Profile picture
T. @RickyRawls
, 23 tweets, 7 min read Read on Twitter
ok, serious question: is there anyway a more famous person can publicly disagree with a less famous critic over something and litigate the validity of her take without it being considered targeted harassment?
I feel like the "targeted harassment" claim gets thrown around a little too loosely. Like what if he wrote a response article to her article and then tweeted about it?
Also, I think Che makes some legit good points about comedy bloggers and instead of addressing them they're just going with the "he's doing targeted harassment of a woman" thing which rubs me wrong, the optics of it
Okay so now this writer gets involved and my question is, why does she start with “as a black woman”? And is she really caping for the white people with a bootstraps argument? Note she has immigrant parents
I don’t think she even gets Che’s argument when he calls two white comedy critics privileged. Neither do the comedy critics when they laugh at Che by pointing out that he is richer and more successful than they, as if to prove this makes him a moron for calling them privileged
His point is for him to achieve his success, especially his level of success, it took him way way more work and against the odds than for them to reach their level of success. The fact he is doing better than them doesn’t negate that. Yet they’re acting like he’s dumb...
Of course because these people can only recite the same 6 talking points to everything, of course she has to give the article the most tortured circuitous route that allows her to hit on all the Shea butter greatest hits including “black men are the white people of black people”
Meanwhile she’s lecturing him with a bootstraps argument and caping for the actual white people of white people. black men are bad and beyond the benefit of the doubt because they’re the white people of white people but actual white people somehow do get benefit of the doubt
This is the anti-Killmonger argument that blavity blacks often use. Killmonger was irredeemable because he was trying to be like the oppressor but then don’t bat an eye at the movie ending with T’Challa working with the *actual* oppressor lol
I’m not reaching by the way, this is her previous article. She is big into the “straight black men as the face and shock troops of internalized western patriarchy” thing
Her email address is right there in her bio! He was mocking said bio.
He’s mocking this woman’s bio and in one paragraph she puts her email address twice. Once at the beginning of paragraph and once at end. He’s supposed to go over it with a fine tooth comb to redact her email address every time it appears even tho she has it in her bio twice?
There is this annoying damsel in distress infantilizatjon white women are allowed to lapse into that’s so annoying. She has her email all over her bio + in screencapping it to make a joke he’s obligated to protect her from herself by redacting it repeatedly even while mad at her?
totally valid critique of what he actually did! Fair point. He sidestepped her point by making it about the validity of nerds to critique comedians. I’m fine with that critique. Its the optics of the targeted harassment characterization that bugs me
Also, I have a quick question: do the people who are saying they have no sympathy for Che because he’s transphobic actually know the joke in question that he said? Because I just saw the special last night
I’m strongly suspecting that many people saying “I don’t care because he’s a transphobic piece of shit anyway” actually know the joke he said because I really don’t think it deserved to get lumped in with the other ones in the first place...
Something the struck me about the Princess Weekes piece was this. To support her black men as the selfish enemies against everyone, including black women and even good white liberals, she claims this which wasn’t what I remembered being said. She also says ignores women of color
To make sure I wasn’t crazy I just loaded up the special and double checked. Here’s what he actually said.
She literally lied and made up what he said, not misrepresented or took out of context but literally invented, just to push the “straight black men are only out for themselves and no one else and want to oppress and ignore black women at their expense” narrative
But does he give her article, which is filled with anti-black male racist tropes and even makes up a line someone didn’t even say just to make black men look worse , the same scrutiny? Nope.
Now notice that he doesn’t say all time great’s not the content...he says all time great URL, which I assume refers to the’s the title he loves. Why? Probably for the same reason she chose the title.
She knows by pointing out her double oppressed woman...she gets a license to traffic in anti BM tropes that a white liberal can’t...she’s signaling to white people the service she’s providing them with the title. I can say what you can’t get away with for you
Think about it. The debate is not at all about black women. At all. Why would it be necessary to point out she’s a black woman, to the point of making it the start of the headline? That’s no accident
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to T.
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member and get exclusive features!

Premium member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year)

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!