|
GrassyNollie
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Birthday: 2/9/1987 Gender: Female
Interests: Eating melty candy bars while standing too close to you in line, smelling like pea soup, and saying cool stuff that's almost one word and not quite another.
VISIT THESE SITES...DO IT!:
www.explodingdog.com
www.whiteninjacomics.com
www.homestarrunner.com Expertise: I would like to major in detangling, maybe even (dare to dream...) achieve a doctorate in the field. After this I will insist that everyone refer to me as "Dr. Detango"--as apposed to my previous title of "The DVD Master".
Message: message me
Member Since:
3/25/2003
|
|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| THAT'S MRS. PINNICK TO YOU!
...Derek and I got married!
June 28th, 2008
| | |
| SOME MORE RESPONSES... In typical internet forum fashion, I've had to refute more arguements (well, not HAD to, but felt compelled to do so) and here is the entire thread, including the original note that began this dialogue.
I'm disgusted with the way people have responded to this whole Mr.
NDSU incident. It was not racist, it was not homophobic, it was not
blackfacing! It was no different from Eddie Murphy or Dave Chapelle
dressing up as a white man and cracking jokes. Albeit, I didn't find it
that funny, I definitely did not find it offensive in any way. If some
people don't know, then I will tell you this: the whole incident made
national news! To me that is blown way out of proportion and only hurts
our entire campus. Also, saying that the two gentlemen in the skit were
dressed as cowboys is ridiculous. Did anyone ever consider that that is
what they wear on a daily basis? Whether or not you agree with me
doesn't matter. Things have gotten way out of control, and a lot of
people are sick of it.
| | |
| RESPONSE TO ANY (HOWEVER, ONE IN PARTICULAR) WHITE MALE WHO QUESTIONED THE OFFENSIVENESS OF THE "MR. NDSU BLACKFACE" INCIDENT:
as a heterosexual, white male, you wouldn't find it offensive--would you? you aren't the one that gets to decide whether or not this is offensive. you can have your opinion about it, but you owe it to those whose situation you do not understand, and will NEVER understand, to respect their right to be offended. it wasn't blackface in the sense that the guy didn't have white painted lips, but it was clearly a gesture at blackface in the very least, and is therefore associated with the historical connotations of blackface, i.e. an overtly racist act meant to make fun of african americans in a time when they were even moreso oppressed than they are now.
it is NOT the same thing as when dave chappelle puts on white makeup, it's not the same as when men dress as women, it's not even the same as when griffin darkened himself to research Black Like Me. it's all about the historical context and--to a lesser extent--the intention of the act. it's also a matter of being inappropriate for the medium in which it was presented: at a sorority-run fundraiser. it wasn't sarah silverman dressing in blackface on comedy central, it was a student expecting to impress judges at a male university pagent. if i had friends who previewed their mr. ndsu show for me, and it was like this, i would’ve told them that not only was it not clever or funny, but would get them in major trouble, and would likely alienate and offend people. somehow, out of all the people who knew about this skit, not one of them knew not to do it, and that is what is scary.
that said, i truly don't think that this guy meant to cause the kind of trouble that he did for the school, or be racist in any way, but you have to be pretty out of the loop to know how inappropriate painting your face dark is in this context and this country.
| | |
| THE MONTY HALL MATH PROBLEM...
As explained by my physical chemistry professor (it came up today while discussing the Boltzman Distrubution...he was explaining another type of probability, so I asked about this one)
Aside: this conundrum came up during Spring Break...on the show "Let's Make a Deal" the contestant has a choice of three doors, and after he or she picks, one of the other three doors is opened by the host, who knows which door hides the prize. You are supposed to guess whether it's statistically favorable to change doors or to stick with the original door. You are then told that your chance of winning if you switch is 2/3...and here is why:
At the beginning, you have a 1/3 chance of winning, no matter which door you pick. You have a 2/3 chance of not winning at this same time, as in, a 2/3 chance that it is behind one of the other doors. The thing is, when one of these doors is eliminated, the chance that it WAS behind one of those doors is unchanged. So, by switching, you will have a better chance of winning.
To give a similar, but more obvious example: if I pick a number between 1 and 100, and tell you to guess it, you have a 1% chance of picking the right number. If I then "eliminate" 98 numbers and tell you that the number is yours or the one I have left; you would feel like you have a better chance with the one that I kept, right? Yes--there would be a 99% chance that this was the right number.
And there you have it!
| | |
| HAD TO...

This is for Maggie and her affinity for noodly dishes and easter eggs.
| | |
|