stupid people on facebook
So I called in last night because I was so sick I could barely stand up, and my friends Floyd and Danielle came over to sit with me and they brought me medicine. I have awesome friends and some people are awesome.
Then this morning happened. I went to Kmart to buy eggs and sugar for these peanut butter cookies I found on the internet that only have 3 ingredients (1 cup sugar, 1 cup peanut butter, 1 egg...SRSLY BEST COOKIES EVER) and when I got back, all hell had broken loose on my Facebook page. First, someone had written to "correct" me about a horror movie (bad move, that one) and he insisted that the Japanese movie "Ju-On" was made into the American movie "The Ring." No it wasn't. that's patently false, and a ten second search through Google will tell you that "Ju-On" was remade into "The Grudge," as I said in my post.
The second article I posted that led to a shitstorm was this one: http://race.change.org/blog/view/whats_so_funny_about_antoine_dodson
I said that I don't think this song is funny, but even if it WERE funny (because it's a little funny in the dark comedy sense that the criminal left behind a truckload of evidence and thus should be caught easily) it's not funny to me how many people mock the man in this video, who in my eyes is a hero for saving his sister. People mocking him for his mannerisms and for his dialect are being pretentious douchwads who need to get a clue. Of course, as soon as I posted it, someone had to waltz in and voice dissent. I know this guy from work, and depending on the day, he's either really friendly or really dismissive like he's the "cool kid" in High School and I'm not cool enough to talk to him. He comes in to comment on my link and says:
I laughed because it's such a good song. You don't have to get up in arms over every thing you find on the internet.
My friend Teressa doesn't appreciate this, so she counters with this:
Andrew, that's patronizing and dismissive. Just because it's on the internet doesn't make the issue any less valid, real, or outrageous. If an issue being a topic of discussion on the internet were a reason not to take subjects seriously, then everything from murder to child abuse to the Holocaust would not be "serious business."
Andrew is getting very "up in arms" himself at this point, the same thing he cautions me against, so he replies thusly:
Bah. Why must you take the fun out of pretty innocent videos. If you watch the rest of the stuff that Schmoyoho has done you'll see that they aren't making fun of anyone. They also Auto-tune the news, the double rainbow guy, Babies, Teddy Roosevelt, the crazy lady from the store robbery, and a ton of others. There is a difference in finding issue with the real offensive stuff on the internet and just getting up in arms over something that happens to be popular at the time.
My friend Andrea gets irked at his apparent inability to comprehend that we still don't agree with him, so she offers this statement:
It was a song that was made over a brother defending his sister almost getting raped. Rape isn't funny.
Andrew is annoyed with her intrusion, so he replies with this:
You're just being combative. The song doesn't make fun of rape in any way shape or form. They also auto-tuned Winston Churchill, but I don't see anyone saying "Wow....world war II wasn't funny, this should be removed" and they auto-tuned Obama talking about the oil spill in the gulf, yet there is no one saying "Wow, oil spills aren't funny, this video is disgusting". Not to mention what this video has probably done for that guy, bringing him recognition and money which, lets be honest, he's an eccentric man from the projects I doubt he had much going for him. Like I said you guys are just being overly sensitive. No rape isn't funny, I could understand were this joking about it. Unfortunately it is not.
I am annoyed with his mischaractarization of the entire argument, so I reply with this:
I don't "have" to get up in arms, but I can get "up in arms" if I don't think something is funny, and I don't think this song is funny, hence this post. Also, if you'd read what I said more clearly, you'd see that I wasn't complaining about the song being made as much as complaining that the people laughing at this brother were laughing at him for his speech and mannerisms, which I didn't think was funny and still don't.
That "if you'd read what I said more carefully" bit was a nasty little jab, and it would have been out of line if he hadn't been so dismissive and patronizing throughout his entire argument.
Why I disagree with Andrew's Points
1. You can laugh and think this video is funny all you want. I never said people were not allowed to laugh at the video, I said that I do not agree with them.
2. You characterize my post as "getting up in arms" while I say it's simply me voicing my dissent with the majority opinion about this video. You also insinuate that I get "up in arms" over "every little thing I find on the internet" without providing evidence of my "getting up in arms" about all the other "little things" I supposedly get up in arms about. Also, I don't consider the people mocking this young man to be a "little thing." To me, it is a "big thing" and thus I chose to comment on it.
3. I am not "taking the fun" out of anything. To me, there wasn't any "fun" in the first place, so I mentioned that I don't find it funny. If my one comment of dissent took the "fun" out of your viewing experience, that's kind of silly. If my comment made you feel less amused at the video, perhaps it wasn't very funny to begin with?
4. The difference between the people making videos sampling Winston Churchill and Obama should be clear. I don't see anyone making fun of Obama or Churchill because they think those men are inarticulate and thuis mock-worthy. People are mocking this young man because they think his dialect and way of expressing himself with his body language makes him "funny." I think that is wrong.
5. You say there's a difference in finding offense in the "real offensive stuff" and getting upset over what happens to be popular. I find this video to be "real offensive" so I commented on it. You disagree. that's fine. I never said that you weren't allowed to have a different opinion, I simply said that I disagree with it. If you get "up in arms" about me getting "up in arms" about something that's not worth getting "up in arms" about, than maybe your time would be better spent voicing your opinion about those "real offensive" things you find on the internet, instead of telling me why my opinion is wrong.
6. It's a little hypocritical for you to accuse other people of being "combative" when you've been "combative" with everyone since your initial post. "up in arms" "you shouldn't" "Bah" and "why do you have to take the fun out of this" sound pretty combative to me.
7. You mentioned this website autotuning Churchill and Obama and said "but no one says these should be removed." That's a strawman argument. I never once said the video autotuning Antoine Dodson should be removed from anywhere, I simply said I don't find it funny.
8. You've made three argumentative posts on my Facebook page telling me why my opinion is wrong but I'm the one being "oversensitive"? I find that hard to believe.
I don't know if this fight is over yet, but it's already kind of hilarious and it might just be warming up.
Then this morning happened. I went to Kmart to buy eggs and sugar for these peanut butter cookies I found on the internet that only have 3 ingredients (1 cup sugar, 1 cup peanut butter, 1 egg...SRSLY BEST COOKIES EVER) and when I got back, all hell had broken loose on my Facebook page. First, someone had written to "correct" me about a horror movie (bad move, that one) and he insisted that the Japanese movie "Ju-On" was made into the American movie "The Ring." No it wasn't. that's patently false, and a ten second search through Google will tell you that "Ju-On" was remade into "The Grudge," as I said in my post.
The second article I posted that led to a shitstorm was this one: http://race.change.org/blog/view/whats_so_funny_about_antoine_dodson
I said that I don't think this song is funny, but even if it WERE funny (because it's a little funny in the dark comedy sense that the criminal left behind a truckload of evidence and thus should be caught easily) it's not funny to me how many people mock the man in this video, who in my eyes is a hero for saving his sister. People mocking him for his mannerisms and for his dialect are being pretentious douchwads who need to get a clue. Of course, as soon as I posted it, someone had to waltz in and voice dissent. I know this guy from work, and depending on the day, he's either really friendly or really dismissive like he's the "cool kid" in High School and I'm not cool enough to talk to him. He comes in to comment on my link and says:
I laughed because it's such a good song. You don't have to get up in arms over every thing you find on the internet.
My friend Teressa doesn't appreciate this, so she counters with this:
Andrew, that's patronizing and dismissive. Just because it's on the internet doesn't make the issue any less valid, real, or outrageous. If an issue being a topic of discussion on the internet were a reason not to take subjects seriously, then everything from murder to child abuse to the Holocaust would not be "serious business."
Andrew is getting very "up in arms" himself at this point, the same thing he cautions me against, so he replies thusly:
Bah. Why must you take the fun out of pretty innocent videos. If you watch the rest of the stuff that Schmoyoho has done you'll see that they aren't making fun of anyone. They also Auto-tune the news, the double rainbow guy, Babies, Teddy Roosevelt, the crazy lady from the store robbery, and a ton of others. There is a difference in finding issue with the real offensive stuff on the internet and just getting up in arms over something that happens to be popular at the time.
My friend Andrea gets irked at his apparent inability to comprehend that we still don't agree with him, so she offers this statement:
It was a song that was made over a brother defending his sister almost getting raped. Rape isn't funny.
Andrew is annoyed with her intrusion, so he replies with this:
You're just being combative. The song doesn't make fun of rape in any way shape or form. They also auto-tuned Winston Churchill, but I don't see anyone saying "Wow....world war II wasn't funny, this should be removed" and they auto-tuned Obama talking about the oil spill in the gulf, yet there is no one saying "Wow, oil spills aren't funny, this video is disgusting". Not to mention what this video has probably done for that guy, bringing him recognition and money which, lets be honest, he's an eccentric man from the projects I doubt he had much going for him. Like I said you guys are just being overly sensitive. No rape isn't funny, I could understand were this joking about it. Unfortunately it is not.
I am annoyed with his mischaractarization of the entire argument, so I reply with this:
I don't "have" to get up in arms, but I can get "up in arms" if I don't think something is funny, and I don't think this song is funny, hence this post. Also, if you'd read what I said more clearly, you'd see that I wasn't complaining about the song being made as much as complaining that the people laughing at this brother were laughing at him for his speech and mannerisms, which I didn't think was funny and still don't.
That "if you'd read what I said more carefully" bit was a nasty little jab, and it would have been out of line if he hadn't been so dismissive and patronizing throughout his entire argument.
Why I disagree with Andrew's Points
1. You can laugh and think this video is funny all you want. I never said people were not allowed to laugh at the video, I said that I do not agree with them.
2. You characterize my post as "getting up in arms" while I say it's simply me voicing my dissent with the majority opinion about this video. You also insinuate that I get "up in arms" over "every little thing I find on the internet" without providing evidence of my "getting up in arms" about all the other "little things" I supposedly get up in arms about. Also, I don't consider the people mocking this young man to be a "little thing." To me, it is a "big thing" and thus I chose to comment on it.
3. I am not "taking the fun" out of anything. To me, there wasn't any "fun" in the first place, so I mentioned that I don't find it funny. If my one comment of dissent took the "fun" out of your viewing experience, that's kind of silly. If my comment made you feel less amused at the video, perhaps it wasn't very funny to begin with?
4. The difference between the people making videos sampling Winston Churchill and Obama should be clear. I don't see anyone making fun of Obama or Churchill because they think those men are inarticulate and thuis mock-worthy. People are mocking this young man because they think his dialect and way of expressing himself with his body language makes him "funny." I think that is wrong.
5. You say there's a difference in finding offense in the "real offensive stuff" and getting upset over what happens to be popular. I find this video to be "real offensive" so I commented on it. You disagree. that's fine. I never said that you weren't allowed to have a different opinion, I simply said that I disagree with it. If you get "up in arms" about me getting "up in arms" about something that's not worth getting "up in arms" about, than maybe your time would be better spent voicing your opinion about those "real offensive" things you find on the internet, instead of telling me why my opinion is wrong.
6. It's a little hypocritical for you to accuse other people of being "combative" when you've been "combative" with everyone since your initial post. "up in arms" "you shouldn't" "Bah" and "why do you have to take the fun out of this" sound pretty combative to me.
7. You mentioned this website autotuning Churchill and Obama and said "but no one says these should be removed." That's a strawman argument. I never once said the video autotuning Antoine Dodson should be removed from anywhere, I simply said I don't find it funny.
8. You've made three argumentative posts on my Facebook page telling me why my opinion is wrong but I'm the one being "oversensitive"? I find that hard to believe.
I don't know if this fight is over yet, but it's already kind of hilarious and it might just be warming up.