Unethical Tweet Of The Month: Actress Rosanna Arquette

Observations, besides the obvious and obligatory, “What an idiot!”…

1. This is signature significance for a stupid woman, desperately virtue- signaling to her peer group. No fair or intelligent person would say or think such a thing.

2. The tweet is declaring that an entire race should be ashamed of itself. This is bigotry; this is racism. Arquette lacks the intellectual skill to figure that out, though it is startlingly straightforward.

3. One of the responses to the tweet, which helps us define the kind of person who would follow the likes of Rosanna Arquette on Twitter, wrote, “Please don’t. I understand the inclination but this is actually more harmful than helpful. POC are not trying to shame decent white people for being white. This feeds into a right wing talking point that this is what we want. I don’t. I want allies who see my humanity. That’s it.” 

Ah. Here we have a rebuttal to a woman asserting that all whites are the same declaring what “POCs” want, as if they are also monolithic. Beautiful.

4. Again, we must reluctantly applaud Twitter, as destructive as it is, for once again providing a tool for silly, incompetent, bigoted public figures to out themselves.

5. Despite well-deserved ridicule on social media for this fatuous and offensive tweet,  Arquette hasn’t learned anything. Now playing the victim, she told The Wrap, “There are toxic and very vicious people on social media. Threatening and cruel. I said yesterday the I am ashamed of the color of my skin. I am privileged just because I’m white. I feel shame. Because of all the violence that is happening in America and other racist countries.”

Yes, we know that’s what you said, Rosanna. One could legitimately call publicly impugning everyone with a particular skin shade “cruel.”  In fact, I’ll do that right now: calling people shameful based on a single immutable characteristic is cruel as well as bigoted and cretinous. “All the violence” is an ignorant and inflammatory characterization, as is “racist.”

6. I wonder what it will take to rid the culture of the toxic influence of has-been celebrities, a group ranging from the trivial Alyssa Milano to the disgraced Dan Rather to the diminished Larry Tribe, who use social media to exploit their unearned or no longer valid authority?

Arquette,  considered a rising film star in the 80s, has been living off forgettable work in TV, cable and small film projects since her last role in a significant production, a single (though memorable) scene in 1994’s “Pulp Fiction.” Her younger siblings’ (Patricia and David) careers have eclipsed hers, and both of them are washed up now too. Arquette is neither educated, informed, analytical nor astute: why does a star who peaked in the 80’s based primarily on her looks attract social media followers? How barren does one’s life and mind have to be to look to the likes of this woman for enlightenment?

18 thoughts on “Unethical Tweet Of The Month: Actress Rosanna Arquette

  1. Another example of the increasing need for the “no, this is not satire” disclaimer when relating the words and deeds of the American left.

    • It’s nicknamed “Poe’s Law”. This is part of why Snopes is fact checking Babylon Bee, because it’s hard to tell actual satire apart from most of the political left nowadays.

      I’m expecting the Babylon Bee to satire Rosanna Arquette on this and predict it will be hard to tell it’s actually satire because how ridiculous her actual statement is.

  2. She should feel ashamed for all women, for all actors too, because she is such a bad example in proving how biased she is to the young people in this world. Better to keep her mouth shut than digging herself in deeper after her first mistake.
    (That should be the twitter motto. But anything to juice traffic, eh? The quote source is unknown and there’s a lot of versions. The oldest I saw was Proverb’s “Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue.” Though the more modern seems to date to around 1900, and incorrectly attributed to Lincoln, Twain, and a bunch more. The rabbit holes you can drop through looking to credit a source… fascinating quote study)

  3. It’s a ludicrous statement, but, Jack, I would argue that her career status is irrelevant. She’s a celebrity and, regardless of how long ago she peaked, her words have weight that they should not. The same should be true of George Clooney, Chris Evans, Woody Harrelson (whose story about having to sneak away from Donald Trump at a long ago party is apparently considered newsworthy on Yahoo) and any other celebrity.

    As American citizens, they can say what they like, but it’s our fault as a country for putting celebrities on a pedestal and allowing them a forum that other citizens do not get. Their voices drown out millions and encourage others to believe that their views are more mainstream than they are.

    The Golden Age, Silver Age and Bronze Age of movies is over. We need to grow out of our obsession with the famous.

  4. I have mixed feelings about the validity of examples like this…. Not because they don’t exemplify a trend… No, there are hundreds, thousands, of not-blue-checked accounts more than willing to say the same thing… But because they *do* exemplify a trend, and I refuse to give the blue-check-squad more credit than they deserve. The idea deserves derision, but paying undue attention to washed out has-beens who never had any more first hand experience or knowledge than the average crazed street preacher never really seemed a good spend of my time. “Crazy person we shouldn’t care about says crazy thing” isn’t exactly a man-bites-dog headline.

    • HT, she’s notable insofar as she is symptomatic of a toxic epidemic ravaging the country. Or maybe two: lefty insanity and celebrity worship.

  5. Yes, I agree it is signature significance for something. Let’s recap:

    1. She regrets being born white. What if somebody, say former president Obama, said they regretted being born black? Wouldn’t that be seen as racism? How is this different? Once again, logic leads us to the conclusion that racism against whites is okay, because of black chattel slavery over 200 years ago.

    Is there some point at which it will no longer be okay to say racist things about whites? I actually don’t believe so, because the Left will never deprive itself of their self-perception of moral superiority and racism is central to that. It is more acceptable today for whites to say racist things about their own race than to accept the circumstances of their birth.

    2. She regrets her privilege. She can always give that up, surrender her career as an actress and live like the rest of us. But she won’t, because then nobody will follow her on Twitter. Her position as a “movie star” is why people care about what she says.

    I wonder what it will take to rid the culture of the toxic influence of has-been celebrities, a group ranging from the trivial Alyssa Milano to the disgraced Dan Rather to the diminished Larry Tribe, who use social media to exploit their unearned or no longer valid authority?

    Like a chronic disease, I don’t think it can be cured, only kept at bay. Right now, it is a pandemic and exacting a profound social cost.

    Arquette is neither educated, informed, analytical nor astute: why does a star who peaked in the 80’s based primarily on her looks attract social media followers? How barren does one’s life and mind have to be to look to the likes of this woman for enlightenment?

    Because people who remember her want her approval. It has some sort of meaning in their lives to have the approval of a washed-up celebrity with no discernible ability to comment on any social issue.

    Why is this? It’s one of the great mysteries, like why people will risk their lives at the Grand Canyon to get a cool selfie. I regard it as a mental illness, but I’m sure the “woke” APA would rebuke me on that.

  6. Silver spoon with a leg up in a business when/where the usual advantage was gained by legs open… She never faced real life that common Americans deal with.

    Her opinion is less than ignorable.

    • She’s conflating her personal privilege with general “white privilege”. Yes, she was born with privilege, but it’s because who she was born to, not the color of her skin. She had vastly greater opportunities compared to millions of poor white people. That privilege would have existed regardless of her skin color.

      This is the reason Trump is president. Because of the overall demographics, there are far more total number of disadvantaged whites. Yes, the percentage is lower but the overall number is greater.
      Progressives insist that poor white people still have “privilege” yet all those poor white people are wondering “well, where is my privilege?” Until they learn this lesson, this avenue of attack on whites will backfire.

  7. The surname Arquette derives from the French word “archer” which signifies “bowman,” deriving from the Latin word “arcuarius or arcarius” which signifies “bow.”

    Neither here nor there. I am always interested in what names mean.
    ________________________________

    I am ashamed of the color of my skin. I am privileged just because I’m white. I feel shame.

    Ah, but here is an interesting opportunity to examine ‘white self-hatred’. If one has absorbed and integrated the prevailing historical narrative that demonizes Europe and the Occident, self-contempt and even possibly self-annihilation — suicide essentially — are the proper responses.

    I do not think that this can be reduced to a ‘leftist issue’. I think it is more fundamental. And I have come to recognize that the events in Europe in the 20th century, including the Shoah: what is true about it, and also what is not true about it, have become if you will an engine, or the fuel of an engine, which destroys European and therefore white self-solidarity.

    Remember: Despite all the drama of the present, despite all the emotionalism that is being wielded, despite all the charged rhetoric that we will all be sucked into, there are larger things at stake.

    Every tool will be brought out against any kind of ‘white consciousness’ which has been identified as evil-itself. All I can recommend is to examine the discourses of those who have identified the problem. That is, at the core of ‘the war against whiteness’.

    Bowden says — it makes sense — that the present onslaught is one of the most difficult and dangerous assaults leveled against greater Europe. In the following he employs a kind of Nietzschen psychology to expose one major root of it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.