There is a particularly troublesome side-effect I have seen develop over the years as the internet has become an ever more powerful and effective tool in galvanizing and giving voice to the voiceless (in addition to amplifying the voice of those who already had a platform). I, and a few of the original bloggers and readers of SM, have had the chance to experience how the signal-to-noise ratio on our threads have worsened with time. There is much more reaction and much less reflection. I agree, my statement is laced with some nostalgia and my perception surely skewed with the passage of time. You will doubtless find examples of contrary evidence, but I feel it is true nonetheless. I also sense a generational rift growing wider. It is so much easier for people to be outraged nowadays, as compared to just a few years ago. And why not? We have so many tools at our disposal by which to express this outrage. And none require any thinking whatsoever. When op-ed columns were the only means to highlight an unreported issue, you had to carefully craft your message and had time to reflect on your claims and conclusions. By contrast, our websites/blogs, Facebook pages, Twitter accounts all allow us to be outraged and share our outrage with others in an instant. Groupthink is also encouraged, since many of these platforms come with ready-made friend networks. If my 10 friends are outraged by something then I should be too or I will be the outlier and ostracized. I will be tagged misguided. Or worse. De-friended.
But what bothers me so much more than the frequency of our outrage is WHAT we get outraged about and what we conveniently ignore because it is too difficult to tackle or takes more energy than a mouse click. What bothers me is this new breed of lazy internet armchair activists.
Back in February of 2006 , I wrote a long post in defense of the Danish cartoon of the prophet with a bomb in his turban. I believe in free speech and oppose all censorship, as long as it does not actively incite violence against a group. Poking fun at a religion is all good. Yelling fire in a crowded movie theater is not. What happened on the radio in Rwanda before the genocide there was an obscene violation of free speech. Cartoonists, radio shock jocks, satirists, Borat, Glenn Beck, and others all have a right to say whatever they want just as we have the right to be upset about it and write their producer, station owner, etc. But when we do take that step we better understand exactly what it is that we find objectionable and why. We should be able to clearly and concisely articulate it and balance it with our other priorities and concerns. I am not saying don’t get mad about your local asshole shock jock. I did so here (same EXACT topic as Stein’s, but decidely different context and intent). I am just saying that every time you get outraged, you lose just a bit more of your effectiveness unless you are totally on top of your game. Look at what has happened to Jesse Jackson. One time civil rights leader, now a punchline. Look at what has happened to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). One time defender of animals now simply known as a promoter of gorgeous naked women. Look at what happened to the Tea Party. From grass roots revolution against the excess of government a year ago…to angry old xenophobic white people afraid of change. The lesson is that you pick and choose your battles wisely and understand and communicate your outrage in a cogent, unassailable and proportionate manner.
In the Hindu American community there is a pervasive and misguided belief that we Hindus are disproportionately the victims of our religion being made fun of. This is utter bullshit, despite what you have believed ever since Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom imprinted this into your psyche. In the U.S., Christianity is more regularly made fun of, ridiculed, blasphemed, satirized, and generally shat upon then Hinduism, Buddhism, and Sikhism combined. I’ll bet you it isn’t even close. So why is it that a 100 people will be outraged and start letter writing campaigns and insult their fellow desis as “weak Gandhis” every time Hanuman is poked fun of or Shiva appears on a dog? For those 100 there will be 1 person that speaks up or writes a letter when a turban-wearing Sikh gas station owner is savagely beaten or when the media collectively decides that only brown-skinned people can be labeled terrorist. Divyendu Sinha was savagely beaten and killed THIS WEEK. Where is a link to this story on your Facebook pages and Twitter feeds? Where are your letters to the local politicians and police? Maybe you will find time to write them when you are done being outraged at an unskilled satirist. But that’s so much more work, isn’t it? Being outraged at Stein is quick and easy. Minimal effort for maximum desi activist cred to pull out at your next potluck.
South Asian Americans are undeniably growing in political power and influence. Nikki Haley’s recent victory in South Carolina is evidence of that. South Asians have an overwhelmingly disproportionate representation in the medical, hotel, and high tech industries. America is slowly turning Hindu. Our President practices yoga and uses its teachings for spiritual guidance in times of crisis. Aziz Ansari hosted the MTV music awards. After all that, many of you want to finally stand up and be an armchair activist when a two-bit humorist calls India poor or our God blue? Desi, please. Sit down until you are ready to do real work. You are embarrassing me.
Despite the fact that we have made much progress, there is so much we still need to come together on. We as Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, etc. We as first generation and second generation. We as “upper class” and “working class.” Given our still small number we have to be smarter, more articulate and more factual than others in our outrage. We need to turn the outrage into political and policy action for the maximum good. We need to run for office. We need to write funny and biting satire about ourselves and our monkey Gods and get it published in Time (we can surely do better than Stein). Nationalism and jingoism should have no seat at our table.
Finally, let me say one thing about my fellow bloggers on SM. Anna’s post was more nuanced than some commenters gave her credit for and that is a shame. On the internet the tendency is to throw out the nuance and then polarize the debate. As much as Taz and I totally disagree on the Stein column, I have respect for her. Not just because she is my friend but because she actually walks the walk (undoubtedly more so than me). She is consistent and measured in what she gets upset over and she puts her boots on the ground to do something about it every time. I think she and some of the other voices out there (like SAALT’s more measured protest
) are off the mark in their reaction to the Stein article, but then again, if that is the case they’ve earned that right.
Do you include yourself in this category?
That’s a subjective point. It becomes awfully easy to cheerlead offensive material when you yourself aren’t offended by it. It takes humility to understand that even though you personally weren’t offended, other people may be. That is a leap for some. No one is pushing for censorship. Nobody. But speech has consequences. One may have the right to speech; one does not have the right to speak and be immune to subsequent criticism.
This is easy to do I’m sure if you’re not in fact religious. You are not critiquing yourself. You are criticizing someone else in the Indian community – that is precisely why it comes so “easy” for you.
This is nothing to be proud of. Nor is it anything to aspire to. Communities exercise their own policing. Extra-legal consequences for ill treatment include blackballing, counter-criticism, protest, pressure tactics. Communities have nothing to be proud about for being “shat upon”. It means they are not adequately counter-punching. Yes we have to choose our battles, no one argues otherwise. Yes, we should be able to laugh at ourselves — but its WE that should be making that distinction.
It’s painful and laborious. Just ask me. I have to justify the disagreement to both disbelieving non-Indians as well as Indians who are INDIGNANT at me for being indignant. But someone has to do it. Glad I am.
Jagr, please stay off this thread (this is a polite request at this time). You epitomize all that I find offensive and are sucking all the oxygen out of the other threads. Thanks.
It is kind of hard to tell people how to feel.
It is not like one or 2 people reacted to the Stein piece. I read it and a feeling of “WTF is going on here” came over me.
What is the point of anything in print if we are not to let any of it affect us? It is not like there are Indians throwing bricks in the streets at random cars and screaming “No justice no peace!”
i agree with what your saying about censorship. we need to get rid of it, on the net, off the net. some people think that if their offended, that means they can shut other people up. thats the beauty of free speech. fight speech with…..more speech. whether its time or a danish cartoon. only cowards or hypocrites try to silence others.
Abhi
What do you find so offensive about Jagr’s post ? I’m genuinely curious as this is the first time i think that I’ve seen a request for a commentator to not participate in a discussion on this blog.
Thank you. xoxo.
RavT,
I don’t think anyone is arguing for censorship here, at least I’m not.. If people found Stein’s article offensive, then they have the freedom to express that view, and voice that . How does censorship come into it ? Stein is free to publish what he wants, and people are free to complain about it. No one is arguing that Stein should not be able to peddle his snark, but people are also free to call him on that.
I am perfectly fine with him expressing his view. Just not via dozens of comments on three different threads where he dominates the conversation and bullies others while polarizing the debate (read his first comment).
The comments on this post will be utterly worthless if the same individual makes the same arguments and chokes out others views. Normally we don’t politely ask, we just delete or ban if someone disrupts a conversation. This is not a public space, this is a private blog (before anyone starts claiming censorship). Our objective has always been to have an honest, open, and polite discussion in the threads which we have time to monitor.
Abhi, I’m not up to leaving the whole big comment I could leave about this, but let me just say this:
get it published in Time
This is exactly the problem. There’s an editorial staff that commissioned this piece (Stein is a former staffer and current freelancer), who edited it line by line, who made sure it fit into the page allotment, who carried it through three copy proofs, who commissioned an illustration for it, who ported it to the website. If that staff didn’t see fit to forcefully suggest–as they routinely do at Time Inc–some changes to his tone, requiring some indication of his lack of seriousness, some sense of “I keed, I keed,” some reflection on the humanity of the subject, then what makes you think they’re going to ever give our satire a real chance? The clearly didn’t care how this piece would play with their South Asian & South Asian-American staff (past, present, and future), with their minority and immigrant staff, with their South Asian-American & minority readers, with the South Asian American children who go to their school library (or Google) and rely on a magazine like Time to help them write reports on important subjects like Thomas Edison. This piece was not published in a vacuum, and the fact that it went through and is being stood speaks of a system of white privelege and old boys clubbery that will not end until we make sure they know we notice it and we are not amused.
My problem with the outrage over the Joel Stein article is that the many in the desi community are becoming like Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson. We lose our minds over articles like this, yet when it comes to issues like honor killings, brown on brown gang violence, female foeticide, new south asian immigrants be taken advantage by other south asians, and on and on. There is no where near the outrage there sould be.
Maybe I’m weird but I have much more outrage over the Toronto desi father who killed his 16 year old daughter for be too canadian then over what Joel Stein wrote. I guess that must make me weird.
sam, i wasnt objecting to anything in particular, just saying that i thought speech is best countered by speech. abhi talked about it in the blog, so i was connecting to that. the average person objects to censorship in principle, but the moment they hear something that doesnt sit well with them, the hypocrites find some technicality for getting rid of it. i dont have a problem with people talking out against stein at all. no one is above criticism, stein has to defend his speech just like everyone else.
Abhi, wait its okay for us to restrict speech but not the government? Restricing speech is restricting speech, no matter who’s doing it. Legally yeah you can do it, doesn’t make it the right thing to do. Theres a comment policy – why don’t we use that.
i pretty much agree 100% with what abhi is saying. and i’m glad he posted it to the front page to have a little balancing out of perspective.
re: time, i take saheli’s point, but the newsweekly is fast becoming ancient history, isn’t it?
We lose our minds over articles like this,
who is this “we” you speak of? that’s an issue. as a person of the right i have to say that the economically focused old left is a lot easier to engage with, and disagree with, than the culture focused newer left. marginal tax rates and industrial policy have a concreteness which “institutional racism” and “white privilege” do not. yes, i i agree that both of the latter exist, but it’s really hard to get unanimity and the nature of intersubjectivity is that different people can have totally different valid and sincere perceptions.
there is some weird behavior going on on this thread. i might be seeing things or thinking of another thread but there was a comment somewhere early on that was deleted. there were 4 comments, then 3. what is going on here??!! i read the post too it was bland. no racism, not absuive. this is starting to become a joke if people cant even post without someone cutting it because they dont like it.
Dammit, I’m so tired and sick of this subject I pressed post instead of preview and of course there are typos and I wasn’t even done.
The clearly didn’t care how –> They clearly didn’t care
and
and is being stood speaks –> and is being stood by speaks
Also, I want to say that I thought Anna’s post was exactly on point, in that she went, line by line, through the honest and emotional and personal reaction that many of us had. That’s the style of her blogging, and while I don’t do it and and it’s not my style, I appreciate it. It is a well developed blog genre of its own, beyond the Mutiny, at this point, and she’s recognized for it outside of the Mutiny. To me, that was one of the biggest selling points of the mutiny: back in the day, before it got overwhelmed by excessively anonymous and nasty commenters, it felt like a safe place on the internet where South Asian Americans could actually talk about our personal experiences as South Asian Americans. (Actually, I thought she was being too nice. )
But at some level the emotional is the whole point: this article displayed a fantastical amount of callous disregard and willingness to be cruel to an entire group of people based only on their race, trading in on the fact that many people of other races might be amused. It was cruel, not funny. And race-based cruelty (like any other identity-based cruelty) is insidious because by focusing on identity it separates you from others who might otherwise have been empathetic to you on the basis of common humanity. Race privilege (which in this country is usually white, though we certainly have our own version) is rarely having to care about that dynamic because you’re so frequently completely isolated from it. And allies are the people who care despite the fact that they don’t immediately have to. (And major props to all my non-desi friends who immediately said they thought this column was shit. That’s the essence of being an ally.)
I’m really sorry to read hear about Divyendu Sinha. That’s terrible and I will read up more on it. Honestly–why didn’t you write about that instead? If you had, I’m sure it would have shown up on my feed. Yes, that is a much more important issue. But no, it’s not totally unrelated. As Radhika Marya pointed out, dot-heads was a racial term associated with savage and fatal violence in New Jersey. Stein trivialized it, and by not acknowledging the seriousness of the history there, he helped erase it just a little longer. But articles like this feed into the general zeitgeist that some people are so truly exotic and foreign they just don’t belong here. They make that kind of cruel hatred mainstream and acceptable. How many aggressive New JErsey teenagers are going to read Stein’s article, have too many beers, and go fuck yeah and find some more smelly idol-worshipping dotheads to beat up? Hopefully none, but it certainly doesn’t help in any way.
And geez, people, can we stop mixing everything up? Why do you assume, because I’m angry about this in a very specific way, that I’m not angry about the other “brown” issues? And how on earth do any of you know that the people who are angry about this don’t do plenty of stuff regarding the other “brown” issues? This is not a zero sum game. Plenty of the people who have been pissed off at Stein have also worked hard to prevent desi domestic violence. It’s irritating to bring these issues into competition, they are not in competition.
I feel like I’ve been screaming IT’S SATIRE at everyone! You can’t agree that Stein’s piece was satire and then criticize his every word, believing that HE believes it….because he doesn’t. That’s why its satire – what he is saying is ridiculous.
One desi girl on Stein’s facebook account berrated him for not liking spicy food since he mentioned spicy food in his piece. Hello? Are you serious?
How silly would it be to rip apart a Stephen Colbert piece acknowledging it is a joke but breaking apart and analyzing every word he says? That would be silly!
It’s obvious that Stein meant no ill-intent. I agree with Abhi – let’s focus our energies on the real racism. Not some spoofy article in a magazine.
Abhi, Thanks for your very thoughtful post. I appreciate it.
I especially agree with the need to walk the walk rather than limit your outrage to the easy, armchair variety. But that’s where our agreement ends. Abhi, I can’t imagine anybody of Indian descent who read that article – who reads beneath the poor satire and offense – not feeling actual hurt when a previously venerated magazine publishes something like that. The article is horrendous, to be sure. But it’s actual content, to me, is not the meat of the problem; it’s everything leading up to it’s publication, and it’s actual publication, that hurts so much. Saheli addresses this well.
And the comparison between Christianity being made fun of versus any number of other religions, to me, falls flat. In this country, there is a clearly dominant religion (Christianity) or dominant religious culture (Judeo-Christianity) and the chances of that majority culture and religion being hijacked by stereotypes in a way that actually hurts individuals – while certainly it’s been done and is possible – I argue that it is simply not comparable to the disproportionately devastating impact stereotypes and bigotry affect minority religions and cultures and nationalities (Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and more).
The inherently irresponsible and at times violent rhetoric of comment threads notwithstanding, I stand by even the armchair outragiers here. There is genuine hurt beneath what has happened here, and whether it’s politically wise to modulate those feelings or not, is a separate issue. Whether these people should be out walking the walk is also a separate issue. I, for one, don’t believe in “earning the right” to feel things.
Thanks for listening, and I hope to hear your and anyone else’s thoughts.
Definition of Satire: “Satire is primarily a literary genre or form, although in practice it can also be found in the graphic and performing arts. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.” source: Wikipedia.
Abhi, I understand your sentiment. I live in Edison, and I wasn’t as much offended or outraged by Stein’s article. Actually, I felt pity for the man because, even though he was satirizing (albeit poorly), he genuinely seemed to be intimidated by change.
However, I don’t necessarily agree with you. Indians – well, South Asians, really – are making great strides in the United States. That’s wonderful. But I feel that racism and stereotypes is deeply entrenched in the American society, and speaking out against such generalizations is vital, I think. Not because it “defends” South Asians, but because it battles ignorance.
“Armchair outrage” – while it’s not necessarily productive all the time, it generates discussion, a difference of opinion (like here on SM) and more accessibility to the issues. It’s a stepping stone above apathy, and for that I am grateful. In my opinion, today’s teen-aged generation do not seem to care as much about these issues (or, I don’t see much of it).
And regarding your argument about Christianity being ridiculed the most – I would contest that. Majority of the time, it is generally the religious fanatics that are ridiculed – be it Christianity, Jewish, or Islam. Christianity stands prominent because it is, obviously, the biggest religion in the US.
I am also a bit put off that you are suggesting that we should write to make fun of ourselves so it won’t matter as much when others do it. What’s the point in that? It isn’t particularly constructive.
With all due respect, this assumes that the activism and political awareness of mutineers begins and ends at SM. If you weren’t a blogger, I would have no idea your level of social awareness or activism, but I would never assume that it was non-existent. You make some very valid points here, but this portion of it really weakens the entire post for me, and quite frankly, it’s a bit insulting, esp. to the many people who support SM and it efforts.
I love how the onus hovers from commenters to younger generations to technology. But none on the obvious. Posts on this blog itself through the past weeks are filled with outrage and veritable baits. This post itself is filled with outrage. Outrageous.
<
blockquote> Divyendu Sinha was savagely beaten and killed
<
blockquote>
Just so that there is no conflation with the “angry old xenophobic white people afraid of change” description in the previous paragraph, the teenagers who killed Sinha were Black. It seems to be the universal code in the media that the race of the victims is included (a White motorist was also beaten in the same incident) but that of the attackers is left out if they are Black.
Maybe if I just write about how offended I am my comment will get more replies. 😀
OFFENDED OUTRAGED GASP SHOCK AT EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD THAT IS HORRIBLE AND WRONG. Yay traffic! waits for someone to be offended by this comment
I leave you with a quote from the Master Offender himself, Salman Rushdie:
“What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.”
Well, may be it was Satire. But honestly I didn’t get it, was just mildly annoyed and was about to dismiss the article. But then realized its published on Times and a lot more people would be reading it and at least half of them would not get the joke. If it was just a blog or a personal comment, its not worth crying foul. But when published on a respected publication it needs to be addressed.
Abhi,
I posted the article about Divyendu Sinha on the news feedbecause there’s a part of me that believes that race played a part in his death. For any of you from NJ, you know Old Bridge is the next town over from Edison and South Asians in that town and neighboring Sayreville (especially after the building of the temple) have been verbally abused a countless number of times by teens whether they were on foot or in passing cars. I don’t believe Stein is an out and out racist, but his attempt at satire fell flat and in my belief will be interpreted by a prejudiced few as a column getting away with being bigoted against Indians. This belief that bigotry is allowed without punishment will only embolden racists and prejudiced people to share their views with less reservation, be it to their children, neighbors, coworkers whoever. Maybe none of the 5 men who murdered Divyendu Sinha came from homes with parents who had bigoted views of Indians, but there aren’t very many people around here who believe that right now.
Poking fun at a religion is all good
What about poking fun at the holocaust? When can we expect a long screed from you on the right of people in the west to draw holocaust cartoons or deny the holocaust?
OMG, I just got Abhi’s title.
Awesomesauce. High five.
“Divyendu Sinha was savagely beaten and killed THIS WEEK. Where is a link to this story on your Facebook pages and Twitter feeds? Where are your letters to the local politicians and police? Maybe you will find time to write them when you are done being outraged at an unskilled satirist. But that’s so much more work, isn’t it? Being outraged at Stein is quick and easy. Minimal effort for maximum desi activist cred to pull out at your next potluck.”
I think Abhi has nailed the issue. It is not offensive nature of the article that is being disputed – it is about the response when much worse occurs.
While I agree with “picking your battles”, and I haven’t gotten my panties in a bunch over Stein’s article, I won’t deny anyone the right to be annoyed and outraged by what was light-racism presented as satirical humor.
Maybe Stein was just airing views that a number of whites hold under their breath.
What I don’t understand from his article, is the stuff about “Assimilation”, which Italians seem to have done so well. He writes, “Their assimilation is so wonderfully American”.
To be an American, must I give up my cultural identity? supress it? convert to christianity? get a shorter name?
Who will I be, when I am not me ?
abhi,
surely you’re not saying that writing outraged letters and tweeting about a murder, deemed as ‘random’ and ‘not motivated by hate’ by the local police, is actually consequential? If exposure to ‘brown people cultures’ over time is how you measure acceptance of the same, how come I’m wasn’t the most popular kid growing up in an American ashram? The answer is that some xenophobic humor has timber wolf legs and will run you down in any conditions and at any time. Joel Stein, unlike the 2 white and 3 black assailants in Old Bridge, is not a sociopath. Anna and Taz were certainly not arguing that. I fail to see, however, how marshaling the brown chattering class voices against ‘real racism’ does any good.
There is no “effective” racial demagoguery to be deployed anymore. The internet, glorious internet, and it’s attendant cynicism are shredding the credulousness necessary for the volk to accept such racial rhetoric as genuine and honest. Didn’t Barack get the, “he’s a dark, suspicious, foreign-looking dude but i’m voting for him anyways” demographic?
i thought about FBing the Sinha murder but thought, “why politicize someone’s death to win cheap and ultimately hollow, debating points in an inconsequential weblog?”
Of the 5 teenagers who have been charged in the murder of Dr. Divyendu Sinha, 3 are African American while the other 2 are white.
and when I say, ‘inconsequential,’ I mean the big things–like the massive deprivations of liberty and property that occur in s. asia frequently–not robert putnam stopping in to say hi.
This. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sandip-roy/joel-stein-and-the-curry_b_631926.html
“That” coming from the same publication that posted that insipid “how to date Indian guys” article, which frankly I thought was far more offensive than anything Joel Stein’s ever written.
no, “that” coming from Sandip Roy. It is a well written piece, and nicely concludes that both Stein and the Immigrants “cant go back”.
I know I’m banned from this thread but I had to say – what a wonderfully written response by Sandip Roy!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sandip-roy/joel-stein-and-the-curry_b_631926.html
Suede has an interesting point and I think Stein is off on the Italian-Americans. SOME assimilated very well and it took at least 50 years for aspects of Italian food to make it into the pantheon of “American” cuisine, where it got sugared and overcooked along the way. But by and large, Italian-Americans were short hand for uncouth, smooth connivers, secretly not-like us behavior at home and among themselves so you can’t really trust them through out the 70’s and 80’s. Obviously Stein has never been to an Italian-American wedding where the befuddled family of the non-Italian marrying in has to have certain things explained to them and the new spouse is referred to as the “American” by 2nd and 3rd generation Italian-Americans.
Suede makes a very good point in that we, whose families desperately tried to assimilate in the 40’s/50’s, egged on by nationalism (Executive Order 9066 made our parents and grandparents “enemy aliens” – quite an incentive), and the new post-war America, lost quite a bit. We lost our languages in 1/2 a generation. Italy moved on, we did not. We visually fit in after the Puerto Ricans started showing up. We became “white” after WWII. You know you have arrived when cringe worthy caricatures pass as “cultural” aspects in “festasitalianas” (only the Southern ones. The northerners know better). And then Francis Mayles takes over and explains your relatives to you in gentle exotic-zoo tinged prose while everyone swoons over her book and you secretly seethe over the fact that she has the money to buy the padrone’s house that your contadini relatives fled from because the state was about to make them serfs again. And you stand on ground that was never yours but someone else’s, taken before you ever immigrated and answer in weary tones- no. I’m not connected and I will not be able to arrange a hit on your (fill in the blank) no matter how much you insist that you are sure I am.
Yeah, being assimilated is a blast.
The part about christianity in america being made fun of significantly more is a red herring. It is the mainstream religion and culture in the country and christians in this country know this when they are being made fun of. A lot of the humour directed against hinduism often is not well meant, and perpetuates stereotypes about a cultural and religious minority. This difference is fairly vital. It is true that south asian americans are making major strides and getting more visible in the american mainstream, but note that both Mr. Jindal and Ms. Haley have to visibly assert that they are explicitly christian and not anything else. To me this is nothing other than them being asked to deny their roots and their non christian/south asian heritage. They maybe fine with it, but I doubt it is very reassuring to the many non christian south asians in those states.
“”That” coming from the same publication that posted that insipid “how to date Indian guys” article, which frankly I thought was far more offensive than anything Joel Stein’s ever written.” Amen sister.
People seriously need to do some serious soul searching before getting their Sharpton on at every imaginary infraction. If you thing Airbender’s race flap was crazy, check this: http://www.racialicious.com/2009/08/18/district-9-is-racist-alternate-perspective/
Excellent post Abhi, Lots to chew on.
Unity people, Unity!!
Excellent post, Abhi. Thank you.
People seriously need to do some serious soul searching before getting their Sharpton on at every imaginary infraction.
But it makes people feel better about themselves. I see this all time among south asian leaders here in Canada. With every minor infraction[Example-2007 comments by Vancouver talk show host Bruce Allen], they seem to act like complete idiots and play the victim card, then they do spend time with issues that are much more important in Canadian desi community.
Sadly the Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson playbook seems to be popular among most minority groups leaders in North America.
My thoughts exactly Abhi
The lesson is that you pick and choose your battles wisely and understand and communicate your outrage in a cogent, unassailable and proportionate manner.
Abhi, this depends entirely on circumstance and context, i.e you don’t know mine when I react negatively to Stein’s article.This sort of latent bigotry served up with stale humor is all too common in the sub-urban midwestern community in which I now live and one I’ve been actively fighting and calling people on since I moved here. As Saheli said, “And geez, people, can we stop mixing everything up? Why do you assume, because I’m angry about this in a very specific way, that I’m not angry about the other “brown” issues? And how on earth do any of you know that the people who are angry about this don’t do plenty of stuff regarding the other ‘brown’ issues? This is not a zero sum game.”
I’m not offended by Stein’s article (because, as you say, Taking Offense alone doesn’t accomplish much) and will fight for his right to say it, but do reserve the right to challenge people on why they wish to engage in public dialogue of this nature.
Again, I’ve said this in the comments of two previous SM posts on this topic, so I’m probably “choking out other’s views via dozens of comments on three different threads” and will wait to be deleted. (Hint: If you don’t want the dead horse beaten, don’t keep bringing it up post after post. You, too, had the opportunity to voice your own opinion over and over again in the previous posts.)
The humour is OK. Because almost never does it, in the US, emanate from other religious groups, unlike in India, where in Tamil Nadu, Hindu traditions and icons (not those of any other tradition) have been subjected to ridicule and defilement. It is the condemnation, condescension, and the rag doll treatment of Hinduism, the misappropriation and the bait-and-switch in many different degrees that is troublesome. And this happens from both sides of the political spectrum. Fundagelicals issue don’t-observe-Diwali advisories while lefty college profs condemn any activism by or association of hindus and of hindus only.
If you don’t want the dead horse beaten, don’t keep bringing it up post after post. You, too, had the opportunity to voice your own opinion over and over again in the previous posts.)
couldn’t agree more with this statement. Why not have a post on this horrible murder? It will bring attention to it to many people and perhaps a petition will be created, so others who already aren’t disgusted with this murder, can show their anger.
And who isn’t disgusted with this murder? Who doesn’t protest it? Stein’s article is unfortunately the type of talk that very well leads to murders like the above; it’s good for Stein and crimes against minorities to be brought into attention. Orgs like Saalt and other civil and human rights groups do it all the time.
Really it’s pretty easy to be disgusted with the murder of a human being and Time’s article. It’s not one or the other.
Agree with Maitri and PS, I understand this is a private forum which you are kind enough to share with us. But if you keep posting about the same topic people will keep commenting. I don’t think anyone has a right to decide who should be outraged by what and how they should react to it. It is not always about being right but being understanding of perspectives.
I know my opinion may not mean much but I have been reading this site since 2004 and I am very disappointed by the tone.
A bit disappointed with the tenor of Abhi’s comment and autocratic responses. First of all, it’s okay to disagree. Second of all, it’s also okay for the vast majority of people, who lead their daily, routine lives without any activism or protests, to be jolted out of that same existence by an article in Time magazine. It is because it impinges on their life directly almost; it is an unavoidable affront to the sense of complacency and security that many well-established desi families feel, with their achieving offspring, their assimilation into American society etc.etc. Not everybody needs to be protesting at the frontlines for them not to have credibility, when disagreeing with Stein’s article and sharing it with their friends. For most people, that might be the most activism that they ever do, and that’s ALSO OKAY.
The point that many seem to be missing, (and Abhi, I disagree with you threatening to ban jagr721; while I might disagree with his comment here, I do not see this particular comment as ‘sucking the oxygen’ out of the room.
It remains to be seen whether SM is a platform where only sanctioned ‘friends’ and bloggers – a clique essentially, can use their platform to critique something, while others remain at the mercy of how you feel today; which clearly seems to be ‘angry’; angry that people are getting all het up over something you see as inconsequential; but which to them, might be a direct repudiation, however trivial, subtly validated by a magazine like Time, – of everything they believed about themselves.
I meant to say this before – Justice Holmes would be proud of you, Abhi 😉
I tend not to comment on Abhi’s posts because, in the past, I have found him to misinterpret some of my comments(or those of others) and oftentimes react to them in what can sometimes be characterized in a disproportionately obnoxious way. I understand this is a private forum, and I respect that, but it’s not fun to engage in comments on this blog when some of the bloggers (thankfully, not most) have such visceral reactions, especially when many of us have been long-time supporters of this blog and keep the comments civil.