So many people defending Morrissey's racist statement

Theo

Active Member
:lbf: You actually don't get the distinction. Great.

It would never occur to me to feel that the Chinese are a subspecies just because I saw a video of some Chinese people abusing animals. Morrissey said you can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies. Sorry, I can't relate to that statement. I've seen plenty of videos of people of other races, nationalities, ethnicities, etc., committing horrible abuse on animals. Furthermore, unlike Morrissey, when I see a video showing horrible acts being done by people who have some, well...let's say as one example, different skin color to me...I don't react by feeling that all people with that skin color (or whatever) are a "subspecies". It just wouldn't occur to me to react that way, and it's queer to see someone else reacting that way.

But, maybe Morrissey is one of those white Europeans who is always looking for a reason to call people from other parts of the world inferior to himself.

It was a donation, which is what you give to a cause you want to support

It's laughable that you think it was just a donation. Would he have given this donation had he not gotten into some controversy over his statements on immigration in an interview? His "donation" was quite clearly the buying of some defense from a lefty anti-racist group when he felt he had stepped into some shit.

Hey, I didn't think he had to apologize for anything in that incident. But, yeah, I found it laughable that he paid tens of thousands of dollars to a lefty group called Love Music Hate Racism. Apparently you don't see how funny it is, but I'll keep laughing at it and you can keep pretending you don't see what's funny about it. :)
 

starless

★★★★★
So if he had said:

"You can’t help but feel that the Chinese are inhumane.” - would that be racist?

Let me tell you, Morrissey doesn't care if the people who mistreat animals are Chinese, English or Finnish. To him those people are uncivilized beings - or 'subspecies' - as he poetically put it.

And of course his choice of word was meant to provoke. But writing this off as 'racist' is rather superficial in my opinion.
 

Qvist

Active Member
It would never occur to me to feel that the Chinese are a subspecies just because I saw a video of some Chinese people abusing animals. Morrissey said you can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies. Sorry, I can't relate to that statement. I've seen plenty of videos of people of other races, nationalities, ethnicities, etc., committing horrible abuse on animals. Furthermore, unlike Morrissey, when I see a video showing horrible acts being done by people who have some, well...let's say as one example, different skin color to me...I don't react by feeling that all people with that skin color (or whatever) are a "subspecies". It just wouldn't occur to me to react that way, and it's queer to see someone else reacting that way.

But, maybe Morrissey is one of those white Europeans who is always looking for a reason to call people from other parts of the world inferior to himself.

Ah, so now you acknowledge that there is a distinction? Thank you, that was the point - not whether you agree with Morrissey or not.

It's laughable that you think it was just a donation. Would he have given this donation had he not gotten into some controversy over his statements on immigration in an interview? His "donation" was quite clearly the buying of some defense from a lefty anti-racist group when he felt he had stepped into some shit.

Well, this is progress by stages! Now you've gotten as far as acknowledging that regarding a donation as a bribe implies a whole set of claims regarding the intention and circumstances of the donation. Of course, there are some fairly wide expanses left to cover, beginning with the recognition of the distinction between the self-evident and the kind of automatic conclusion to which it might be permissible to jump if you're twelve years old and paranoid (or are accustomed to entertaining conspiracy theories, which boils down to much the same practical result).


Hey, I didn't think he had to apologize for anything in that incident. But, yeah, I found it laughable that he paid tens of thousands of dollars to a lefty group called Love Music Hate Racism. Apparently you don't see how funny it is, but I'll keep laughing at it and you can keep pretending you don't see what's funny about it. :)

Actually, I think I'll just be happy that I'm not the sort of person to whom that is obviously funny.
 

smiffy

dont leave us in the dark
im very bored with the whole debate............
love him or loathe him, those who loathe him should f*** off to another site, or post in here once then immediatley f*** off afterwards.
Those that love him but are disgusted by his coments, need to get off the fence and decide, then probably f*** off.


Is he racist? is he f***

nuff said

ps ive just add a bottle of red wine in 10 minutes, apologies if this has skewed my judgment
 

Theo

Active Member
Actually, I think I'll just be happy that I'm not the sort of person to whom that is obviously funny.

You don't find it funny that he paid off some lefty "anti-racist" group almost 50 grand to help give him cover from the charges that he said something "racist" about immigration in England? I don't think he said anything racist back in that other interview, so why the heck was he giving some silly "Love Music Hate Racism" group tens of thousands of dollars? If I'm the only one who finds that funny, so be it! I find it REALLY funny. But also pathetic.

----

Turning back to Kewpie, I'm trying to figure out why she decided to troll me in this thread. I hope it's not because I have previously posted that one of the reasons I found Morrissey's statement troubling was because I know that that kind of mentality towards the Chinese (that they are "sub-human") was promoted during WW2 by Japan and that that led to some of the most horrible crimes against humanity in the history of the world, committed by Japan against China. But, yeah, that's why I quite agree with the statement in the Guardian that Morrissey has entered some dark waters here. Perhaps Kewpie doesn't want to hear about that, for her own nationalistic reasons?

For example, I previously cited the atrocities in Nanking, and referred to the book The Rape of Kanking: the Forgotten Holocaust of World War II by Iris Chang.

That book had a massive impact on me, not just about the history of WW2, but about the human race in general. So much so that when I heard that the author was giving a speech near me, I went to listen. It was shocking how many Japanese-Americans had decided to come out to the speech and Q&A to give Iris Chang a hard time, because they didn't want people to know the truth about this forgotten holocaust that Japan has never owned up to or apologized for. They wanted to erase this story from history, and shout down this author for telling us the history. Iris Chang has since passed away, but I was happy to meet her, and to have her sign my copy of that disturbing but important book.



I only post that pic because so many trolls have caused people to falsely question my sincerity about things.

And when I hear someone say stupid statements like what Morrissey said, and then see that person stand by those statements even upon reflection, I think that person deserves to be called out.
 
Last edited:

Black Cloud

Case Sensitive


I only post that pic because so many trolls have caused people to falsely question my sincerity about things.

I have that book, too. My name isn't Robert, though.
 

Theo

Active Member

As a sidenote, in case anyone is confused, my real name is Robert. I go by Theo on here in honor of Theo van Gogh. Theo van Gogh, a descendent of Vincent van Gogh, was murdered in cold blood on the streets of Holland because he collaborated with Ayaan Hirsi Ali on a film critical of the treatment of women under Islamic fundamentalist ideology.

This is why I am called an "Islamophobe". Kewpie left that out.

You can find the film "Submission" online, and you can judge for yourself whether I am an "Islamophobe" because I support it.

I am an "Islamophobe" because I abhor this sort of intolerance:

 

Scarlet1987

The sanest days are mad
This is the funniest thread ever. Please please go and buy yourself a tiny piece of life
 

smiffy

dont leave us in the dark
Originally Posted by Theo


As a sidenote, in case anyone is confused, my real name is Robert. I go by Theo on here in honor of Theo van Gogh. Theo van Gogh, a descendent of Vincent van Gogh, was murdered in cold blood on the streets of Holland because he collaborated with Ayaan Hirsi Ali on a film critical of the treatment of women under Islamic fundamentalist ideology.

This is why I am called an "Islamophobe". Kewpie left that out.

You can find the film "Submission" online, and you can judge for yourself whether I am an "Islamophobe" because I support it.

I am an "Islamophobe" because I abhor this sort of intolerance:
 

davidt

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Subscriber
The thing of it is, he was given an opportunity by The Guardian to retract his choice of words and, upon relfection, he chose to stand by his original statement.

I would've let it slide if he had said someting like, "I didn't use the right words to express what I was trying to say."

But he stands by his statement that the Chinese are a subspecies.

Furthermore, this is someone who is very sensitive about word choices and language. For example, he discussed sexist language with Joni Mitchell when he interviewed her for Rolling Stone some years back. The fact that he's so sensitive about language like that, and yet he chose, upon reflection, to stand behind calling the Chinese a "subspecies" is troubling.

What stupid views Morrissey holds isn't the biggest deal in the world, and it doesn't mean he isn't an excellent singer/songwriter. But I ain't gonna stand with him on his racist statement. I find the pathetic excuses being made for him in some of these threads so embarrassing to read that I don't think I even wanna take part in those threads anymore. It's too tiring to deal with fawning celebrity-worshippers.

I agree with your statement here. The wording is what got into the headlines, the animal rights call to action is fairly vague and unlikely to result in any change. As you mentioned, for someone so precise with language, he had to have known what he was getting into especially with the past accusations. Does he really want headlines that continue to tie his name to the word 'racism' even if there is a deeper explanation?

Here it's natural to get more of those in defense and sometimes it is difficult to look at it rationally if we are so close to the subject.
 

Worm

Taste the diffidence
I agree with your statement here. The wording is what got into the headlines, the animal rights call to action is fairly vague and unlikely to result in any change. As you mentioned, for someone so precise with language, he had to have known what he was getting into especially with the past accusations. Does he really want headlines that continue to tie his name to the word 'racism' even if there is a deeper explanation?

Here it's natural to get more of those in defense and sometimes it is difficult to look at it rationally if we are so close to the subject.

Liked and appreciated your comment.

However, a rational look at Morrissey's use of language is precisely what makes many of us feel he simply chose his words carelessly. It was an awful remark, but some time ago, when he implied a wish that China should be nuked for its treatment of animals, nobody batted an eyelash because it was obvious he was wildly exaggerating to drive home his point. In this case he meant "subspecies" to mean "inhuman", since in his view anyone who treats animals cruelly is less than human, but he foolishly chose a word with very nasty connotations. His hyperbole got away from him.

Also, in my opinion it's the fans who think Morrissey has such a tight command of the English language that are not quite seeing things as they really are.
 

davidt

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Subscriber
Liked and appreciated your comment.

However, a rational look at Morrissey's use of language is precisely what makes many of us feel he simply chose his words carelessly. It was an awful remark, but some time ago, when he implied a wish that China should be nuked for its treatment of animals, nobody batted an eyelash because it was obvious he was wildly exaggerating to drive home his point. In this case he meant "subspecies" to mean "inhuman", since in his view anyone who treats animals cruelly is less than human, but he foolishly chose a word with very nasty connotations. His hyperbole got away from him.

Also, in my opinion it's the fans who think Morrissey has such a tight command of the English language that are not quite seeing things as they really are.

I think it's open for interpretation what he meant and I've seen opinions on all sides. I personally feel it was not careless, rather he chose it very carefully. Some debate the scientific definition and usage of the word but either way from the tone I think he was angered by what he saw and the word was meant to be derogatory.
 

Worm

Taste the diffidence
I think it's open for interpretation what he meant and I've seen opinions on all sides. I personally feel it was not careless, rather he chose it very carefully. Some debate the scientific definition and usage of the word but either way from the tone I think he was angered by what he saw and the word was meant to be derogatory.

Yes, I think everyone agrees about the tone. He meant it to be derogatory, no question.

Among those who think he chose the word very carefully, there seem to be two main camps. One group thinks he meant it literally, meaning he's a racist. The other thinks he isn't racist but used the word to generate publicity to sell records and/or draw attention to animal rights. Since you think he chose his words carefully, which side do you favor? Or do you think he had another intention behind his word choice, and if so, what would it be?

Not being pushy, I've just been curious to know your opinion.
 
Last edited:

King Leer

Leering since '97
I would think he chose to be blunt to bring attention to what's going on in China, even if the choice of words put him in a negative light. Carefully thought out PCisms wouldn't garner the attention he wanted on the issue(?)

The problem is Morrissey is not "media savvy" (as we know he refuses to read newspapers and watch the news, he claims) and underestimates how the words become the news while tangential stories on "While we're here, why don't we take a closer look at China's record on animal abuse" don't get written. Not one single article I've read on this racist brouhaha even mentions the title/airdate of the TV contents he was referring to!

The word is full of crashing hacks!

Yes, I think everyone agrees about the tone. He meant it to be derogatory, no question.

Among those who think he chose the word very carefully, there seem to be two main camps. One group thinks he meant it literally, meaning he's a racist. The other thinks he isn't racist but used the word to generate publicity to sell records. Since you think he chose his words carefully, which side do you favor? Or do you think he had another intention behind his word choice, and if so, what would it be?

Not being pushy, I've just been curious to know your opinion.
 

Worm

Taste the diffidence
I would think he chose to be blunt to bring attention to what's going on in China, even if the choice of words put him in a negative light. Carefully thought out PCisms wouldn't garner the attention he wanted on the issue(?)

The problem is Morrissey is not "media savvy" (as we know he refuses to read newspapers and watch the news, he claims) and underestimates how the words become the news while tangential stories on "While we're here, why don't we take a closer look at China's record on animal abuse" don't get written. Not one single article I've read on this racist brouhaha even mentions the title/airdate of the TV contents he was referring to!

The word is full of crashing hacks!

True and true. I modified my question. :rolleyes:
 
Top Bottom