Current Events > What did you think of Terry Crews' recent controversial comments?

(+) Yeah! (+)

cjsdowg posted...

Yeah that is the same logic as Crews post.

It is not the same logic.

cjsdowg posted...

He literally warned people of black supremacy, how is that unifying ?

He didn't "warn" of it, do you sincerely believe his tweet expresses the idea "black people are fighting to achieve black supremacy right now, and that is the most important thing to discuss"?

---

joe40001 posted...

He didn't "warn" of it, do you sincerely believe his tweet expresses the idea "black people are fighting to achieve black supremacy right now, and that is the most important thing to discuss"?

If he thinks black people are fighting to the achieve black supremacy than that makes it point even worse.

It is not the same logic.

How is it not, he said if the people doing the crime does not get on board with stopping it, then the victims would become the new people doing said crime.

---

"Defeating white supremacy without white people creates black supremacy."

Sounds like a warning to me.

As I've said in other topics, it's a clumsy statement that invites the very conversations we're having right now rather than focusing on a message of unity.

And the funny part is like the opposing argument is "well just stop doing that or something".

---

cjsdowg posted...

If he thinks black people are fighting to the achieve black supremacy than that makes it point even worse.

He doesn't

cjsdowg posted...

How is it not, he said if the people doing the crime does not get on board with stopping it, then the victims would become the new people doing said crime.

Because you don't in any way fight rapists with rape.

---

CyricZ posted...

"Defeating white supremacy without white people creates black supremacy."

Sounds like a warning to me.

As I've said in other topics, it's a clumsy statement that invites the very conversations we're having right now rather than focusing on a message of unity.

And the funny part is like the opposing argument is "well just stop doing that or something".

Maybe it is clumsy, but the "white people aren't the enemy, us working together to fight this as humans is the best approach" is a great sentiment.

He doesn't deserve any hate for this.

---

Honestly, can't see any actual malintent with his message, his clarifications later show he was at least trying for a unifying message. It was just rather clumsily worded and comes at a time when tensions are at an all time high so going to draw great amount of ire.

---

Liberals turning on a guy for saying he wants people to work together regardless of race shows how messed up their morals are
---

Funkydog posted...

Honestly, can't see any actual malintent with his message, his clarifications later show he was at least trying for a unifying message. It was just rather clumsily worded and comes at a time when tensions are at an all time high so going to draw great amount of ire.

Plus there are so many real targets for ire these days, going after Crews is such a counterproductive action.

---

Its also hilarious that the people whining at the message being "clumsily " "provocative " "poorly thought out" "causing the conversations we're having right now distracting us!"

are the same dudes who flip out when people say All Lives Matter is a better slogan than BLM

the irony is palpable
---

joe40001 posted...

Because you don't in any way fight rapists with rape.

And black people have not histrionically fought white supremacy with large number of people becoming supporting supremacy.

---

cjsdowg posted...

And black people have not histrionically fought white supremacy with large number of people becoming supporting supremacy.

Nobody is arguing for supremacy, it is talking about working together.

That said, sentiments like "white people are the problem" are a real thing, even "white people are inferior" or hating on people just because they are white is a thing that happens. So there is a non-zero amount of times that racial intolerance was fought with racial intolerance in the other direction.

Yet I'm pretty sure you'll not find a lot of examples of somebody fighting rapists by raping them. So it's not the same logic.

---

joe40001 posted...

Yet I'm pretty sure you'll not find a lot of examples of somebody fighting rapists by raping them. So it's not the same logic.

Almost any joke about Prison rape is fighting crime with the possibility of rape.

Nobody is arguing for supremacy, it is talking about working together.

Dude it the one who warned about it out of the the blue.

I am not even going to touch that idea that because something happened more then Zero time, it to bring up as real possibility.


---

joe40001 posted...

Maybe it is clumsy, but the "white people aren't the enemy, us working together to fight this as humans is the best approach" is a great sentiment.

He doesn't deserve any hate for this.

Yeah, it would have been fine without the "black supremacy" comment.

That's why we're asking "why did he say that?"

Maybe it was a slip. Maybe he didn't really mean that and would like to rethink his statement.

*checks Mr. Crews' Twitter*

Nope. He's doubling down.

---

CyricZ posted...

Yeah, it would have been fine without the "black supremacy" comment.

That's why we're asking "why did he say that?"

Maybe it was a slip. Maybe he didn't really mean that and would like to rethink his statement.

*checks Mr. Crews' Twitter*

Nope. He's doubling down.

*checks his twitter*

I am saying if both Black and Whites don't continue to work together-- bad attitudes and resentments can create a dangerous self-righteousness. That's all.

Wow what an evil man?

Funny thing is youre proving him right
---

Joe Terry called any black person who disagreed with him a black supremacist .

---

cjsdowg posted...

Joe Terry called any black person who disagreed with him a black supremacist .

And by "disagreed with him" you mean "the notion that all people are equal regardless of race"
---

cjsdowg posted...

Joe Terry called any black person who disagreed with him a black supremacist .

Evidence plz

Because I very much doubt that

---

cjsdowg posted...

Joe Terry called any black person who disagreed with him a black supremacist .

No he didn't. He specifically said he wasn't calling people that or that it exists to people who disagree with him.

Or evidently he has, which isn't helping his point at all. My bad, apologies.

CyricZ posted...

Yeah, it would have been fine without the "black supremacy" comment.

That's why we're asking "why did he say that?"

Maybe it was a slip. Maybe he didn't really mean that and would like to rethink his statement.

*checks Mr. Crews' Twitter*

Nope. He's doubling down.

We must be reading a different twitter.

He's said several times he isn't saying black supremacy exists and that he just thinks we should unite together to tackle racism.

That said, his comments were still horribly poorly worded and he could have clarified better. But it still seems obvious to me he was trying to say "let's unite to tackle racism"

---

joe40001 posted...

Evidence plz

Because I very much doubt that

https://mobile.twitter.com/terrycrews/status/1269840577127788545
https://mobile.twitter.com/terrycrews/status/1269823820522614784
---

Terry "If a child is not raised by a mother and father, it will be severely malnourished" Crews

Terry "While I appreciate a black woman supporting me for coming out with my personal abuse story, I will undermine her when she goes public with abuse in the workplace"

I used to really like him but he's shown he's not as positive and "let's all come together guys" as you may think he is.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

https://mobile.twitter.com/terrycrews/status/1269840577127788545
https://mobile.twitter.com/terrycrews/status/1269823820522614784

So are you siding with the people who call him those names then? Is it appropriate for those people to tell him he's not really black?

The only thing I seem him really doubling down on is saying "we need to work together, and those not working for equality but working for hatred aren't helping" which is true.


---

Funkydog posted...

He's said several times he isn't saying black supremacy exists and that he just thinks we should unite together to tackle racism

Here is literally calling people here.

https://twitter.com/terrycrews/status/1269840577127788545


---

cjsdowg posted...

Here is literally calling people here.

https://twitter.com/terrycrews/status/1269840577127788545

Well that's rather dumb of him. Not sure people who "gate keep blackness" are supremacists, and calling people that doesn't help anything. Thank you for correcting me.

He should have stuck with the message he was trying to spread, that of unity.

---

Kastrada posted...

Terry "If a child is not raised by a mother and father, it will be severely malnourished" Crews

Isn't it accurate that many young boys/men who don't have a healthy father figure in their life often struggle as a result?

Kastrada posted...

Terry "While I appreciate a black woman supporting me for coming out with my personal abuse story, I will undermine her when she goes public with abuse in the workplace"

That sounds like a bit of a strawman of him.

Like it's ok if he's not everybody's favorite guy ever. I just don't cosign hating what seems like a positive guy with desires for compassion, unity, and tolerance.

---

joe40001 posted...

So are you siding with the people who call him those names then?

No

See:

UnfairRepresent posted...

Liberals turning on a guy for saying he wants people to work together regardless of race shows how messed up their morals are

Guys like cjsdowg and Cyricz being furiously passionately angry at the notion of all people being equal says a lot about who they are as people
---

Funkydog posted...

Well that's rather dumb of him. Not sure people who "gate keep blackness" are supremacists, and calling people that doesn't help anything. Thank you for correcting me.

He should have stuck with the message he was trying to spread, that of unity.

It's not the best word for it. There might be a pedantic argument that any person of any race who tries to gatekeep who of that race is "really" in that race is a whatever-race supremacist.

I think he just re-used that word because he's annoyed with how much grief he's getting for a positive message.

I don't blame him for being annoyed. There is a surprising amount of any Terry vitriol here, and this is just a small-ass message board. Imagine all the crap he's hearing on twitter, particularly consider just how insanely toxic twitter can be.

---

joe40001 posted...

Isn't it accurate that many young boys/men who don't have a healthy father figure in their life often struggle as a result?

joe40001 posted...

That sounds like a bit of a strawman of him.

Like it's ok if he's not everybody's favorite guy ever. I just don't cosign hating what seems like a positive guy with desires for compassion, unity, and tolerance.

He literally said a child with same-sex parents would be severely malnourished compared to one with a mother and father.

And strawman? Gabrielle Union was a big supporter of his when he came out as an abuse victim. He showed her no support when she came out with AGT abuse allegations and turned into "The only woman in my life I have to protect is my wife" or some shit like that.

You can't revel in the protection and support that an entire movement has given you, specifically one of your coworkers, and then "New phone, who dis" her and whitenight the alleged abusers in the process.


---

UnfairRepresent posted...

No

See:

Guys like cjsdowg and Cyricz being furiously passionately angry at the notion of all people being equal says a lot about who they are as people

Ok, I guess I was confused by your stance on the whole thing. I acknowledge you were right and that he re-used the word, but I don't think your characterization that he was calling "anybody who disagreed a black supermacist", instead he seemed to be calling the people who gate-keeped his own race or name called him.

I then mis-inferred that you were critical of him overall and thus might be siding with the people he is opposing in those tweets. That was my mistake.

---

Kastrada posted...

He literally said a child with same-sex parents would be severely malnourished compared to one with a mother and father.

Like I said, isn't it accurate that many young boys/men who don't have a healthy father figure in their life often struggle as a result? That isn't to say same sex parents or single parents are in any way bad. It's not uncompassionate or intolerant to talk about this.

And strawman? Gabrielle Union was a big supporter of his when he came out as an abuse victim. He showed her no support when she came out with AGT abuse allegations and turned into "The only woman in my life I have to protect is my wife" or some shit like that.

You can't revel in the protection and support that an entire movement has given you, specifically one of your coworkers, and then "New phone, who dis" her and whitenight the alleged abusers in the process.

I said a strawman because again I doubt the idea he would actively undermine somebody who was abused.

---

Kastrada posted...

He literally said a child with same-sex parents would be severely malnourished compared to one with a mother and father.

And strawman? Gabrielle Union was a big supporter of his when he came out as an abuse victim. He showed her no support when she came out with AGT abuse allegations and turned into "The only woman in my life I have to protect is my wife" or some shit like that.

You can't revel in the protection and support that an entire movement has given you, specifically one of your coworkers, and then "New phone, who dis" her and whitenight the alleged abusers in the process.

That is severely disappointing of him.

The idiocy on same sex parents is your standard bigotry, if still awful. But the dismissing others abuse when his own message of coming out with his and being ignored is shocking and I find it hard to believe. He might have apologised for both of them now, but saying "I never experienced racism" in response to her own allegations, when that's the same exact shit people said to his sexual abuse is just staggering.

---

joe40001 posted...

Like I said, isn't it accurate that many young boys/men who don't have a healthy father figure in their life often struggle as a result? That isn't to say same sex parents or single parents are in any way bad. It's not uncompassionate or intolerant to talk about this.

The only negative aspect in terms of their development is outside forces/prejudice can harm their upbringing.

joe40001 posted...

I said a strawman because again I doubt the idea he would actively undermine somebody who was abused.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/terry-crews-apologizes-gabrielle-union-america-s-got-talent-comments-n1127951

You can say "strawman" as much as you want. But he literally says he invalidated her experience in his eventual apology.

---

Kastrada posted...

The only negative aspect in terms of their development is outside forces/prejudice can harm their upbringing.

I don't think biology and human history created father figures just for the lulz. Having a positive paternal force in a young boy's life helps, there is data to back this up. This isn't an attack on families who don't have that.

Kastrada posted...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/terry-crews-apologizes-gabrielle-union-america-s-got-talent-comments-n1127951

You can say "strawman" as much as you want. But he literally says he invalidated her experience in his eventual apology.

I'll be honest I'd have to look at it. My points have just been about my perception of his character. That said citing him apologizing and growing doesn't do much to help the case to demonize him at all.

---

joe40001 posted...

I don't think biology and human history created father figures just for the lulz. Having a positive paternal force in a young boy's life helps, there is data to back this up. This isn't an attack on families who don't have that.

Having a positive influence in any child's life is going to have data backing up the fact that it's positive. Yes you are correct in that. And you are really straddling the line into "Heterosexual couples are better than homosexual couples for raising kids" territory. The fact of the matter is Terry Crews said that and you siding with that logic is an attack on families who don't have that.

joe40001 posted...

I'll be honest I'd have to look at it. My points have just been about my perception of his character. That said citing him apologizing and growing doesn't do much to help the case to demonize him at all.

Except he hasn't been growing. Nothing that sticks. He has been saying these things that are meant to be positive and it hurts people and he apologizes. Then he does it again. And again. And he will apologize for this recent tweet as well. That's a recurring theme for him.

---

Firstly I just disagree with your characterization of his comments/character.

Kastrada posted...

Having a positive influence in any child's life is going to have data backing up the fact that it's positive. Yes you are correct in that. And you are really straddling the line into "Heterosexual couples are better than homosexual couples for raising kids" territory. The fact of the matter is Terry Crews said that and you siding with that logic is an attack on families who don't have that.

Saying a family who is too poor to afford good healthcare/good education isn't an "attack" on poor families.

Single parents for example aren't bad people for being single parents. They are awesome for doing everything they can to raise their kid. But that doesn't change that most kids are better off with 2 parents.

Single parents aren't "bad" gay couples aren't "bad". Nobody is attacking them.

---

joe40001 posted...

Single parents aren't "bad" gay couples aren't "bad". Nobody is attacking them.

Terry Crews literally said, in response to someone bringing up gay couples, that those children are severely malnourished compared to a father-mother dynamic household.

How is that not attacking them? How is saying they are less effective not an attack?

---

Kastrada posted...

Terry Crews literally said, in response to someone bringing up gay couples, that those children are severely malnourished compared to a father-mother dynamic household.

How is that not attacking them? How is saying they are less effective not an attack?

Like I said with poor people, just because somebody is poor and thus less able to provide for kids doesn't mean they are bad.

Gay couples and single parents I'm sure love and care for their kids just as well as a traditional couple, but there is a reasonable argument that young men suffer if they never had a paternal figure in their life to model healthy masculinity after.

But that's not an attack on anybody's character.

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

I think it was a clumsily worded statement for an idea that conceptually I think most people would agree with.

---

I don't get why people react so viscerally to the idea in the first place. We obviously are in no place where that could be enacted on a governmental level, but individual people can certainly come to hold that mindset. That is a possible consequence of any group founded on a specific trait if they aren't open enough with those on the outside of the group. Institutional power isn't the only form of supremacy.

joe40001 posted...

Like I said with poor people, just because somebody is poor and thus less able to provide for kids doesn't mean they are bad.

Gay couples and single parents I'm sure love and care for their kids just as well as a traditional couple, but there is a reasonable argument that young men suffer if they never had a paternal figure in their life to model healthy masculinity after.

But that's not an attack on anybody's character.

Joseph Campbell in the heros journey writes that in addition to the father role being important, most men encounter a secondary male role model such as a coach/teacher/sensei w.e who is crucial and also provides something the father cant

You cant fulfill every role for someone
---