Racist Rainbow — Page 7

Dear Lord, if those quotes from RR were his attempt at humour, then they certainly didn't work for me, on any level.

His targets certainly were all of ethnic origins but the only 'joke' that amused was the Chinese[food] in the fridge, the rest just went over my head.

It seems that they were the jokes of an era and if that is when RR was trying to establish himself and create a following then maybe that is what audiences were laughing at then. What else was he doing then, was he a stand up, a chorus boy, a cabaret act and were those one liners part of a 'larger act'?

In Australia way back then there was a very popular stage show 'Wogs out of Work'-might not work now.

Whatever they were a part of[RR jokes], they sure aren't amusing enough to be a stand alone throw away line.

RR for me[NOW] is a very clever, creative, unique, specific and current talent saying words that are particularly appropriate during this difficult era of black/virus/politics.

I hope that RR will continue to entertain in this very controversial niche he works in and that he has the maturity to apologise for his immaturity all those years ago.

If Michael Richards (Seinfeld, for those who don't know) can get kicked to the curb, 14 years ago, (2006) for making racist remarks, then this person's words should be just as accountable 10 years ago. I don't know why people are giving him a pass.

Is this what we're condoning now? Is this what we're pardoning? Is this what we're turning "a blind eye to"? In what world is any of this even right?! He is a coward. He doesn't have the guts to own up to what he so clearly chose to put out there be it 10 years ago or 10 minutes ago. HE SHOULD NOT GET A PASS.

If he has any sense of dignity he would address but his obvious privilege will not allow him to and he's probably talking to the "spin doctors" to save his behind.

Updated On: 8/20/20 at 06:28 PM

I love that as I write this, to my very right there is a Randy Rainbow video all ready for viewing.

Despicable. Yet again, this website's history of pardoning horrible, abusive people is very, very long. I'm sure you will delete this because you refuse to look at and take responsible for all of it. Typical.

so now we have the "apology" (in the advocate, I am told but have not seen). we can therefore pivot to whether to buy it, how to reconcile it with his kneejerk reaction, and what acts of contrition (if any) we would like to see.

LizzieCurry said: "Part of him does sound genuinely sorry. Another part needed a stronger crisis management team."

Yeah, going into the whole "nefarious people" angle really doesn't make it seem like he's all that sorry.

You clearly don't get it.

Don't waste your time with that poster. Carlos. He spent his first two weeks here defending Amar Ramasar and his despicable actions towards women and yes, I have the receipts Joe.

I used the word "context" earlier and it is still what this is about. What did these words mean when said, and what was the intention? It is true that sensibilities evolve but let's ask whether the ten year old words fit with those unevolved sensibilities. What he was doing a decade ago (not a half century ago) was not okay then, and his intention -- to make a living by repeatedly denigrating "others" in what were frankly hackneyed ways -- was never okay. never. He now wants to associate his brand with, e.g., Joan Rivers. But Joan Rivers comedy was smart. Her comedy was edgy but purposeful. RR is just nasty: making people laugh at the expense of others. What was his purpose? To make fun of minorities in ways that are hurtful to human beings? Joan's comedy was informed by Lenny Bruce; Randy's is informed by Jackie Mason.

The initial (now taken down) reaction was pathetic; the new one is worse. I am sure he is sick at the stomach. Wouldn't you be if you were watching your brand self-destruct? The new "apology" doesn't own what he did; it wraps itself in a conspiracy theory. Seriously, Randy, that's the best you can do? Stick a fork in this one; he's done.

CarlosAlberto said: "joevitus said: "What does "get a pass" even mean? You don't like him: don't follow him. I'd never heard of the man until this thread was created, and now I'm getting exposed to these crappy one-liners. So thanks for spreading his name further, I guess.

This ishow things should work: you don't like something, you don't give your money or time to it. I don't like any of hisjokes I've read, but I dislike people trying to control the discourse even more. If people like him, I hope theykeep following him and ignore you. Bellowing what amounts tothis shouldn't be allowed promulgates the notion that things should have to be allowed in the first place.

There are far worse things in the world than a fifth rate comic."

You clearly don't get it. This is more than "some jokes" people dislike, this is more than people trying to control discourse. These are not jokes. It goes deeper than "if you don't like it, don't read it"This is hate speech in the guise of jokes, under the cloak of "comedy". Well guess what? It's not funny and should not be allowed nor condoned. This should not and cannot be normalized. EVER.

So whatever comes out of this it was of his own doing and is a direct result of his poor choices."

Odd definition of "get it" if by that you mean "understand the issue." I get it, all right. I've been around people trying to control thoughts all my life. I'm just sad so many of them for the past 30 years or so have been on the left. Used to be only conservatives tried to control what we were exposed to "for our own good." I think "you don't get it' must mean "you aren't responding as I think you should."

And they are just jokes. And you can control what you encounter. Especially in this day and age where no one station, channel, etc. has anything like 50% of the entertainment audience. It's all about what we choose to encounter these days.

The word "normalize" is part of the modern puritanical jargon. It's a scare word to make us think if we encounter something, we have no capacity to assess or reject it, only to embrace and conform to it. No one looks at jokes like this and says "Well if this comic makes this joke, everyone must feel this way about this thing, so it must be okay and I should think this way, too." That's not even how comedy works. For you to find that kind of humor funny, you have to already hold the viewpoints it espouses or you don't have the sharing a familiar experience that humor is based on.

But it's funny, if you think being exposed to this stuff normalizes it, that you are in favor of making these tweets known far and wide. By your logic, you're helping to build a new generation of bigots.