U.S. Riots of May 2020 over George Floyd and others - ITT: a bunch of faggots butthurt about worthless internet stickers

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
Idiot BLMer on twatter saw a queer theory book and thinks Southerners actually ate their slaves:

View attachment 1500577

The comments are literally hysterical:
If you check the twitter thread, one of the mouth agape urban youth uploaded a copy for the herd to appraise. Apparently she eventually figured out how to not make it private.

From the introduction:
The manuscript for The Delectable Negro arrived on my desk, as it were, in 2008. My task then was a seemingly simple one: compile a bibliography for the notes and copyedit the text for submission. As I worked through the text, however, the state of Vincent’s notes and missing references within the manuscript, no doubt due to his illness and the earnest pace that drove him to try to complete this manuscript when most people would be more worried over their terminal illness, presented additional challenges for publishing his work. These challenges included incomplete or missing citations, notes and citations that contained factual errors, and specific references within his note that were either ambiguous or pointed to particular versions of popular texts that could not be identified fully. As I worked to compile the bibliography, it became increasingly evident that there were enough errors in the manuscript that we would be remiss to print it as it stood. To do so would be more than poor scholarship; it would be a dishonor to Vincent Woodard’s legacy.

In order to be completely confident of the accuracy of his notes and references, the only proper course was to check each and every reference for accuracy. As anyone would imagine, this entailed considerable effort and research time. To work backward through a scholar’s research trajectory, tracking down each citation, reference, and mention through archival materials is a colossal undertaking. This herculean task was not completed alone. It is only fitting to acknowledge here the hard work of two student assistants, Matthew Alan Lang at the University of Illinois at Chicago and Andrew Brown at Northwestern University. Without their diligent attention and assistance, Vincent’s work might never have seen the light of day. It is fitting here to acknowledge also the incredible tolerance of NYU Press and Vincent’s family. Without their enduring patience, The Delectable Negro would have been a much poorer tribute to Vincent’s hard work.
:story:

Further down...
It is also unfortunate that his manuscript lacked a proper conclusion.

The manuscript was so shit they spent years tracking down every single old man addled brain citation so it was even publishable. Oh and it didn't have a real conclusion.

Have fun!

A review of it I found:
BOOK REVIEW

The Delectable Negro: human consumption and homoeroticism within U.S. slave
culture
VINCENT WOODARD, 2014 (Ed. Justin A. Joyce and Dwight A. McBride, foreword E.
Patrick Johnson)
New York: New York University Press
311 pp., ISBN 0 8147 9461 6, £ 55 (hardback); ISBN 0 8147 9462 3, £ 18.99 (paperback)

In his brilliant reading of Harriet Jacobs’s Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl (1861),
Vincent Woodard argues for a more fluid conception of gender and black consumption in
order to envision ‘new and dynamic’ worlds of ‘possibility’ for black experiences under
slavery (p. 167). Woodard’s study of the archives of consumption – a term used to express
a range of practices including institutionalized hunger, sexual modes of consumption,
seasoning rituals, cannibalism, erotic pleasure, and soul harvesting – aims to do this by
providing a new language and apparatus for thinking about how ‘blacks experienced their
consumption as a fundamentally ... homoerotic occurrence’
(p. 7). Moreover, Woodard’s
reading of black experiences of consumption (through the prism of homoerotic encounters
and gender indeterminacy) emphasizes the possibility of agency for enslaved subjects,
shedding light on hitherto under-theorized acts of resistance. In part, by taking seriously
the enslaved person’s epistemology of cannibalistic practices as actual event rather than
metaphor
, Woodard demonstrates his commitment to centereing the integrity of the
knowledge paradigms of enslaved persons, thereby restoring authority to the black
speaker. This important study also compels us to think anew the site of erotic pleasure and
hunger (described by Woodard as auto-consumption) as places for radically transforming
the discourse of black consumption and ‘the politics of interiority’ (p. 212).

This fascinating study, published posthumously with commendable editorial
assistance from Justin A. Joyce and Dwight A. McBride, is a tour de force with a
sweeping critical vision ranging from the reading of white cannibalism in transatlantic
literature to legacies of black hunger a propos homoeroticism in the context of 1960s
political insurgence. The range of critical methodologies and texts (including but not
limited to slave narratives, WPA interviews, advertisements, cartoons, neo-slave
narratives, journals, diaries, poetry, and historical fiction) embolden this project but also
threaten its coherence.
The introduction to the study situates cannibalism as ‘an originary
framework for the emergence of homoeroticism’ within the economies of the slave trade
and plantation culture (p. 19). The concept of ‘originary framework’ correlates with the
author’s interest in language and philosophy and his wider argument about the failure of
critics to conceptualize the libidinal experience of the enslaved person beyond familiar
binaries of homo/hetero, master/slave, black/white, masculine/feminine, etc. With its
explicit aim to expand our thinking about sexuality in the period of slavery and search for a
language expressive of queer subjectivity, this book will appeal to readers interested in the
intersections of sexuality, language, and gender identities.

In Chapter 1, Woodard ‘establish[es] an interconnection between cannibalism and
chattel homoeroticism’
(p. 25) by attending to Africanist perspectives on the economies of
consumption. Moderating the boundary between literal acts of eating, carving, and
cooking flesh as well as metaphorical acts of ‘seasoning’ the flesh (through violence,
religious conversion and sexual brutality)
, The Delectable Negro connects institutiona-
lized practices with intimate human relations during the eighteenth century. Following
Woodard’s reading of Equiano’s narrative in Chapter 1, the next chapter explores the
Essex affair and the interplay between sex, honor, and human consumption in the
antebellum period. Chapters 3 and 4 provide sustained original readings of two canonical
slave narratives, drawing attention to the subversive use of hunger and gender
performativity to claim space for a wider epistemology of slave sexuality. In Chapter 3,
Woodard explores Frederick Douglass’s narrative through the lens of hunger in order to
recuperate a ‘latent grammar’ for the ‘unspeakable dimensions of his own [Douglass’] sex
and embodied knowledge
’ (p. 104). In contrast to conventional interpretations of
Douglass’s heroic resistance and rhetorical mastery, the author reads for subterfuge,
encoding, and inversions of speech (via a compelling reading of incest) to demonstrate the
‘effeminate values’ and emotional and erotic life (p. 112) concealed within Douglass’s
text
. Chapter 4 establishes a correlation between hunger and gender categorization with
particular focus on incest and human consumption in the work of Harriet Jacobs. This
chapter contains a strong and original reading of the character of Luke and provides a
necessary preliminary exploration of the role of white women within economies of power,
sexuality, and gender consumption.

Chapters 5 and 6 turn their focus to the contemporary period and Chapter 5 in
particular marks a shift in tone and methodology away from close textual analysis and
theorization to wider cultural narrative. Woodard explores responses to Styron’s novel The
Confessions of Nat Turner (1967) aiming to illustrate the transhistorical legacies of
homoeroticism and cannibalism via the recurrent haunting of Nat Turner. In my view, this
chapter is the weakest chapter of this otherwise outstanding study. Chapter 6 returns to the
framework of hunger, consumption and black male sexuality via an interesting reading of
the black male orifice and oral sex scene in Morrison’s Beloved
(1987) and includes a
preliminary sketching of a genealogy of the uses of black bodies and body parts as figures
for a ‘politics of interiority’ (p. 212).

The paradigmatic potential of Woodard’s conception of the black male orifice
demonstrates the potential of this work to spur new approaches to the studies of slavery
and critical theory
and signals productive future extensions to the epistemology outlined
here to include figures and persons not currently included. It would be fitting tribute to the
author himself to see readers from across the disciplines engage with the provocation and
cognizance of Vincent Woodard’s work.

Rachel van Duyvenbode
The University of Sheffield, UK
q 2015, Rachel van Duyvenbode
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2015.1073964
Emphasis mine.

There's something ironic about someone taking something heretofore treated metaphorically, literally for the purposes of verbal masturbation about black men's orifices and homo eroticism, only to have black people interpret his interpretation literally and have have it become factual history in their minds. :story:

Big edit:
Y'all missed the best part of this...
Who they are on the inside:
zm4rmw-s_400x400.jpg
49876014_1595519542952811_r.jpeg
 
Last edited:
There's something ironic about someone taking something heretofore treated metaphorically, literally for the purposes of verbal masturbation about black men's orifices and homo eroticism, only to have black people interpret his interpretation literally and have have it become factual history in their minds. :story:

"Hey man, what if all the talk about being hungry was really talking about being a gay cannibal?"
"Uh... it wasn't, though."
"Yeah but what if it was? What if there was this whole other language where words mean completely different things?"
"But there wasn't. You know there wasn't."
"BRB writing a book."
 

Most of the beginning of this video is just Crowder's questions getting droned out by this Antifa douchebag's music, and when the jogger actually talks to him he basically says "I refuse to let you speak" and then he starts blasting the music again while he looks at his phone.

To me, this seems like the crux of the problem; how do you beat this? This guy has the power to override any conversation because he's loud, and you can't reason with him because he's obviously indoctrinated if he's willing to waste his day doing this shit. If you hit him, you're worse than he is and if you break his boombox it's vandalism. Is there any way to actually win this without leaving and admitting that you can get chased away by any lone dumbass?
 

Most of the beginning of this video is just Crowder's questions getting droned out by this Antifa douchebag's music, and when the jogger actually talks to him he basically says "I refuse to let you speak" and then he starts blasting the music again while he looks at his phone.

To me, this seems like the crux of the problem; how do you beat this? This guy has the power to override any conversation because he's loud, and you can't reason with him because he's obviously indoctrinated if he's willing to waste his day doing this shit. If you hit him, you're worse than he is and if you break his boombox it's vandalism. Is there any way to actually win this without leaving and admitting that you can get chased away by any lone dumbass?

Turn it into a performance piece, get sign language interpreters, let people write shit on paper, have the crew show up in costumes to poke fun at the frail egos of the anarchists

Basically, they're trying to goad crowder. I don't even really like Crowder, but the man got his name out there by goading morons. He's just got to step his game up in some ridiculous way and get the more thin-skinned anarchists to fuck up and try to vandalize his shit
 
If you check the twitter thread, one of the mouth agape urban youth uploaded a copy for the herd to appraise. Apparently she eventually figured out how to not make it private.

From the introduction:

:story:

Further down...


The manuscript was so shit they spent years tracking down every single old man addled brain citation so it was even publishable. Oh and it didn't have a real conclusion.

Have fun!

A review of it I found:
BOOK REVIEW

The Delectable Negro: human consumption and homoeroticism within U.S. slave
culture
VINCENT WOODARD, 2014 (Ed. Justin A. Joyce and Dwight A. McBride, foreword E.
Patrick Johnson)
New York: New York University Press
311 pp., ISBN 0 8147 9461 6, £ 55 (hardback); ISBN 0 8147 9462 3, £ 18.99 (paperback)

In his brilliant reading of Harriet Jacobs’s Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl (1861),
Vincent Woodard argues for a more fluid conception of gender and black consumption in
order to envision ‘new and dynamic’ worlds of ‘possibility’ for black experiences under
slavery (p. 167). Woodard’s study of the archives of consumption – a term used to express
a range of practices including institutionalized hunger, sexual modes of consumption,
seasoning rituals, cannibalism, erotic pleasure, and soul harvesting – aims to do this by
providing a new language and apparatus for thinking about how ‘blacks experienced their
consumption as a fundamentally ... homoerotic occurrence’
(p. 7). Moreover, Woodard’s
reading of black experiences of consumption (through the prism of homoerotic encounters
and gender indeterminacy) emphasizes the possibility of agency for enslaved subjects,
shedding light on hitherto under-theorized acts of resistance. In part, by taking seriously
the enslaved person’s epistemology of cannibalistic practices as actual event rather than
metaphor
, Woodard demonstrates his commitment to centereing the integrity of the
knowledge paradigms of enslaved persons, thereby restoring authority to the black
speaker. This important study also compels us to think anew the site of erotic pleasure and
hunger (described by Woodard as auto-consumption) as places for radically transforming
the discourse of black consumption and ‘the politics of interiority’ (p. 212).

This fascinating study, published posthumously with commendable editorial
assistance from Justin A. Joyce and Dwight A. McBride, is a tour de force with a
sweeping critical vision ranging from the reading of white cannibalism in transatlantic
literature to legacies of black hunger a propos homoeroticism in the context of 1960s
political insurgence. The range of critical methodologies and texts (including but not
limited to slave narratives, WPA interviews, advertisements, cartoons, neo-slave
narratives, journals, diaries, poetry, and historical fiction) embolden this project but also
threaten its coherence.
The introduction to the study situates cannibalism as ‘an originary
framework for the emergence of homoeroticism’ within the economies of the slave trade
and plantation culture (p. 19). The concept of ‘originary framework’ correlates with the
author’s interest in language and philosophy and his wider argument about the failure of
critics to conceptualize the libidinal experience of the enslaved person beyond familiar
binaries of homo/hetero, master/slave, black/white, masculine/feminine, etc. With its
explicit aim to expand our thinking about sexuality in the period of slavery and search for a
language expressive of queer subjectivity, this book will appeal to readers interested in the
intersections of sexuality, language, and gender identities.

In Chapter 1, Woodard ‘establish[es] an interconnection between cannibalism and
chattel homoeroticism’
(p. 25) by attending to Africanist perspectives on the economies of
consumption. Moderating the boundary between literal acts of eating, carving, and
cooking flesh as well as metaphorical acts of ‘seasoning’ the flesh (through violence,
religious conversion and sexual brutality)
, The Delectable Negro connects institutiona-
lized practices with intimate human relations during the eighteenth century. Following
Woodard’s reading of Equiano’s narrative in Chapter 1, the next chapter explores the
Essex affair and the interplay between sex, honor, and human consumption in the
antebellum period. Chapters 3 and 4 provide sustained original readings of two canonical
slave narratives, drawing attention to the subversive use of hunger and gender
performativity to claim space for a wider epistemology of slave sexuality. In Chapter 3,
Woodard explores Frederick Douglass’s narrative through the lens of hunger in order to
recuperate a ‘latent grammar’ for the ‘unspeakable dimensions of his own [Douglass’] sex
and embodied knowledge
’ (p. 104). In contrast to conventional interpretations of
Douglass’s heroic resistance and rhetorical mastery, the author reads for subterfuge,
encoding, and inversions of speech (via a compelling reading of incest) to demonstrate the
‘effeminate values’ and emotional and erotic life (p. 112) concealed within Douglass’s
text
. Chapter 4 establishes a correlation between hunger and gender categorization with
particular focus on incest and human consumption in the work of Harriet Jacobs. This
chapter contains a strong and original reading of the character of Luke and provides a
necessary preliminary exploration of the role of white women within economies of power,
sexuality, and gender consumption.

Chapters 5 and 6 turn their focus to the contemporary period and Chapter 5 in
particular marks a shift in tone and methodology away from close textual analysis and
theorization to wider cultural narrative. Woodard explores responses to Styron’s novel The
Confessions of Nat Turner (1967) aiming to illustrate the transhistorical legacies of
homoeroticism and cannibalism via the recurrent haunting of Nat Turner. In my view, this
chapter is the weakest chapter of this otherwise outstanding study. Chapter 6 returns to the
framework of hunger, consumption and black male sexuality via an interesting reading of
the black male orifice and oral sex scene in Morrison’s Beloved
(1987) and includes a
preliminary sketching of a genealogy of the uses of black bodies and body parts as figures
for a ‘politics of interiority’ (p. 212).

The paradigmatic potential of Woodard’s conception of the black male orifice
demonstrates the potential of this work to spur new approaches to the studies of slavery
and critical theory
and signals productive future extensions to the epistemology outlined
here to include figures and persons not currently included. It would be fitting tribute to the
author himself to see readers from across the disciplines engage with the provocation and
cognizance of Vincent Woodard’s work.

Rachel van Duyvenbode
The University of Sheffield, UK
q 2015, Rachel van Duyvenbode
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2015.1073964
Emphasis mine.

There's something ironic about someone taking something heretofore treated metaphorically, literally for the purposes of verbal masturbation about black men's orifices and homo eroticism, only to have black people interpret his interpretation literally and have have it become factual history in their minds. :story:
I'm not sure what the hell this is all about. Was he saying that Negro slaves were fucking each other and then EATING each other?
 
If Antifa can crowd up and act violent and disruptive, then Crowder's boys can surround and intimidate as well. Where did you get a silly idea like honor amongst criminals?
The cops are always going to favor Antifa in a city, this guy would be screeching if Crowder even suggested using any kind of force; Crowder would end up attacked by the cops, and the boombox asshole would win because Crowder can't have his discussions from a prison cell.
 

Most of the beginning of this video is just Crowder's questions getting droned out by this Antifa douchebag's music, and when the jogger actually talks to him he basically says "I refuse to let you speak" and then he starts blasting the music again while he looks at his phone.

To me, this seems like the crux of the problem; how do you beat this? This guy has the power to override any conversation because he's loud, and you can't reason with him because he's obviously indoctrinated if he's willing to waste his day doing this shit. If you hit him, you're worse than he is and if you break his boombox it's vandalism. Is there any way to actually win this without leaving and admitting that you can get chased away by any lone dumbass?

You can't reason with someone who arrived at their conclusion unreasonably.
 
The Narrative is currently like this

Actual NPCs: His airway was being crushed!

Low IQ people who actually watched the original video rather than just parroting what they're told: His carotid/jugular was being crushed!

People who are stupid but nonetheless understand the difference between your back and your neck: Lying prone was (somehow) making him unable to breathe!

Loyal practitioners of doublethink: The cops being mean to him caused him to have a panic attack and die!

Fence sitters: I don't know what happened but I'm pretty sure it was the cops' fault, please don't rape my children

What someone believes is a function of their intelligence and how brainwashed they are, with the least intelligent/most brainwashed still holding onto the crushed airway theory. All opinions are held as true by the media depending on which audience they're talking to. Places that cater to the most useless scum of society like Vox, Vice, Twitter, etc. are still riding high on long-debunked talking points. They know they're lying, but it doesn't matter. The point isn't to be truthful, the point is to whip as many people into a violent frenzy as possible, and to do that you just need to know what level of dishonesty you can get away with.



Then why was he yelling "I can't breathe" before the cops even had him on the ground? Are we assuming that his lie came true by coincidence? Or could it be the much more reasonable theory that he was having trouble breathing long before the cops touched him because of something else? Say, a fuckload of drugs inside an already barely-functional body?
And none of it matters for anything but the narrative. The cop will hang.
 
It's semi protected so they're probably aware someone'll try replace that profile image with the screencap from the bodycam footage or mention that he pointed a gun at a pregnant woman's belly while he and his friends were robbing her.

Well, they seem to have left out his short lived career as a porn star, sadly this fellow Kiwi could not include this part of his life on his Wikipedia article.

It's such a shame. I am told by liberals and progressives that thier is a stigma in sex work, sadly Saint Floyd cannot be a shining beacon to overcome this stigma.
 
Loyal practitioners of doublethink: The cops being mean to him caused him to have a panic attack and die!
This is what happens when you start with a conclusion and work back from there. They're like the creationists, but much worse.
Then why was he yelling "I can't breathe" before the cops even had him on the ground? Are we assuming that his lie came true by coincidence? Or could it be the much more reasonable theory that he was having trouble breathing long before the cops touched him because of something else? Say, a fuckload of drugs inside an already barely-functional body?
This is the one time I'll believe him and not think it's just him trying desperately to get out of an arrest .
Downright one of my favorite Comments
View attachment 1500725
Damn, I was gonna ask about Antebellum Holocoasters, but i was beaten to the punch.

Most of the beginning of this video is just Crowder's questions getting droned out by this Antifa douchebag's music, and when the jogger actually talks to him he basically says "I refuse to let you speak" and then he starts blasting the music again while he looks at his phone.

To me, this seems like the crux of the problem; how do you beat this? This guy has the power to override any conversation because he's loud, and you can't reason with him because he's obviously indoctrinated if he's willing to waste his day doing this shit. If you hit him, you're worse than he is and if you break his boombox it's vandalism. Is there any way to actually win this without leaving and admitting that you can get chased away by any lone dumbass?
There's no reasoning with these people. There is no conversation to be had. The best he can do is to upload videos of him getting shouted down to shoe the undecided normies, but there is no talking to these people.
The leftist "anarchists" are only until they're in power.
It's exactly why Marxism posits a system without hierarchy while always resulting in a dictatorship.
 
And none of it matters for anything but the narrative. The cop will hang.
Nah, my money is still that they will flub the case in such a way that no charges ever happen, thus confirming that black peepo never get any justice, and all cops are evul.
Just in time to cause a much needed boost to the flagging energy of the riots.

The plan is to make this last through the election.
 
While I strongly dislike the NRA it serves a good purpose as a neon target for the graboids and draws attention away from GOA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom