General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Wow. Bravenak (DU member) going at it with Sarandon! [View all]Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)If I may yet again return to what I actually wrote, I posted that the "sweatshop" charge was a smear. What I now learn (which I admit I hadn't known before) is that Susan Sarandon co-founded a company that operates ping pong parlors in several cities, where a visitor can also buy various game-related merchandise like sneakers or paddles.
If you want to call such merchandise sales "tacky", that's your privilege, but I actually played ping pong in my youth. I wore sneakers and used a paddle. That a ping pong parlor sells ping pong equipment doesn't cause me to faint from surprise. Presumably some 1%ers would dismiss the whole sport, and anything connected with it, as tacky -- but for those of us who've never belonged to a country club, there's value in recreation that doesn't require expensive equipment or acres of land. I can only imagine the invective that some DUers would be heaping on Sarandon if she had instead become involved in yacht racing.
Now, putting aside this interesting digression into table tennis, let's note the two important points:
1. That Sarandon is involved with a business that sells merchandise does not prove, indeed does not come close to proving, that she operates a sweatshop. Yes, the merchandise has to be made somewhere. During the run-up to the 2016 general election, the Hillary Clinton campaign website was selling various "I'm with H>er" swag. I myself owned and wore a Clinton/Kaine lapel button. What would happen if, on the basis of that evidence, some dimwit posted on DU that Hillary Clinton had operated a sweatshop? You know and I know what would happen to that post (and deservedly so).
2. You refer to my "defense of her virtue". This is more reading comprehension fail. Sarandon has been faulted for supporting Stein, and I agree with that criticism. The facts are clear that she did so. Sarandon has also been faulted for allegedly operating a sweatshop. I disagree with that criticism because, as far as any evidence produced in this thread goes, the charge is total bullshit, i.e. an unsupported smear. See, the tricky point is that it's possible for one criticism of Sarandon to be valid while another is invalid. This silly phrase "defense of her virtue" tries to blur that distinction. If I defend Sarandon against one bullshit charge, that has nothing to do with the charges that supporting Stein was a mistake or that involvement with a downmarket sport like ping pong is tacky.