over-sensi-sensitivity

[yodedude2]

We are growing and going through changes. I am old enough to remember when racism and misogyny were the accepted norm and only of a few of the kids I knew thought it was a problem. I would rather be in our "over sensitive" society than go back to that.

bravo.

adding...for many, racism and misogyny is still the norm. tribalism in general (us and them) is still the norm for all. folks are so deep into privilege they don't even recognize their own biases, but quickly take offense when it gets turned on them. how many times do you hear about folks getting ticked off for others not speaking english around them?

 

[friskinator]

It occurs to me that this new world; this hyper connected - instant reaction world, almost certainly has added to the situation. young folks are quick to emotions, both in and out. It seems like they are almost a separate species. The way they interact is often a mystery to me. To me, it seems that their brand of communication is all about a reaction. It's less about informing, like we old timers, and more about a thumbs-up, like and lol deal. It's very fleeting too. They move from topic to topic like monkeys jumping to limbs in a tree. They don't seem as interested in lasting images and memories. They live vicariously in the now. Sorry for the generalization. I know it's bad form but I wanted it to be inclusive of a broad group as that is what I am observing.

Now, granted, I'm not the most connected guy. I'm famously detached from the facebook, twitter, instawhatchamacallit world. I'm just not interested. So maybe I'm off base with this, but it seems to me a lot of the "Offense" these days is a communication mechanic not a social stance.

Just another idea to put out there.

Agreed. And when you throw in the element of being praised with positive comments/likes/etc from their friends all day long, it can lead to hyper-over-sensitivity when anything challenges that. It seems that personally-directed negative comments generally aren't allowed on social media (except for politics, of course), and if something happens that "offends" them (either online or IRL), they simply can't handle it.

 

[bholder]

My ex told me I'm both insensitive and overly sensistive. Wow.

 

[buldog5151bass]

We are growing and going through changes. I am old enough to remember when racism and misogyny were the accepted norm and only of a few of the kids I knew thought it was a problem. I would rather be in our "over sensitive" society than go back to that.

Agreed, but in some ways the pendulum has swung too far, with ironic consequences. Blazing Saddles was one of the best parodies out there, but the very things that made the message would likely block it from production today. Loony Tunes are considered too violent, yet some of the stuff out there is far more graphic.

 

[blue4]

It occurs to me that this new world; this hyper connected - instant reaction world, almost certainly has added to the situation. young folks are quick to emotions, both in and out. It seems like they are almost a separate species. The way they interact is often a mystery to me. To me, it seems that their brand of communication is all about a reaction. It's less about informing, like we old timers, and more about a thumbs-up, like and lol deal. It's very fleeting too. They move from topic to topic like monkeys jumping to limbs in a tree. They don't seem as interested in lasting images and memories. They live vicariously in the now. Sorry for the generalization. I know it's bad form but I wanted it to be inclusive of a broad group as that is what I am observing.

Now, granted, I'm not the most connected guy. I'm famously detached from the facebook, twitter, instawhatchamacallit world. I'm just not interested. So maybe I'm off base with this, but it seems to me a lot of the "Offense" these days is a communication mechanic not a social stance.

Just another idea to put out there.

But again, every older generation thinks the new one has their head in the clouds and won't focus on what matters. Is my daughter being on the cell phone talking or texting or on Facebook really supposed to be different from my sister laying in the hallway taking up the house phone for literally hours at a time? IMO I don't think so, I think it's just how young people are. I do think I have a somewhat different perspective then most people on a topic like this. My employer is large, really large. There's been 3 big hiring pushes. 1987, my group in 2000, and the newest group in 2015. I was 25 then, most of my group was 40+. So I have tons of friends that are 55-65, and as many that are 21-35. So every night I sit in the middle listening to each generation make false claims about the other. It's led me to believe people have been and probably will always be the same.

 

[mellowinman]

Agreed, but in some ways the pendulum has swung too far, with ironic consequences. Blazing Saddles was one of the best parodies out there, but the very things that made the message would likely block it from production today. Loony Tunes are considered too violent, yet some of the stuff out there is far more graphic.

See, this ignores many of the points being made. First of all, Blazing Saddles could easily be made today. Far more offensive "comedies" are made and released daily. Loony Tunes being violent is a separate issue to what has been discussed on this thread; mainly that they perpetuated offensive racial and ethnic stereotypes, namely buck tooth cross eyed Asian characters, people of color portrayed as monkeys or similar; and some very questionable practices.

Repeat after me:

Blazing Saddles Could be Made Today!
Blazing Saddles Could be Made Today!
Blazing Saddles Could be Made Today!
Blazing Saddles Could be Made Today!

Looney Tunes Portrayed Racial and Ethnic Caricatures that Dehumanized Entire Groups!
Looney Tunes Portrayed Racial and Ethnic Caricatures that Dehumanized Entire Groups!
Looney Tunes Portrayed Racial and Ethnic Caricatures that Dehumanized Entire Groups!
Looney Tunes Portrayed Racial and Ethnic Caricatures that Dehumanized Entire Groups!

Six more times, and you'll have it.

 

[buldog5151bass]

See, this ignores many of the points being made. First of all, Blazing Saddles could easily be made today. Far more offensive "comedies" are made and released daily. Loony Tunes being violent is a separate issue to what has been discussed on this thread; mainly that they perpetuated offensive racial and ethnic stereotypes, namely buck tooth cross eyed Asian characters, people of color portrayed as monkeys or similar; and some very questionable practices.

Repeat after me:

Blazing Saddles Could be Made Today!
Blazing Saddles Could be Made Today!
Blazing Saddles Could be Made Today!
Blazing Saddles Could be Made Today!

Looney Tunes Portrayed Racial and Ethnic Caricatures that Dehumanized Entire Groups!
Looney Tunes Portrayed Racial and Ethnic Caricatures that Dehumanized Entire Groups!
Looney Tunes Portrayed Racial and Ethnic Caricatures that Dehumanized Entire Groups!
Looney Tunes Portrayed Racial and Ethnic Caricatures that Dehumanized Entire Groups!

Six more times, and you'll have it.

1. Brooks has said that film would not be.
2. I am not talking about those caricatures - I am talking about the cartoon violence.

Read my posts.

 

[mellowinman]

1. Brooks has said that film would not be.
2. I am not talking about those caricatures - I am talking about the cartoon violence.

Read my posts.

I read your posts, and they are perpetuating two falsehoods, which I addressed in the post you are quoting.

1. Brooks is WRONG. See the film "The Ridiculous 6," with Adam Sandler. THAT got released. There are so many horribly offensive films/tv shows/cartoons being released daily that Blazing Saddles would barely be noticed. Brooks is often WRONG. Once you understand that, your life can go on.
2. You may be talking about cartoon violence, but you are glossing over the fact that Looney Tunes cartoon violence is shown daily on TV stations all over the world, while the truly UGLY Looney Tunes cartoons were long ago banned, and rightly so. This IS a thread about oversensitivity, is it not? Cartoon violence; film violence; TV show violence; it is the norm. No one considers it controversial. Perhaps you missed Game of Thrones? The scene where the guy pops the other guy's head? I'll NEVER recover from that image. I'll take it to the grave. I'm not complaining; I watched it voluntarily. I'm just pointing out that violence has never been all that controversial in American media.

I read your posts. They were BRILLIANT. I'm still trying to catch my breath.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Between you and Brooks, when it comes to the inner workings of the film industry, pardon me if I take him.

Again, you miss my point - some graphic violence is allowed. A duck getting his bill spun around in a circle is considered improper.

 

[Funky Ghost]

But again, every older generation thinks the new one has their head in the clouds and won't focus on what matters. Is my daughter being on the cell phone talking or texting or on Facebook really supposed to be different from my sister laying in the hallway taking up the house phone for literally hours at a time? IMO I don't think so, I think it's just how young people are. I do think I have a somewhat different perspective then most people on a topic like this. My employer is large, really large. There's been 3 big hiring pushes. 1987, my group in 2000, and the newest group in 2015. I was 25 then, most of my group was 40+. So I have tons of friends that are 55-65, and as many that are 21-35. So every night I sit in the middle listening to each generation make false claims about the other. It's led me to believe people have been and probably will always be the same.

This is more than that. As I alluded to, it is now not only a social mechanism but a mechanical one as well. It's not the "Get off my lawn!" type of conjecture. Far from it. It's about a behavioral paradigm. I'm uninterested in the "That's not the way we did it!". discussions because frankly they bore me. Meat and potatoes social anthropology? I'm all in.

 

[mellowinman]

Between you and Brooks, when it comes to the inner workings of the film industry, pardon me if I take him.

Again, you miss my point - some graphic violence is allowed. A duck getting his bill spun around in a circle is considered improper.

I didn't miss your point. I just didn't think it was very important in the overall context of the discussion. And you can "take Brooks" all you want. I have given compelling evidence for my argument. Maybe he would have a HARD TIME getting Blazing Saddles made, using the network he normally uses, but you can't be seriously taking the position that the film Blazing Saddles COULD NOT BE MADE TODAY. You aren't, are you? NO STUDIO would allow its release? It just COULDN'T be done? Man, that's crazy talk.

 

[Funky Ghost]

bravo.

adding...for many, racism and misogyny is still the norm. tribalism in general (us and them) is still the norm for all. folks are so deep into privilege they don't even recognize their own biases, but quickly take offense when it gets turned on them. how many times do you hear about folks getting ticked off for others not speaking english around them?

I find this hard to believe ( and even harder to prove for those that suggest it ) given for more than 2 decades we, as a culture, have been beat over the head with this topic. It's been under a microscope so long that a person that behaves as you suggest must have grown up their entire life in seclusion from the media, entertainment and anyone of a different race than them.

Maybe it's because I live in Sacramento and it is counted among the most ethnically diverse cities in the United States, but I have not seen this world so many people claim to bear witness to. I've seen very isolated instances to be sure. On BOTH sides. A fair point that is very often missed because it is an uncomfortable truth. The topic isn't a slide where you get on and go one direction. Anyone that takes that stance isn't interested in conversation. They are pushing an agenda, or force feeding you an ideal. I am uninterested in that. It serves no purpose (and isn't designed to help in any event) Thankfully more and more people seem to have come to the realization that this has been used to drive a wedge between peoples by those who have no desire for positive things to happen. We are too well traveled and too well informed for old bigoted ideals to stand. It's not perfect, but it is absolutely changing. The person of the 40's and 50's was moored to their homes. Their world was right outside their door. It's easy to avoid change in that environment. Now though? It's very tough to hate a people when you travel to them and get to know them or vice versa.

 

[blue4]

This is more than that. As I alluded to, it is now not only a social mechanism but a mechanical one as well. It's not the "Get off my lawn!" type of conjecture. Far from it. It's about a behavioral paradigm. I'm uninterested in the "That's not the way we did it!". discussions because frankly they bore me. Meat and potatoes social anthropology? I'm all in.

I'm not sure what your saying. I'm saying youth in every generation are basically the same, but use different tech to do the exact same things. Perhaps you're saying the same but I'm misunderstanding.

 

[pcake]

i never found the racist parts or characters of any cartoons funny, and some made me very uneasy at a pretty young age. the crows in dumbo made me cringe, and i had no idea why that was at the time. and yes, i love blazing saddles, but something that makes it work for me is that blazing saddles makes fun of everyone across the board.

btw, i have yet to talk to someone who uses the term "special snowflake" without meaning to insult the people they're pointing it toward. then, when the people they're insulting are insulted, those people who called them special snowflakes say "gotcha!"

I just think in some cases, it has had the opposite effect than it was intended. Like I said, Blazing Saddles was intended to lampoon people who were racists, and yet, today, it would never get released.

As to Warner Brothers, some of the early stuff was overtly racist (as was parts of Fantasia, for example). But take a look at the violence. We all knew that Daffy Duck wasn't really getting his bill blown off - we knew it wasn't serious.

do you really think a 1 1/2 or 2 year old kid really knows that daffy duck isn't really getting his beak blown off?

 

[Funky Ghost]

I'm not sure what your saying. I'm saying youth in every generation are basically the same, but use different tech to do the exact same things. Perhaps you're saying the same but I'm misunderstanding.

Our thoughts are very nearly the same ( and I agree with you - but ). The descriptor was usually ascribed by a later generation and they were speaking solely from a generational standpoint. My thought is that now, it is less about that and more about a co-dependence and a social adaption to mechanical devices which have driven a new way of interacting with their world, and each other.

 

[buldog5151bass]

i never found the racist parts or characters of any cartoons funny, and some made me very uneasy at a pretty young age. the crows in dumbo made me cringe, and i had no idea why that was at the time. and yes, i love blazing saddles, but something that makes it work for me is that blazing saddles makes fun of everyone across the board.

btw, i have yet to talk to someone who uses the term "special snowflake" without meaning to insult the people they're pointing it toward. then, when the people they're insulting are insulted, those people who called them special snowflakes say "gotcha!"



do you really think a 1 1/2 or 2 year old kid really knows that daffy duck isn't really getting his beak blown off?

Certainly it is less violent than a LOT of the graphic stuff out there - stuff that makes ME queasy. And kids who were watching those shows on a daily basis were not one year old - they were elementary school kids, and yes, they understood that Daffy (or Wile E.) would go on to the next scene - especially since they did.

 

[yodedude2]

Maybe it's because I live in Sacramento ...

yes, i imagine california and texas are a bit different.

 

[Funky Ghost]

yes, i imagine california and texas are a bit different.

I guess it depends where but over-all, yeah. I lived in El Paso for 2 years ( all of Jr High ) and when I went to Sac for high school... heh a bit of a shock to say the least.

 

[blue4]

Our thoughts are very nearly the same ( and I agree with you - but ). The descriptor was usually ascribed by a later generation and they were speaking solely from a generational standpoint. My thought is that now, it is less about that and more about a co-dependence and a social adaption to mechanical devices which have driven a new way of interacting with their world, and each other.

Ah you're saying technology has enabled a jump from plain youth to youth to the tenth power. I can see that.

 

[Funky Ghost]

Yeah and even more to the point a youth that has been significantly changed because of technology. It's a much larger shift than say, me going from my 45's to CD's. It's still a way to listen to music and requires a tool to be used ( record player / cd player ) but kids today are connected 24/7 with information available 24/7. Instant gratification at a fingertip. Vilification also readily available. We, as an older generation can easily say "Just turn it off." But to them, it is the way it's done. To disconnect is not an option. Self worth, to them, is now a community based value system in a way we older folk have never been subjected to.