Sarah Jeong, Ungrateful Monster

She’s a hypocritical cunt, who like most self-hating Asian women, only dates white men, according to her own twitter archives.

Fuck this bitch. And fuck the NYT for its blatant hypocrisy in acknowledging racism only when it comes from certain groups and not others.

I have a feeling the Times will back down soon and she'll be gone. This has become a big topic on right wing media. Having her there will play right into Trump's media attacks.

Her views are slanted.

Why was the original thread deleted?

Because the webmaster identified the thread rightly as a troll thread.

Not really, R5. I think there were other reasons.

NOPE TROLL TROLL TROLL

r1 I thought she is a lesbian?

The woman is hired by one of the leading papers in America for their editorial board and she appears to be a virulent racist. Discussing the implications of that, and how it effects the political climate is trolling?

And yet the constant stream of "Does [insert right wing female's name here]'s pussy stink?" juvenile threads are not? Seriously?

OP is a Trump ass-licker troll.

And you’re a simple minded cretin with no critical thinking ability r10. See how this works?

Newsflash: being Asian doesn’t mean you can’t be a racist cunt.

It's a legit topic, R10. I found her tweets troubling.

I would watch a TV show with her and Michelle Malkin just repeatedly slapping each other.

Are you all ready to join the white supremacist army to protect us from these terrifying minority racists?

Go to sleep, Vlad. You’ll find a lot more divisive issues between now and the election.

Oh no..she is calling racist people out on their bullshit. What a monster!

But r16, she doesn’t condemn people because they’re racists. I’d get behind that in a second. She condemns them because they’re white men.

To be honest I don’t think she *actually* hates white men. I think it’s just part of the young progressive mantra, something you chant to show how woke you are. But it is pretty annoying, and has alienated lots of nonpolitical people from the Democratic Party. So it’s definitely worthy of examination.

I'm capable of loathing Trump AND Jeong.

Oh my God, r3, I laughed out loud but feel guilty.

[quote]Yes, Trump has problems

And that is the understatement of the century.

They will let her go.

The current brouhaha is damaging their already shaky credibility with anyone who isn’t a hardcore liberal Democrat.

If they keep her, she will be a joke for the right as long as she is an editor. Editrix?

Great job of playing into the “Fake News” meme, NYTimes.

Vox explains this alt right trolling campaign.

I’m guessing the real trolls aren’t wasting their time trying to influence Daraloungers. I suspect it’s some deplorables who have been gaslighted into believing fake news is what the president says it is.

R22

That is hysterical.

The bending over backwards defense of this “racist” cunt is killing any sense of respectability for the Times.

Fox News, Breitbart, etc., are the only ones who care about this, so anyone bringing up the issue is a right-wing troll.

She has addressed the issue, she has pointed out that she was purely reacting in kind to racist comments directed at her, she has acknowledged that those responses were a mistake and she has apologized. That is far more than any conservative racists (of which there are many) have done.

I'm frankly surprised (and glad) that the Times is backing her up.

R3, I see what you did there.

They won't fire her. Being anti-white is OK and encouraged.

R24, there were far too many Twitter posts to be only reactions to others' racism. Rewarding that behavior with a powerful and lucrative job is damaging to American political culture.

South Korea = 2nd World Nation. Australia?

Not France or Japan. See it for what it is and the general character

This is why we can't have nice things. Every time a person like this gets a media job I lose another couple thousand white Wisconsin housewife votes.

R14, yes. Yes i am but the educated franchise.

R24, I call bullshit. Don’t tell me you really buy that excuse. Almost as bad as Joy Reid being “hacked.”

Ever come in contact will a Korean who was adopted since young? How did you feel and why?

So typical for the Chinese-Americans, overly ambitious, resenting the white Americans. At the same time trying to emulate them or at least date them. And yes, she does look like a lesbian. I bet she’s had her fair share of rejections. That might a explain the hatred this woman harbors inside her head.

My favorite part: “dog eating gook.” Bit harsh. She is actually a vegan.

Here is my attempt at a balanced take on this - expressing dislike for a system that is stacked against her own race isn’t objectionable, even if you disagree with her viewpoint.

Expressing dislike toward individuals because she imagines them as her enemies within such a system is way more problematic.

Behaving with cruelty toward anyone is wrong. Doing so because of race-based animus is unacceptable (not to mention counterproductive). Being mean to old people is straight up disgusting. Expressing pleasure in any of the above is grounds for punch & delete.

There’s the implication that her comments were in direct response to unacceptable & disgusting racist comments made toward her. Best case scenario, she literally took others’ racist comments & substituted “white” for the originally targeted subgroup. It would be nice to think that these thoughts didn’t come from her own head.

Asian women really think they're oppressed, don't they?

They're the whitest POC, actually.

I think that there are very fine people on both sides...

And not a one of them told her to fix her hair, R37.

The New York Times......

All the racism that's fit to print.

The New York Times...

Enemy of the People.

(No, this isn't a troll thread at all!)

It’s Asian women who play up the POC thing which frankly is hilarious. It’s like the black people with the biggest complaints about racism, the tiniest micro aggressions, are always super lightskinned.

In our culture, no one needs to listen to you unless you’re oppressed, and the more oppressed the better. It’s why race and transgender issues have hijacked feminism.

An opinion piece yesterday was titled: A Guide to Dating Woman in a Matriarchy

Does no one on the Time's staff realize what a joke the paper has become?

"Trump just admitted to conspiracy! Send out the flying monkeys to attack the press!"

Is NYT still owned by the scumbag Mexican billionaire?

By the way, Asian households have the highest average household income in the US, higher than white households.

Oppressed?

Yes, R45, if your parents immigrated to the United States and you majored in Victim Studies at Harvard, probably free on a scholarship for oppressed minorities. And it is all the fault of white men.

If you don't like "white men" or have to mention "white" this or that constantly... please, do not fuck, date, or even speak to us.

Interesting take from DL favorite Andrew Sullivan:

R48: Captain Bareback needs to shut his whore mouth after supporting racist Charles Murray. He has NO ROOM to speak on this.

R22: Bless you! The Vox piece explains everything perfectly. Everyone here WILL read it, and then shut up about this non-issue.

THREAD CLOSED!

Andrew Sullivan is an idiot who refuses to acknowledge that some of Jeong's "offensive" tweets are actually her mocking his "polite" racism.

And the trolls on here with their FAUXRAGE about Sarah Jeong's vicious satire while quoting the likes of respectable bigot Andrew Sullivan can fuck off.

"It would be nice to think that these thoughts didn’t come from her own head"

Except she has now been appointed to the Editorial Board of the NYT.

[quote]there were far too many Twitter posts to be only reactions to others' racism. Rewarding that behavior with a powerful and lucrative job is damaging to American political culture.

You know, you're right.

[quote]Is NYT still owned by the scumbag Mexican billionaire?

His name is Carlos Slim. He's the majority shareholder.

GTFO with this, "If you don't support Sarah Jeong/NYT's decision, you are a right wing troll!!!!1!!"

Some people see the world, and the views held by the people in it, with just a tad more nuance than that.

The Dems go further and further left, as evidenced by the support Bernie got in 2016, and the candidates we've seen since then. And if you don't agree and support those positions, you are suddenly "right-wing".

You can see it here in the rhetoric on DL. If we don't like what Sarah Jeong tweeted, we're now "right-wing".

If you think this approach will bring success to Democrats, you're wrong. You're alienating other Democrats. You're driving people away. We're losing the ability to debate and negotiate amongst ourselves, and instead we resort to name-calling: "Trumpster", "deplorable", "racists", etc. Granted that's been the reality on Datalounge for years, but as the real world starts to mirror those tactics more and more, the results are not going to be good.

[quote]If we don't like what Sarah Jeong tweeted, we're now "right-wing".

And then, without irony, you proceed to prove the point.

R56, ah yes, nuance. Except when it comes to putting Jeong's tweets in context. Then, suddenly, nuance is irrelevant.

^ an impt point r57, “the twitterverse” and “Black twitter” are now the go-to vox populi for instant reaction splashed across the media, but they are far from representative of who actually casts votes. While the college-age Twitterverse sits around e-cheering insults lobbed at old white men, those old white men & their old white wives head to the polls.

[quote]And then, without irony, you proceed to prove the point.

Hardly. My positions on the issues haven't changed. But if I'm now "right-wing" - and no different to you than someone who has supported Republican candidates and causes over the years - there is a significant problem in our party.

[quote]By the way, Asian households have the highest average household income in the US, higher than white households.

[quote]Oppressed?

Well that’s the point I base upthread though. In millennial/gen-Z leftie circles, you only matter if you’re oppressed. So you’d better find a reason to be oppressed if you want a voice. This is why very lightskinned black people are often the biggest complainers — they have to be because they’re seen as “privileged” in the black community.

Or if you’re very white, and worst of all very white and very straight, you’d better show how you’re definitely not one of the *bad* ones — achieved by constantly criticizing what you are. And I do mean constantly.

base = made

R57, I doubt you read what Jeong tweeted and stopped to think about the context or, as R56 posited, nuance of her remarks. And if you can't see that, indeed, you prove the point.

I’m not down with her other comments, but old straight white men are the group most likely to be deplorables.

How is that different from saying it’s alright to describe young black men as criminals, r65?

I work in academia. In my experience, it's usually the most socioeconomically privileged students (and professors) who complain the loudest about being oppressed.

My theory is that, on some level, they feel guilty about having better lives than many of their peers (this is esp. true of the global elite, international students from mainly China and India). So playing up their "oppression" is a way to assuage this guilt.

Or, if I were to be more cynical: they are used to being privileged, to having things and getting their way. Arriving in a humanities department in the US, they quickly learn that "oppressed voices" are usually the loudest, most powerful voices in the room, and thus play up their oppression to maintain their privilege, just in a different context.

I hope the NYT keeps her. She’s a fantastic representative of their views on the Oppression Olympics.

I was oppressed!

- Lorna Luft

I bet she’s deadly jealous of Phan Thi Kim Phuc. That’s some world wide sympathy right there and all she had to do was be burned to near death by napalm, nothing like as bad as indulging in a flame war on Twitter.

"The Dems go further and further left", blah, blah, blah - and a paragraph of drivel...

And the Repugs go further and further right and...not a word.

So? R72, I was *already* against the Rs. Of course the party has become more extreme in the past 30 years; but I didn't agree with them in the 1990s either.

The woman was called the most vile shit on Twitter and you trash have the AUDACITY to claim that because Asians make money (a racist stereotype in and of itself) she isn't oppressed and can't complain? You people are no better than deplorables. If you're real that is, which I think most of the people attacking her are not...

I didn't agree with the Republicans in the 70s (when I was a child), the 80s, the 90s, the 'Aughts, and now; the common thread for the past 50 years is, however, that the Democrats just can't become as bad as the Republicans, saying and doing the same things that they do, because that will cost us... what, exactly? What have we got to lose at this point? What has 50 years of being polite brought us?

And why is it that Republicans can go as batshit crazy as they want and it never seems to cost them a single vote, but if a Democrat says something even slightly over the line, it's worthy of ostracization/joblessness/death?

[quote]because Asians make money (a racist stereotype in and of itself)

Asian Americans are the highest earners in the US. Pray tell how this fact is "racist."

This comment on Slate sums up how I feel about the affair:

[quote]This whole issue is fundamentally a test, a test of if you're willing to apply a standard fairly, if you're willing to behave intellectually honestly, and if you're willing to follow the same rules yourself that you want to impose on other people.

R77: Except that is inaccurate as the Vox piece makes quite clear. Read it.

R76: It's racist because it's being used to say it's ok to call her a gook cunt and other vile shit on Twitter and since other Asians make money, she does too cuz she's Asian, and therefore she can't be oppressed and can't fight back.

[quote]worst of all very white and very straight,

No, the worst thing to be is a gay man. We're hated far more than the straights.

The oppression olympics are becoming so goddamned tedious.

She went to HLS and is on the editorial board for the NYT. I'd say she is less oppressed than the majority of Americans of any race or national background.

Who knows if she even *really* thought those things? It's possible she did, but this sort of stuff is also just viewed as proper righthink, and cute and clever stuff to say that you're just supposed to pepper your speech with all the time in this IdPol millieu bubble people like her live in.

R57, I partly agree, but I think you're conflating2 somewhat different things, 'further left' as in anti-establishment left-populist economic concerns is probably a left that could speak to more people including many working-class people, provided it's done properly. 'Further left' as in, well this kind of stuff, IdPol oppression olympics is another thing.

" I was *already* against the Rs"

The Rs? OF COURSE you were...

Oh STFU, r82.

Touched a nerve, cunt?

R81: She was responding to people calling her a gook cunt and claiming her saying something should be cancelled was discriminating against white people everywhere. That's why she said #cancelallwhitepeople to say how ridiculous it is to equate those 2 things.

R83: There is no far left taking over the party. We're calling you out over you're MARY-ING over a non-existent problem. And the idea that NYT gives anybody an editorial board job is going to influence the vote of ANYONE is asinine to the nth degree.

[quote]I’m not down with her other comments, but old straight white men are the group most likely to be deplorables.

She made no mention of "straight" in her tweet. She might as well be talking of the little white gay men that populate this forum.

I'm a white guy but I'm astonished at the number of white guys who are absolutely scared to death of Asians and Hispanics and blacks becoming the majority in this country. It's poisoning their thinking.

They start stamping their feet - "I've always been a Democrat but I'm going to turn Republican if the Democrats don't stop with this political correctness!" etc. etc. - as if allowing an Asian woman to fight back against vile racist comments were FAR more terrible than trying to destroy access to health care.

R87: Marry Me!!

Some dim triggered nut has arrived on this thread to tell everyone else how to think! What a treat. Please go on - you’re doing such a great job of selling your viewpoint.

Was she honestly responding to racist comments? I'm not convinced. She might be making it up now to cover her ass. Even if she was joking, her tweets were nasty. Assualting the elderly passes for humor these days?

r90 She wasn't. Those comments were made in many different contexts and at times with several years between each.

If you're on political Twitter, you know she's a combative piece of shit who likes to perform victimhood, including to get people fired.

R90 and R91: Both liars and assholes who won't read Vox and therefore don't know what you're talking about. Shut up on this. You're uneducated.

r92 lol

And who besides mentally-retarded teenaers reads Vox, R92?

Uneducated=unindoctorinated.

Bottom line? Bitch, without Round Eye, you fuckee 14th Century concumbine. East Asians are THE WORST racists..and this White Man doesn't give a good goddamn about what you think. You soak up our culture like sponges, because your own art and culture are so primitive by comparison.

Twist in the wind, Ms. Horizontal Smile.

@R92.. Is that you, Sarah?

Here's the thing--no one made her write those tweets. Yes, I'm sure she's the recipient of awful, racist tweets, but, no, that doesn't mean she had to respond in kind. That's on her. And what she chose to Tweet show her to be a bigot. And, yes, people with sketchy agendas dug those tweets up, but there are many of them and made over a series of years. At the very best, her tweeting habits show poor judgment, at worst, well, she's a bigot.

Is it really a good idea for a major newspaper to have a journalist with poor judgment and a shown bias against a large group of people in a position of authority?

Jeong should be lt go for the same reasons as Quinn Norton--neither has the judgment, lack of prejudice or even the basic common sense to work at the Times. As journalists they *know* what they tweet is a matter of record, but they were still fucking idiots about it.

I will give a pass to James Gunn--comedy is tricky and his tweets are gross, but understandable in context of his career. He should get the Guardian directing job back.

Well said, R96.

Vox? Right.

The bitch is a blatant racist. The NYT's continues its slide into hilarious irrelevancy. It is actually a sin. Back in the day it was quite intelligent, a trend setter, the news source for educated people. The A section is best used for the litter box.

R99

Harsh.

True, but harsh. She’s going to an amazing editrix to avoid.

I prefer Bai Ling.

I reported one of her comments to Twitter. I just got a notification that it violated their policy against "hateful. conduct." So, what the hell, NY Times?

She's Korean. They're freaks.

Is this Vox a colored site?

[quote]I'm sure she's the recipient of awful, racist tweets, but, no, that doesn't mean she had to respond in kind.

You're right! The only people who should be allowed to respond in kind are old, angry, white men who have led lives of misery and oppression since the Civil and Voting RIghts Acts were passed.

I'm glad she wrote those tweets. White people have done lots of horrible shit - they need to hear this stuff because much worse has been said by them. And is being said by them right now.

The real question: why are white people such fucking snowflakes?

Seriously r106? You have all the reasoning ability of a preschooler. “Some of them said bad stuff so it’s OK for me to say equally bad stuff about all of them”? She’s a vacuous racist cunt. I don’t care who is making racist remarks about whom, I don’t care what skin color they are, economic grouping or where they buy their coffee; if you are making statements about a group of people based on their skin color then you are a racist. It’s really not any more complex than that no matter what your Victimhood Studies TA says.

She's keeping a low profile now. Understandably, but won't this make it difficult to do her job?

She was responding to the following racist tweets directed at her. If someone was attacking you with homophobic slurs, would you respond back?

The number one rule of dealing with trolls is DON'T ENGAGE.

So if she said #cancelfags and "fagssuck, you'd be cool with that r109? She wouldn't do that, of course, cause only hating white people is okay. She's dumb but not that dumb.

R111 I'm not saying that it's okay. She should have ignored the racist trolls like Don Lemon did.

Don Lemon mentions at 7:00 in the following clip, that he gets bombarded with racist tweets on social media but he never responded because it's unprofessional and it might get him fired.

R111 I'm not saying that it's okay for her to respond back. She should have ignored the racist trolls like Don Lemon did.

Don Lemon mentions at 7:00 in the following clip, that he gets bombarded with racist tweets on social media but he never responded because it's unprofessional and it might get him fired.

The whole excuse that she was “responding” to racist tweets is complete bullshit. She’s been tweeting these things for years.

She says them because she means them.

R105, No, it's not right for them either. I also think Quinn Norton deserved to be fired.

You don't have to respond to a racist by being a racist. Why is that such a hard concept for you? I've had various slurs thrown at me online, but I don't ever post a response that I wouldn't want heard in a crowded room full of strangers--because that's essentially what you're doing when you play on the Internet.

As I said, Jeong, at best, shows poor judgment. Particularly since it wasn't one tweet--she did this over the course of years.

Her behaviour is typical of a young Millennial, which is unprofessional, immature behaviour on social media as if she's responding to bullies in a high school yard.

Yep, and her defense is basically "Well, he started it!" I can't believe that the NYT is giving that a pass. No, the last thing the NYT needs is someone who can't control her termper and then justifies her lack of self-control on other people.

Also, it's a little disturbing that her go-to for flaming is bigotry. I don't care what her excuse is. I can be screaming at the top of my lungs and I'm not going to spew bigotry because I.don't.think.that.way.

Exactly r117! I see these videos of people doing racist rants and I am always shocked, seriously, that "nigger" is in someone's lexicon, I don't think I've ever said it, it's odd how easily it comes to people.

I work with a woman who reminds me a lot of Sarah Jeong. Born in Korea, grew up privileged in US.

I cannot have a five minute interaction with her without hearing her complain about "white people," "white men," "whiteness," etc. Sometimes (she knows I'm out) she will do me the courtesy of adding, "straight" to "white men." If she is not ragging on whiteness, she is ragging on Americans. (I get that, but after a while, it gets vacuous. Yes, Americans are dumb. Aren't you clever!)

I asked her recently, "What did you think of the recent lecture on XYZ?"

Her response: "Ugh. He talked like a typical white man."

She's, frankly, exhausting.

This bitch needs to back the fuck up before she gets smacked the fuck up!

The Hanoi Hydrangea will be livid that xhyr wasn’t offered the job.

R119, let me guess-she only bangs(or at least is attracted to) cute white guys?

[quote] I don't think I've ever said it, it's odd how easily it comes to people.

And yet you just said it in your post, R118.

you caught me r123, am I supposed to type N word like a pussy? No.

Why should she be grateful for a war fought in a foreign country, before she was born, that she had nothing to do with? Are you implying she doesn't count as 'full' american because she isn't white?

You're right, and for that matter, why should we be grateful to the Allies? we aren't Jews in 1940!

r126 If you want to talk about World War II - African-Americans were expected to fight for a country that treated them as second-class citizens. Loyal Japanese-American citizens were put in concentration camps. But the most important thing is to condemn as Sarah Jeong as an ungrateful monster who will destroy all white people.

R127--and those things weren't good. They also don't work as excuses for Sarah Jeong's Tweets. Again, she shows a lack of judgment and evidence of bias against a large heterogenuous group of people. Her lack of self-control means she shouldn't be anywhere near the New York Times.

Whataboutism is lame when the right does it. It's also lame when SJWs do it.

Her words are indefensible.

She’s going to be a rock around the NYT’s neck. As if they weren’t sinking fast enough.

It’s too bad because I used to enjoy the arts section, food section, etc.

r128 You are right - I believe in fighting for social justice. What about you?

Oh ffs, r130 has stated her boundaries!

An ironic discussion on a website that constantly slams "breeders" for their homophobia. Just ignore them, right? Don't fight back. Clutch your pearls and cry in a corner instead.

R130, Of course I do, whisch is why I also get that responding to bigotry with bigotry is a stupid, self-defeating tactic. I think it's funny that you're self-righteously defending someone's bigotry.

Barack Obama has endured way more slurs and threats than Jeong ever has, but he didn't respond to those attacks with bigotry. He's smarter than that.

Jeong isn't--which is why she has no business in a position on the NYT editorial board. By not canning her, the NYT is tacitly approving bias and bigotry--a bad look for a newspaper. Jeong writes about technology--because her bigotry has been so blatant, her credibility as a journalist is shot--if she's comparing two companies, one founded by a white guy, the other founded by an Asian-American, will her biases enter into how she assesses each company? Particularly since she seems to believe that white people haven't produced anything on their own--an odd stance in a technology reporter, by the way, she seems unfamiliar with Fairchild and co.

If, say, she's covering a patent dispute between white and Asian claimants will her bias affect her coverage and ability to assess the legitimacy of the claims?

Jeong's damaged goods--and the NYT is in really bad shape if no one has the brains to jettison her. They don't need someone who's comes with this much baggage.

How hard did you laugh when you typed out that you fight for social justice? Because that's why you're furiously tweeting and datalounging, to make sure the little guy gets his!

Uh oh. On tape.

R130, Ah, the personal attack. Translation: you can't defend Jeong's bigotry.

R135, I don't find her comment there as offensive as her tweets, but she comes off as a bit of a dim bulb.

What the hell is the NYT thinking?

..... it's like they're trying to alienate people and they just won Alex Jones a bunch of new fans.

R129, the NYTs has been putting the rock around its neck in earnest for about 5 years. The New Yorker started doing so about a year ago. The NYT's was always a propaganda mouth piece (I learned this during the lead up to the invasions of Kuwait and, especially, Iran). I don't know who it's master is now but the A section is complete leftist insanity.

It used to be fun when you had to figure out the propaganda, now all you have to do is read the headlines on page one.

R139 here.....that should read IRAN, post 9/11

r136 Are you even paying attention? r128 "insulted" me by calling me an SJW. Of course, racists invented the slurs "SJW", "politically correct", and "snowflake". But when I respond, I'm somehow the one making the personal attack?

R141, No, "politically correct" actually dates back to the early 80s and it was invented on the left, then co-opted by the right. I first heard it from a Berkeley lesbian back in 1985. SJW also originated in the 20th century--neutral term that became derogatory. "Snowflake" comes from "special snowflake"--and, no, it didn't originate with racists.

And I actually didn't call you any of those terms. I made a comment about the lameness of whataboutism on both the right and the left.

But, if you want a personal insult, here's one: you're an idiot.

Why was she getting all these racist tweets (prior to getting this job)? How was she even known enough to inspire racist tweets coming at her?

r142 Sorry I "triggered" you.

r143 I think she was commenting on high tech, which made her the target of a lot of racist, homophobic basement dwellers.

R142/143--you really think high tech brings out basement dwellers? It's more likely Jeong was looking for attention since attention brings Twitter followers and helps develop one's all-important "brand". She waded into some controversial topics, got some bottom feeders to respond and then decided to join them.

She got caught and is now playing the victim card, but, fact is, her casual bigotry served a purpose for her.

This Atlantic article gets at some of it--

R141, you know for a fact that racists, who are always and only white in your universe, I am sure, came up with those terms? If so, prove it. SOOoooo white racist men start to call social justice warriors and snowflakes, who are overwhelmingly white, social justice warriors and snowflakes? Or do you mean black racists came up with those terms?

#DEMOCRATICNATIONALSOCIALISTS

r147 / r148 I just checked your posting history. You are a deplorable, stupid troll.

R149, do you like to dox people too?

DL allows you to check anyone's posting history. I'm sorry if that bothers you. Why would you accuse me of doxing? Projection on your part?

Now everyone is wanting to watch Info Wars.

A more balacned look.

This is gong to backfire on the Times.

R153, Hogwash. Frank Rich isn't a polemicist, he's a critic capable of writing a brutal take-down, but he doesn't play bigot on Twitter. Nothing about what Jeong does requires that she be a bigot on Twitter over a period of years. She can be lively and opinionated without being a bigot.

What a stupid article.

Shenzhen Tech Girl Naomi Wu on her experiences with Sarah Jeong, Jason Koebler and Vice Magazine. It's long but interesting and gives insight into Jeong and Koebler's arrogance.

Interesting read r156

[quote]I found her tweets troubling.

Oh shit, she's "troubling!"

Don't any of you yahoos wonder why the white straight Redditbro contingent always has a problem with every woman that gets a job in journalism? Or why all these tough manly bros start quaking in their sneakers when they see an Asian lady tweeting with the #CancelAllWhitePeople hashtag? Why they think it literally means she's calling for genocide?

It's especially stupid here on DL, where every single day we have people very literally calling for murder, rape, assault, doxxing, genocide, lynching, bashing, and everything in between. You don't see Mr. Troubled up there calling for the webmaster to block any of our homegrown trolls.

It's backlash. The same people saying Jeong wants to genocide all whites OMG are on other threads complaining about "diversity" and using dogwhistles like "vibrant" and "colorful."

R158 go and read the article at r156. She’s not just “troubling” she’s a vicious, lying asshole.

Interesting quote about Sarah Jeong from Naomi Wu in R156's link:

[quote] With the platform that journalism gave her amplifying that power, sent on behalf of the exact sort of “privileged White man” she [Sarah Jeong] claims to despise, she went out to destroy another Asian woman.

Every time I see this thread title, I LOL for real. Just how delicate a snowflake must you be to think a few joke tweets from an Asian woman about white men/people make the tweeter a "monster"?

Newsflash: our very own POTUS tweets something vastly more monstrous at least half a dozen times a day.

They weren't a few joke tweets. Jeong said this kind of crap for years, said it in speeches. Yes, they're stupid, which is why she shouldn't be working at the NYT. Right-wing trolls make all sorts of racist "jokes", doesn't mean they're not racists. Jeong makes all sorts of "humorous" bigoted comments--doesn't mean she's not a bigot.

Here's a clue--non-bigots don't think bigoted comments are funny.

And, wow, that Medium piece--Jeong had no problem whatsoever working her American/Harvard privilege to protect the white guys at Vice. I see why she's getting protected in return--she basically sucks up to white-guy hipster types--and has that urban contempt for rural and working-class whites.

Jeong has the ethics of a snake.

New York Times Writer Bashes Paper’s Latest Hire Sarah Jeong, Then Apologizes

That chick is a pussy r163, just like Kathy Griffin. Can't believe someone would let fucking Huff Po shame them into apologizing.

r164 To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?

Did they ever fire her?

No, they didn't and she is pushing transing of minors. Here she recommends the latest NY Times trans article..

sarah jeong ‏ Verified account @sarahjeong

seems like another good argument for giving trans children the choice to take puberty blockers?