casualracism

4 ms·

1.
by casualracism 5y ago
I don’t have a copy of the cartoon, and I haven’t read anything about this story other than what’s in the article. But that the article is very vague about the cartoon is rather telling in itself: if it is innocuous enough why isn’t it incl
2.
by casualracism 5y ago
I posted multiple quotes from the very article being discussed as a reply to another misinformation comment from you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28097088 If this very one-sided article says it was racist, it was,
3.
by casualracism 5y ago
This is a straw man because that’s not what the cartoon was about, at least not according to TFA.
4.
by casualracism 5y ago
Maybe you read about the incident elsewhere but TFA vaguely hints at a drawing of a Chinese person with offensively stereotyped features, which doesn’t sound compatible with your Winnie the Pooh theory. In any case TFA deliberately made it
5.
by casualracism 5y ago
TFA tried very hard to bury and brush off this detail but had to include > It depicted a comic character that had been altered and had stereotyped Chinese features, with yellow skin tone and slit eyes. This drawing circulated on social m
6.
by casualracism 5y ago
What are you even talking about? Posting racist cartoon depicting stereotypes about Chinese is exactly what the Chinese studies PhD student did, so this is an exact parallel.
7.
by casualracism 5y ago
As I said in another comment, in the U.S., if you’re an African American studies PhD student and you post a racist cartoon depicting black stereotypes, it’s not hard to imagine losing your doctorate candidacy.
8.
by casualracism 5y ago
Not sure what the timeline is here. TFA strongly implies it’s a tweet on March 21 inciting a response on March 28, but buries the lede about the racist cartoon posted at an unknown time that the professor claims to have received an email ab