Rob Roy/Talk

InfoInfo ArticleArticle
Search:    
Differences:

version 48 (2006-11-29 14:20:43 by EdwinSaada)
←previous edit
version 49 (2006-11-29 15:07:41 by JabberWokky)
next edit→
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 71: Line 71:

----------------

Damn! How did I miss this entire entry? I must have been off the wiki on 2006-03-13. I was the one who originally wrote that, and I specifically remember why: because I thought (and still do) that the "more brown" comment was tasteless. I knew it was a joke, so I didn't worry about it. However, if I didn't know him though his sister and via the wiki, I would have questioned his character on the basis of that comment. I think somebody had also just been asking if the Klu Klux Klown was a joke or not. The point of that whole paragraph was "He's not racist, although some of his jokes may come off as such if you don't recognize them as jokes". Sheesh. I should have paid attention... at no point did anyone call him a racist, just the opposite: I intended to say that he specifically was *not* a racist although his colorful comments could be taken (incorrectly) as such. Note my original edit comment: "Lest you get the wrong idea". My apologies to anybody who felt they had to defend him, and specifically to Rob if he thought he was being branded a racist. -- ["JabberWokky"]

This is a page for discussion of the content of the original page. This page was created because there was a dispute or argument about the content of the page (Rob Roy). Hashing out our differences here will allow for a more productive dialogue and won't clutter the original page.


The following section just doesn't make sense to me:

"Rob has made occasional seemingly racist comments in public, saying that "Chipotle is only half a shade browner than Taco Bell" and referring to Picnic Day as "White Family Day" (people "[WWW]genetically predisposed to be oppressive"). These are counterbalanced, however, by actions which would seem to give him a positive balance of political correctness, such as introducing an ASUCD resolution against the military (which we all know wasn't about homosexuality as much as it was about race), harassing Sodexho for it's business practices (which we all know isn't about worker's rights as much as it is about racism), and additionally, some of his friends are on L.E.A.D.. "

Rob does make seemingly racist comments, but the examples don't make sense..the military resolution was about equal rights (not race), having friends on an asucd political slate doesn't make him not a racist (I'm not saying he is — in fact I know he's not — it's just a weird example to put there) —PhilipNeustrom

* Oh come on, every knows I'm not a racist. Sometimes I say sarcastic things that above all are critical of my own race. But I don't think this deserves its own Talk page. Chipotle is owned by McDonald's. Taco Bell is owned by Pepsi, but Chipotle appears to be more "authentic." There are several Culture Days but no White Family Day so I made the joke that it is picnic day because most alums of UC Davis and inhabitants of Davis are white (this is of course, because of a history of racial disparity in the US in that white people, having inherited the country's wealth, have better access to universities and are more likely to be able to afford to buy homes in the city of Davis). It is not a racist remark, but rather a scathing comedic remark that takes into account an unfortunate historical reality. And yes I made a joke about Germans and English having a history of being oppressive - because they do have that history (ie. WW2 and the sun never setting on the English Empire). A Talk Page is getting a little too politically correct. I'm not going to pull that dumb, "but I have black friends" line. Everyone knows I'm not a racist. This page is ridiculous. All my statements were jokes that would only be offensive to the most thin-skinned white people. And in the modern rules of comedy you are allowed to make fun of your own race. Everyone knows that. - RobRoy


Maybe you know Roy isn't a racist, & maybe I know Roy isn't a racist, but he's a public official aspiring for a public position, and the countervailing perception of his public statements should not be deleted. If a public official you didn't personally like made seemingly weaksauce comments, I think you'd all feel they should be noted. Now I'm certainly not arguing that the entry should misleadingly imply he's going around spouting racist things, I think we should follow established wiki practices and counterbalance it with evidence to the contrary, & cushion it into the larger context of who he is. To flatly delete it because its not who you believe Roy to be is setting a severe double standard for your friends however. -KrisFricke


If Wiki is meant to be an informational source, that means people coming to it and reading entries should get a good glimpse into what they are looking for. Some posted comments are not a good reflection of the way things actually are. Removing the ridiculousness doesn't have anything to do with how friendly I am with Rob, it has to do with trying to instill integrity into the Wiki.

Take, for example someone who was believed to wear communist-like clothing. What you're arguing is that if someone perceives the wearing of communist-like clothing as being communist that it would be OK for that person to write upon that person's wiki page (or in the Aggie) things about that person being a communist. Assuming that there was good reason behind whatever article of clothing being mistaken for an endorsement of communism, it would not make sense to keep the original charge that the person is a communist on the wiki page. This is because doing so may give people not in full knowledge of the context the wrong impression- something that would be a VERY bad thing particularly in the case that this person is high profile and running for a political office. (hopefully this all made sense, I just wrote 2 term papers, a scholarship essay and read a book in the last 48 hours.) -TL

PS: can we delete this page now?!?


Any suggestions on how to improve the material/wording?PhilipNeustrom


Hello Rob, Welcome to running for Davis City Council. People will say all kinds of things about you and try to throw you off your message. Just stay the course, as you have here. It'll get more and more heated as time goes on. Just hang in there. - SharlaDaly

Does calling all Latin people "Mexicans" count as racist or just complete ignorance? "As they only hire attractive women as servers and Mexicans as cooks." —JeremiahBurney

I think that it is difficult to correctly classify people - as an adviser at UCD I've seen Hispanic, Latina/Latino, racial identification by county of birth i.e. Mexican, Guatemalan, etc., racial identification by birth place of ancestors or nationality, i.e. Mexican American, etc. Which is correct if making a broad statement? Is it racist to refer to someone as Chinese, when they might be from a specific province or have some suble heritage that is unknown? Maybe it would be safer to just "decline to state." —SharlaDaly

I don't pretend to know the answer to those questions. I say "Asian" and "Latin" or "Hispanic". Again, not entirely correct, but probably more approriate than "Chinese" or "Mexican". That's like calling me Irish just because I'm white. Wait, I am Irish. Never mind. :D Admittting your error takes balls Rob. My respect. —JeremiahBurney


It sounds like Rob's (alleged) comments are anti-racist to me. Or is even the very mention of race by definition a racist statement? Is it even possible for a white (White?) person to make a non-racist comment? Can non-white people be racists? How off-white would a person have to be? Does telling a "racist joke" mark them for the rest of their life (disqualify them for office, get their Ikeas blackballed)? How can a person prove they are not a racist? What if, just what if, Rob's (alleged) comment is true? Would he be a racist for making a true statement? Is it possible that stating a truth qualifies someone for ostracism? Are some statements so taboo ("dare not speak its name") that they are beyond discussion? The implication is that thinking certain thoughts is reprehensible.

I lament that society as a whole, and some people in particular, are so uber-sensitive to their own concept of "correctness" that even mentioning said topic in their mind qualifies one as being in some "deserving-of-scorn" class. This is closely related to the "zero-tolerance" (AKA "zero-thinking") laws. What ever happened to being able to reason and rationally discuss ideas, no matter what they are, in critical non-prejudicial ways? Even "critical" is nowadays misunderstood as being "against" something (so is being "skeptical", but that's another matter). It's ironic (and telling) that those who rail against prejudice are themselves most guilty of it. Just ask them to even correctly define "prejudice".

Rob is in the unenviable position (between a rock and a hard place, they say) of having to "prove" something which is impossible to prove. It's sad that we bash our most promising citizens before they barely get off the ground. This is why we get leaders like Bush. And we deserve it. Perhaps Rob can from this, learn that one does not have to do wrong to be convicted. Now that we've flogged him enough, why don't we throw this trash into the recycle bin forever. —SteveDavison


Look, it seems pretty clear that everyone posting here basically agrees that (a) Rob isn't a racist, and (b) the reasons he was called a racist (or at least the reason someone brought the whole thing up) are not particularly good reasons, (c) some people feel that it is important to address this publically. This is a tempest in a teapot. Is there any reason we shouldn't just write his page to reflect that Rob does not shy away from the race issue, that people who know him can't take racism allegations against him seriously, and that while taking racism seriously, Rob is human and occasionally discusses race in a way that might raise some particularly sensitive eyebrows (while noting that he's admitted making careless statements before, and apologised when he felt he had made a mistake). That seems balanced, addresses the issue (since some people still feel that it actually needs to be addressed), and gets rid of the whole silly issue. Personally, if I don't hear any strong objections to this in a few days, I'll just write the blurb on his page to reflect this and be done w/ it. —EricKlein


Does Rob Roy currently work at Ben & Jerry's? Because I thought he was the ex-manager and was touting Free Cone Day as one of his past accomplishments, but I see him working there in the pictures. It doesn't seem right to me that he should take advantage of his current job for political purposes. Even more so because as stated on the Free Cone Day page, it has been an annual Ben & Jerry's promotional event since 1979 and so Rob Roy has little responsibility for it's existence, contrary to the statements on his posters. -NickSchmalenberger


Damn! How did I miss this entire entry? I must have been off the wiki on 2006-03-13. I was the one who originally wrote that, and I specifically remember why: because I thought (and still do) that the "more brown" comment was tasteless. I knew it was a joke, so I didn't worry about it. However, if I didn't know him though his sister and via the wiki, I would have questioned his character on the basis of that comment. I think somebody had also just been asking if the Klu Klux Klown was a joke or not. The point of that whole paragraph was "He's not racist, although some of his jokes may come off as such if you don't recognize them as jokes". Sheesh. I should have paid attention... at no point did anyone call him a racist, just the opposite: I intended to say that he specifically was *not* a racist although his colorful comments could be taken (incorrectly) as such. Note my original edit comment: "Lest you get the wrong idea". My apologies to anybody who felt they had to defend him, and specifically to Rob if he thought he was being branded a racist. — JabberWokky

This is a Wiki Spot wiki. Wiki Spot is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that helps communities collaborate via wikis.