Whoopi Goldberg is a sexist and a racist

Post Reply New Topic

I don't mind "heady" discussions at all. I just felt like I wanted to add my perspective. I don't fancy myself a simpleton, even though I am laconic in my writing.

People sometimes get wound up over every little thing, and lose perspective. And that tends to obscure the true essence of things.

I can't dictate another person's emotional reaction to something; that is not my intention. I haven't the arrogance to do that. It's also the absolute wrong thing to do.

Perhaps this is a case of "wrong place, wrong time." I screwed up here.

People argue all the time; then they calm down. Disagreement should never be a disqualification for friendship and respect.

I bid you all adieu. I shall explore new avenues within the Site.

I believe Whoopi Goldberg is an actress who has some strong views on things--some of which I don't agree with. She is outspoken. She came from a humble background, and was able to attain her fame without selling her soul.

If she is calling outraged Bernie supporters hypocrites for being outraged, then she is insinuating that they are sexist and racist, and would not be outraged if Bernie was not a white male. That is a completely baseless accusation, considering that Bernie supporters are pretty much by definition liberal and supporters of social justice. So she is still completely wrong in doing so. Even if some of them are hypocrites, it doesn't in any way justify the system being rigged against him.

Not only that, most Bernie supporters are pretty young, so the answer to her implied question, "Where were you when this was happening to blacks and women?" would probably be, "I was a little kid, or not even born yet." So even if that was her meaning, it is still completely ridiculous race baiting.

Last edited by L_Holmes on 04 Aug 2016, 4:10 am, edited 2 times in total.

I have a hard time believing you won't be back, considering you've said a very similar thing on other threads and ended up coming back anyway with more pointless nonsense and personal attacks. But by all means, prove me wrong.

As a former Bernie supporter, I am still able to understand why she said what she said and don't think she is a sexist or a racist.

You have to take what she said in context. If you can't understand the anger and the passion and the integrity behind her statement, I really have no words. You can't just swap words and pretend that logic still follows. It's not that simple. You have to take the whole scenario into consideration.

There is definitely a section of society that perceives Bernie's supporters as socialists, primarily concerned with class/wealth inequality, rather than "social justice" types concerned with a wide range of issues. I think it's primarily passionate Clinton supporters who already perceive Hillary as the "social justice" candidate.

I agree that the criticism doesn't hold much water. People struggle to be dispassionate in politics. Bernie supporters are mostly wet, they're not the same people who may have refused to vote for a woman or black person in the past.

Explain what you mean by the context then, because you didn't really explain anything. You just stated your incredulity about my supposed misinterpretation of her words. That is not very convincing.

Understandable does not mean acceptable. I can understand someone's reasons for saying something and still think they are completely wrong. Plus, what does she even have to be so angry about? That Bernie supporters are upset (understandably) that the DNC conspired against him? Is that not a legitimate grievance? Yes, in the past, women and blacks were oppressed. I assume this is what you mean by the context of why she said it. My response to that is: so what? How does past injustice bear any relevance in the present, or in this particular case? The fact that Bernie is a white man doesn't matter, but Whoopi thinks it totally does. She can't stand that someone would support a white man over a woman, because in her mind getting a woman elected is more important than having a leader with integrity.

I stand by what I said, her comment was completely stupid and racist. I don't care if she is upset about past injustice. She is trying to take a case where a man was treated unfairly (that's an understatement) and make it seem like the real victim is actually women and blacks, because f**k logic.

If you still think I'm misunderstanding what she said, then by all means explain it to me. But I think it was pretty obvious what she meant.

Race and gender should be irrelevant, but they are not.

4)'Damn, I know. At least you know that in my company you're guaranteed equal pay for equal work, and both I and your co-workers respect you. I hope you're happy here regardless of that history, because I want you to stay with us for a while.'

Being liberal and even pro-social-justice does not preclude one from being ignorant, racist, and/or sexist. I've met plenty of people - especially white guys - who *think* they're really egalitarian while simultaneously both treating women like pets, insisting that black people are dangerous, and denying that racism and sexism even exist.

@ L_Holmes: I agree with most of what you've said, on this ENTIRE thread----as I have, on your other threads, regarding this topic. Whoopi Goldberg IS a sexist / racist!! I don't feel she always HAS been a racist----she USED to be very "white friendly", for lack of a better term. I feel it's quite possible she has BECOME racist because, maybe, she has over-corrected for all the HUGE amount of flak she's gotten for dating so many white men. I also believe that it's quite possible that she has over-corrected, like so many other women, and become a SEXIST. I have a theory that some women, who heard "Don't take that from men", for so long, over-corrected and are now, sometimes, actually OPPRESSING men. The pendulum swings.....

Another way in which the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction, is that now white people are being discriminated against / experiencing MAJOR racism / are being oppressed----again, I feel it is over-correcting----but, it's very difficult to find a white person who will admit that, publicly (they might say it to their family, in their living room, but.....). Mainly, there's just too many white people, who are stuck on "Awww, poor black people----look what we did to THEM----we should have heart". It's very interesting to me, that people continue this cycle of "Awww.....", but when we discussed reparations, almost NOBODY was in-favor of THAT!!

You said:

"All of these are deflections. It is an attempt to avoid criticizing her for her obvious idiocy. And why do we avoid criticizing her? Because we have low expectations. This is what I'm talking about. By refusing to criticize her, you are holding her to a lower standard than the rest of society. It is like affirmative action, but instead of employment or education, it's basic accountability. "She should not be held accountable; she is a black woman, so it is understandable that she would feel this way on this subject. Criticizing her would be insensitive. We should just let it slide, it's no big deal." That mentality is totally f****d up. Her behavior is completely unacceptable. She is a massive celebrity and the host of a popular women's talk show. She should be held completely responsible for her racist comment. The fact that she's a black woman should not make any difference."

I totally agree that they're deflections----and that people avoid criticizing black people because they have allowed themselves to be coerced into feeling guilty because of slavery. The one thing I've never thought-of, is if we, in fact, are doing this because of "low expectations"----holding them to a lower standard, I totally get----the "low expectations" thing, is very profound, and I'll have to give that a further think.

Sidebar: I also agree about KK. I've told him, before, that he doesn't read the OP, properly, but he doesn't listen, cuz it is MORE important for him to be saying: "LOOK AT ME----here's me, making a comment". Just ignore him----like most people on PPR do, because his posts don't offer anything of substance----I know it's easier said than done, but.....

Being racist and sexist is completely antithetical to being liberal and pro social justice. Obviously there are going to be morons and hypocrites within every group, but to say that the anti-Hillary protestors are defined by those few people is just ridiculous. Especially when even many Hillary supporters are not exactly thrilled about voting for her, because of how corrupt and dishonest she is.

How many of the protesters that Whoopi is referring to, as a percentage, do you think actually fit the description you are giving? You (and Whoopi) are creating a straw man that is not representative of the Bernie movement as a whole in any way. Bernie supporters want Bernie because he represents their values, and because Hillary, being the corrupt establishment candidate that she is, represents everything they hate. It's not because they want to prevent a woman being elected.

If Bernie was instead Bernette, I seriously doubt that would affect the support he's gotten in a negative way. If anything, him being a white male has hurt his campaign against Hillary, because of people like Whoopi Goldberg who believe that we have to elect the woman at all costs.

There is a long list of legitimate reasons that Hillary should not be president, and Whoopi is trying to dismiss these concerns on the grounds that not voting for the woman is somehow sexist. Utterly ridiculous.

Yes, I wouldn't say she fits what people normally think of when they think of a racist, but certainly she holds some views that are racist, if what she says on her show is anything to go by. I know this isn't the only case of her saying this sort of thing; I even read somewhere that she once compared being expected to show up to a meeting with being enslaved. I don't know the exact context of that, but I think most people would agree that this sort of a comment goes too far.

As far as the racism of low expectations goes, a prime example is many of the clips of "police racism" on the internet. Not just the shootings; I watched a video recently where a crowd of kids with cameras swarmed some cops who were detaining a homeless black man with prosthetic legs. The man was resisting arrest, attempted to bite one of the officers several times, and also tried to kick them with his metal legs. In response, they cuffed him and kept him restrained until a vehicle arrived to take him away. The man was not hurt by the police (many of whom were actually black or Asian), and yet the crowd acted like this was yet another example of police brutality and racism.

If it was happening to a white homeless guy, you could almost guarantee nobody would give a s**t, but because he was black, people immediately came to his defense, despite his clear efforts to assault the officers in question. I also find it funny that the officers did not do anything to these kids other than politely asking them to step back, despite them interfering with police business and being extremely disrespectful, calling them "pigs" over and over. The fact that these SJWs fearlessly confront officers, waving cameras in their face and casually insulting them, doesn't really support the narrative that blacks are afraid of the police.

As for KK and others here that I have gotten angry at, I admittedly went overboard a few times (maybe I just need to develop thicker skin), but I still think that they crossed the line many times. I only responded with anger to people if they were attempting to derail the topic in some way, with personal attacks, worthless platitudes, and even just totally unrelated comments about some other broad topic.

I understand that these people are probably just not the type to enjoy heated discussions like I am, and a lot of it was probably not done with malicious intent. But my question to them is: why, then, would you want to comment on a thread about controversial topic, started by a guy who clearly wants to have a rigorous debate about it? If you want light-hearted and supportive discussion instead of arguing, that is what pretty much every other section on this site is for.

Seconded. Best to just ignore, but I feel for you...

Regarding Whoopi, meh ... she's never been the most clever of people. I think she is unaware of the import of disregarding fairness; but I can see why she would. She has likely been the subject of lots of unfairness and perhaps this has led her to value it less. I don't agree with her, but I still like her and I get where she's coming from.

Say WHAT?????

Who ignores me? That's a load of horse hockey.

I have a right to respond to threads.....just like anybody else.

I guess you can't please the world.

Nobody's going to drive me away. Because I don't deserve it.

Not ignore you kraftie, but ignore some of your comments. I agree with what Cat wrote about you not reading threads thoroughly. I have seen you do this numerous times and it has led to misunderstandings. (I am in fact wagging my finger right now. )