Bizarre "Did you know" on "N**** in the White House"

trout · Unread post by **trout** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:26 am

From Wikipedia's front page, right now:

Did you know...
From Wikipedia's newest content:
... that "Niggers in the White House" (1902) was written after President Roosevelt invited Booker T. Washington to the White House?

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 3:13 am

Written by the appropriately named Bonkers The Clown (T-C-L).

"Niggers in the White House" is an American racist[1] political poem by an anonymous author, first published in 1902 in the Sedalia Sentinel, following a visit of Booker T. Washington to the White House at the invitation of Theodore Roosevelt. In satirical verse it presents the author's vision of how the presence of African Americans in the White House would cause disorder, including loud music, immorality, violence, and eventually an interracial presidential family.

It does not appear to have garnered much critical attention.

Anroth · Unread post by **Anroth** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:50 am

I thought you already had had an inter-racial president by that point?

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:08 am

Inevitable that "Bonkers" was going to do something like this. He is one of Wikipedia's most insane pests. And I'm convinced he's a sockpuppet of a "famous Wikipedian" or has connections to one of them, serious connections. Because of the following:

Remarkably, in September 2012 an article about Justin was created. Justin showed up to edit it himself, repeatedly. And it was finally nominated for deletion on 6 February 2013, in which a monstrosity called Bonkers the Clown aggressively argued to keep the article. (Note that Bonkers' early userpage edits were rev-deleted, for no apparent reason.) After more than two weeks, the argument petered out, and the article stayed.

In early 2013 someone, name deleted, tried to create an article about Mr. Lowrey, with the claim that he was now notable. The result was an AFD in which Mike himself showed up to demand deletion, and a freak called Bonkers The Clown argued for keeping it. The article and its histories were erased, and that was that.

Michaeldsuarez · Unread post by **Michaeldsuarez** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:33 am

I thought that they didn't allow the N-word to appear on the Main Page:

*[[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px|link=]] Oppose current hook and alts that features the highly offensive name of the article/organization. While Wikipedia is [[WP:NOTCENSORED]], the main page certainly is. While overall I'm open minded about the nomination, it needs to have a hook that A.) has the article name piped behind something less offensive but is also B.) not misleading so that potential readers have an idea of what they're clicking on. [[User:Agne27 |Agne]][[Special:Contributions/Agne27|Cheese]]/[[User Talk:Agne27|Wine]] 03:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

[...]

*This isn't going to happen guys, sorry. [[User:Prodego|''Prodego'']] [[User talk:Prodego|talk]] 03:52, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
**And why not? [[User:Seb az86556|Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556]] [[User_talk:Seb_az86556|> haneʼ]] 03:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
***That article isn't suitable for being displayed on the main page. Mostly due to the name. [[User:Prodego|''Prodego'']] [[User talk:Prodego|talk]] 03:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
****Errr... ALT5 doesn't display it. Duh. [[User:Seb az86556|Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556]] [[User_talk:Seb_az86556|> haneʼ]] 03:58, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
*****(ec) I '''oppose''' this link (piped or not) appearing on the main page. If this term had any positive connotation, I might not oppose. I doubt that homosexual dark-skinned persons would consider the combination of these terms anything less than instigatory and derogatory. Until, the offended group embraces the term as their own, others should not be using it on the main page. There are many derogatory terms that offended groups embrace, I have no reason to believe that is the case here. Certain types of women may love their thugs, and certain men may love their bitches, and thugs and bitches may feel endeared, I just don't see someone pushing the envelope to the point where they use the term "gay nigger" in any positive sense.--[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] ([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|C]]/[[User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon|BIO]]/[[WP:CHICAGO]]/[[WP:FOUR]]) 04:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
***** (ec) ALT5 is even worse than the originals for regular DYK, and will hardly go through for 1 April. Pushing offensive name/insinuations through, for the fun of it, will not help, and I believe only a modest and constructive approach might (though chances are slim). Back to refs - that the hook is referenced to WP:RS is not enough, the article should be referenced to reliable sources. [[User:Materialscientist|Materialscientist]] ([[User talk:Materialscientist|talk]]) 04:07, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
::::::[[File:Symbol delete vote.svg|16px|link=]] Not suitable for the main page in any form. Sorry guys. --[[User:Demiurge1000|Demiurge1000]] ([[User_talk:Demiurge1000|talk]]) 04:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

greyed.out.fields · Unread post by **greyed.out.fields** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:42 am

EricBarbour wrote:Inevitable that "Bonkers" was going to do something like this. He is one of Wikipedia's most insane pests. And I'm convinced he's a sockpuppet of a "famous Wikipedian" or has connections to one of them, serious connections. Because of the following:

Remarkably, in September 2012 an article about Justin was created. Justin showed up to edit it himself, repeatedly. And it was finally nominated for deletion on 6 February 2013, in which a monstrosity called Bonkers the Clown aggressively argued to keep the article. (Note that Bonkers' early userpage edits were rev-deleted, for no apparent reason.) After more than two weeks, the argument petered out, and the article stayed.

I thought I'd have a peek and see what was so egregious about them, but Mr Clown's early edits summaries were oversighted, not revdel'd. (Article was later deleted, but is still publicly viewable.)

In early 2013 someone, name deleted, tried to create an article about Mr. Lowrey, with the claim that he was now notable. The result was an AFD in which Mike himself showed up to demand deletion, and a freak called Bonkers The Clown argued for keeping it. The article and its histories were erased, and that was that.

"Delete. A clown creates an article about a man who dresses all in orange? Begone, already! --Demiurge1000 (talk)"
I'm neither confirming or denying that Mr Clown started the deleted article. I'm sure you'll be happy to trust Mr Urge, though, right?

So, who is this "famous Wikipedian" you speak of?

Michaeldsuarez · Unread post by **Michaeldsuarez** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:50 am

greyed.out.fields wrote:I'm neither confirming or denying that Mr Clown started the deleted article.

Allow me to confirm it for everyone using Bonkers The Clown's own public admission:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Orangemike&diff=539393830&oldid=539389055

== [[Michael James Lowrey]] ==

Just created this today... But sadly got nominated for deletion eight minutes after. COI aside, do you think you're notable enough to merit an article? ☯ [[User:Bonkers The Clown|'''Bonkers''' ''The Clown'']] '''\(^_^)/''' '''[[User talk:Bonkers The Clown| Nonsensical Babble]]''' ☯ 10:24, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:52 am

EricBarbour wrote:Inevitable that "Bonkers" was going to do something like this. He is one of Wikipedia's most insane pests. And I'm convinced he's a sockpuppet of a "famous Wikipedian" or has connections to one of them, serious connections. Because of the following:

Remarkably, in September 2012 an article about Justin was created. Justin showed up to edit it himself, repeatedly. And it was finally nominated for deletion on 6 February 2013, in which a monstrosity called Bonkers the Clown aggressively argued to keep the article. (Note that Bonkers' early userpage edits were rev-deleted, for no apparent reason.) After more than two weeks, the argument petered out, and the article stayed.

In early 2013 someone, name deleted, tried to create an article about Mr. Lowrey, with the claim that he was now notable. The result was an AFD in which Mike himself showed up to demand deletion, and a freak called Bonkers The Clown argued for keeping it. The article and its histories were erased, and that was that.

If he's well connected, why can't he get his way on AfDs?

Tarc · Unread post by **Tarc** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:56 pm

Remarkably, in September 2012 an article about Justin was created. Justin showed up to edit it himself, repeatedly. And it was finally nominated for deletion on 6 February 2013, in which a monstrosity called Bonkers the Clown aggressively argued to keep the article. (Note that Bonkers' early userpage edits were rev-deleted, for no apparent reason.) After more than two weeks, the argument petered out, and the article stayed.

Looks like the result was actually delete, though it lingers in userspace; User:Koavf/Justin_Anthony_Knapp (T-H-L)

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 5:41 pm

EricBarbour wrote:I'm convinced he's a sockpuppet of a "famous Wikipedian" or has connections to one of them, serious connections.

A bunch of his user page history got oversighted (not even rev-del'ed) and the only trace is a cryptic edit summary afterwards saying "for the user's own good"... I suspect incompetence rather than malice.

On the topic of this thread, Wikipedia may be "not censored" but how bloody stupid do you have to be to let something like this get to the front page? How is it possible to be that ignorant of the nature of people to be offended?

It's amazing how many Wikipedia questions have the answer "Asperger's Syndrome".

Unread post by **tarantino** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:08 pm

greyed.out.fields wrote:I thought I'd have a peek and see what was so egregious about them, but Mr Clown's early edits summaries were oversighted, not revdel'd. (Article was later deleted, but is still publicly viewable.)

I think he's just a kid from Singapore that had too much personal information on his user page, and who seems to have a fascination with African American stereotypes. He's also friends with another young Singaporean, Arctic Kangaroo.

Unread post by **Peter Damian** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:45 pm

Precisely why I love American history. All the rich vocabulary. Unutterable? Niggers niggers niggers niggers. There! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 06:56, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nigge ... hite_House

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:58 pm

tarantino wrote:
greyed.out.fields wrote:I thought I'd have a peek and see what was so egregious about them, but Mr Clown's early edits summaries were oversighted, not revdel'd. (Article was later deleted, but is still publicly viewable.)
I think he's just a kid from Singapore that had too much personal information on his user page, and who seems to have a fascination with African American stereotypes. He's also friends with another young Singaporean, Arctic Kangaroo.

Ah, yes. Bonkers the Clown created the article Watermelon stereotype (T-H-L). It appeared on the main page of Wikipedia on April 13, 2013:

"Did you know ... that contrary to the racist stereotype that African Americans eat more watermelon than average (1909 illustration pictured), a survey showed that they actually eat less?"

This is the lede from when Mr. Bonkers first created it:

The Watermelon stereotype is an American stereotype of African Americans. The stereotype has it that African Americans have a love for watermelons. This stereotype is prevalent even in today's society.

This loving and thoughtful article is adorned with this image, a thumbnail of which Bonkers also had on the Wikipedia main page:

Here's some loving fun-loving times from the "did you know" nomination page that led to that image being selected:

Edit I've changed the pic to an earlier one from 1904 I feel that it is better because the watermelon is larger, and emphasis on their "animalistic appetite" for the melons is increased. Likely to draw more attention; looks more outstanding than the 1910 one. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
@Crisco: maybe you're right. I was thinking "animalistic" compared to plain "large" brought out more effect. But if you say so, large it is then. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to avoid comparing blacks to animals, even if it may have been the form of denigration the "Coon cards" used. Besides, when we're already so close to the limit any extra characters are just baggage. The new pic is fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

How's this image? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

BEtter! I'se so happy yer found this! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:53, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

God that place is loathsome.

Unread post by **Peter Damian** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 8:24 pm

Don't know what to make of it. On the one hand, it is educational to demonstrate the attitudes of people in previous generations. We show pictures of Crystal night, of lynchings and so forth. There are pictures like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Der_S ... s_1929.jpg in the article on anti-semitism.

On the other hand, context is everything. Why is this person writing these articles?

Bonkers, you are doing the best you can at making me regret defending this article. I think the reasons you and I find it to be significant are very different.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:10, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Bonkers the Clown, you confirm exactly what I feared, that this is being published very little in a spirit of useful historical documentation, and a whole lot in a spirit of defiant provocation. Extremely unfortunate. Awien (talk) 13:15, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Of course there is satire... The white presidential family and the niggers are heavily ridiculed in the poem. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

"The white presidential family and the..."? Sorry, I must have missed that; could you repeat, please? Basket Feudalist 15:32, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

The Devil's Advocate · Unread post by **The Devil's Advocate** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 10:40 pm

He probably just thinks it is funny. Many a DYK entry are motivated by lulz.

Cla68 · Unread post by **Cla68** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 10:50 pm

If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 10:52 pm

Cla68 wrote:If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.

Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:08 pm

DanMurphy wrote:
Cla68 wrote:If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.
Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.

Examples?

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:17 pm

EricBarbour wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
Cla68 wrote:If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.
Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.
Examples?

A great many folks in Singapore (and other regional countries) have extremely crude and racist views of blacks. This can generally be shrugged off since most of the speakers have never met a black person.

More importantly in the Singapore case, there are enormous amounts of racism targeted at the city state's Malay minority (and Malaysian and Indonesian "malays"). It comes back in the opposite direction too.

In general in the region, people talk freely in a racist fashion that would surprise many on this board. For instance "Budi? Of course he's a liar - he's Javanese. They wear their knives in the back for a reason." Or: "Ahmed? He got into a brawl? Well, duh! He's a hot-blooded Boyonese. Everyone knows those people can't control their temper."

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:26 pm

DanMurphy wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
Cla68 wrote:If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.
Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.
Examples?
A great many folks in Singapore (and other regional countries) have extremely crude and racist views of blacks. This can generally be shrugged off since most of the speakers have never met a black person.

More importantly in the Singapore case, there are enormous amounts of racism targeted at the city state's Malay minority (and Malaysian and Indonesian "malays"). It comes back in the opposite direction too.

In general in the region, people talk freely in a racist fashion that would surprise many on this board. For instance "Budi? Of course he's a liar - he's Javanese. They wear their knives in the back for a reason." Or: "Ahmed? He got into a brawl? Well, duh! He's a hot-blooded Boyonese. Everyone knows those people can't control their temper."

All over eastern asia.
The countries I've spent time in, China, Japan and Korea, are all completely out in the open with their racism.

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:31 pm

This is a long ago story of mine that touches on race in Singapore. (Always regretted I didn't do more on the place's culture; almost all of my Singapore coverage was either business related or defense related).

Bielle · Unread post by **Bielle** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:34 pm

Vigilant wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
Cla68 wrote:If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.
Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.
Examples?
A great many folks in Singapore (and other regional countries) have extremely crude and racist views of blacks. This can generally be shrugged off since most of the speakers have never met a black person.

More importantly in the Singapore case, there are enormous amounts of racism targeted at the city state's Malay minority (and Malaysian and Indonesian "malays"). It comes back in the opposite direction too.

In general in the region, people talk freely in a racist fashion that would surprise many on this board. For instance "Budi? Of course he's a liar - he's Javanese. They wear their knives in the back for a reason." Or: "Ahmed? He got into a brawl? Well, duh! He's a hot-blooded Boyonese. Everyone knows those people can't control their temper."
All over eastern asia.
The countries I've spent time in, China, Japan and Korea, are all completely out in the open with their racism.

I've been spit on in Kuala Lumpur, ignored in Singapore and asked to leave a hotel lobby in Hong Kong. I was then a 40-year-old, lone, white female, tidily and conservatively dressed.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:37 pm

Strange to me. I was under the impression that the Lee regime was extremely paranoid, censorious, and intolerant of anything that would make
Singapore look "bad" to the rest of the world. I remember this 1996 Atlantic article, for example:
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/is ... /water.htm

Mancunium · Unread post by **Mancunium** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:42 pm

EricBarbour wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
Cla68 wrote:If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.
Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.
Examples?

Singapore was a founding state of Malaysia, and was expelled because of Malay/Chinese race-based policies and emotions.

Singapore#Demographics (T-H-L):

Prior to 2010, each person could register as a member of only one race, by default that of his or her father, therefore, mixed-race persons were solely grouped under their father's race in government censuses. From 2010 onward, people may register using a "double-barrelled" classification, in which they may choose one primary race and one secondary race, but no more than two.[149]

As a sympathetic-appearing foreigner, I find that it doesn't take Singaporeans long to turn the conversation towards their antipathy to their Chinese/Malay/Tamil (pick any one or two only) fellow-citizens.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:48 pm

Bielle wrote:
Vigilant wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
Cla68 wrote:If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.
Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.
Examples?
A great many folks in Singapore (and other regional countries) have extremely crude and racist views of blacks. This can generally be shrugged off since most of the speakers have never met a black person.

More importantly in the Singapore case, there are enormous amounts of racism targeted at the city state's Malay minority (and Malaysian and Indonesian "malays"). It comes back in the opposite direction too.

In general in the region, people talk freely in a racist fashion that would surprise many on this board. For instance "Budi? Of course he's a liar - he's Javanese. They wear their knives in the back for a reason." Or: "Ahmed? He got into a brawl? Well, duh! He's a hot-blooded Boyonese. Everyone knows those people can't control their temper."
All over eastern asia.
The countries I've spent time in, China, Japan and Korea, are all completely out in the open with their racism.
I've been spit on in Kuala Lumpur, ignored in Singapore and asked to leave a hotel lobby in Hong Kong. I was then a 40-year-old, lone, white female, tidily and conservatively dressed.

As a business oriented white male, I've always enjoyed the preferred treatment that I've come to believe I am due.
This is in stark contrast to the woeful state of my grooming here at wikipediocracy.

Cla68 · Unread post by **Cla68** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:08 am

The black people I met in Singapore (I have been there three times) told me they loved living there. We're starting to get off-topic, but all the times I've been discriminated against in Asia has been language discrimination, not racially-based. If I could get by in the local language, I haven't had any trouble.

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:09 am

Cla68 wrote:The black people I met in Singapore (I have been there three times) told me they loved living there.

I loved living there too.

Alison · Unread post by **Alison** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:17 am

DanMurphy wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.
Examples?
A great many folks in Singapore (and other regional countries) have extremely crude and racist views of blacks. This can generally be shrugged off since most of the speakers have never met a black person.

More importantly in the Singapore case, there are enormous amounts of racism targeted at the city state's Malay minority (and Malaysian and Indonesian "malays"). It comes back in the opposite direction too.

In general in the region, people talk freely in a racist fashion that would surprise many on this board. For instance "Budi? Of course he's a liar - he's Javanese. They wear their knives in the back for a reason." Or: "Ahmed? He got into a brawl? Well, duh! He's a hot-blooded Boyonese. Everyone knows those people can't control their temper."

I've been to Singapore many times now in connection with my work, and I have to agree with you here, Dan. On one of my first visits, I really wanted to go exploring the city, so I asked some of my Chinese-Singaporean colleagues if they'd like to come along with me and see some of the Indian areas. "Oh, we don't need to go there. Those people smell!!"

I later learned that the Chinese, Indian and Malay populations seem, on the whole, to keep to themselves. I was in my twenties at the time and was kinda shocked. Just the whole casual way that that was put out there, so matter-of-factly.

Versus · Unread post by **Versus** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:12 am

Alison wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.
Examples?
A great many folks in Singapore (and other regional countries) have extremely crude and racist views of blacks. This can generally be shrugged off since most of the speakers have never met a black person.

More importantly in the Singapore case, there are enormous amounts of racism targeted at the city state's Malay minority (and Malaysian and Indonesian "malays"). It comes back in the opposite direction too.

In general in the region, people talk freely in a racist fashion that would surprise many on this board. For instance "Budi? Of course he's a liar - he's Javanese. They wear their knives in the back for a reason." Or: "Ahmed? He got into a brawl? Well, duh! He's a hot-blooded Boyonese. Everyone knows those people can't control their temper."
I've been to Singapore many times now in connection with my work, and I have to agree with you here, Dan. On one of my first visits, I really wanted to go exploring the city, so I asked some of my Chinese-Singaporean colleagues if they'd like to come along with me and see some of the Indian areas. "Oh, we don't need to go there. Those people smell!!"

I later learned that the Chinese, Indian and Malay populations seem, on the whole, to keep to themselves. I was in my twenties at the time and was kinda shocked. Just the whole casual way that that was put out there, so matter-of-factly.

The difference though is that in Singapore, the racism is not institutionalised. Of course you will get racist individuals there, just as you get racists in other countries. Malaysia on the other hand, the racism is institutionalised. There is a government policy of discriminating in favour of Malay Muslims called Bumiputera, designed to keep the number of ethnic Chinese and Indians at a minimum in the public service using a quota system.

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:29 am

Versus wrote:
Alison wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:Why? Plenty racism in Singapore.
Examples?
A great many folks in Singapore (and other regional countries) have extremely crude and racist views of blacks. This can generally be shrugged off since most of the speakers have never met a black person.

More importantly in the Singapore case, there are enormous amounts of racism targeted at the city state's Malay minority (and Malaysian and Indonesian "malays"). It comes back in the opposite direction too.

In general in the region, people talk freely in a racist fashion that would surprise many on this board. For instance "Budi? Of course he's a liar - he's Javanese. They wear their knives in the back for a reason." Or: "Ahmed? He got into a brawl? Well, duh! He's a hot-blooded Boyonese. Everyone knows those people can't control their temper."
I've been to Singapore many times now in connection with my work, and I have to agree with you here, Dan. On one of my first visits, I really wanted to go exploring the city, so I asked some of my Chinese-Singaporean colleagues if they'd like to come along with me and see some of the Indian areas. "Oh, we don't need to go there. Those people smell!!"

I later learned that the Chinese, Indian and Malay populations seem, on the whole, to keep to themselves. I was in my twenties at the time and was kinda shocked. Just the whole casual way that that was put out there, so matter-of-factly.
The difference though is that in Singapore, the racism is not institutionalised. Of course you will get racist individuals there, just as you get racists in other countries. Malaysia on the other hand, the racism is institutionalised. There is a government policy of discriminating in favour of Malay Muslims called Bumiputera, designed to keep the number of ethnic Chinese and Indians at a minimum in the public service using a quota system.

Nonsense. Not about institutionalized racism in Malaysia. Of course there is. Just as there is in Singapore. The Singaporeans are a little more slick about it though, I'll give them that.

The Devil's Advocate · Unread post by **The Devil's Advocate** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:00 am

All this talk about whether East Asians are a notoriously racist and backward people is interesting, but I don't see how you can infer from this that Bonkers is racist. Is it not possible that he just finds old-timey racism hilarious? Old-timey racism is kind of stupid when you look at it. Still not sure why eating watermelon was ever a negative stereotype.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 7:14 am

The Devil's Advocate wrote:All this talk about whether East Asians are a notoriously racist and backward people is interesting, but I don't see how you can infer from this that Bonkers is racist. Is it not possible that he just finds old-timey racism hilarious? Old-timey racism is kind of stupid when you look at it. Still not sure why eating watermelon was ever a negative stereotype.

This is a greeeeeeat topic for you to opine upon.

Tarc · Unread post by **Tarc** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:21 pm

The Devil's Advocate wrote:Still not sure why eating watermelon was ever a negative stereotype.

NY Times, 1895:

Chicago Defender, 1935

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:10 pm

Meanwhile, Down by the bay where the watermelons grow or, indeed, Wheezy Anna, Wheezy Anna, down where the watermelons grow (And they’ve got big pips in)

The Devil's Advocate · Unread post by **The Devil's Advocate** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 9:57 pm

Tarc wrote:NY Times, 1895:

Chicago Defender, 1935

Lol, I wasn't asking for a serious debate about the watermelon stereotype. My whole point was that it was silly and made no sense to begin with, so Bonkers finding it hilarious is more likely than him being racist. The only relevance him being from Singapore would have is that he probably doesn't care as much for our cultural sensitivities.

Cla68 · Unread post by **Cla68** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 9:59 pm

I hope I'm wrong when I get the impression that a few of you in this thread are opining that you believe that Singaporeans/East Asians are generally racists, so Bonkers must be racist since he is from Singapore/East Asia. There are a couple of logical fallacies in that.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:04 pm

Cla68 wrote:I hope I'm wrong when I get the impression that a few of you in this thread are opining that you believe that Singaporeans/East Asians are generally racists, so Bonkers must be racist since he is from Singapore/East Asia. There are a couple of logical fallacies in that.

Racist or not, he's still a noticeboard and AFD troll. And I expect that someday, he will either be made an admin, or blocked permanently -- that seems to be the primary either-or fate of Wikipedia's hardcore trolls.

Mancunium · Unread post by **Mancunium** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:07 pm

Cla68 wrote:I hope I'm wrong when I get the impression that a few of you in this thread are opining that you believe that Singaporeans/East Asians are generally racists, so Bonkers must be racist since he is from Singapore/East Asia. There are a couple of logical fallacies in that.

Yes, your impression is wrong. Our memories of Singapore are merely off-topic.

Bielle · Unread post by **Bielle** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 11:09 pm

My own reading of the situation was that Bonkers was either set up or "merely" encouraged. The whole point had little or nothing to do with stereotypes and melons, but rather with calling the US President a "nigger in the White House", and getting away with it on the front page of Wikipedia. I don't think it was silly at all, but malicious in a smarmy teenage way that seems to run through many who are chronologically adults. I was appalled, and I am not an American.

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Wed Sep 18, 2013 11:37 pm

Mancunium wrote:
Cla68 wrote:I hope I'm wrong when I get the impression that a few of you in this thread are opining that you believe that Singaporeans/East Asians are generally racists, so Bonkers must be racist since he is from Singapore/East Asia. There are a couple of logical fallacies in that.
Yes, your impression is wrong. Our memories of Singapore are merely off-topic.

Cla68 wrote:

If he is from Singapore, he is probably just doing this to amuse himself with no racial animosity or intention for race-baiting. The issue here, I think, is that it shows how WP is completely lacking any real or consistent editorial control.

You suggested being from Singapore was somehow a defense against him being a racist. Which was patently absurd, as has been amply demonstrated. Some of my best friends are from Singapore (and other points in "East Asia") and they aren't racists.

Captain Occam · Unread post by **Captain Occam** » Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 am

Bonkers looks more like a troll than a racist to me. There's a certain type of person who likes to make jokes about anything that's taboo, just for the sake of the shock value. 50 years ago people who wanted to do that would make sex jokes or jokes using swear words, but as sex jokes and swearing have gradually become more mainstream, it's become harder and harder to still shock anyone with that. Nowadays the real shock value is from ethnic slurs and race jokes.

I sometimes see the same attitude in TV shows that try to deliberately flout social taboos. Does anyone remember this scene from South Park?

Cla68 · Unread post by **Cla68** » Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:39 am

DanMurphy wrote:You suggested being from Singapore was somehow a defense against him being a racist. Which was patently absurd, as has been amply demonstrated. Some of my best friends are from Singapore (and other points in "East Asia") and they aren't racists.

You're right, I did commit a logical fallacy by implying that he wasn't racist because he was from Singapore. Nevertheless, in my traveling and living around East and South Asia I have encountered or observed very little, if any, obvious racism. Plenty of ethnocentrism and language discrimination, but that isn't necessarily racism.

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Thu Sep 19, 2013 2:03 am

Cla68 wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:You suggested being from Singapore was somehow a defense against him being a racist. Which was patently absurd, as has been amply demonstrated. Some of my best friends are from Singapore (and other points in "East Asia") and they aren't racists.
You're right, I did commit a logical fallacy by implying that he wasn't racist because he was from Singapore. Nevertheless, in my traveling and living around East and South Asia I have encountered or observed very little, if any, obvious racism. Plenty of ethnocentrism and language discrimination, but that isn't necessarily racism.

How many of the regional languages do you speak?

Cla68 · Unread post by **Cla68** » Thu Sep 19, 2013 4:59 am

DanMurphy wrote:
Cla68 wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:You suggested being from Singapore was somehow a defense against him being a racist. Which was patently absurd, as has been amply demonstrated. Some of my best friends are from Singapore (and other points in "East Asia") and they aren't racists.
You're right, I did commit a logical fallacy by implying that he wasn't racist because he was from Singapore. Nevertheless, in my traveling and living around East and South Asia I have encountered or observed very little, if any, obvious racism. Plenty of ethnocentrism and language discrimination, but that isn't necessarily racism.
How many of the regional languages do you speak?

I can get by in Japanese. I used to be able to ask for directions, order off the menu, that kind of thing in Korean when I lived there but I forgot almost all of it. I have been refused entrance to venues in Japan and Korea until I spoke a few polite words to them in their language, which is why I believe the discrimination was for language, not race.

The funny thing is, I can understand Singlish fairly well. During trips to Singapore, my coworkers would almost always ask me to ask for directions or information from the locals because I was the only one who could consistently understand the dialect. I think it was because of my experience speaking English with other East Asians that I could understand their accent.

The Devil's Advocate · Unread post by **The Devil's Advocate** » Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:09 am

Bielle wrote:My own reading of the situation was that Bonkers was either set up or "merely" encouraged. The whole point had little or nothing to do with stereotypes and melons, but rather with calling the US President a "nigger in the White House", and getting away with it on the front page of Wikipedia. I don't think it was silly at all, but malicious in a smarmy teenage way that seems to run through many who are chronologically adults. I was appalled, and I am not an American.

Actually, I doubt he was going for anything that clever. Pretty sure he just found its prolific use of the term "nigger" delightful. It is probably also the fact that it all rhymed and ends with Teddy Roosevelt being decapitated.

Anthonyhcole · Unread post by **Anthonyhcole** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 12:45 am

No Niggers, No Jews, No Dogs
What are the odds on that being on the front page in the next 30 days?
Link I've known a lot of foreigners, from all over the world. Lots of Asians. Even those with only a tenth of Bonkers's English comprehension know it's never OK to say "nigger". He's trolling.

Jaranda · Unread post by **Jaranda** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 4:50 am

Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Tokyogirl79 (T-H-L)

This was the first time I encountered him outside AFD comments. I was extremely tempted to block Bonkers at that time for trolling that RFA, but stayed away I was one of her nominators. The questions he asked was the exact definition of trolling, luckily Tokyogirl ignored him and those questions were crossed off. He's a troll in AFD as well, has no grasp of reliable sourcing in what I've seen there, mostly ILIKEIT comments, including some sensitive BLPs of alleged criminals and the likes (will link later 1 AM here, but someone could easily search in his history). I don't see him last the year.

Wer900 · Unread post by **Wer900** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:08 am

Anthonyhcole wrote:No Niggers, No Jews, No Dogs
What are the odds on that being on the front page in the next 30 days?
Link I've known a lot of foreigners, from all over the world. Lots of Asians. Even those with only a tenth of Bonkers's English comprehension know it's never OK to say "nigger". He's trolling.

What a racist asshole. I've heard Asians speak of "niggers" or "black people" before (in a stereotypical, if not necessarily derogatory tone), but nothing as implying of racial superiority as the words of racist fucker Bonkers.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 10:19 am

People imagine that if you are non-white, you cannot be racist. This is a fallacy. For example, Asian shopkeepers of my acquaintance often complain about black shoplifters as if white people never did that sort of thing. In Rwanda, there was actual genocide of one black tribe by another; because they were all black, few people in the West realise that this was catastrophic racism.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 2:59 pm

Anthonyhcole wrote:No Niggers, No Jews, No Dogs
What are the odds on that being on the front page in the next 30 days?
Link I've known a lot of foreigners, from all over the world. Lots of Asians. Even those with only a tenth of Bonkers's English comprehension know it's never OK to say "nigger". He's trolling.

I can't wait to hear his explanation.