Disco Writer used the N word in the writers room.

[Awesome Possum]

This is why the whole “both sides” thing is bad. It creates a false equivalency so people actually think the people against genocide also want to kill or the people against Nazis are really fascists. Which is exactly what terrible people want, drag down the opposition so they look slightly better.

 

[Armus]

Mutual respect and reverence for individual life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for ALL people shouldn't have to be debated. There is no "both sides" when it comes to that. But who gets to define who has legitimacy and who doesn't in the marketplace of ideas in a free society like ours? We live in a pluralistic society, divided in belief, religion, lifestyle, and traditions. Rural people, city people, conservatives, progressives, gay, straight, the religious and nonreligious. There should be some common ground where each side can make their case without having their voice marginalized as being evil.

Who gets to define who is truly hateful?
Or who is the bigot?

If one side gets to define it just to silence opposition and win the debate, well that's not gonna fly without a fight.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Mutual respect and reverence for individual life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for ALL people shouldn't have to be debated. There is no "both sides" when it comes to that. But who gets to define who has legitimacy and who doesn't in the marketplace of ideas in a free society like ours? We live in a pluralistic society, divided in belief, religion, lifestyle, and traditions. Rural people, city people, conservatives, progressives, gay, straight, the religious and nonreligious. There should be some common ground where each side can make their case without having their voice marginalized as being evil.

Who gets to define who is truly hateful?
Or who is the bigot?

If one side gets to define it just to silence opposition and win the debate, well that's not gonna fly without a fight.

Generally if a marginalized group tells you something is hateful, it’s because it is. And by generally, I mean 9.99999999999999% of the time. You don’t get to debate that, especially if it’s directed at you. Just like if someone asked you to turn down a radio because it’s too loud, it’s accepted that you turn it down and instead of arguing that they’re wrong.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Only white people write for Discovery? Please proceed, governor.

As expected, a reply that tried to tap-shuffle-tap around your post that was as offensive as it was utterly divorced from any understanding of the realities faced by black people about everything--including language, identity and how others do not get to judge our experience through their arrogant "we know best" filter.

Good show..

 

[Armus]

Generally if a marginalized group tells you something is hateful, it’s because it is. And by generally, I mean 9.99999999999999% of the time. You don’t get to debate that, especially if it’s directed at you. Just like if someone asked you to turn down a radio because it’s too loud, it’s accepted that you turn it down and instead of arguing that they’re wrong.

Just as possible that it is hate, it's possible to label someone as hateful just because you know it is an effective way to discredit them and marginalize their voice. It's possible and some think it is an effective political strategy. I'm not saying it is always the case.

Case in point. Up until recently it wasn't out of the ordinary for someone to hold the view that immigration laws should enforced without accused of being xenophobic.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

This is why the whole “both sides” thing is bad. It creates a false equivalency so people actually think the people against genocide also want to kill or the people against Nazis are really fascists. Which is exactly what terrible people want, drag down the opposition so they look slightly better.

Maybe I just missed where the discussion took the turnoff into one of the "both sides" being discussed being Nazis, but what does this have to do with Walter Mosley's use of the n-word in describing something he personally experienced, or the person who complained about it to CBS HR objecting to it, neither of whom would presumably support Nazis or the use of bigoted slurs as malicious epithets against others?

Mosley was discussing the use of the n-word as a terrible event from his past where a cop used it while in the process of racial profiling him. It was not a pro-n-word commentary or one saying it should be open season for anyone to use the word in any context.

The person complaining to HR thinks any use of the n-word is wrong regardless of context, even if you were the victim of the real-life verbal attack and were conveying the experience to make a point, presumably in relation to a storytelling idea. I disagree with them on this issue, but I think we can all agree that they would also not be Nazi supporters.

So I'm just not following where the slippery slope into Nazism argument comes in, since none of the three factions involved in this incident (Mr. Mosley, HR complainant, or CBS) would be supporters of making things easier for Nazis to use racial epithets.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Eve and the Apple in the Garden of Eden.

DON'T EAT THE APPLE EVE!!!

YOU ATE THE APPLE EVE!!!

YOU CAN GO NOW EVE!!!

 

[Jayson1]

People say sides as if you only have two choices. Which creates a team mentality instead of something that addresses individuality because we aren't Borg but we can get like that if we stuck in a echo chamber. People need to listen to people as people because if you do enough people will mostly stop seeing others as the enemy. As for the dangers that is where the justice system is suppose to step up and do it's job. Jason

 

[DaveyNY]

A reasonably well adjusted person would most likely have informed Mr. Mosley in a polite manner, that they find the use of the N word offensive in any context.
(though I find it strange for any Professional Writer to be bothered considering it was a personal story from a well known Author that was being related)
At which point Mr. Mosley would probably have acknowledged their discomfort, and attempted to explain in an articulate manner, that their "discomfort" about his story-language is nothing compared to actually being the one on the brunt end of its use.

My guess is that it was probably someone who had to endure the god awful berating going on during the first season with the now gone producers and has become hyper sensitive to it all.


THIS sums up my feelings about it all...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

(I'm almost positive that half the folks around here work for the CIA ... ummm ... CBS.)
<chuckle>

 

[Awesome Possum]

Just as possible that it is hate, it's possible to label someone as hateful just because you know it is an effective way to discredit them and marginalize their voice. It's possible and some think it is an effective political strategy. I'm not saying it is always the case.

Case in point. Up until recently it wasn't out of the ordinary for someone to hold the view that immigration laws should enforced without accused of being xenophobic.

No one is against immigration laws being enforced, that’s just making shit up. The actual issue is holding people in camps, some of them children, indefinitely. Especially when they are asylum seekers which is a legal way to enter a country. Those people broke no law, claiming otherwise is either a fabrication or outright ignorance.

Maybe I just missed where the discussion took the turnoff into one of the "both sides" being discussed being Nazis, but what does this have to do with Walter Mosley's use of the n-word in describing something he personally experienced, or the person who complained about it to CBS HR objecting to it, neither of whom would presumably support Nazis or the use of bigoted slurs as malicious epithets against others?

Mosley was discussing the use of the n-word as a terrible event from his past where a cop used it while in the process of racial profiling him. It was not a pro-n-word commentary or one saying it should be open season for anyone to use the word in any context.

The person complaining to HR thinks any use of the n-word is wrong regardless of context, even if you were the victim of the real-life verbal attack and were conveying the experience to make a point, presumably in relation to a storytelling idea. I disagree with them on this issue, but I think we can all agree that they would also not be Nazi supporters.

So I'm just not following where the slippery slope into Nazism argument comes in, since none of the three factions involved in this incident (Mr. Mosley, HR complainant, or CBS) would be supporters of making things easier for Nazis to use racial epithets.

I fell off the track.

 

[DaveyNY]

No one is against immigration laws being enforced, that’s just making shit up. The actual issue is holding people in camps, some of them children, indefinitely. Especially when they are asylum seekers which is a legal way to enter a country. Those people broke no law, claiming otherwise is either a fabrication or outright ignorance.


I fell off the track.

DO we really want to dive head first into that particular sticky-widget here?

Even I know that perhaps the Immigration Thing is best left to discussions in TNZ.

 

[Rahul]

Both sides in any discussion are people. That part is undebatable.

But not always do both sides have similar valid points. In some cases, one side can be entirely off the rails, with no middle ground to be found because of their utter lunacy. Case in point: People arguing to take away human rights of other people.

Those who argue for that are still people. But their opinions in that case simply hold no value and can and should be disregarded, and certainly not given the same weight as those tho do think human rights apply to all humans.

 

[Armus]

No one is against immigration laws being enforced, that’s just making shit up. The actual issue is holding people in camps, some of them children, indefinitely. Especially when they are asylum seekers which is a legal way to enter a country. Those people broke no law, claiming otherwise is either a fabrication or outright ignorance.

I was only referring to the fact that those who have tried to argue for legal enforcement, which would include ending sanctuary city laws which contradict national policy, and include more money to support border regulation, have been labeled as xenophobic by some. Specifically I was referring to the people who support some of the immigration policies of the current U.S. President. It's a legitimate subject for debate. Certainly a country can debate its own laws, its very own future, without demonizing.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

As expected, a reply that tried to tap-shuffle-tap around your post that was as offensive as it was utterly divorced from any understanding of the realities faced by black people about everything--including language, identity and how others do not get to judge our experience through their arrogant "we know best" filter.

Good show..

Perhaps you missed that I have experiences with racism. Of course, you may proceed, governor.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Walter is now unwilling to work anywhere with HR, that will not give him an N-word waiver?

 

[DaveyNY]

I was only referring to the fact that those who have tried to argue for legal enforcement, which would include ending sanctuary city laws which contradict national policy, and include more money to support border regulation, have been labeled as xenophobic by some. Specifically I was referring to the people who support some of the immigration policies of the current U.S. President. It's a legitimate subject for debate. Certainly a country can debate its own laws, its very own future, without demonizing.

When the guy at the top is doing most of the "Demonizing" what else can one expect?

 

[Armus]

When the guy at the top is doing most of the "Demonizing" what else can one expect?

A dog eat dog world then?

 

[Lord Garth]

As of now, there is nothing that convinces me that this incident is symbolic of deep problems related to Kurtzman, Discovery or CBS. It just seems like another moment in which a creative person had difficulty adjusting to a particular workplace.

The boring truth. Some people want it to be more exciting.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I was watching a farewell from the cast and crew of Kill joys, and when the writers said "farewell" the legend describing their function was "writers room"

The writers room is not a place, "room" is a collective noun for a group of writers.

 

[Jayson1]

When the guy at the top is doing most of the "Demonizing" what else can one expect?

Techinically it can't be the most. It's just the most shocking because it is something that is so un-presidental. Hopefull he will be gone next year and people are going to need to decide what they realistically want from the guy. Possible Warren but likely Biden. If this stuff keeps happening even when Trump is gone we are alot of trouble. Jason