I think you may jumping to conclusions in assuming the actor used poor judgement in using the symbol. Considering the ambiguity of the gesture, it’s entirely possible he simply didn’t know it has been associated with racists. I reviewed the ADL’s entry regarding the gesture and, contrary to what’s been purported in this thread, the entry explains that the symbol is NOT a black-and-white hate symbol, but rather that care should be taken to evaluate its meaning.Regardless of the intent, which we simply can’t know with the data we have, the judgement of the actor is appalling. There is simply no excuse for using an ambiguous symbol, which has a well-known association with racism, when posing with a child of color at a theme park.
LinkADL said:Because of the traditional meaning of the “okay” hand gesture, as well as other usages unrelated to white supremacy, particular care must be taken not to jump to conclusions about the intent behind someone who has used the gesture.
I think you misunderstood my point.I think you may jumping to conclusions in assuming the actor used poor judgement in using the symbol. Considering the ambiguity of the gesture, it’s entirely possible he simply didn’t know it has been associated with racists. I reviewed the ADL’s entry regarding the gesture and, contrary to what’s been purported in this thread, the entry explains that the symbol is NOT a black-and-white hate symbol, but rather that care should be taken to evaluate its meaning.
Are we seriously to expect a low-level lineworker to be aware of the recent political connotations of what the ADL still considers to be, in many contexts, a benign hand gesture? As @Zachary and @Lolers said, maybe he violated a more general rule against making hand gestures, in which case the firing is justified from a technical and PR standpoint. But to attribute the gesture to “appalling” judgement, when it can just as easily be attributed to an innocent unawareness of the connotation, is unfair in my opinion.
Yes both you and @Zachary are correct in this mater and he needs to kick rocks, and be like Lee and press on. And Yes @Zachary after watching the video the little girl was not doing that motion that or throwing up gang signs, and since it was an actor thru Uni they should know and get stuff that is not allowed and even those gang signs or anything related to any thing gang, hate, discrimination et etc etc. IF you do anything that is the handbooks, weekly stuff thru UOTM pass outs that violates the company policy than yes. I know thru experience since I worked at the park but now transferred to a new job with Uni still, that they don't play with what is in the book. I have seen people get fired on their break in back stage area for giving gang related signs for saying at same time he is an OG Crip in Orlando. So yeah they don't play, and glad they gor rid of him and terminate him. We don't need team members offending or being disrespectful, they should be on stage up in the parks making the guest a pleasant time and immerse them into either the movies in the studios, or over at IOA andI just want to point out some context that is being overlooked here: the child is biracial. Regardless of the intent, which we simply can’t know with the data we have, the judgement of the actor is appalling. There is simply no excuse for using an ambiguous symbol, which has a well-known association with racism, when posing with a child of color at a theme park. Honestly, I can’t imagine the character actors are allowed to use any symbol that could be interpreted as racist, given the inevitable blowback to the company.
Edit: symbols for “butthole” are equally inappropriate for a character dine.
I too was unaware that this symbol was considered offensive until the controversy around this photo. I also never knew it meant butthole but was aware of the game around tricking your friends to look at it.I guess I'm in the dark with the intent on the symbol before reading any of this - I would think he's just playing a dumb game (kind of like punch-buggy). Had no idea it could mean butthole or racist whatever.
Not trying to be argumentative, but this sounds like rhetoric. I think this entire thread has been a wonderful example of how an objective discussion around what may or may not have been a racist gesture can take place without anyone attacking each other and labeling one another "racist" based on their desire to take a deeper, objective look into the situation. I'm a little confused by the term "passive approval of racism." What does that mean? I haven't seen anyone on this thread approving racism at all, either passively or directly.Up front, I agree with Lolers and Nicole. We do not know intent or have enough back ground to serve as judge and jury. I am picking up a vibe here that I don't like, passive approval of racism. I feel like there are some who are very quick to wave off racist behavior. (if that is what it is)
The world has always been filled with plenty of racists and bigots, and unfortunately those words used to have far more power than they do today. Today, people are far more quick to label someone as a "racist" or "bigot" to the point where those words have begun to lose their meaning. How can society overcome racism and bigotry if the terms themselves have lost their power? An example of this is accusing those involved in an objective discussion of passive approval of racism. I'm a little confused how you came to that conclusion.If the past few years have demonstrated anything, it is that bigots are everywhere and are far more bold then they used to be.
I believe that, like statistics, Occam's Razor can be abused. Drawing conclusions based on simplicity of assumption is a dangerous thing, as is immediately inserting an individual human being into whatever the current political climate happens to exist, and then judging and/or labeling them based on an ever-changing societal construct formed substantially around a combination of flawed groupthink and a hunger for power. Regardless of the political climate, absolutely no one can know anyone else's thoughts or intentions, and drawing conclusions based on simplicity tends to lead to the pervasive mob mentality that exists today.Now all that having been said.
Consider Occam's Razor, "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem." Latin for "More things should not be used than are necessary."
What our dear William was suggesting (within context) was that given two equal conclusions, the most simple is usually right.
So when looking at this image, is it simpler that this person is holding up an upside down Okay sign or that, in our current political climate he was try to get away with throwing up a quiet racist symbol while touching a bi-racial child?
I don't think anyone in this thread has accused anyone else of being sensitive or needing to grow a spine. This thread has been extremely objective in my opinion. Unfortunately, it seems the ability of people to objectively consider that not everything people do or say is meant to make them uncomfortable has greatly declined as society's ability to objectively communicate has declined. If people learned how to understand each other, and accept that others are different from themselves (and that this is perfectly okay - ideal, even), maybe they wouldn't be so quick to jump to a conclusion that others are actively trying, or feel entitled, to make them uncomfortable. No one can know what another person is thinking or feeling, and empathy and compassion need to flow in all directions in order to be effective. Today's society seems to demand empathy and compassion for themselves while patently refusing to give the same to others.Again without context we just don't know. But I think dancing around and all but saying, "everyone is too sensitive and needs to grow a spine" is, frankly bull shit.
People need to stop being bullies and acting as if it is their god given right to make other uncomfortable.
As I wrote in my last post, I believe this thread has been an extremely objective discussion. Can you point to the portions of this thread from which you're drawing your conclusions? Because I've seen no one dismissing, victim shaming, or excusing racist behavior, and I'd like to know what I've been missing.IWhat do we know? A biracial child had a picture taken with what is, or what is now, a symbol of hate on her shoulder. And I can't help but draw the conclusion most people commenting in this thread are, at best, being dismissive and inadvertently victim shaming. Or, at worst, excusing racist behavior. If I was in these parents shoes, I'd be stark raving mad and with good cause. I'm mad just thinking about it now.