• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Actress Daniele Watts reported for lewd acts, goes nuts at police investigating

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shabutaro

Member
Ok, so maybe I'm missing something. Why has the consensus shifted to shes a liar? I heard the tape, and it sounds like a misconception on her part. She was just sitting there and she was approached by the cops. She did react very verbally, but its not crazy for a Black person to feel profiled by the police. Whatever it was, they ended up being wrong, right? I don't really get it.


Also want to say I hate that the cop says "race card" so many times. Its a destructive term and its not particularly nice to hear coming from a police officer.
 

Sketchbag

Banned
Who said it is always or never anything? Generally posters who have little to no information/wrong information are the standard posters who chime in on threads with the "wait for more information!" tagline. They are generally getting their sources from white supremacists websites, or other dubious information as well. Its clockwork.
I don't entertain these ideas. I discuss the events and details of the story. Not a background of a character you may assume does this and that.

While waiting for all information is literally a great idea, and no one here is saying it isn't. On neogaf, and in discussion in real life; Certain issues have an abundant amount of 'facts' that are on the table to cast the police in a negative light (And its usually video/audio/reporters documentation of police abuse) And we will still have the mindset that ignores all of these things, to blindly give the police the benefit of the doubt because of a bias. That bias is clear when the facts are indeed on the table, and the posters decide to continue their campaign of trying to share the blame of an incident, making up scenarios where the victim got themselves shot, etc. Its a myriad of behavior that comes with "wait for the facts."

I do not doubt this happens but that only means you don't give anyone the benefit regardless of situation. Wait for facts and more details. Jumping to conclusions based on what cops did somewhere else in the country is so irrational.

People that genuinely feel that there isn't enough information, usually don't cite statistics of black crime from Stormfront, proving that blacks create their own problems. Its always something suspect in the history, not just standing behind the idea of waiting for all facts.
Who on GAF is citing black crime from Stormfront? And this issue about history is weird. There are people who refuse to acknowledge an incident may not be racist because the police officer abused his power against a minority. I've asked numerous times for more information regarding past (to see if this officer does indeed have a past of some kind of racism), to which I'm now the person people "roll eyes" at and say "quantum lock!11!" and what not. Is this not a form of bias as well?

You're getting some impression that someone is telling you that literally waiting for facts, and only doing that, that is it, is a bad thing. No, that is not a bad thing. Now, waiting out facts is another thing. You have facts on the table, but you still want to wait for the version your bias wants to come true. This is what happens with the general people from this camp, as its obvious for other posters. You have all members who make judgement calls in threads. I don't roll my eyes if X poster who isn't always the same person "waiting out the facts", suggests it.

See above.

its a shame this one thing happened, because it will be fuel for people who want to continue to harbor bias in these discussions. Despite being shot while handcuffed on the ground-- the facts have to come in...

The question isn't if its right or wrong, but the question is if its from a general place of concern/decision or the same pattern of bias over and over and over and over. You aren't defending some god given right to assess the situation, no one would say assessing a situation is bad.

Actually, a lot of people would say say assessing the situation is bad or don't care about the facts. We have people saying, "it's reasonable to assume that given what's happened in the last few months". Is it reasonable? How is it reasonable? It's grossly exaggerating how many police officers are corrupt, racist, and power hungry and applying it here.

I remember a thread I participated in where a police officer pulled over a black man and then abused his power. No where in the video did anything racist occur or remotely racist. Yet the police officer was racist. We have memes like, "walking while black", "sitting while black", "driving while black", etc. These aren't shedding light on any rights violations that may have occurred, they're used to bandwagon other people and trivialize other comments.
 

Carnby

Member
Who said it is always or never anything? Generally posters who have little to no information/wrong information are the standard posters who chime in on threads with the "wait for more information!" tagline. They are generally getting their sources from white supremacists websites, or other dubious information as well. Its clockwork.

WHO? Who here gets their news from white supremacists websites. What an Unbelievable comment.
 
WHO? Who here gets their news from white supremacists websites. What an Unbelievable comment.

It's happened a few times before, where posters have used links from either straight-up supremacist sites or thinly veiled ones. Not so unbelievable, Gaf members include a wide variety of people.
 
Ok, so maybe I'm missing something. Why has the consensus shifted to shes a liar? I heard the tape, and it sounds like a misconception on her part. She was just sitting there and she was approached by the cops. She did react very verbally, but its not crazy for a Black person to feel profiled by the police. Whatever it was, they ended up being wrong, right? I don't really get it.


Also want to say I hate that the cop says "race card" so many times. Its a destructive term and its not particularly nice to hear coming from a police officer.
They were reported for having sex in public in full view of other people.
 

Yaboosh

Super Sleuth
Source? Link?


A guy tried to use a white supremacist website to support his assertion that black men are more violent than white men.

Or something to do with crime rates amongst black men versus white men,


He didn't know it was a white supremacist website though.
 

DarkFlow

Banned
I have a strong feeling some posters are unicorns. I don't have any proof of this, you're just going to have to believe me on this.
 

Sketchbag

Banned
Is it really that hard to believe? It's not like Gaf is some delousing plant that removes all of what people might wallow in on other sites.

It isn't difficult to believe or think people could.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
 

commedieu

Banned
I don't entertain these ideas. I discuss the events and details of the story. Not a background of a character you may assume does this and that.



I do not doubt this happens but that only means you don't give anyone the benefit regardless of situation. Wait for facts and more details. Jumping to conclusions based on what cops did somewhere else in the country is so irrational.


Who on GAF is citing black crime from Stormfront? And this issue about history is weird. There are people who refuse to acknowledge an incident may not be racist because the police officer abused his power against a minority. I've asked numerous times for more information regarding past (to see if this officer does indeed have a past of some kind of racism), to which I'm now the person people "roll eyes" at and say "quantum lock!11!" and what not. Is this not a form of bias as well?



See above.



Actually, a lot of people would say say assessing the situation is bad or don't care about the facts. We have people saying, "it's reasonable to assume that given what's happened in the last few months". Is it reasonable? How is it reasonable? It's grossly exaggerating how many police officers are corrupt, racist, and power hungry and applying it here.

I remember a thread I participated in where a police officer pulled over a black man and then abused his power. No where in the video did anything racist occur or remotely racist. Yet the police officer was racist. We have memes like, "walking while black", "sitting while black", "driving while black", etc. These aren't shedding light on any rights violations that may have occurred, they're used to bandwagon other people and trivialize other comments.


Unless you're a person that blindly holds a bias and uses "wait for the facts" then you don't have to respond with your actions. If you aren't an asshole who uses the tactic, you're not an asshole. Thats literally the person im talking about. If you aren't that, again, well. thats not you. Again, theres nothing wrong with the literal idea of "waiting for facts" waiting for facts combined with suspect posting that has a historic bias is another issue, and it is what I hate that this event will be used as an excuse for.

You're going in circles here. Waiting for the facts, as a general practice is fine. Posting bullshit then following it up with "wait for all the facts" is what is done to skirt the issue. Again, waiting for all the facts - and waiting for all the facts alone - is a good practice.
 

Carnby

Member
A guy tried to use a white supremacist website to support his assertion that black men are more violent than white men.

Or something to do with crime rates amongst black men versus white men,


He didn't know it was a white supremacist website though.

Oh okay. So one time one guy did it, once. I don't think that means all "wait for the facts" people are getting their news from white supremacist sites, like (whatever their name is) suggested.
 

Sketchbag

Banned
Unless you're a person that blindly holds a bias and uses "wait for the facts" then you don't have to respond with your actions. If you aren't an asshole who uses the tactic, you're not an asshole. Thats literally the person im talking about. If you aren't that, again, well. thats not you. Again, theres nothing wrong with the literal idea of "waiting for facts" waiting for facts combined with suspect posting that has a historic bias is another issue, and it is what I hate that this event will be used as an excuse for.

You're going in circles here. Waiting for the facts, as a general practice is fine. Posting bullshit then following it up with "wait for all the facts" is what is done to skirt the issue. Again, waiting for all the facts - and waiting for all the facts alone - is a good practice.

Can you quote some instances of this? Especially the Stormfront and other shady websites. I understand what you're saying, but you're making it out to be wide spread. I'm curious to know how wide spread because, as you can tell, I'm not going to just take your word for it.
 
I think it's sad that someone like Bryan Singer is probably forever tainted in a lot of people's minds as a rapist. I think that has a lot to do with everyone running with a story without waiting for the facts to emerge.

Also mobs can form and do bad real life damage if no one waits for facts and things keep escalating.
 
It isn't difficult to believe or think people could.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I guess it doesn't seem extraordinary to me. Gaf has a fairly large population, so the idea that some members might visit or even frequent those kinds of sites wouldn't surprise me. Like I said, I don't have examples saved or specific names, but the times I saw it stuck in my mind because Gaf is usually pretty upstanding thanks to moderation and quality posters.
 

zaxon

Member
They are generally getting their sources from white supremacists websites, or other dubious information as well. Its clockwork.

And now we've reached the "anyone who's views aren't in lockstop with my own is obviously a white supremacist Stormfront poster" part of the thread.

Wonderful.
 

Sketchbag

Banned
I guess it doesn't seem extraordinary to me. Gaf has a fairly large population, so the idea that some members might visit or even frequent those kinds of sites wouldn't surprise me. Like I said, I don't have examples saved or specific names, but the times I saw it stuck in my mind because Gaf is usually pretty upstanding thanks to moderation and quality posters.

You don't think saying there are people on GAF who quote Stormfront isn't an extraordinary claim?

I am not saying there aren't as I don't know every one but if you're going to say things like this you should have some form of evidence.
 

J10

Banned
I don't believe you.

He's not lying. Multiple people here have cited "studies" from the New Century Foundation in these kinds of conversation.

And now NeoGAF racists are going to bring up this story from now until eternity whenever they wanna play "Devil's Advocate."
 
He's not lying. Multiple people here have cited "studies" from the New Century Foundation in these kinds of conversation.

And now NeoGAF racists are going to bring up this story from now until eternity whenever they wanna play "Devil's Advocate."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Century_Foundation

The New Century Foundation is an organization founded in 1994 known primarily for publishing American Renaissance. From 1994 to 1999 its activities received considerable funding by the Pioneer Fund,[1][2][3] and has been described as a white supremacist group,[4] which its founder, Jared Taylor, denies, calling it white separatist.

Taylor advocates segregation as a natural expression of racial solidarity while denying that his views constitute white supremacism. Viewing societal problems as racial in nature, Taylor upholds white racial homogeneity as the key to peaceful coexistence with other races . He sees Japan as an exemplar of a racially homogenous society, and views Asians generally as genetically superior in intelligence to whites. He also view whites as genetically superior in intelligence to blacks.[5][6]
 
They're buried but people have been found to use racist sites as sources.

Also, this thread reads like that KFC story where the little girl was supposedly asked to leave cos of her scars but it turned out to be a hoax.

If you're going off just one side shit can get twisted.
 

Parch

Member
And now we've reached the "anyone who's views aren't in lockstop with my own is obviously a white supremacist Stormfront poster" part of the thread.
Wonderful.
Apparently all it takes to launch the witch hunt is a "I'd like more info" comment.
 

Carnby

Member
He's not lying. Multiple people here have cited "studies" from the New Century Foundation in these kinds of conversation.

And now NeoGAF racists are going to bring up this story from now until eternity whenever they wanna play "Devil's Advocate."

Well that's unfortunate. Can I safely assume that was quickly put to a stop?

I did a quick Google search to see which news outlets are reporting that Watts is a proven liar. I really couldn't find any. In fact the CNN interview she did today was after the tape was released. Before they interview, CNN played audio of a very calm office detaining her, and the anchor asked Watts how she feels after going through such traumatizing event. LMAO.
 

Keri

Member
Wait...what's happening in here? Are some posters arguing that it's reasonable to assume NeoGAF posters are racist, because there are some racists on NeoGAF?

Why are we not rejoicing in unity, over recordings showing a celebrity acting nuts?
 

There you go.

I've been pulled over a few times driving while Mexican, in a BMW and a Caddy so I was on this girl's side... Kinda, cos a pro kissing a john in public? Sounded fishy as hell but still... Man, this thread was a rollercoaster.

She was no more than a spoiled brat I think though.

Both sides need to back down I think cos this was pretty much "do you know who I am?!" Situation.
 
Wait...what's happening in here? Are some posters arguing that it's reasonable to assume NeoGAF posters are racist, because there are some racists on NeoGAF?

Why are we not rejoicing in unity, over recordings showing a celebrity acting nuts?

No

Saying that it's reasonable to believe that there are some racists on Gaf because there are some racists on Gaf, or at least some people who have no qualms with using racist sources.

Note: "some" is not a definite number
 

Apath

Member
So she claimed the cop profiled her as a prostitute because she was kissing someone, and it turned out she was actually having sex in public? That's hilarious.
 

Apt101

Member
How out of hand are the police going to get before someone, anyone, in politics does something about it?

Edit: wait what? she was bonin'?
 

lednerg

Member
People at the start of this thread were justified in being upset at the cops based on the information we had to go on at the time. We heard it was a married couple 'making out' who then got profiled and harassed by police, and that the woman was later handcuffed for not showing ID. We assumed all of that was true because what would even be the point of making up such an outlandish story? We got our answer the next day. Turns out she was just being an impossibly stupid and vindictive asshole.

Even if the audio recording didn't exist, had we only been told that they were sited for lewd acts (fucking in public with the car door open), that alone would've changed everything. The arguments I and others were making about her not having to identify herself would be moot because she was being lawfully detained after all. That doesn't make what we were saying invalid, it only means it doesn't pertain to this particular case. I feel it was still a worthwhile discussion.

Should we all have waited to have 'all the information' to voice our opinions? Eh. If that's what you want to do, then fine. However, I wouldn't expect everyone else to fall in line, or act like you're being the only reasonable person here. As evidenced today in this thread, we're more than capable of adjusting to the changing circumstances as new information comes in. We're in a forum, a place which encourages discussions about the topics of the day. We're not jurors; voicing our gut reactions doesn't have consequences that extend far beyond this place. If all everyone did was wait until we knew everything, being ever so cautious of rushing to judgment lest we end up being wrong, then nobody would post in these kinds of threads.
 

PogiJones

Banned
It is upsetting that some posters are so happy not that this was revealed not to be more police-served racism, but that they were right about not believing her. Like positively cooing with delight that they were right and others were wrong. Score one for devil's advocacy then

You're absolutely right, there's no reason to feel excitedly justified when your position ended up being correct in retrospect. Which is why you'd never show such "restrained jubilation," as lexi put it, over being right about someone's character. Or maybe...

I wish the guys who defended him throughout the entire Trayvon ordeal would come into these threads. Usual suspects no place to be seen once again.
They've got plenty of other internet caves where there stupidity will go unchallenged, and possibly even praised

...maybe you would do the same thing, and even take it further by not only gloating that those who disagreed with you were wrong, but also painting the whole opposition with a broad brush, and calling them stupid.

Now, for real, I agree with you that people should be restrained in their celebration of being "right," (even though few things are so binary).

But at the heart of this "restrained jubilation" is the fact that many of us are NOT stupid cave-dwellers, many of us have sided with minorities on many occasions, but many of us have been painted as racists, or in my case, "suspect," just because we've been calling for reasonable restraint in snap judgments.

You know why it's always the "usual suspects" that are calling for reserved judgment and measured discourse? It's not because we're advocates of oppression; it's because we're advocates of reserved judgment and measured discourse. Threads about sexism and racism tend to be the topics most welcoming to snap judgments, and so the "usual suspects" trying to reign things back get painted as misogynist racists.

So of course some people are getting some feeling of retribution, the people who have been so frustrated that promoting measured responses and restraint is always labeled as racist or sexist. For once, they can say, "This is the kind of danger I was talking about with snap judgments, that innocent people get hurt with this kind of shotgun justice," and finally, there's a thread for them to say it without them getting branded as racists, and quite possibly banned.

Before this thread (and probably still after this thread), it's mostly true that reasoned, measured posts--while often dogpiled--were not banned regardless of which "side" they came from. But emotional responses were only tolerated from one side: the majority side. If you don't agree with the majority, you have to be extremely careful in how you express it. If you get at all emotional with a minority opinion, you're gone.

Now, that wouldn't be so bad if the majority also couldn't get emotional and launch attacks either. But if you're being as reasonable and well-mannered as you can expressing your minority opinion, and then you get a bunch of dog-piling posters attacking your character, it's very, very difficult to reign in your emotion. When people are throwing unrestrained punches at your character, completely unchecked by moderators, it's difficult not to throw a few back. And so the minority opinion gets banned and purged at a far higher rate than the majority opinion, thus reinforcing the majority's status quo.


TL;DR: Snarky and emotional comments are completely allowed and go unpunished if it's expressing the majority opinion, but if it's expressing a minority opinion--or even just telling the majority opinion to hold back a bit--a snarky or emotional comment will get a ban. So yes, I can completely understand why people who have been frustrated with this complete domination of the conversation would feel a sense of vindication at this thread, since finally, the sense of their posts calling for measured and restrained responses is thrust into the light, and the injustice of those calling them racist or sexist is exposed clear as day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom