. paleface's comment provides details which substantiate the claims, they aren't refuting it. Incidentally, I think your comment employs sarcasm too. But just to be safe, "This makes sense" is you being sarcastic, right? You think this actually doesn't make sense? > I’m sure “anti white racist” isn’t any sort of culture war word salad. I am virtually certain that claim refers to this [quoted from wikipedia]: > "In August 2018, Jeong was hired by The New York Times to join its editorial board as lead writer on technology.[18][19] The hiring sparked a strongly negative reaction in conservative media, which highlighted derogatory tweets about white people that Jeong had posted mostly in 2013 and 2014.[20][21][22] Critics characterized her tweets as being racist; Jeong released an apology,[23][24] saying that the tweets were meant to satirize online harassment toward her as a woman of color.[20][25]" Whether or not you find the satire excuse credible, this incident is plainly the basis for the accusation of Sarah Jeong being racist. It may not be a perspective you agree with, I haven't bothered to look up the tweets and their context so I don't have an opinion one way or the other concerning Sarah Jeong actually being a racist or merely satirizing racism. But regardless of whether you agree with the claim it's not 'word salad' e.g. the incoherent speech of a schizophrenic. She would not have said her statements were satire of racism unless her statements could be reasonably construed as resembling racism. Satire of a thing will inherently resemble the thing, so teasing out the difference will be an exercise in subjective judgement. Tacitly accusing somebody of mental illness because you disagree with their subjective interpretation of ostensible satire is inappropriate.
    - 3y ago
hwillis 3y ago
No, I'm pretty sure they're just saying she should have known better. Vice were the ones who outed Naomi.
paleface 3y ago
I’m providing context, to the parent comment. My reasoning is multi faceted. You’re welcome to read whatever you like, into why I provided the aforementioned context - but it’s probable, you’d be wrong. > […] and is a US citizen […] From 2017, according to Wikipedia. I’ve been following the rise of Naomi Wu, for a long time. I’ve seen her skills, and abilities, called into question by Dale Dougherty, of Make Media/Magazine - simply because she was a woman, who didn’t fit the dowdy/frumpy stereotype, en vogue with the supposed “community”. In fact, they went so far as to claim, there was a hidden man/husband, controlling her, behind the scenes. Now it transpires she’s gay, they have even more to answer for - in their quest, in trying to gatekeep, who does, and doesn’t, fit the approved imagery of hackerdom.
- reducesuffering 3y ago
  > My reasoning is multi faceted. You’re welcome to read whatever you like, into why I provided the aforementioned context - but it’s probable, you’d be wrong. Your reasoning is multi faceted, but instead of explaining your reasoning you waste your breath telling me I'm probably wrong? Good explanation. I don't really care why you did it. Just that you're incorrect in adding "South Korean journalist" as a follow-on to her being labelled a "Western journalist."
- Chris2048 3y ago
  > I’ve seen her skills, and abilities, called into question by Dale Dougherty, of Make Media/Magazine - simply because she was a woman.. Did he say that? because many have said the same for other reasons. > they went so far as to claim, there was a hidden man/husband, controlling her, behind the scenes They did. Any refutation, beyond moral outrage?