Let's start with the fact that I like this chick: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2391884/mixed_minute_one_drop_rule/
Also, here is a project she spoke of which is about being multiracial Asian and other: http://seaweedproductions.com/the-hapa-project/hapa-about/
OK. Now, I will talk about what it's like to be multi-racial. I will start with the fact that growing up, most of my white friends said things like "I don't think about race" and "I don't think of you as being non-white".
I probably don't have to dissect those statements for the people here.
It's a given that if you are white, you don't have to think about race, because you are the "default". However, those of us who are not technically (or legally) white do have to think about it. I am in an interesting position as a nonwhite person who is really on the borders of being able to "pass". I have light skin and freckles, and my black hair is curly and not kinky. I could possibly "pass" with an uncritical audience who were willing to overlook my obviously black and native american features. I am, in fact, half white... half Norwegian/Scottish, even, and it doesn't get a whole lot more white than that. But I digress.
In 1995, I married a white man, and proceeded to have children with him. One is a blue-eyed blond with freckles, a fabulously homegrown cornfed-looking white boy of almost overwhelming American (white) good looks. The fact that he looks almost exactly like my (Native and black) father is of no matter in terms of how people perceive him; he is functionally white for all intents and purposes. It makes me feel like sicking up in my mouth a little to write out things like "functionally white". But we (and by we I mean anyone who is aware of the fucked state of race relations) all know it's a wretched part of reality.
My son, despite being genetically a "man of color", will receive the benefits of being a white man in this society. In addition, he will receive the benefit of being incredibly handsome, which is his nonwhite grandfather's legacy. Truly the best of both worlds.
So. Let's talk about my oldest daughter.
She, by some social standards, got fucked in the genetic lottery. While my son has my slimness and his father's pale coloring, my daughter got my coloring and her father's chub. So we made a gorgeous white boy and a chubby young woman (with perhaps ironically classic 1920's-silent-film-(white)-beauty features) who identifies as "not-white", even though by recent Federal ruling she does not legally qualify for any scholarships or programs for black women.
I don't worry for her future, for many reasons including that she is absolutely, objectively a genius, and incredibly charming and socially adept, and she has a college fund. However, I get to watch this bizarre racial showdown of my own children play out right before my eyes; the popular blonde athlete and the little girl about whom a friend's child once asked, "Mom, why are Nigel and Jeti black, but Taro and Deedle are white?"
So, my oldest daughter and I are black. It's kind of weird. It's weird when I hear Jeti on the phone trying to describe her ethnicity to a friend. It's weird hearing Taro telling someone "Well, my grandfather is black and indian but I guess I'm basically white..." and it's weird anytime I date a white guy who is looking for "authenticity", because I ain't got it. I am authentically Portland, authentically Pacific Northwest, authentically a flameworker, and I have years of authenticity as a retail employee and a coffee jockey, but I am not authentically racially goddamn anything. Really.
Other than the fact that being not-white makes a person different from the default, and you can't escape it or not-know it. Ever. Reminders are everywhere and constant. I look forward to the "browning of America" because it would be awesome for me, and all three of my kids, the white one, the black one, and the one who is still disconnected from racial identity, to just relax and feel normal. For a change.
Forever and ever, amen.
What I said in that other thread, kind of feel like an ass now. :oops:
Nigel, this was a fascinating peek into your life and how "the race card" informs that life. I often forget how easy I have it in this culture... (and by "often" I actually mean "99.9% of the time") It made me uncomfortable to read the part about white people saying "I never think about race", because I've said it before, and while it's an honest statement (I don't), it never occurred to me how problematic a statement it was, and is. I mean, I don't believe in a god, and so one would think the ovious jump here would be for me to say "I never think about the possibility of there being a god", but christ I do. A lot.
So, the question now is... for me, anyway... WHY don't I think about race?
This is something to chew on, because the obvious answer seems like it would be 'fear', but of what?
Thank you for opening this up Nigel. I have some thinking to do.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 04, 2012, 09:32:29 PM
What I said in that other thread, kind of feel like an ass now. :oops:
Don't. See my reply in that thread.
Quote from: Hoopla on January 04, 2012, 09:38:30 PM
Nigel, this was a fascinating peek into your life and how "the race card" informs that life. I often forget how easy I have it in this culture... (and by "often" I actually mean "99.9% of the time") It made me uncomfortable to read the part about white people saying "I never think about race", because I've said it before, and while it's an honest statement (I don't), it never occurred to me how problematic a statement it was, and is. I mean, I don't believe in a god, and so one would think the ovious jump here would be for me to say "I never think about the possibility of there being a god", but christ I do. A lot.
So, the question now is... for me, anyway... WHY don't I think about race?
This is something to chew on, because the obvious answer seems like it would be 'fear', but of what?
Thank you for opening this up Nigel. I have some thinking to do.
Thank you.
"Why" is really easy. It's the same reason I never think about changing my boat's oil. I don't have a boat.
You don't have to feel guilty about never thinking about race. In fact, that would be an awesome default. I WISH that was the universal default. The problem comes in when people think that default applies across the board.
Quote from: Hoopla on January 04, 2012, 09:38:30 PM
So, the question now is... for me, anyway... WHY don't I think about race?
My guess?
Because you are civilized. You are civilized because from the mid-1800s through the 1970s, a series of giants came along and shamed your ancestors/parents/whatever into being civilized by the act of those giants
demonstrating civilization. These giants included people like Lysander Spooner, Fredrick Douglas, Medgar Evers, Martin Luther King Jr, Mohammed Ali, and even Lyndon Johnson. There are also examples in Canada (which has race problems of its own, though not typically involving Blacks).
Needless to say, this civilization didn't take with everyone, and the people that were affected by it took 150 years to get there...But now civilization is in decline, and one indicator of that is the recent and pervasive return to racism. You see it everywhere, and there's some sort of perverse "rebellion" to it..."I'm not afraid to state the facts, yada yada". It seems that people in their 20s-30s have finally found a way to piss off their hippie parents, namely by being knuckle-dragging morons.
Mind you, I'm as whitebread as they come, and this is all observation, not experience. Hence the "guess".
Thing is, I DO see color. I like having a bazillion different races around me, because they are all attractive in different ways...And in a city where "misegnation" (Spelling? Brainfarting) is the norm, I have to add that mixed-race people are smoking fucking hot, male or female. There are probably very good biological reasons I feel this way, or maybe I just like variety. I don't know. It's just the way I am. Shallow? Probably.
Nigel's answer is probably more correct.
We don't think about race, because our race has no negative connotations for us.
Gotta think.
How does someone rebut that Persecuted White Syndrome symptom while trying not to cause an irreparable rift in a friendship? Is that possible?
If this is a threadjack question, I'll make it its own thread but it drives me crazy when I hear stuff like "An all black ballet group? That's racist against whites! Why can't there be an all white ballet?"
Of course, the person that was said to had a perfect rebuttal, which was "They do have that, it's the Juliard School of Dance [or whatever it's called]."
One last thing: EVERYONE reacts to race at one point or another. It's all hind-brain stuff, and the difference between a hating bigot, an apologist, and a human being is how you process the reaction...IE, how the front of your brain reacts.
Example: About 6 months ago, I was standing outside of my friend's game shop, having a cigar with him. Out of a store two doors down comes a Black dude, about 25 years old or so, with a pistol on his hip. We both tensed up, then I started to laugh...I mean, half of Hat's customers are openly strapped, so why did we react to this young man? Oh, yeah, because he was Black.
Automatic reaction followed by feeling very, very stupid. I said as much to Hat, and he started to laugh at himself as I was laughing at myself.
Nobody is immune, no matter what race you are. The trick is to stand upright when your lizard brain tells you to prepare to fight or flee because the other guy looks different.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 04, 2012, 10:02:32 PM
How does someone rebut that Persecuted White Syndrome symptom while trying not to cause an irreparable rift in a friendship? Is that possible?
If this is a threadjack question, I'll make it its own thread but it drives me crazy when I hear stuff like "An all black ballet group? That's racist against whites! Why can't there be an all white ballet?"
Of course, the person that was said to had a perfect rebuttal, which was "They do have that, it's the Juliard School of Dance [or whatever it's called]."
A comedian I once watched said "All these guys say, 'How come there's a Black entertainment channel? Why can't we have a White entertainment channel? And I say, you do. It's ALL THE OTHER ONES.'
But how do you rebut it without fucking up a friendship? Easy. You rebut it. If they get that offended, did you really want to be friends with them? You are, after all, judged by the company you keep...and rightly so.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 04, 2012, 10:08:14 PM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 04, 2012, 10:02:32 PM
How does someone rebut that Persecuted White Syndrome symptom while trying not to cause an irreparable rift in a friendship? Is that possible?
If this is a threadjack question, I'll make it its own thread but it drives me crazy when I hear stuff like "An all black ballet group? That's racist against whites! Why can't there be an all white ballet?"
Of course, the person that was said to had a perfect rebuttal, which was "They do have that, it's the Juliard School of Dance [or whatever it's called]."
A comedian I once watched said "All these guys say, 'How come there's a Black entertainment channel? Why can't we have a White entertainment channel? And I say, you do. It's ALL THE OTHER ONES.'
But how do you rebut it without fucking up a friendship? Easy. You rebut it. If they get that offended, did you really want to be friends with them? You are, after all, judged by the company you keep...and rightly so.
I think that the person I have in mind is open to that sort of thing. I just suck at thinking of stuff to say off the cuff, until about three days after the fact. Ah well, practice makes perfect and whatnot...
/threadjack
It's funny, because that kind of racist reaction even applies if you're black. I have it, other black people have it. It's weird as fuck.
I will say, that if you are a white person in a friendship with a non-white person, that IME the best way to deal with it is to just acknowledge it. I mean, we all already know it. So speaking bluntly about it won't hurt. And will probably help in terms of being closer.
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 10:18:08 PM
It's funny, because that kind of racist reaction even applies if you're black. I have it, other black people have it. It's weird as fuck.
Wait. You mean Blacks reacting to other Blacks?
That's not so weird, given what our culture taught and - to some degree - still teaches.
Quote from: Hoopla on January 04, 2012, 09:38:30 PM
So, the question now is... for me, anyway... WHY don't I think about race?
My explanation is similar to but not exactly like Nigel's, and is based off observation and experience: because you have no reason to. White people (particularly white men) are the default, as Nigel said, and have an entire culture going for them, because American culture going back to colonization was dominated by whites. If I go shopping, the women in the ads are usually white, or can pass for such, most actors are white, and most people in positions of authority are white. If you go shopping, Hoops, most of the men in the ads (I think? I've never paid attention to men's advertising) are white, etc. Neither of us will be looked at too hard by store security, neither of us will loose out on a job or be denied house because of our whiteness, etc. We have no reason to think about what we look like because it's never held against us.
People of color, otoh, are constantly reminded that they are, in fact, not the default, from blatant racism to subtle things like a white woman clutching her purse when a Black man comes nearby. Ads usually show white people, movies feature mostly white people (and leads are usually white people, with the exclusion of folks like Halle Berry and Will Smith), and most people in positions of authority are white. People of color are relegated to the fringe of society, simply because of what they look like and they know it.
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 10:18:08 PM
It's funny, because that kind of racist reaction even applies if you're black. I have it, other black people have it. It's weird as fuck.
I had a (Black) teacher explain it as ingrained racism. People of color are not immune, he said, to absorbing the subtle racism that exists in a society that likes to sometimes think of itself as being colorblind.
Quote from: Secret Agent GARBO on January 04, 2012, 10:31:07 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 10:18:08 PM
It's funny, because that kind of racist reaction even applies if you're black. I have it, other black people have it. It's weird as fuck.
I had a (Black) teacher explain it as ingrained racism. People of color are not immune, he said, to absorbing the subtle racism that exists in a society that likes to sometimes think of itself as being colorblind.
This scenario reminds me of the advert for this new show that will be airing soon on Comedy Central, which goes
Black dude standing on corner, waiting for the WALK signal, and talking on the phone with someone
Another black dude, talking on the phone to someone else in ebonics (???) about a party or meeting them at some future time to have fun.
WALK signal happens, and the first black dude walks into the crosswalk. When he is just out of earshot of the second guy, he says in a slightly effeminate and very white enunciation, "Oh my god, Christian, I was almost mugged just now!"
I do find it funny, and that probably makes me a bad person.
I have a weird question, and I may be overthinking this because I'm just extremely exhausted right now, but it's about stereotypes.
I grew up in an area where blacks lived on the Southside because that was the segregated area, that's where all the violence was, that's where people get shot/stabbed/raped all the time, and it's a place where white cops basically would go to die. End of story. It's still like that, if not worse, today.
This is how the area really is, 90% black, poor and violent. Now, whites can easily be poor and violent (and live on the Southside for that matter) but it does always seem like the criminals in questions are black. This seems to fit a certain, very, what's the word, typical? Traditional? Old School? View of blacks in the South. (In this respect, Florida is the South, in that it was a slaveholding Confederate state.)
Now, do we only see this/report this BECAUSE of the perceived stereotypes (let's face it, we all know that whites can be poor, violent rapists too)? Or do people feel they need to act the stereotype of their race?
Obviously, because of these perceived stereotype that was ingrained in my head for so many years (blacks that dress like this, live here, act this way...etc.), I had a little panic attack on a bus from Boston one night when I nice young black fellow sat next to me, and then tapped me on my shoulder to ask if it was okay if he could eat next to me. That sort of behavior would be INSANE to comprehend in St. Petersburg.
Does that make any sense? Or am I talking out of my ass because I'm tired? :?
Quote from: Suu on January 04, 2012, 10:55:03 PM
I have a weird question, and I may be overthinking this because I'm just extremely exhausted right now, but it's about stereotypes.
I grew up in an area where blacks lived on the Southside because that was the segregated area, that's where all the violence was, that's where people get shot/stabbed/raped all the time, and it's a place where white cops basically would go to die. End of story. It's still like that, if not worse, today.
This is how the area really is, 90% black, poor and violent. Now, whites can easily be poor and violent (and live on the Southside for that matter) but it does always seem like the criminals in questions are black. This seems to fit a certain, very, what's the word, typical? Traditional? Old School? View of blacks in the South. (In this respect, Florida is the South, in that it was a slaveholding Confederate state.)
Now, do we only see this/report this BECAUSE of the perceived stereotypes (let's face it, we all know that whites can be poor, violent rapists too)? Or do people feel they need to act the stereotype of their race?
Obviously, because of these perceived stereotype that was ingrained in my head for so many years (blacks that dress like this, live here, act this way...etc.), I had a little panic attack on a bus from Boston one night when I nice young black fellow sat next to me, and then tapped me on my shoulder to ask if it was okay if he could eat next to me. That sort of behavior would be INSANE to comprehend in St. Petersburg.
Does that make any sense? Or am I talking out of my ass because I'm tired? :?
Blacks are a very visible minority, and are disproportionally poor...Almost equal doesn't mean equal, in any sense, including societal, and they are less likely to have a few things you and I enjoy.
A) Generations of an accumulated standard of living.
B) The same educational chances. Let's not fool ourselves, here. Anyone who's seen a school in Maywood, IL and one in Naperville, IL can tell you that.
C) The same policing and community services.
Add to that the fact that poverty tends to be a self-sustaining condition, and you have the situation you describe. The same situation, incidentally, that can be seen in South Tucson among Hispanics and among Whites in the Appalachias.
Lastly, the media loves to reinforce stereotypes and over/under report. Remember during Hurricane Katrina, when CNN and ABC had two separate pictures of looters? One was a White guy, and it was labelled "man finding food during the aftermath", and the other guy was a Black guy doing EXACTLY the same thing ON THE SAME DAY, and the caption was "looter outside of local grocery market."
I like this post, Nigel. I'm mixed. My kids are white. Granted, we're all white, but my children haven't been exposed to our Latino roots in the same way I was. I don't know that I've ever seen my kids even mention race unless I bring it up.
For me, amongst "white" people, outside of friends who knew my family or knew very much about me it was never brought up. At church, in the "old neighborhood", etc, it was very definitely a thing. In fact, like the 2 or 3 black kids I'd ever had at any school or in any social scene still today, me and the other "chiconkeys" kind of cliqued together pretty tight.
Something interesting that I've noticed is that I don't have an accent (I've got a non-regional dialect, specifically), none of my cousins have accents, my grandma didn't even really have an accent. My half-brothers and sisters, no Latino blood whatsoever, all have accents. They grew up one city over and most people from their area all have a vaguely latino accent. Many people that I've met in Denver have a very similar accent. Even without mixing the blood, the cultural aspects of race are becoming very intermingled.
I love it when Nigel brings up race issues. It gives me more things to help kick my hindbrain in the ass.
I like how this thread makes me think about stuff I either never thought to, or didn't want to.
I'm seeing things in different perspectives.
I like that.
Good topic Nigel
And then I just saw this--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylPUzxpIBe0&feature=share
"Shit white girls say, to black girls"
Quote from: Sir Squid Diddimus on January 05, 2012, 04:22:16 AM
And then I just saw this--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylPUzxpIBe0&feature=share
"Shit white girls say, to black girls"
:lulz:
Race was one of those things I didn't really think about until my dad slapped the shit out of me for saying he looked like Mr. T. At the time, they had similar facial hair and forehead furrows.
And then one of my cousins had a half-black baby and was effectively thrown out of the family (after they beat the shit out of her). While the blond-haired, blue-eyed girl my brown-haired and brown-eyed aunt and uncle adopted was made the family favorite/pet.
People are fucked up.
I strongly suspect that I cannot read or think about this thread until tomorrow.
(Because I have had some wine)
:lulz: You had me worried there, for a minute.
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 10:18:08 PM
It's funny, because that kind of racist reaction even applies if you're black. I have it, other black people have it. It's weird as fuck.
Seeing this reaction to "the Other (defined as non-white mainstream)", even in the minority populations in multi-cultural Hawaii is what clued me into the fact that these reactions had been manipulated into my head, and I needed to manipulate them out. Dok Howl's game-shop experience is right on the money.
White male privilege is awesome. It means when other white male people do stupid shit, I don't have to go on a protest to denounce them.
GOt some catching up to do here. Will get back to this.
Excellent post Nigel.
My experience with race was based on a weird upbringing. First, in the tiny hillbilly village where I grew up, there weren't any non-whites. I was a teenager when the town council realized that there was still a law that said black people couldn't be in the town limits after dark.
My grandmothers, both of them, were rampantly racist. When my mom was young she went on a study date with a guy from her high school. Grandma had my uncles beat him up. My other grandma was equally bad... once I recall at a restaurant she pointed at a mixed couple and said "They shouldn't be mixing breeds like that!"
Yet, my parents raised me in a religion that, for all of its faults, does a good job on integration. I grew up with friends from nearby cities that were of other races, I spent more time with them and had more in common with them than any of my schoolmates.
For me, I always saw race, but I saw it as something embarrassing. My grandmothers behaviors, the town I lived in, all the old racist people I knew... it left me feeling guilty for their actions. It took a long time to get over that and occasionally it still smacks me in the head when I least expect it.
I worked with a guy, we had similar skills, identical jobs, he even had a college education... and yet when everyone went out on Friday night, he was occasionally stopped by cops, while none of the rest of us ever were. People that claim that racism is over or that everything is equal now are on crack.
I always accepted early on that there were idiots of all walks, including race. But as with Rat, I grew up in a very white rural area, save for a couple of kids from Kenya who were adopted by the local doctor. In the larger county there were issues of discrimination with some sparse Native American populations, and then of course there was always the stuff between those with English ancestry and those with French ancestry.
Where I am now I am quite aware of race and the implications it has for certain segments of our community. The latest Mayoral race, unfortunately, put back into the public sphere the very ugly feelings the many in the old "native" French-Canadian population has against the more recent and growing refugee population. And there it is race AND religion.
The problem is so much attention is paid to surface issues that people don't get to know each other. when you sit down and talk and learn more about these families who've been displaced, not once, but twice, you quickly realize that they aren't that different. They have the same fears for their kids, they care about the safety of their neighborhood, they care about the safety of their community. They look different, talk different, have a slightly different faith, but there are far more similarities.
But people don't want to stick their neck out to learn.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on January 05, 2012, 01:52:59 PM
Excellent post Nigel.
My experience with race was based on a weird upbringing. First, in the tiny hillbilly village where I grew up, there weren't any non-whites. I was a teenager when the town council realized that there was still a law that said black people couldn't be in the town limits after dark.
My grandmothers, both of them, were rampantly racist. When my mom was young she went on a study date with a guy from her high school. Grandma had my uncles beat him up. My other grandma was equally bad... once I recall at a restaurant she pointed at a mixed couple and said "They shouldn't be mixing breeds like that!"
Yet, my parents raised me in a religion that, for all of its faults, does a good job on integration. I grew up with friends from nearby cities that were of other races, I spent more time with them and had more in common with them than any of my schoolmates.
For me, I always saw race, but I saw it as something embarrassing. My grandmothers behaviors, the town I lived in, all the old racist people I knew... it left me feeling guilty for their actions. It took a long time to get over that and occasionally it still smacks me in the head when I least expect it.
I worked with a guy, we had similar skills, identical jobs, he even had a college education... and yet when everyone went out on Friday night, he was occasionally stopped by cops, while none of the rest of us ever were. People that claim that racism is over or that everything is equal now are on crack coke.
Sorry couldn't resist. :lol:
Anyway, my experience with race isn't that I say "oh, I don't see race" or anything like that. I do try very hard not to say something like "the black guy over there" and instead say "that guy with the goatee and the red shirt". Maybe it's silly, and in the same vein, but I really try not to use race as an identifier, and I now that I think about it, I imagine it comes from the same sort of thing.
I grew up in an all-white town. Race was never an issue. When I was in high school, a black family moved in and their kids came to school and they were... well, they were treated like any other newcomers, at least as far as school was concerned. I cannot personally attest to their experiences otherwise, but as they are still living there, I suppose it wasn't absolutely atrocious.
On the other hand, my cousin grew up in a black neighborhood. He was the only white kid on the block. He had a tough time making friends and didn't really fit in. His (half)sisters are mixed, and so had a much easier time of it, but I don't think that was much consolation to him at the time.
I can't speak for him, of course, and it's been a few years since I've seen him but I imagine that he thought about race a lot.
I don't really know what point I'm trying to make with that. I guess that different experiences exist. Stupid, yeah.
And I should probably post this now because I keep deleting and changing lines, and i keep having to fight the urge to hit 'back' and pretend like I was never gonna post ITT.
Uncomfortable topic, yeah... Not quite sure where I'm going with this, but if we're laying our cards on the table:
The majority of my black friends are openly gay. At work, my black coworkers have the dress code and conduct standards as expected for a large financial firm. I guess what I'm trying to say is that socially, my contact with black people are almost entirely framed in contexts other than the "black stereotype". For lack of a better way to say it, the black people I socialize with are framing themselves in a way that parallels my (white, male, slightly queer) context.
On the other hand, I live in a neighborhood that rubs shoulders with the "economically disadvantaged" part of town. There are shootings every other month or so just a couple of blocks away; as per Roger, the majority of people who live there are black, latino, or otherwise "not white". When I'm coming home late at night on the train, I do have an initial danger/fear response when I see a bunch of stereotypical "from the hood" kids. I tell myself that it's probably justified... but at the same time, I've never been mugged or assaulted. So the evidence doesn't match up with my behavior.
These are squirrely questions. When I try to think about them, my brain throws up dozens of rationalizations and easy outs and the question itself slips away. Good topic.
I grew up in whitetown. There were approximately a dozen indians (not a single black as far as I know) and a couple of chinese for an area with a population of 2 or 3 thousand. To my knowledge no one ever gave them any trouble or racism. We were much too occupied hating on each other. See I grew up in a sectarian town. Blacks and asians were (to the best of my knowledge) not "dirty stinking fenian bastards" so we didn't feel the need to stomp them on site. Whitey, on the other hand - he got it based on the colour of his teeshirt.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 04, 2012, 10:29:18 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 10:18:08 PM
It's funny, because that kind of racist reaction even applies if you're black. I have it, other black people have it. It's weird as fuck.
Wait. You mean Blacks reacting to other Blacks?
That's not so weird, given what our culture taught and - to some degree - still teaches.
Yep.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 04, 2012, 10:36:50 PM
Quote from: Secret Agent GARBO on January 04, 2012, 10:31:07 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 10:18:08 PM
It's funny, because that kind of racist reaction even applies if you're black. I have it, other black people have it. It's weird as fuck.
I had a (Black) teacher explain it as ingrained racism. People of color are not immune, he said, to absorbing the subtle racism that exists in a society that likes to sometimes think of itself as being colorblind.
This scenario reminds me of the advert for this new show that will be airing soon on Comedy Central, which goes
Black dude standing on corner, waiting for the WALK signal, and talking on the phone with someone
Another black dude, talking on the phone to someone else in ebonics (???) about a party or meeting them at some future time to have fun.
WALK signal happens, and the first black dude walks into the crosswalk. When he is just out of earshot of the second guy, he says in a slightly effeminate and very white enunciation, "Oh my god, Christian, I was almost mugged just now!"
I do find it funny, and that probably makes me a bad person.
:lulz: That's hilarious.
I've been trying to wrap my head around the subject of race in America for quite some time, but I just can't.
Race issues in Europe are extremely different.
So, ultimately, this post is useless, other than to say I'm glad I'm not over there and brown.
Quote from: Sir Squid Diddimus on January 05, 2012, 04:22:16 AM
And then I just saw this--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylPUzxpIBe0&feature=share
"Shit white girls say, to black girls"
OMG that was funny!
I'm glad that people have found this thread interesting/thought-provoking. I especially appreciate that people are using it as a stepping-off point for imagining what it is like to have race be an ever-present factor. When my ex and I lived in Oakland, he made a comment that stuck with me... he said it was the first time in his life that he was a minority, and it made him conscious of being white.
Waffle Iron, I wish we had a non-white European on the board so that we could get a sense for whether race is as much a non-issue for them as it is for you.
Quote from: Nigel on January 05, 2012, 05:13:44 PM
I'm glad that people have found this thread interesting/thought-provoking. I especially appreciate that people are using it as a stepping-off point for imagining what it is like to have race be an ever-present factor. When my ex and I lived in Oakland, he made a comment that stuck with me... he said it was the first time in his life that he was a minority, and it made him conscious of being white.
Waffle Iron, I wish we had a non-white European on the board so that we could get a sense for whether race is as much a non-issue for them as it is for you.
The non-white Europeans I know here in Turkey have a mixed situation. For a long time the Kurds and Gypsies(even though they are white-ish) got the short shrift. However, over the past 10-20 years the nationalistic "We're Turks" has made a big improvement in their lives and the racial behaviors. HOWEVER, the racial stereotyping still exists and its still common, it just gets trumped by the nationalism. Sorta like "They're Kurds... but at least they're Turkish Kurds". The social prejudice isn't nearly as obvious or as strong here (most of the Kurds I've talked to seem surprised at the racial issues in the US) and the political prejudice seems non-existant. However, as an outsider, I can easily see the personal prejudice... its kinda limited to sneers or 'looking down the nose', but its still there.
British minorities complain about racism and I've met a few people who claimed to hate this or that skin colour so I'm assuming it's a problem over here too. Check the recent Stephen Lawrence case if you don't believe me. Racism is just another one of those fucking "isms" which, as a non ism-ist, is a really fucking annoying constant reminder that I'm surrounded by muppets who can't be arsed to judge an individual on their own merits rather than conform to whatever blind prejudice was programmed into them from birth or by their peers.
I've never been a target of racism but I have been one of a few protestants in the wrong colour of pub or one of a couple of long haired dudes near a crowd of skinheads so I know the principle of the thing. When I was 18 I worked for a catholic who treated me like a cunt, probably at least partly on the strength of my orangeness (I know how much I hated him cos he was a fucking papist)
Things like the black only music awards and women only this and gay only that bug me for a couple of reasons. Firstly that whatever minority or marginalised group of society should feel (and rightly so IMO) that they have to do this to help escape their marginalisation. I agree with this on principle but can't help feeling that it would be better served some other way than building a picket fence around your group. I'm of the strong opinion that it probably does as much to reinforce the views of the ones who are the problem as it does to help the situation.
I've heard the "oh but if we tried to do white only this or that there'd be outrage..." argument way too many times not to realise it is a very popular opinion, regardless of the fact that it's retarded and wrong. It shouldn't be like this but it is and you don't fight that attitude by building more and more little fortified positions. There are a lot of good ways to fight the "-isms" but the fortified position thing seems to do about as much harm as it does good.
Quote from: Nigel on January 05, 2012, 05:13:44 PM
Waffle Iron, I wish we had a non-white European on the board so that we could get a sense for whether race is as much a non-issue for them as it is for you.
Most of my non-white Norwegian friends don't see it as much of an issue either, other than when other white people bring it up. Which they tend to do constantly.
And of course the racists. But they are few and far between, if you don't count online.
But I would like to know how it is in other countries.
Although your observations, as a white person, have relevance, they are only observations, so there is really no way for you to relate the experience of being a non-white Norwegian, any more than I can relate the experience of being an American man. I would love it if there was someone here to speak for themselves on what it's like to be a brown person in Norway, but there isn't. Unless you can get one of your non-white friends to come here and post...
Quote from: Nigel on January 05, 2012, 06:26:22 PM
Although your observations, as a white person, have relevance, they are only observations, so there is really no way for you to relate the experience of being a non-white Norwegian, any more than I can relate the experience of being an American man. I would love it if there was someone here to speak for themselves on what it's like to be a brown person in Norway, but there isn't. Unless you can get one of your non-white friends to come here and post...
That shouldn't be too hard.
Quote from: Waffle Iron on January 05, 2012, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 05, 2012, 06:26:22 PM
Although your observations, as a white person, have relevance, they are only observations, so there is really no way for you to relate the experience of being a non-white Norwegian, any more than I can relate the experience of being an American man. I would love it if there was someone here to speak for themselves on what it's like to be a brown person in Norway, but there isn't. Unless you can get one of your non-white friends to come here and post...
That shouldn't be too hard.
That would be AWESOME!
Another hilarious thing that someone (my ex-husband, in fact) once said to me was "You're basically culturally white". I've heard similar sentiments (in the form of the belief that dominant culture is inherently imbued with a race) expressed many times in many different ways and it never fails to be mind-bogglingly offensive on a cornucopic multitude of levels.
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 10:18:08 PM
It's funny, because that kind of racist reaction even applies if you're black. I have it, other black people have it. It's weird as fuck.
I'm just catching up to this thread now, so I'll probably have a few in a row posts before I catch up to myself.
I have a friend from high school who I recently got in contact with (went to my first Type O Negative concert with him), who is black. He had some sort of comment to this. It was something like, "black people shoot each other because they know each other and there's some stupid reason for it. I don't know why white people are so afraid, you're the insane fuckers that shoot multiple random people for no apparent reason."
He also had this gem, "I don't know why we were called colored people when your the ones who change colors. You turn red when you're drunk, blue when you're cold, green when you're sick...."
Quote from: Nigel on January 05, 2012, 05:13:44 PM
I'm glad that people have found this thread interesting/thought-provoking. I especially appreciate that people are using it as a stepping-off point for imagining what it is like to have race be an ever-present factor. When my ex and I lived in Oakland, he made a comment that stuck with me... he said it was the first time in his life that he was a minority, and it made him conscious of being white.
Waffle Iron, I wish we had a non-white European on the board so that we could get a sense for whether race is as much a non-issue for them as it is for you.
I imagine that it depends on the European country and the non-white background in question. I don't see things being terribly different in England than it is in America, except that you have the whole Empire thing going on and, iirc, racism directed towards Indians and Pakistanis as much as anything else. As far as what I've observed within Ireland, prejudice was often directed prior to the economic boom towards Scottish and Protestants (mostly just badmouthing), and then after the economic boom, towards Eastern Europeans and Indians, and maybe a befuddled chuckle at a Brazilian area. I didn't get a sense that it was so much a race thing so much as, "what are all of these non-Irish people doing here if they're not tourists?" Or, as my grandfather put it, "They're all over the place" when I mentioned seeing a Polish and a Hindi section at the local library.
I'm still kinda collecting my thoughts on this. Perspectives change over time too.
At this point, I generally think of people along what they self-identify as. As far as white people go, I don't think of them as white, or of whiteness, but I do think of them as this or that, as opposed to, or just like, me. For example, my drummer self-identifies as Italian, and he acts as much as an Italian as I do an Irishman. And yet, he's just as Irish as he is Italian (a quarter). It bothers me when people refer to their background as white. It makes me wonder if they're a crazy racist, since I'm used to white people, no matter how Americanized, identifying with one or two European backgrounds. I just don't like it as a label of any sort, unless it's used as self-mockery.
I'll also do the same thing for black people if they identify with a particular culture. If they're Haitian, I think of them as Haitian as opposed to black, Trinadadian if they're Trinidadian, etc. Irish if they're from Ireland, English if they're from England (Phil Lynnott and Robbie Gee respectively, for example). It tells a more accurate story, and gives a little more nuance to their own experiences and perceptions (apparently, at least for a while, African Americans in Boston really did not like other black people if they came from the Caribbean). However, if I don't know, I do default to thinking of them as black. Or Asian if they're Asian. I don't like it but, yeah "white" is the default.
I think I'm going to have to mull over this some more.
I had a thought about those all some-group groups (women, gay, black, etc). I'm pretty sure if someone not of the group's demographic asked to join (at least in America), they would HAVE to be admitted, because that opens up a huge legal can of worms with that law I can't remember, but they have it on every job application forever. The thing is, would a man WANT to join an all-women dance club (not for hook up reasons)? Would a white WANT to join an all black or all hispanic or all brown group? Not that wanting to join is the problem, but I mean like, it turns into sort of a peer group, and if you don't fit the particular demographic, then you automatically would feel like you wouldn't fit in, and peer (either yours or the group in question) pressure would make you uncomfortable. It seems to me like that would be the case.
So the people who say, "Well that isn't fair!" It makes me want to ask, "Do YOU want to join? No? Shoosh, then."
I don't think I explained my thought very clearly, but I'm not very clear on it either.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 01:32:33 AM
I had a thought about those all some-group groups (women, gay, black, etc). I'm pretty sure if someone not of the group's demographic asked to join (at least in America), they would HAVE to be admitted, because that opens up a huge legal can of worms with that law I can't remember, but they have it on every job application forever. The thing is, would a man WANT to join an all-women dance club (not for hook up reasons)? Would a white WANT to join an all black or all hispanic or all brown group? Not that wanting to join is the problem, but I mean like, it turns into sort of a peer group, and if you don't fit the particular demographic, then you automatically would feel like you wouldn't fit in, and peer (either yours or the group in question) pressure would make you uncomfortable. It seems to me like that would be the case.
So the people who say, "Well that isn't fair!" It makes me want to ask, "Do YOU want to join? No? Shoosh, then."
I don't think I explained my thought very clearly, but I'm not very clear on it either.
Well, there's lots of White members in the NAACP.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 01:32:33 AM
I had a thought about those all some-group groups (women, gay, black, etc). I'm pretty sure if someone not of the group's demographic asked to join (at least in America), they would HAVE to be admitted, because that opens up a huge legal can of worms with that law I can't remember, but they have it on every job application forever. The thing is, would a man WANT to join an all-women dance club (not for hook up reasons)? Would a white WANT to join an all black or all hispanic or all brown group? Not that wanting to join is the problem, but I mean like, it turns into sort of a peer group, and if you don't fit the particular demographic, then you automatically would feel like you wouldn't fit in, and peer (either yours or the group in question) pressure would make you uncomfortable. It seems to me like that would be the case.
So the people who say, "Well that isn't fair!" It makes me want to ask, "Do YOU want to join? No? Shoosh, then."
I don't think I explained my thought very clearly, but I'm not very clear on it either.
The people who make a stink about that sort of thing are just trying to prove a point without actually having to do it. Because why would they want to associate with people who aren't like them?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 06, 2012, 01:37:08 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 01:32:33 AM
I had a thought about those all some-group groups (women, gay, black, etc). I'm pretty sure if someone not of the group's demographic asked to join (at least in America), they would HAVE to be admitted, because that opens up a huge legal can of worms with that law I can't remember, but they have it on every job application forever. The thing is, would a man WANT to join an all-women dance club (not for hook up reasons)? Would a white WANT to join an all black or all hispanic or all brown group? Not that wanting to join is the problem, but I mean like, it turns into sort of a peer group, and if you don't fit the particular demographic, then you automatically would feel like you wouldn't fit in, and peer (either yours or the group in question) pressure would make you uncomfortable. It seems to me like that would be the case.
So the people who say, "Well that isn't fair!" It makes me want to ask, "Do YOU want to join? No? Shoosh, then."
I don't think I explained my thought very clearly, but I'm not very clear on it either.
Well, there's lots of White members in the NAACP.
That's because they actually want to join.
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 01:26:40 AM
I'm still kinda collecting my thoughts on this. Perspectives change over time too.
At this point, I generally think of people along what they self-identify as. As far as white people go, I don't think of them as white, or of whiteness, but I do think of them as this or that, as opposed to, or just like, me. For example, my drummer self-identifies as Italian, and he acts as much as an Italian as I do an Irishman. And yet, he's just as Irish as he is Italian (a quarter). It bothers me when people refer to their background as white. It makes me wonder if they're a crazy racist, since I'm used to white people, no matter how Americanized, identifying with one or two European backgrounds. I just don't like it as a label of any sort, unless it's used as self-mockery.
I'll also do the same thing for black people if they identify with a particular culture. If they're Haitian, I think of them as Haitian as opposed to black, Trinadadian if they're Trinidadian, etc. Irish if they're from Ireland, English if they're from England (Phil Lynnott and Robbie Gee respectively, for example). It tells a more accurate story, and gives a little more nuance to their own experiences and perceptions (apparently, at least for a while, African Americans in Boston really did not like other black people if they came from the Caribbean). However, if I don't know, I do default to thinking of them as black. Or Asian if they're Asian. I don't like it but, yeah "white" is the default.
I think I'm going to have to mull over this some more.
Have you noticed how when some people say, in a conversation about what race they are, a person says "I'm American" you classify them as a complete whackjob? Is this just me? Because I mean, I am apparently mostly German and Italian, (and a little Irish and Cherokee but who doesn't? quite a few people, but the point is it is not uncommon to be so mixed), but I have no links to Germany or Italy. I have never been, and I'm pretty sure circumstances will make sure I will never go. I have traveled outside of the US only once, in Nogales, Mexico, because some family member was in town and wanted to go to the Great Big Southern Dollar Store.
I do not do Italian or German things, I don't know anything about the cultures (except Germans drink beer and eat weinerschnitzel, and Italians are, I dunno, I think smelly?), and I barely know where they are on a map. I am, for all intents and purposes, of American decent, so why does it feel like to say "My race is American" is so silly?
Because of fucking nut jobs, I guess, but even so.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 06, 2012, 01:37:08 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 01:32:33 AM
I had a thought about those all some-group groups (women, gay, black, etc). I'm pretty sure if someone not of the group's demographic asked to join (at least in America), they would HAVE to be admitted, because that opens up a huge legal can of worms with that law I can't remember, but they have it on every job application forever. The thing is, would a man WANT to join an all-women dance club (not for hook up reasons)? Would a white WANT to join an all black or all hispanic or all brown group? Not that wanting to join is the problem, but I mean like, it turns into sort of a peer group, and if you don't fit the particular demographic, then you automatically would feel like you wouldn't fit in, and peer (either yours or the group in question) pressure would make you uncomfortable. It seems to me like that would be the case.
So the people who say, "Well that isn't fair!" It makes me want to ask, "Do YOU want to join? No? Shoosh, then."
I don't think I explained my thought very clearly, but I'm not very clear on it either.
Well, there's lots of White members in the NAACP.
I'm not sure that negates my entire argument. In fact I think it is a supporting piece of evidence? Not sure what my argument was.
Blargh.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 01:46:38 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 01:26:40 AM
I'm still kinda collecting my thoughts on this. Perspectives change over time too.
At this point, I generally think of people along what they self-identify as. As far as white people go, I don't think of them as white, or of whiteness, but I do think of them as this or that, as opposed to, or just like, me. For example, my drummer self-identifies as Italian, and he acts as much as an Italian as I do an Irishman. And yet, he's just as Irish as he is Italian (a quarter). It bothers me when people refer to their background as white. It makes me wonder if they're a crazy racist, since I'm used to white people, no matter how Americanized, identifying with one or two European backgrounds. I just don't like it as a label of any sort, unless it's used as self-mockery.
I'll also do the same thing for black people if they identify with a particular culture. If they're Haitian, I think of them as Haitian as opposed to black, Trinadadian if they're Trinidadian, etc. Irish if they're from Ireland, English if they're from England (Phil Lynnott and Robbie Gee respectively, for example). It tells a more accurate story, and gives a little more nuance to their own experiences and perceptions (apparently, at least for a while, African Americans in Boston really did not like other black people if they came from the Caribbean). However, if I don't know, I do default to thinking of them as black. Or Asian if they're Asian. I don't like it but, yeah "white" is the default.
I think I'm going to have to mull over this some more.
Have you noticed how when some people say, in a conversation about what race they are, a person says "I'm American" you classify them as a complete whackjob? Is this just me? Because I mean, I am apparently mostly German and Italian, (and a little Irish and Cherokee but who doesn't? quite a few people, but the point is it is not uncommon to be so mixed), but I have no links to Germany or Italy. I have never been, and I'm pretty sure circumstances will make sure I will never go. I have traveled outside of the US only once, in Nogales, Mexico, because some family member was in town and wanted to go to the Great Big Southern Dollar Store.
I do not do Italian or German things, I don't know anything about the cultures (except Germans drink beer and eat weinerschnitzel, and Italians are, I dunno, I think smelly?), and I barely know where they are on a map. I am, for all intents and purposes, of American decent, so why does it feel like to say "My race is American" is so silly?
Because of fucking nut jobs, I guess, but even so.
No, you're right on the money. When someone is describing themselves as American, it should only refer to whether or not they're eligible to vote here. It's not a race or an ethnicity. If anything it's the exact opposite. It's a vague blanket culture sure, but a vague one. The only place I'm aware of my Americanness is when I am outside of the United States.
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 01:55:07 AM
No, you're right on the money. When someone is describing themselves as American, it should only refer to whether or not they're eligible to vote here. It's not a race or an ethnicity. If anything it's the exact opposite. It's a vague blanket culture sure, but a vague one. The only place I'm aware of my Americanness is when I am outside of the United States.
The thing about blanket culture vs race... Have you noticed after a few generations here, families start looking a little more homogenous? A little more Americanized features, sort of thing? Or am I imagining things?
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 02:00:28 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 01:55:07 AM
No, you're right on the money. When someone is describing themselves as American, it should only refer to whether or not they're eligible to vote here. It's not a race or an ethnicity. If anything it's the exact opposite. It's a vague blanket culture sure, but a vague one. The only place I'm aware of my Americanness is when I am outside of the United States.
The thing about blanket culture vs race... Have you noticed after a few generations here, families start looking a little more homogenous? A little more Americanized features, sort of thing? Or am I imagining things?
It might be a regional thing. Boston is a major city for recent immigration (always has been). We're always getting new blood, both from around the world, and also from other Americans who move here for either school or employment.
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 02:02:19 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 02:00:28 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 01:55:07 AM
No, you're right on the money. When someone is describing themselves as American, it should only refer to whether or not they're eligible to vote here. It's not a race or an ethnicity. If anything it's the exact opposite. It's a vague blanket culture sure, but a vague one. The only place I'm aware of my Americanness is when I am outside of the United States.
The thing about blanket culture vs race... Have you noticed after a few generations here, families start looking a little more homogenous? A little more Americanized features, sort of thing? Or am I imagining things?
It might be a regional thing. Boston is a major city for recent immigration (always has been). We're always getting new blood, both from around the world, and also from other Americans who move here for either school or employment.
That's probable.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 02:04:26 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 02:02:19 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 02:00:28 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 01:55:07 AM
No, you're right on the money. When someone is describing themselves as American, it should only refer to whether or not they're eligible to vote here. It's not a race or an ethnicity. If anything it's the exact opposite. It's a vague blanket culture sure, but a vague one. The only place I'm aware of my Americanness is when I am outside of the United States.
The thing about blanket culture vs race... Have you noticed after a few generations here, families start looking a little more homogenous? A little more Americanized features, sort of thing? Or am I imagining things?
It might be a regional thing. Boston is a major city for recent immigration (always has been). We're always getting new blood, both from around the world, and also from other Americans who move here for either school or employment.
That's probable.
I look different from my mother's family, who've been here since the later half of the 1800s (blight will do that), I look more like my dad's side featurewise.
But I'm thinking about it, and I'm trying to think of the right way to phrase it. I think you and I hit on the same thing, but we're still kinda like, "no, that's not quite it." But I'm going to give it a shot. You think of yourself as Italian and German, even though you have no connection with either of those countries or cultures. I think part of that is that it's easier to identify what your roots are if you're white. You just have to look at your name and figure out at least part of your ancestry. Black people don't really have that, cuz of slavery and shit. They're just black. When a white person identifies primarily as white, they're suddenly calling too much attention to their race, and that makes us uncomfortable. We don't like to think of ourselves as white. I'm Irish, and when I feel like being an asshat, Scottish too. You're German and Italian. That guy over there is a mutt and freely admits it. That lady over there doesn't know what she is, but she's from New Jersey. And I guess it kinda feels like when a person is referring to themselves as white they're intentionally separating themselves from the rest of the human race. When people talk about being American, they mean the same thing, but the emphasis is more on patriotism, but you know that their concept of American is probably specifically white.
Does that sound right?
Does to me, Twid.
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 01:26:40 AM
I'm still kinda collecting my thoughts on this. Perspectives change over time too.
At this point, I generally think of people along what they self-identify as. As far as white people go, I don't think of them as white, or of whiteness, but I do think of them as this or that, as opposed to, or just like, me. For example, my drummer self-identifies as Italian, and he acts as much as an Italian as I do an Irishman. And yet, he's just as Irish as he is Italian (a quarter). It bothers me when people refer to their background as white. It makes me wonder if they're a crazy racist, since I'm used to white people, no matter how Americanized, identifying with one or two European backgrounds. I just don't like it as a label of any sort, unless it's used as self-mockery.
One of my American Studies teachers talked about this, saying that "white" as a social construct gives preference to people who fit that label and places them at the top of the social hierarchy, which I think makes historical sense.
(http://elbeltonfoundation.com/web_images/sign_whites_only.jpg)
I'm inclined to think that we here at PD tend to forget the history, since I do know we've talked about this particular aspect of this topic before and a few people had something to say about hyphenated identities and "the right kind of white people".
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I fully admit to doing that, and having it put that way it sounds utterly ridiculous, unless of course it's a room full of black people.
Same thing happened with the friend that I mentioned a while ago. He was pointing out a mutual friend's brother in a group of 3 blond dudes and one black dude. Went something like this:
Vinny: He's the Aryan looking one.
Me: Uh.... which one?
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 04:11:49 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I fully admit to doing that, and having it put that way it sounds utterly ridiculous, unless of course it's a room full of black people.
Same thing happened with the friend that I mentioned a while ago. He was pointing out a mutual friend's brother in a group of 3 blond dudes and one black dude. Went something like this:
Vinny: He's the Aryan looking one.
Me: Uh.... which one?
I like to sometimes gratuitously describe someone as white when everyone else is white too.
"Hey, I think you work with my friend Todd!"
"Huh... I don't know, what does he look like?"
"Well, he's white... (pause) brown hair, blue eyes, about five foot ten..."
Yeah, it's trolling. But it's fun. :lol:
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 02:02:19 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 06, 2012, 02:00:28 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 01:55:07 AM
No, you're right on the money. When someone is describing themselves as American, it should only refer to whether or not they're eligible to vote here. It's not a race or an ethnicity. If anything it's the exact opposite. It's a vague blanket culture sure, but a vague one. The only place I'm aware of my Americanness is when I am outside of the United States.
The thing about blanket culture vs race... Have you noticed after a few generations here, families start looking a little more homogenous? A little more Americanized features, sort of thing? Or am I imagining things?
It might be a regional thing. Boston is a major city for recent immigration (always has been). We're always getting new blood, both from around the world, and also from other Americans who move here for either school or employment.
A big fresh cultural mix tends to keep the tossed salad in effect. A few chunks of carrot tossed into a long steeping melting pot, turns into the melting pot pretty quick.
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 04:22:52 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 04:11:49 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I fully admit to doing that, and having it put that way it sounds utterly ridiculous, unless of course it's a room full of black people.
Same thing happened with the friend that I mentioned a while ago. He was pointing out a mutual friend's brother in a group of 3 blond dudes and one black dude. Went something like this:
Vinny: He's the Aryan looking one.
Me: Uh.... which one?
I like to sometimes gratuitously describe someone as white when everyone else is white too.
"Hey, I think you work with my friend Todd!"
"Huh... I don't know, what does he look like?"
"Well, he's white... (pause) brown hair, blue eyes, about five foot ten..."
Yeah, it's trolling. But it's fun. :lol:
:lulz:
Latino, Mexican, Hispanic, Spanish, Chicano, Mestizo, Puerto-Rican, etc, etc, etc, comes with a whole different world of "label anxiety" (as I believe I may have just demonstrated to a certain extent).
I personally settled on Latino just because the rest of my family always said Spanish, and it was always understood to mean anything but Mexican. Then my more uptight cousins started saying Hispanic but the history behind that word (better than Mexican) turned me off. In response I made it a point to say Mexican in reference to myself, them and every other damned Mexican that couldn't just suck it up.
Then I had to quit that cause it was more or less just not correct, and also I was on to something new to be indignant about. My family didn't come from Mexico. They've actually been right here in this country since before this country was this country, and the one's still living in the Valley speak Spanish almost exclusively. So fuck you very much if I have something not kind to say when I hear "if they're gonna come to this country, they should at least learn the language."
Also, I'm clearly not Puerto-Rican, Honduran, Nicaraguan or from one of those other countries that Mexicans come from, so basically it's Latino for discussion purposes, Chiconkey for descriptive purposes and nothing much for all other purposes cause I'm functionally-white and it doesn't get brought up much.
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I am actually, personally, totally cool with being described as white. I don't like Caucasian at all. I've started to refer to myself publicly as a cracker.... yeah, I'm taking it back. You should see people's faces when I respond to stupid shit they say with "Cracka, please!". Hey, if they can say stupid shit, so can I.
Hoopla
-big ol' cracker
Quote from: Hoopla on January 06, 2012, 05:10:37 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I am actually, personally, totally cool with being described as white. I don't like Caucasian at all. I've started to refer to myself publicly as a cracker.... yeah, I'm taking it back. You should see people's faces when I respond to stupid shit they say with "Cracka, please!". Hey, if they can say stupid shit, so can I.
Hoopla
-big ol' cracker
She said white AMERICANS you Canuck bastard! :argh!:
:lulz:
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 05:14:11 AM
Quote from: Hoopla on January 06, 2012, 05:10:37 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I am actually, personally, totally cool with being described as white. I don't like Caucasian at all. I've started to refer to myself publicly as a cracker.... yeah, I'm taking it back. You should see people's faces when I respond to stupid shit they say with "Cracka, please!". Hey, if they can say stupid shit, so can I.
Hoopla
-big ol' cracker
She said white AMERICANS you Canuck bastard! :argh!:
Cracka please. Yeah, you guys may think you own that name, but naw... I got a receipt and everything.
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 04:22:52 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 04:11:49 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I fully admit to doing that, and having it put that way it sounds utterly ridiculous, unless of course it's a room full of black people.
Same thing happened with the friend that I mentioned a while ago. He was pointing out a mutual friend's brother in a group of 3 blond dudes and one black dude. Went something like this:
Vinny: He's the Aryan looking one.
Me: Uh.... which one?
I like to sometimes gratuitously describe someone as white when everyone else is white too.
"Hey, I think you work with my friend Todd!"
"Huh... I don't know, what does he look like?"
"Well, he's white... (pause) brown hair, blue eyes, about five foot ten..."
Yeah, it's trolling. But it's fun. :lol:
I do that do that too. But then again a lot of soldiers I've served with seem to have less issues with calling white people white. Or maybe it's because a lot of my seniors were black.
Quote from: Hoopla on January 06, 2012, 05:21:25 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 05:14:11 AM
Quote from: Hoopla on January 06, 2012, 05:10:37 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I am actually, personally, totally cool with being described as white. I don't like Caucasian at all. I've started to refer to myself publicly as a cracker.... yeah, I'm taking it back. You should see people's faces when I respond to stupid shit they say with "Cracka, please!". Hey, if they can say stupid shit, so can I.
Hoopla
-big ol' cracker
She said white AMERICANS you Canuck bastard! :argh!:
Cracka please. Yeah, you guys may think you own that name, but naw... I got a receipt and everything.
:lulz:
Quote from: Hoopla on January 06, 2012, 05:21:25 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 05:14:11 AM
Quote from: Hoopla on January 06, 2012, 05:10:37 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I am actually, personally, totally cool with being described as white. I don't like Caucasian at all. I've started to refer to myself publicly as a cracker.... yeah, I'm taking it back. You should see people's faces when I respond to stupid shit they say with "Cracka, please!". Hey, if they can say stupid shit, so can I.
Hoopla
-big ol' cracker
She said white AMERICANS you Canuck bastard! :argh!:
Cracka please. Yeah, you guys may think you own that name, but naw... I got a receipt and everything.
Who gave you the receipt, General Cornwallis? If you guys wanted to be Americans you should have let Benedict Arnold do his thing to Montreal. Then he wouldn't have had to go down in history as a bad guy. And now we're stuck with more rednecks instead of you guys balancing things out and protecting us from Texan politicians. Thanks guys.
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 05:56:14 AM
Quote from: Hoopla on January 06, 2012, 05:21:25 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 05:14:11 AM
Quote from: Hoopla on January 06, 2012, 05:10:37 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I am actually, personally, totally cool with being described as white. I don't like Caucasian at all. I've started to refer to myself publicly as a cracker.... yeah, I'm taking it back. You should see people's faces when I respond to stupid shit they say with "Cracka, please!". Hey, if they can say stupid shit, so can I.
Hoopla
-big ol' cracker
She said white AMERICANS you Canuck bastard! :argh!:
Cracka please. Yeah, you guys may think you own that name, but naw... I got a receipt and everything.
Who gave you the receipt, General Cornwallis? If you guys wanted to be Americans you should have let Benedict Arnold do his thing to Montreal. Then he wouldn't have had to go down in history as a bad guy. And now we're stuck with more rednecks instead of you guys balancing things out and protecting us from Texan politicians. Thanks guys.
I do what I can.
I'm a super weird puppy because I love love love racial conversations and find them interesting. A lot of my friends have different racial backgrounds, and my DingoGF is Chinese Australian. My favourite part getting to know someone is when you're comfortable enough to have those types of conversation and joke around; DingoGF tells me she's a banana because she's White on the inside, and I'm a... I can't remember what it was actually but you get the idea. Those candid discussions on identity.
I teach kids Japanese so there's a lot of 'why do They...' style questions; I take on discussions about differences- culture, race, ethnicity etc - as a big part of what I do professionally. It's super interesting when I teach them how to express nationality in Japanese because a lot come up and say 'I'm from Zimbabwe/Laos/New Zealand' what should i say? I tell them they can identify how they like: say 'zimbabwean' or 'zimbabwean and australian' or just 'Australian'. Your choice.
I assume it's a big issue in America for the same reason but there's a lot of anger over race from outraged dickheads horrified that someone legally 1/16th Aboriginal can get funding assistance based on race (because of course, they're not a REAL Aboriginal).
I remember resulting years ago that stereotypes weren't just harmful to 'other' races; I remember being in high school and wondering 'What IS White culture? Do we have one?'
Anyway that's my assortment of related thoughts.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 06, 2012, 08:56:41 AM
I teach kids Japanese so there's a lot of 'why do They...' style questions; I take on discussions about differences- culture, race, ethnicity etc - as a big part of what I do professionally. It's super interesting when I teach them how to express nationality in Japanese because a lot come up and say 'I'm from Zimbabwe/Laos/New Zealand' what should i say? I tell them they can identify how they like: say 'zimbabwean' or 'zimbabwean and australian' or just 'Australian'. Your choice.
That's gotta be a kick getting to deal with the genuine unfiltered perspectives like that. They're lucky you genuinely enjoy it. I can imagine all kinds of hyper-puckered adult reactions to straight-forward questions like that.
There is a little incident going on in the UK currently which deals quite nicely with the "non-white European/perception of racism" issues.
Diane Abbott, a black MP for Labour, quite far on the left of the party, made a comment on Twitter about how "white people" like to use "divide and conquer", a colonial tatic. Her tweet was, apparently, in the context of defending the idea there was a black community, and that historically the (white) elite of the UK have tried to prevent one from arising.
Abbott has since been subjected to three days of screeching from Tory bloggers whose fee-fees are hurt and are claiming they are victims of racism (readers of Corey Robin's The Reactionary Mind will know this is a signature method of conservatism, the self-pitying victimisation and aping of left-liberal concerns in a dishonest guise).
Abbot is then pressured by her party leadership into offering an apology.
This should be contrasted with how David Starkey was treated, when he turned the London riots into a racial issue by claiming "black culture" was at the root of the riots. Starkey, a historian, has not been asked to apologise, and indeed had many defenders among the people now attacking Diane Abbott.
IMO, Abbott's statement was probably too broad and simplistic for a current understanding of how racial issues are politically manipulated, but historically speaking she is correct, and besides, it's fucking Twitter. Nevertheless, it shows a very deep uncomfortableness with non-white people criticizing racial issues in the UK. That this happened so quicky after the Stephen Lawrence verdict, one which exposes the degree of institutional racism in the British police, is probably not a coincidence either.
She's been told if she repeats any sentiments like that, she'll be sacked. And told to apologise. Although quite who she is supposed to have offended I can't seem to make out.
The Independent is quoting the Tory MP for Stratford, Nadhim Zahawi, who said "This is racism. If this was a white Member of Parliament saying, 'All black people want to do bad things to us,' they would have resigned within the hour or been sacked."
It looks like "Call me Dave" hasn't wasted the chance to get one of his Asian
MPs to defend honest white folks from the racist attacks, from the horrid racist black woman in the opposition. And rather than just ignore the furore for the load of complete reactionary bollocks that it is, Milliband has jumped through the hoop of PC held up for him by the Tory Press like the good little bitch that he is. I fucking hate them all.
Quote from: BadBeast on January 08, 2012, 01:32:41 AMShe's been told if she repeats any sentiments like that, she'll be sacked. And told to apologise.
Shouldn't it be one
or the other?
I mean, once they sack her, how would they get her to apologize? Whipping?
Sorry, badly worded. She's been told to apologise, and that if she voices opinions like that again, she will be sacked.
And whipped. (We have got whips in Parliament, specially for that purpose)
Fucking hell. 'Cause it's so awful to point out history.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 06, 2012, 01:26:40 AM
I'm still kinda collecting my thoughts on this. Perspectives change over time too.
At this point, I generally think of people along what they self-identify as. As far as white people go, I don't think of them as white, or of whiteness, but I do think of them as this or that, as opposed to, or just like, me. For example, my drummer self-identifies as Italian, and he acts as much as an Italian as I do an Irishman. And yet, he's just as Irish as he is Italian (a quarter). It bothers me when people refer to their background as white. It makes me wonder if they're a crazy racist, since I'm used to white people, no matter how Americanized, identifying with one or two European backgrounds. I just don't like it as a label of any sort, unless it's used as self-mockery.
:raises hand:
I mean, I'm one of those jerks who fills in "Prefer not to respond" on every race/gender multiple choice form (if you're not actively paying me for it, you don't get any valuable demographic info,) but if I were being honest and talking about race I'd have to identify as predominantly "White." Both of my grandmothers were Irish [Catholic], which makes me half-Irish, with my grandfathers being American with generalized English/Germanic European. My last name is English, my middle name is some Scottish clan designation, and I think I'm technically a Fitzpatrick. But both of my grandmothers were
also raging alcoholics, and didn't pass a lot of Irish culture down to my parents. Or maybe they avoided it because they didn't want to be like their mothers? I dunno. Either way, I certainly didn't end up with much of it.
I
could identify as "Irish", but it just seems kind of silly. It's like - why would it matter? In highschool I lived in the suburbs of a city which used to have Irish vs. German zones, but then Black people moved in and I guess the Germans and Irish realized they had more in common than they thought? Either way, not having grown up there and having an English last name made it irrelevant; it's not like people can tell by looking at you. (Maybe if my hair had stayed red longer I would have cared?) At this point, picking Irish would be like looking for an excuse to feel personally offended by the Potato Famine.
That said, I do like books/movies which have heavy Irish culture - maybe thinking it was something that my life had missed out on? But I had the same feeling when I read Tom Sawyer and thought that he was having a more exciting childhood than I was.
Twid, just out of curiosity, do you feel similarly about people who just identify as "black"?
Quote from: Nigel on January 09, 2012, 05:01:14 PM
Twid, just out of curiosity, do you feel similarly about people who just identify as "black"?
I put my hand on my wallet and stare fixedly ahead, with no expression on my face, until the elevator door opens. Then I get out, even if it's not my floor, and wonder if I should call the police or security.
No i dont. Its weird. But like i said black people in the new world cant really pin down where their ancestors are from and thats probably part of it. But the more i think about it the more im concluding its how white people use the word white. They only bring it up when whiteys rights are getting trampled on by libruls muslims and mexicans. It ties in with a whole bunch of other things like if someone were to say "youre white start acting like it" or some other stupid shit like that. It makes me prefer identifying with a national heritage. Having an immigrant father strengthens that too.
That said i had a senegalese professor who i would describe as senegalese before i would describe her as black. So i do prefer to avoid racial identifiers if i can help it.
And i consider lmno white since his dads last name was iii ;)
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 04:22:52 AM
Quote from: Areola Shinerbock on January 06, 2012, 04:11:49 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2012, 03:54:51 AM
White Americans, from my observation, are indeed (mostly) very uncomfortable being called white, and I think that the reason is because they are not very comfortable with anything that reminds them of race.
White people will also often go to ridiculous lengths to avoid describing someone as black. I'm like, say it, man. Just say it. It is an easily identifiable physical attribute, JUST FUCKING SAY IT. Don't dance around with this "Well, he's about six feet tall, short hair, glasses, likes to wear plaid jackets" crap as if I am seriously going to believe that you haven't noticed he's black.
I fully admit to doing that, and having it put that way it sounds utterly ridiculous, unless of course it's a room full of black people.
Same thing happened with the friend that I mentioned a while ago. He was pointing out a mutual friend's brother in a group of 3 blond dudes and one black dude. Went something like this:
Vinny: He's the Aryan looking one.
Me: Uh.... which one?
I like to sometimes gratuitously describe someone as white when everyone else is white too.
"Hey, I think you work with my friend Todd!"
"Huh... I don't know, what does he look like?"
"Well, he's white... (pause) brown hair, blue eyes, about five foot ten..."
Yeah, it's trolling. But it's fun. :lol:
And thank fuck for trolling. Laughing about shit is the only way anything ever gets done. I think it's the coloured (yeah, I said it. You got a better word for everyone from Russell Peters to Chris Rock?) and bold white comedians have done more in the way of social progress and changing attitudes than a VW full of Mexican day-workers...I mean clowns...I mean
Jews.
Okay, for serious: I grew up kind of fucked up and really couldn't afford to turn down love no matter who it came from. Usually that meant freaks, jews, queers and all kinds of minorities. Sometimes, *I* was the minority...aka: "that crazy white girl with the hair dyed red/purple/blue who walks around singin all damned day and thinks she's Madonna or something."
I learned about the birds and the bees from "Genre" magazine and LIGaLY.
I learned how to dance from a puerto rican transgendered lady named Destiny and a black dude who *still* wears a Hi-top (think Kid n Play) haircut...named
Josh. I learned about computers from a rag-tag bunch of (forgive me) "uncle tom" multicoloured (most likely, Asperger's) nerds who spent their study and lunch hours in the computer lab because the thought of wasting that time on inane conversation with stupid people was more torturous than the idea of remaining a "freak." I played RPGs with a similar motley crew.
My nerdy, racially mixed friends, growing up did shit like impromptu scavenger hunts and shit we called "Land Pirating." We drove around wealthy neighborhoods, snagging christmas decorations and then decked that shit out on some poor person's lawn...or worse: we'd arrange them beautifully on the lawn of the local Jehovah's Witness fam. We hung out in the Peter Pan Diner and called ourselves The Lost Boys
When I was 15, I ran away from home with a white girl who looked like Christina Applegate. I eventually ended up living in DFW with a boy named Elvis who was part native and had a huge dick.
I may very well
be one of the few people who doesn't
really see race when I'm looking at you or talking to you...simply because I'm a hodge-podge social idiot.
Sometimes I
succumb to tell and enjoy racial jokes...because they're dumb and they're funny and everyone knows they're not really true...except when there's an element of truth in them. This is the shit that makes the hurt go away. This is what takes the sting out.
To me, anyway...but I'm just a white girl...a freaky, bookish, oddball, RPG-playing, few female friend-having, cat-ears-and-scarves-in-July wearin white girl...with no parental supervision except when it involved bruises.
What do *I* know?
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 09, 2012, 05:45:06 PM
No i dont. Its weird. But like i said black people in the new world cant really pin down where their ancestors are from and thats probably part of it. But the more i think about it the more im concluding its how white people use the word white. They only bring it up when whiteys rights are getting trampled on by libruls muslims and mexicans. It ties in with a whole bunch of other things like if someone were to say "youre white start acting like it" or some other stupid shit like that. It makes me prefer identifying with a national heritage. Having an immigrant father strengthens that too.
Most white Americans whose families have been here a long time have ancestors from a number of European countries, though, so you couldn't really pin down where their ancestors are from, either.
Out here on the West coast, I have heard a number of people either say they don't know what their ancestry is, or that they're "American mutt". Lots of people say "I dunno, white I guess" when I ask them. And those who think they know are often wrong; look at the case of my mother's family. One aunt insisted we were Welsh, another that we were English, but when my mom got her genes indexed it turns out we're Orcadian.
People move around, and identifying as a member of a culture you're not actually part of makes little sense.
Also, regardless of what Roger says, Irish is not a race!
Quote from: Nigel on January 09, 2012, 07:18:23 PM
Also, regardless of what Roger says, Irish is not a race!
Correct. It is a genus.
Outside of Ireland itself, it's a Cult. A bit like Goths, but with more Whiskey.
Thats a fair point nigel. I think either way i try to identify people by geographic ties or cultural ties. I am going through a bit of self assessment here and its kinda hard to figure out my own thoughts on it. Its a complicated subject.
Jumping in here, I'd say that identifying someone through first, geographical and then cultural ties is the perfectly normal and logical way to do so. These are the only identifiers open to you until you've interacted with them. Only then you are qualified to identify them on an ongoing inter-personal basis. This is how we revise our opinions, and either re-inforce, or challenge our preconceptions. Or something.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 09, 2012, 07:21:01 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 09, 2012, 07:18:23 PM
Also, regardless of what Roger says, Irish is not a race!
Correct. It is a genus.
Belgium, however, is a Kingdom. Like Fungi.
My father is Irish/Italian. My mother is Eastern-European Jewish (mostly Polish, some Russian, Lithuanian, Romanian, etc, etc.) with some known Mongolian-only traits in the gene pool on that side of the family, though no direct known ancestor. My skin is pinkish-beige in most areas, save for the occasional little brown spot. My hair is light brown. I'd say "American mutt" is pretty accurate for me physically.
Culturally I primarily identify as Irish. Boxtys are great. Whiskey is great. I play bagpipes.
As for racist jokes, well, I'm a honky chink kike mick wop russkie yankee pollack! I've always found it interesting that the racist term for a pollack is "pollack".
Quote from: PeregrineBF on January 09, 2012, 10:32:58 PM
As for racist jokes, well, I'm a honky chink kike mick wop russkie yankee pollack! I've always found it interesting that the racist term for a pollack is "pollack".
What's so weird about that? The racist term for the Welsh is "Welsh", or even to acknowledge their existence at all.
Quote from: PeregrineBF on January 09, 2012, 10:32:58 PM
My father is Irish/Italian. My mother is Eastern-European Jewish (mostly Polish, some Russian, Lithuanian, Romanian, etc, etc.) with some known Mongolian-only traits in the gene pool on that side of the family, though no direct known ancestor. My skin is pinkish-beige in most areas, save for the occasional little brown spot. My hair is light brown. I'd say "American mutt" is pretty accurate for me physically.
Culturally I primarily identify as Irish. Boxtys are great. Whiskey is great. I play bagpipes.
As for racist jokes, well, I'm a honky chink kike mick wop russkie yankee pollack! I've always found it interesting that the racist term for a pollack is "pollack".
I think you must mean "Polack". A Pollack is an fish of the Cod family, who's name, amusingly rhymes with "Bollock".
Quote from: BadBeast on January 09, 2012, 10:04:32 PM
Jumping in here, I'd say that identifying someone through first, geographical and then cultural ties is the perfectly normal and logical way to do so. These are the only identifiers open to you until you've interacted with them. Only then you are qualified to identify them on an ongoing inter-personal basis. This is how we revise our opinions, and either re-inforce, or challenge our preconceptions. Or something.
Yes. When I first met my friend Dave, The things I noticed first about him were:
1. He's black
2. He's tall
3. He has short hair
4. He has dimples
So, before he was my friend Dave, my mental placemarker was "the tall black guy with short hair and dimples who works at the bookstore". That would be enough information for anyone seeking him out to help them find him.
But once he was my friend, that mental placemarker was replaced with "Dave" and a mental impression of his personality. His appearance became less relevant.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 09, 2012, 08:21:27 PM
Thats a fair point nigel. I think either way i try to identify people by geographic ties or cultural ties. I am going through a bit of self assessment here and its kinda hard to figure out my own thoughts on it. Its a complicated subject.
It is a complicated subject... racial and cultural identity are quite complicated in a country mostly populated with immigrants and their descendants. As a mixed-race person, I actually understand very much a rationale behind the argument that people should mate with their own kind. I don't agree with it (which is good because the odds of me finding a Native/Black/Orcadian who isn't my brother are slim) but I understand it.
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 12:02:17 AM
Quote from: BadBeast on January 09, 2012, 10:04:32 PM
Jumping in here, I'd say that identifying someone through first, geographical and then cultural ties is the perfectly normal and logical way to do so. These are the only identifiers open to you until you've interacted with them. Only then you are qualified to identify them on an ongoing inter-personal basis. This is how we revise our opinions, and either re-inforce, or challenge our preconceptions. Or something.
Yes. When I first met my friend Dave, The things I noticed first about him were:
1. He's black
2. He's tall
3. He has short hair
4. He has dimples
So, before he was my friend Dave, my mental placemarker was "the tall black guy with short hair and dimples who works at the bookstore". That would be enough information for anyone seeking him out to help them find him.
But once he was my friend, that mental placemarker was replaced with "Dave" and a mental impression of his personality. His appearance became less relevant.
Exactamundo.
People are often afraid of the term "racism" itself, because of the negative connotations that apply to anyone found to be "racist".
This can lead to a lack of thoroughness in any process of self examination. But if we define racism as treating others differently on the basis of their race, religion, or other cultural peculiarity, then the rationale is easier to sublimate.
My country virtually invented racism, and it's roots run right through our National psyche. I recognise them in myself, the people around me, and in just about every institution that claims to be "English".
The current climate of "Political Correctness" tends to produce a knee-jerk denial of any such thing, but it's true. We do treat people differently because of their race.
But the way this manifests itself doesn't have to fit this cultural definition of racism. For instance, say you live in a small, middle England Market town. Pop. about 7000, almost completely white and British. And your new neighbours, are a family of middle class, Pakistani Moslem immigrants.
Where you might casually invite a white, British family around at the weekend, for a Porkchop barbecue and a few beers as a neighbourly gesture, this would probably be horribly insulting to even the most conservative Moslems.
So if you wanted to make any neighbourly gesture like that, you'd have to re-asses your approach, (and menu) taking into account the fact that they're culturally 'different' to perhaps everyone else you know.
No bother really. The whole point, (race issues to one side) should be to re-assure the new neighbours that they haven't inadvertently landed among a community of monsters. But because they are Pakistani, a whole bunch of race and religion questions present themselves, that apparently need to be considered. After all, you wouldn't like anyone getting the wrong idea. So the easiest thing to do, is nothing. And it's so easy, that that's what you keep on doing. But his is the wrong motorcycle.
Instead of baulking at the first ugly fence of 'race', just treat them first and foremost as people. If you inadvertently offend them, I'm sure they'll get over it. They will probably let you know if that happens anyway. Then you can apologise, or explain any mistake you might have made. Just like you would if they were white, and British.
Obviously, this is the correct motorcycle. Personally, I have at some point, offended every neighbour I have ever had. Maybe 45% of the time, irrevocably. And maybe 5% of the time, leading to actual physical violence. This has never been about race. Or religion. Or colour. But generally about me being an arsehole. Sometimes about my neighbour being an arsehole. Occasionally, both of us being arseholes.
But nobody, whatever race, religion, or sexual persuasion they might be, has any right at all to not be offended. Especially if they move next door to me. In fact, alongside their opportunity to live next door, comes the fact that in all probability, I shall offend them. But it will not be because I've dumped a pig's head on their lawn, or shouted racial abuse out the window at their noisy kids. Simply because that would be wrong.
Similarly, I shan't assume any offence or insult levelled at myself from them to be racially motivated. (unless of course, it is) That would also be wrong.
The OP is right, this is an uncomfortable topic. I would always be aware that my neighbours were different. On account of them being different. But all that aside, I would never ever use that as an excuse to act intolerantly toward them.
Because
A/ I'm not by nature, an intolerant person.
B/ It would shame me.
But I feel that I have no need to berate myself for treating people culturally different from me, in a way that takes into account the fact that they are culturally different to me.
I wouldn't flirt with a Muslim girl, not because I didn't find her attractive, (She's a girl, isn't she?) but because the chances are, she would not appreciate it at all. She may even find it threatening or intimidating.
A white British girl might not appreciate it either, but she has a hundred different subtle (and not so subtle) ways to tell me to fuck off at her disposal. No harm done.
But she never has any reason to feel threatened or intimidated, not by me. That's not flirting. That's something else.
But if the same rules apply, there's also a fair chance that a Muslim girl might get right into it, play the game. Enjoy a bit of a flirt. But that's not a risk I'm prepared to take.
Is that racist? Truthfully? (That's not a rhetorical question either, I'd like to know if other people would consider that as racist)
I'd have to say that yes, it probably is. But it doesn't feel wrong. Not at all.
Bit of a bombsite, racism innit?
I think that's more of a cultural thing, BB. If she was a non-Moslem Indian girl, for example, you'd be all over that.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 02:54:31 AM
I think that's more of a cultural thing, BB. If she was a non-Moslem Indian girl, for example, you'd be all over that.
It truly didn't even hit me until I read your reply, but you're spot on. My current GF is half Portuguese/Indian! :lulz:
I consider culture to be more relevant than race and perhaps thats why i also take geography into consideration. A muslim can be arab black asian or white. But the most important thing to consider is that they are muslim and then where were they brought up because that will nuance their islam.
For example i have midwestern friends. Theyre american and white so on surface i should have some commonality with them. But culturally and religously i dont. Even ignoring the irish influence i was raised catholic. Theyre lutheran ministers who accept my aberrant pagan ways. I went to visit them after they moved back (they went to boston university and northeastern for grad school) and we went out to a restaurant and they mentioned saying grace. I laughed it off like they were kidding and kept on talking until i saw they joined hands and started praying. Ed and laura had never done this when we broke bread in boston. But suddenly i faux pas'd. New englanders rarely say grace even if religious.
Culture has a whole different relevancy, but people very often conflate culture and race... such as my ex who used to tell me that I am "culturally white".
True. I guess thats part of my discomfort describing myself as white. I might have more in common with a hypothetical black bostonian with an irish immigrant parent than my midwestern friends. But that goes back to a previous post. I think of phil lynnott as an irishman rather than a black dude with a white mother. Its a separate topic than race but still ties in to a degree.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 03:49:03 AM
True. I guess thats part of my discomfort describing myself as white. I might have more in common with a hypothetical black bostonian with an irish immigrant parent than my midwestern friends. But that goes back to a previous post. I think of phil lynnott as an irishman rather than a black dude with a white mother. Its a separate topic than race but still ties in to a degree.
I always saw Phil Lynott as Brazilian, with an Oirish accent. He'd still be alive today if his idiotic in-laws had taken him to Hospital when he OD'd, instead of dumping him at fucking rehab! (I know this because I went to the same rehab he was dumped at) But it was too late for rehab by then. And too late for Hospital by the time they realised he wasn't just gauching out, but had no vital signs. Oops. :x
This may be an interewsting exercise right here bb.
Why do you consider him brazilian and why do i consider him irish? And ill try to keep my own irishness out of the equation as i consider this further.
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 03:41:34 AM
Culture has a whole different relevancy, but people very often conflate culture and race... such as my ex who used to tell me that I am "culturally white".
I'm starting to wonder if "culturism" isn't hot shiny new thing in racism. There's a professor at my old college who teaches history through the lens of culture. As in, "Muslim culture has never produced anything of scientific value, because their religion forbids them from studying the natural laws of the universe. All the great inventions came from the free West, because they valued a spirit of inquiry." He even has a book where he meticulously explains how the "more democratic/free" (i.e., Western) society always wins wars. Except when they don't, which is because they weren't being faithful to their core values of Westerness.
It lets you make statements like "Of course black people are our intellectual and spiritual peers - race is entirely superficial. The reason they're doing so poorly is because their inferior culture - the black community is doing poorly academically and professionally because they don't have the WASP's intellectual curiosity or work ethic" and be not racist, because you're completely okay with black people who "escape" their culture and act like
civilized human beings white people.
It has the added benefit that you can call anyone who disagrees with you a relativist, who as we all know lack morals.
Your prof is obviously full of shit since muslims were responsible for our current understanding of astronomy and mathematics.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 04:35:26 AM
Your prof is obviously full of shit since muslims were responsible for our current understanding of astronomy and mathematics.
I'm really not sure how he missed the origins of the word "Algebra." Or how he manages to hang on at moderately liberal Catholic university that actively recruits exchange students from the Middle East.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 04:30:41 AM
This may be an interewsting exercise right here bb.
Why do you consider him brazilian and why do i consider him irish? And ill try to keep my own irishness out of the equation as i consider this further.
I think probably because he was black. And it was the mixed negro/hispanic/native black of Brazil, not West Indian Black.
Growing up as he did, in a one parent family in Ireland, I doubt if he comfortably identified as "Irish" due to his colour. And if he had grown up in Brazil, the fact he was half Irish wouldn't have factored in whether he was Brazilian. Irish bloodlines (In Ireland) are generally Irish, going back all the way to Brian Boru, and further. And even before that, they would only have been locally diluted, by Danes, or Brits. Brazil has a much more mixed and varied ethnicity, with Irish being part of that since the mid 1700s when Rebel Irish were Transported to the West Indies by Britain. Add to that Portuguese, rebellious plantation slaves, and indigenous mixing too. A good splash of newer Irish blood would make little or no diference to how Brazilian he would have been considered, had he lived there.
ETA; Certain parts of the above post are pretty tenuous, badly worded, and actually absurd. Partly due to poorly reasoned out and hastily put together thoughts, and partly due to Gin. But it does validate the OP, on one point, that racism is an uncomfortable subject. At least, it is from where I am currently sitting. My next post is a lot less wordy and far better illustrates what I was trying to say.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 03:49:03 AM
True. I guess thats part of my discomfort describing myself as white. I might have more in common with a hypothetical black bostonian with an irish immigrant parent than my midwestern friends. But that goes back to a previous post. I think of phil lynnott as an irishman rather than a black dude with a white mother. Its a separate topic than race but still ties in to a degree.
Obviously you think of him as
both an Irishman
and a black dude with a white mother, or you couldn't have chosen him as an example.
And I am going to challenge you on all of your justifications on being uncomfortable describing yourself as "white", because so far they're all variations on "I don't see race".
Quote from: BadBeast on January 10, 2012, 04:49:40 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 04:30:41 AM
This may be an interewsting exercise right here bb.
Why do you consider him brazilian and why do i consider him irish? And ill try to keep my own irishness out of the equation as i consider this further.
I think probably because he was black. And it was the mixed negro/hispanic/native black of Brazil, not West Indian Black.
Growing up as he did, in a one parent family in Ireland, I doubt if he comfortably identified as "Irish" due to his colour. And if he had grown up in Brazil, the fact he was half Irish wouldn't have factored in whether he was Brazilian. Irish bloodlines (In Ireland) are generally Irish, going back all the way to Brian Boru, and further. And even before that, they would only have been locally diluted, by Danes, or Brits. Brazil has a much more mixed and varied ethnicity, with Irish being part of that since the mid 1700s when Rebel Irish were Transported to the West Indies by Britain. Add to that Portuguese, rebellious plantation slaves, and indigenous mixing too. A good splash of newer Irish blood would make little or no diference to how Brazilian he would have been considered, had he lived there.
He was an Irish citizen with an Irish mother... why would he not consider himself Irish? I had to go look up his bio, to see if there were some clues I didn't know about such as having been born in Brazil.
Apparently his dad was from Guyana, which particularly means that he would have had no reason to consider himself Brazilian, but really, honestly, how can you assume that a person wouldn't identify with the home in which they were raised with natural-born relatives, because they have different skin? That's absurd. I don't even know how to go about criticizing it... I'm simply taken aback.
I mean, almost certainly he was aware of being different, but probably wouldn't have been thinking about it all the time. It certainly isn't likely that he thought of himself as Guyanan, as his father wasn't around and he was never exposed to Guyanan culture. Babies don't know they're black; they bond with their caregivers. Children identify with their families. For him to not identify as Irish would mean that he didn't identify with the only family he knew as well as the country he grew up in, and that's just silly. And I am kind of gobsmacked by the "If he had grown up in Brazil, his race wouldn't have been a factor in how Brazilian he was considered".
If I grew up in The Land of Oz, I would have my own troupe of flying monkeys.
If trees had balls, flowers would ejaculate.
I only meant that his being black, and brought up in Ireland, would have been more of a racial issue, than being half Irish would, had he been brought up in Brazil Guyana. Largely because colour is more of a racial identifier than actual culture is.
Quote from: BadBeast on January 10, 2012, 06:02:55 AM
I only meant that his being black, and brought up in Ireland, would have been more of a racial issue, than being half Irish would, had he been brought up in Brazil Guyana. Largely because colour is more of a racial identifier than actual culture is.
OK... that's not at all what you said, though, so you might want to review it and maybe even clarify yourself, because what you actually said was absurd.
And yes, color is, for most purposes, the identifier, and culture is not a racial identifier at all.
But all that has absolutely nothing to do with whether he thought of himself as Irish.
QuoteI doubt if he comfortably identified as "Irish" due to his colour.
Yeah, that last quote is a bit dickish, and not at all based on the sound and lucid reasoning I am usually so renowned for. But fuck it, I'm just a man, and prone to the occasional bout of dickishness, and while that doesn't excuse plain stupidity, it does make for an interesting excercise in why it's a bad idea to post on sensitive subjects whilst drunk. :oops:
Quote from: BadBeast on January 10, 2012, 07:41:19 AM
Yeah, that last quote is a bit dickish, and not at all based on the sound and lucid reasoning I am usually so renowned for. But fuck it, I'm just a man, and prone to the occasional bout of dickishness, and while that doesn't excuse plain stupidity, it does make for an interesting excercise in why it's a bad idea to post on sensitive subjects whilst drunk. :oops:
Eh, no foul, and bonus points for standing down.
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 10, 2012, 04:31:49 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 03:41:34 AM
Culture has a whole different relevancy, but people very often conflate culture and race... such as my ex who used to tell me that I am "culturally white".
I'm starting to wonder if "culturism" isn't hot shiny new thing in racism. There's a professor at my old college who teaches history through the lens of culture. As in, "Muslim culture has never produced anything of scientific value, because their religion forbids them from studying the natural laws of the universe. All the great inventions came from the free West, because they valued a spirit of inquiry." He even has a book where he meticulously explains how the "more democratic/free" (i.e., Western) society always wins wars. Except when they don't, which is because they weren't being faithful to their core values of Westerness.
It lets you make statements like "Of course black people are our intellectual and spiritual peers - race is entirely superficial. The reason they're doing so poorly is because their inferior culture - the black community is doing poorly academically and professionally because they don't have the WASP's intellectual curiosity or work ethic" and be not racist, because you're completely okay with black people who "escape" their culture and act like civilized human beings white people.
It has the added benefit that you can call anyone who disagrees with you a relativist, who as we all know lack morals.
There is definitely something to that idea. In fact, I believe the value of this as a long-term strategy was discussed by several Novelle Droit groups in Europe in the 1970s and 80s, who wanted to deploy Gramscian theories of hegemony and cultural domination against leftists who used it to make racism a terrible social faux pas.
In my long time spent arguing with Neo-Nazi twits, I say this deployed often. Most were actually sincere in using it, but since you could draw out ideas (like "Muslims don't do science" and "are crazy religions zealots who don't believe in the secular state") and then draw parallels to distinctly Western groups, it could be quite fun, as was pointing out that Al-Qaeda is essentially a variant of Leninism, and indeed Islamism as a political movement was drawn from Western, counter-enlightenment philosophies.
I mean, has anyone told the Nazis, the Soviet Union (Lysenkoism lol) or indeed the US Congress that they are meant to respect science?
The idea of culture used in such a way is meant to privilege certain specific narratives concerning Western society, almost all of which are a) flattering to Westerners and b) can be used as a stick to beat other cultures with, no matter how inaccurately. It's advocates might as well say Western Culture (whatever that is) is Doubleplus Good and all other societies (who are of course also monolithic) are guilty of thinkcrime.
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 05:16:36 AM
He was an Irish citizen with an Irish mother... why would he not consider himself Irish?
Apparently his dad was from Guyana, which particularly means that he would have had no reason to consider himself Brazilian, but really, honestly, how can you assume that a person wouldn't identify with the home in which they were raised with natural-born relatives, because they have different skin? That's absurd. I don't even know how to go about criticizing it... I'm simply taken aback.
I mean, almost certainly he was aware of being different, but probably wouldn't have been thinking about it all the time. It certainly isn't likely that he thought of himself as Guyanan, as his father wasn't around and he was never exposed to Guyanan culture. Babies don't know they're black; they bond with their caregivers. Children identify with their families. For him to not identify as Irish would mean that he didn't identify with the only family he knew as well as the country he grew up in, and that's just silly. And I am kind of gobsmacked by the "If he had grown up in Brazil, his race wouldn't have been a factor in how Brazilian he was considered".
I think you're oversimplifying some things here. Children identify
with their family, not necessarily
as their family. If baby Smith is adopted by the Jones family, and the Jones family makes it a point to accentuate baby's "Smithness" in it's exclusivity from "Jonesness", baby Smith will identify
with the Jones family,
as a Smith.
To guess that this is more likely to occur in a racially homogenous culture/nation than in a nation where "mixed" is the norm, is not much of a leap at all. Further, I'd be hard pressed to ascribe anything I have observed about national and racial identity in the America's and try to apply it to European situations. Very apples and oranges, that. There is nothing near "Irish" on this side of the pond. It's so foreign to me, in fact, that I really can't even get my head around it.
The relationship America has with it's 'African Americans' is also very different to the British, with it's Blacks. (West Indian) In 30 years, we've gone from open and unashamed Racism, to more or less wholly accepting of West Indian culture. In the mid 50's, the first Jamaican immigrants had a pretty tough time of things, and their children also bore the full on brunt of ugly Nationalist racism. But by the third generation they'd began to fight back, winning Legal rights with the anti-discrimination act.
But the most fascinating cultural phenomena, for me, is to take a look at the history of the British Skinhead movement. In the 60's, the first Skinheads were anything but racist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcEhAIx1OB4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqEJK0ZspkQ&feature=related
Some of the earliest British Skins were actually black. The whole Skinhead movement rose up from the Jamaican Ska and Rocksteady scene, with black kids, and white kids just getting together for parties, and dancing all night to Jamaican Dancehall music. But by the late 70's & early 80's, the whole scene was politically subverted by right wing neo-nazi groups like the National Front, via the Football Terraces.
Nowadays, people find it hard to believe that Skinheads were ever anything but racist Nazi sympathisers, especially when you see in what form the Skinhead phenomena exported itself as to mainland Europe and America, but it's true. It was originally a black thing, and at it's grass roots level, originated with the working class Jamaican Rude boys.
Quote from: BadBeast on January 10, 2012, 12:41:08 PM
The relationship America has with it's 'African Americans' is also very different to the British, with it's Blacks. (West Indian) In 30 years, we've gone from open and unashamed Racism, to more or less wholly accepting of West Indian culture. In the mid 50's, the first Jamaican immigrants had a pretty tough time of things, and their children also bore the full on brunt of ugly Nationalist racism. But by the third generation they'd began to fight back, winning Legal rights with the anti-discrimination act.
But the most fascinating cultural phenomena, for me, is to take a look at the history of the British Skinhead movement. In the 60's, the first Skinheads were anything but racist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcEhAIx1OB4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqEJK0ZspkQ&feature=related
Some of the earliest British Skins were actually black. The whole Skinhead movement rose up from the Jamaican Ska and Rocksteady scene, with black kids, and white kids just getting together for parties, and dancing all night to Jamaican Dancehall music. But by the late 70's & early 80's, the whole scene was politically subverted by right wing neo-nazi groups like the National Front, via the Football Terraces.
Nowadays, people find it hard to believe that Skinheads were ever anything but racist Nazi sympathisers, especially when you see in what form the Skinhead phenomena exported itself as to mainland Europe and America, but it's true. It was originally a black thing, and at it's grass roots level, originated with the working class Jamaican Rude boys.
... dude seriously?
We don't accept West Indian culture at all that I can see. Racism is still endemic in British society, and is becoming more accepted in mainstream society from where I'm standing. Just look at the Dianne Abbot stupidity, the treatment of all non-white youths by the police, or the rising popularity of the EDL. Daily Mail circulation is still huge, people still conflate 'asylum seeker' 'immigrant' and 'refugee' and consider them all benefit cheats. Class mobility is calcifying with a disproportionate amount of ethnic minorities in the bottom of society.
How much programming do you see on the BBC focused around West Indian culture? Or any culture that isn't mainstream British for that matter? We have some edge radio stations and that's about it. They are consistently portrayed as 'the other', under-represented in the majority of broadcasting and over-represented as the criminals or miscreants when they are portrayed at all.
Britain has a lot of points of distinction with the US, and our relationship with our ethnic minorities
is different. Largely because we don't have such a burden of 'white guilt' as seems to be the cultural norm in the US. Up until a few years ago most people were ignorant of the slave trade and the role we played in it - hell, a lot of people still are, but we've at least started talking about it. We've in no way accepted other cultures, though. Mostly we segregate them off and demand that they keep it out of our faces, acknowledging it only when it is time to pass judgement on them for their backwards ways.
I'm more inclined to agree with DS, for the country as a whole.
However, I will say that Badbeast is from near the part of Dorset I lived in for several years, and if he is basing his experiences on the Dorset/Avon and Somerset/Wiltshire area, he's probably more right. Bristol definitely embraces its West Indian heritage quite strong nowadays, and even in tiny little Midsomer Murder-esque villages up and down the coast, you'll normally have at least a couple of Indian, Chinese black families there, who are normally quite well integrated. The BNP do badly down here, as do similar groups, and racially motivated violence is quite low.
I suspect this is due to the relatively low numbers of ethnic minorities in the South West, as much as anything. People don't see race as a problem as much around there, because most people are white. It's very hard for the fear mongers of MUSLIM-BLACK APOCALYPSE to gain currency in a town where the only Muslim owns the kebab shop and drinks more beer and watches more porn than you do.
Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 08:21:56 AM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 10, 2012, 04:31:49 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 03:41:34 AM
Culture has a whole different relevancy, but people very often conflate culture and race... such as my ex who used to tell me that I am "culturally white".
I'm starting to wonder if "culturism" isn't hot shiny new thing in racism. There's a professor at my old college who teaches history through the lens of culture. As in, "Muslim culture has never produced anything of scientific value, because their religion forbids them from studying the natural laws of the universe. All the great inventions came from the free West, because they valued a spirit of inquiry." He even has a book where he meticulously explains how the "more democratic/free" (i.e., Western) society always wins wars. Except when they don't, which is because they weren't being faithful to their core values of Westerness.
It lets you make statements like "Of course black people are our intellectual and spiritual peers - race is entirely superficial. The reason they're doing so poorly is because their inferior culture - the black community is doing poorly academically and professionally because they don't have the WASP's intellectual curiosity or work ethic" and be not racist, because you're completely okay with black people who "escape" their culture and act like civilized human beings white people.
It has the added benefit that you can call anyone who disagrees with you a relativist, who as we all know lack morals.
There is definitely something to that idea. In fact, I believe the value of this as a long-term strategy was discussed by several Novelle Droit groups in Europe in the 1970s and 80s, who wanted to deploy Gramscian theories of hegemony and cultural domination against leftists who used it to make racism a terrible social faux pas.
In my long time spent arguing with Neo-Nazi twits, I say this deployed often. Most were actually sincere in using it, but since you could draw out ideas (like "Muslims don't do science" and "are crazy religions zealots who don't believe in the secular state") and then draw parallels to distinctly Western groups, it could be quite fun, as was pointing out that Al-Qaeda is essentially a variant of Leninism, and indeed Islamism as a political movement was drawn from Western, counter-enlightenment philosophies.
I mean, has anyone told the Nazis, the Soviet Union (Lysenkoism lol) or indeed the US Congress that they are meant to respect science?
The idea of culture used in such a way is meant to privilege certain specific narratives concerning Western society, almost all of which are a) flattering to Westerners and b) can be used as a stick to beat other cultures with, no matter how inaccurately. It's advocates might as well say Western Culture (whatever that is) is Doubleplus Good and all other societies (who are of course also monolithic) are guilty of thinkcrime.
Agreed. Race and culture are very different and have been very different throughout history. It wasn't that long ago that culturally different societies of the same race enslaved each other in ways almost indistinguishable from the Western enslavement of Africans.
The more I thought about this, I realized that I needed to amend the earlier comment I made about my observations here in Turkey. I think that the prejudice I've seen is probably far more a cultural prejudice than a racial one. For example, there is prejudice against 'Kurds' but this only seems to apply to the Kurds from the southeast. Kurds that are a couple generations integrated into the west don't elicit the same kind of response (as in no response). It seems to me that the heavy accent, the less metropolitan perspective and the much more conservative interpretation of Islam tend to be the factors that most of this prejudice keys off of. The same could be said of the 'gypsies' since most of the ones I've met are pretty much physically indistinguishable from the other Turks. Their clothing, lifestyle, accent and culture seem, again, to be the key factors. Perhaps this is because racially, these groups have been integrated for centuries, while culturally the groups have always been unique. This seems especially true post-Ottoman as the western half of the country became more culturally Europe and the west (esp the Southwest) retained their existing culture.
The US has lots of cultural prejudice and racial prejudice across many different races and cultures. In some cases it seems that the prejudices don't go hand in hand at all. Some people aren't prejudice against 'black people', but appear obviously prejudiced against 'black culture'. Other people seem prejudiced against any culture not their own while accepting any genetic variation within their specific culture. In other cases, people seem open to other cultures but hold obvious prejudice against specific races and their culture.
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 05:03:59 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 03:49:03 AM
True. I guess thats part of my discomfort describing myself as white. I might have more in common with a hypothetical black bostonian with an irish immigrant parent than my midwestern friends. But that goes back to a previous post. I think of phil lynnott as an irishman rather than a black dude with a white mother. Its a separate topic than race but still ties in to a degree.
Obviously you think of him as both an Irishman and a black dude with a white mother, or you couldn't have chosen him as an example.
And I am going to challenge you on all of your justifications on being uncomfortable describing yourself as "white", because so far they're all variations on "I don't see race".
I do see race. If I look at someone, skin color is one of the most obvious things about them. I guess my point is that since someone's skin color doesn't really tell me anything about them that it is largely useless information, whereas where they grew up or where their parents are from gives me a better idea of what has shaped them. Obviously I'm a white guy, but that's such a broad label that it's meaningless. It's not just discomfort at thinking of myself as white, I don't look at myself in the mirror and go, I'm a white guy. The thought just doesn't even occur to me.
I don't analyze stuff that much. If I'm trying to point out a guy in a crowd, and he's Black or Chinese or whatever, I'm going to include that in my description, because it helps me communicate.
After all, it isn't a sin or a crime1 to be Black or Chinese or whatever. It is what it is.
1 This is not accurate in Los Angeles.
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on January 10, 2012, 01:07:39 PM
Quote from: BadBeast on January 10, 2012, 12:41:08 PM
The relationship America has with it's 'African Americans' is also very different to the British, with it's Blacks. (West Indian) In 30 years, we've gone from open and unashamed Racism, to more or less wholly accepting of West Indian culture. In the mid 50's, the first Jamaican immigrants had a pretty tough time of things, and their children also bore the full on brunt of ugly Nationalist racism. But by the third generation they'd began to fight back, winning Legal rights with the anti-discrimination act.
But the most fascinating cultural phenomena, for me, is to take a look at the history of the British Skinhead movement. In the 60's, the first Skinheads were anything but racist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcEhAIx1OB4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqEJK0ZspkQ&feature=related
Some of the earliest British Skins were actually black. The whole Skinhead movement rose up from the Jamaican Ska and Rocksteady scene, with black kids, and white kids just getting together for parties, and dancing all night to Jamaican Dancehall music. But by the late 70's & early 80's, the whole scene was politically subverted by right wing neo-nazi groups like the National Front, via the Football Terraces.
Nowadays, people find it hard to believe that Skinheads were ever anything but racist Nazi sympathisers, especially when you see in what form the Skinhead phenomena exported itself as to mainland Europe and America, but it's true. It was originally a black thing, and at it's grass roots level, originated with the working class Jamaican Rude boys.
... dude seriously?
We don't accept West Indian culture at all that I can see. Racism is still endemic in British society, and is becoming more accepted in mainstream society from where I'm standing. Just look at the Dianne Abbot stupidity, the treatment of all non-white youths by the police, or the rising popularity of the EDL. Daily Mail circulation is still huge, people still conflate 'asylum seeker' 'immigrant' and 'refugee' and consider them all benefit cheats. Class mobility is calcifying with a disproportionate amount of ethnic minorities in the bottom of society.
How much programming do you see on the BBC focused around West Indian culture? Or any culture that isn't mainstream British for that matter? We have some edge radio stations and that's about it. They are consistently portrayed as 'the other', under-represented in the majority of broadcasting and over-represented as the criminals or miscreants when they are portrayed at all.
Britain has a lot of points of distinction with the US, and our relationship with our ethnic minorities is different. Largely because we don't have such a burden of 'white guilt' as seems to be the cultural norm in the US. Up until a few years ago most people were ignorant of the slave trade and the role we played in it - hell, a lot of people still are, but we've at least started talking about it. We've in no way accepted other cultures, though. Mostly we segregate them off and demand that they keep it out of our faces, acknowledging it only when it is time to pass judgement on them for their backwards ways.
When I was growing up in Wiltshire, at my School, Teachers would (not all of them, and not regularly, but often enough) refer to the maybe a dozen black kids at my School as Nig-nogs, or Gollywogs, in class, and in front of everyone, and not think they were doing anything wrong.
On a School trip to London, to see Macbeth by the RSC, a few of us ducked out of going to the Theatre, (two black lads amongst us) preferring to have a bit of a gander around the Record shops instead. When it was time to get back for the Coach home, one of them asked a Patrolling Policeman which way was the quickest way to walk back to the Theatre. The Policeman's response? "Fuck off you black bastard". This was to a polite 12 year old kid, in his school uniform. Kind of soured the whole trip for those of us present.
There were people regularly hanging around outside the School gates, handing out recruitment flyers and pamphlets for the National Front, and if you think the EDL are a bit right of centre, you obviously never ran into these bastards. Think a 20 year old Nick Griffin, in boots and braces, with Nazi armbands and badges, in gangs of half a dozen. Outside SCHOOLS recruiting 11 to 16 year old KIDS!
Grown men, who would spit on black mothers taking their children to school, while handing out their filth to kids.
When I was a bit older, I had a Ghanan friend, who had been adopted by a rich white couple. Nice people, well brought up lad, very well off. His dad had an old MGA Roadster, beautifully restored, that he let my friend drive at the weekends. One night, we were driving back from Bath, when the Police pulled him over. they went over the car, (which was obviously uptogether) and his documents with a fine toothed comb, sneering and derisively rude with every gesture and question. Totally ignoring me, the passenger. When I asked why he'd been pulled over, one of them said "Because it's not right to see a nice British car like this being driven around by a fucking coon". That's the kind of day to day racism I experienced when I was young, just by dint of having black friends.
OK, things are still racist here, especially against Asians, but it's nothing like as up front and in your face as it was back then, believe me.
These days, the Police are uniformly unpleasant to everyone, whites included. That Diane Abbot thing the other day, was nothing more than a low level political jibe, under the radar, save that the press blew it up out of all proportion. And The Daily Mail vastly exaggerate people's attitude towards race, for their own agenda. On the street, between normal people, interacting on a day to day basis, there seems to be far less overt racism than there was back then. And normal people are much more likely to speak up in it's face when it does show itself.
People are much more race/racism aware these days, and whatever private opinions the racists might hold today, they're much more circumspect about what they say, and how they treat people in public. And as far as I can see, that's a vast improvement on how things were in the early 80's.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 04:35:37 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 05:03:59 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 03:49:03 AM
True. I guess thats part of my discomfort describing myself as white. I might have more in common with a hypothetical black bostonian with an irish immigrant parent than my midwestern friends. But that goes back to a previous post. I think of phil lynnott as an irishman rather than a black dude with a white mother. Its a separate topic than race but still ties in to a degree.
Obviously you think of him as both an Irishman and a black dude with a white mother, or you couldn't have chosen him as an example.
And I am going to challenge you on all of your justifications on being uncomfortable describing yourself as "white", because so far they're all variations on "I don't see race".
I do see race. If I look at someone, skin color is one of the most obvious things about them. I guess my point is that since someone's skin color doesn't really tell me anything about them that it is largely useless information, whereas where they grew up or where their parents are from gives me a better idea of what has shaped them. Obviously I'm a white guy, but that's such a broad label that it's meaningless. It's not just discomfort at thinking of myself as white, I don't look at myself in the mirror and go, I'm a white guy. The thought just doesn't even occur to me.
I agree with the "skin color doesn't really tell me anything about them," but unless a person's origin is obvious (they've got an accent or dress in "ethnic" clothing) or they're self-consciously conspicuous about it (they can't go five minutes without reminding you that they're Irish right down to their shamrock tattoo), you don't typically find out a person's origin/ancestry until you've already filed them into some other compartment ("sports nut" or "anime nerd" or "Dave").
As for reactions to people I encounter randomly on the street, skin color is a factor in how I react to them (because I'm an American and therefore at least a little racist by default), but the way they dress, walk, and talk is going to be just as important. A white guy with a shaved head and lots of ink carrying a gun is going to worry more a lot more than a black guy in business casual packing heat.
Quote from: kingyak on January 10, 2012, 06:47:10 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 04:35:37 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 05:03:59 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 03:49:03 AM
True. I guess thats part of my discomfort describing myself as white. I might have more in common with a hypothetical black bostonian with an irish immigrant parent than my midwestern friends. But that goes back to a previous post. I think of phil lynnott as an irishman rather than a black dude with a white mother. Its a separate topic than race but still ties in to a degree.
Obviously you think of him as both an Irishman and a black dude with a white mother, or you couldn't have chosen him as an example.
And I am going to challenge you on all of your justifications on being uncomfortable describing yourself as "white", because so far they're all variations on "I don't see race".
I do see race. If I look at someone, skin color is one of the most obvious things about them. I guess my point is that since someone's skin color doesn't really tell me anything about them that it is largely useless information, whereas where they grew up or where their parents are from gives me a better idea of what has shaped them. Obviously I'm a white guy, but that's such a broad label that it's meaningless. It's not just discomfort at thinking of myself as white, I don't look at myself in the mirror and go, I'm a white guy. The thought just doesn't even occur to me.
I agree with the "skin color doesn't really tell me anything about them," but unless a person's origin is obvious (they've got an accent or dress in "ethnic" clothing) or they're self-consciously conspicuous about it (they can't go five minutes without reminding you that they're Irish right down to their shamrock tattoo), you don't typically find out a person's origin/ancestry until you've already filed them into some other compartment ("sports nut" or "anime nerd" or "Dave").
As for reactions to people I encounter randomly on the street, skin color is a factor in how I react to them (because I'm an American and therefore at least a little racist by default), but the way they dress, walk, and talk is going to be just as important. A white guy with a shaved head and lots of ink carrying a gun is going to worry more a lot more than a black guy in business casual packing heat.
Actually, that is one instance in which I notice that a white guy is white, since it goes with all the other cues presented with it. I get nervous around white guys with shaved heads and a particular manor of dress, whether they're armed or not. I've seen a couple of skins around. Not often but I always kinda cringe when I do. But I'm also a white dude with a shaved head. It's the other visual cues that draw attention to their skin color.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 04:35:37 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 10, 2012, 05:03:59 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 03:49:03 AM
True. I guess thats part of my discomfort describing myself as white. I might have more in common with a hypothetical black bostonian with an irish immigrant parent than my midwestern friends. But that goes back to a previous post. I think of phil lynnott as an irishman rather than a black dude with a white mother. Its a separate topic than race but still ties in to a degree.
Obviously you think of him as both an Irishman and a black dude with a white mother, or you couldn't have chosen him as an example.
And I am going to challenge you on all of your justifications on being uncomfortable describing yourself as "white", because so far they're all variations on "I don't see race".
I do see race. If I look at someone, skin color is one of the most obvious things about them. I guess my point is that since someone's skin color doesn't really tell me anything about them that it is largely useless information, whereas where they grew up or where their parents are from gives me a better idea of what has shaped them. Obviously I'm a white guy, but that's such a broad label that it's meaningless. It's not just discomfort at thinking of myself as white, I don't look at myself in the mirror and go, I'm a white guy. The thought just doesn't even occur to me.
It is typical of white people to not think of themselves in terms of race, because as we discussed earlier in the thread, you don't, typically, have any reason to.
I really had a lot more to say but I have a shit ton of Sociology reading to do. :lol:
Yeah i accept that. But i guess once i find out more about that particular person i try and not categorize them by skin color. Like if i hear a black dude speaking creole i am more than happy to stop thinking about him as black and start thinking of him as haitian. I suppose its silly. I dont imagine ill be able to make sense out of my own thoughts on it anytime soon but i am being more mindful about it. It might be an interesting experiment for me to start deliberately noticing white people as white.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 11:21:13 PM
Yeah i accept that. But i guess once i find out more about that particular person i try and not categorize them by skin color. Like if i hear a black dude speaking creole i am more than happy to stop thinking about him as black and start thinking of him as haitian. I suppose its silly. I dont imagine ill be able to make sense out of my own thoughts on it anytime soon but i am being more mindful about it. It might be an interesting experiment for me to start deliberately noticing white people as white.
You should come here and go to some of the divey little bars in the backwoods with me. Then talk to a couple of people and refer to previous conversations by saying "I was talking to that white dude over there, and..." It'll be fun, I promise. :lol:
Oh man. That would actually be great for omf anywhere. Perfect really since its challenging peoples perceptions.
Maybe even extend it in some cases and go "i think that dude over there is kinda straight but im not really sure."
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 11:31:34 PM
Oh man. That would actually be great for omf anywhere. Perfect really since its challenging peoples perceptions.
I think it would work best in a homogenous setting.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 11:33:32 PM
Maybe even extend it in some cases and go "i think that dude over there is kinda straight but im not really sure."
If we do that one HERE, then bring your finger tape and/or your running shoes. I'll bring my
brass knuckles key chain. :lulz:
:lulz: might be better for if and when you visit beantown.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 11:21:13 PM
Yeah i accept that. But i guess once i find out more about that particular person i try and not categorize them by skin color. Like if i hear a black dude speaking creole i am more than happy to stop thinking about him as black and start thinking of him as haitian. I suppose its silly. I dont imagine ill be able to make sense out of my own thoughts on it anytime soon but i am being more mindful about it. It might be an interesting experiment for me to start deliberately noticing white people as white.
OK... so, what's your point? That you're not racist?
Congratulations.
Im not sure what my point is. Like i said im still trying to figure this out. That im not racist was apparent even before this conversation. But youre helping me think about things in a different way.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 11:45:26 PM
Im not sure what my point is. Like i said im still trying to figure this out. That im not racist was apparent even before this conversation. But youre helping me think about things in a different way.
Here is a potentially interesting thought for you: When you encounter someone of another race, are you conscious of how her interaction/action/perception of you may be affected by the ever-present consciousness that people of color have of race?
Quote from: Nigel on January 11, 2012, 12:38:42 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 11:45:26 PM
Im not sure what my point is. Like i said im still trying to figure this out. That im not racist was apparent even before this conversation. But youre helping me think about things in a different way.
Here is a potentially interesting thought for you: When you encounter someone of another race, are you conscious of how her interaction/action/perception of you may be affected by the ever-present consciousness that people of color have of race?
It was pretty glaring one time, actually, yes. I was picking up a UHaul van, and the clerk told me that their guy out in the parking lot would show me where this particular van was. So I go outside, look around for a UHaul employee and don't see him. Now there's this one guy talking to this other guy, and they're both black. So I go up to him to ask him where the UHaul employee was. I start off, "Sorry to bother you, but..." "I don't work here." "Ok, but do you know...." "I said I don't work here. Just because I'm black doesn't mean I work here." "Right, but I just wanted to know if..." And then he launched into this little speech about how white people think about black people. He just didn't want to hear what I had to say. At first I was annoyed, then I felt bad that his interactions were so shitty that he assumed I was making assumptions based on his skin color, then I got a little bit of horrormirth at the idea that this guy made an assumption about me making assumptions based on his skin color based on my skin color.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 11, 2012, 12:46:57 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 11, 2012, 12:38:42 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 11:45:26 PM
Im not sure what my point is. Like i said im still trying to figure this out. That im not racist was apparent even before this conversation. But youre helping me think about things in a different way.
Here is a potentially interesting thought for you: When you encounter someone of another race, are you conscious of how her interaction/action/perception of you may be affected by the ever-present consciousness that people of color have of race?
It was pretty glaring one time, actually, yes. I was picking up a UHaul van, and the clerk told me that their guy out in the parking lot would show me where this particular van was. So I go outside, look around for a UHaul employee and don't see him. Now there's this one guy talking to this other guy, and they're both black. So I go up to him to ask him where the UHaul employee was. I start off, "Sorry to bother you, but..." "I don't work here." "Ok, but do you know...." "I said I don't work here. Just because I'm black doesn't mean I work here." "Right, but I just wanted to know if..." And then he launched into this little speech about how white people think about black people. He just didn't want to hear what I had to say. At first I was annoyed, then I felt bad that his interactions were so shitty that he assumed I was making assumptions based on his skin color, then I got a little bit of horrormirth at the idea that this guy made an assumption about me making assumptions based on his skin color based on my skin color.
That is a fairly extreme manifestation, but it's probably worth thinking about the fact that black people are usually very conscious of being black around white people, unless they are close friends in which case that awareness tends to be more relaxed (although still on some level present).
Which is one reason the "I don't think about race" default for many white people is met with "Well, isn't that nice
for you". Being able to not think about race is, in itself, a matter of white privilege, uncomfortable as that idea may seem.
Thought experiment: every time you see a person of color, try to think about them being conscious of their own position as a member of a non-dominant race in this society. What might they be wondering your assumptions are about them? If they are a woman, are they worried you think they might be a prostitute, or might harass or rape them? If they are a man, are they worried that you might think that they have nefarious intentions?
Try to do this for an entire day. See whether it alters your perspective on the world.
Quote from: Nigel on January 11, 2012, 12:55:14 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 11, 2012, 12:46:57 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 11, 2012, 12:38:42 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 11:45:26 PM
Im not sure what my point is. Like i said im still trying to figure this out. That im not racist was apparent even before this conversation. But youre helping me think about things in a different way.
Here is a potentially interesting thought for you: When you encounter someone of another race, are you conscious of how her interaction/action/perception of you may be affected by the ever-present consciousness that people of color have of race?
It was pretty glaring one time, actually, yes. I was picking up a UHaul van, and the clerk told me that their guy out in the parking lot would show me where this particular van was. So I go outside, look around for a UHaul employee and don't see him. Now there's this one guy talking to this other guy, and they're both black. So I go up to him to ask him where the UHaul employee was. I start off, "Sorry to bother you, but..." "I don't work here." "Ok, but do you know...." "I said I don't work here. Just because I'm black doesn't mean I work here." "Right, but I just wanted to know if..." And then he launched into this little speech about how white people think about black people. He just didn't want to hear what I had to say. At first I was annoyed, then I felt bad that his interactions were so shitty that he assumed I was making assumptions based on his skin color, then I got a little bit of horrormirth at the idea that this guy made an assumption about me making assumptions based on his skin color based on my skin color.
That is a fairly extreme manifestation, but it's probably worth thinking about the fact that black people are usually very conscious of being black around white people, unless they are close friends in which case that awareness tends to be more relaxed (although still on some level present).
Which is one reason the "I don't think about race" default for many white people is met with "Well, isn't that nice for you". Being able to not think about race is, in itself, a matter of white privilege, uncomfortable as that idea may seem.
Thought experiment: every time you see a person of color, try to think about them being conscious of their own position as a member of a non-dominant race in this society. What might they be wondering your assumptions are about them? If they are a woman, are they worried you think they might be a prostitute, or might harass or rape them? If they are a man, are they worried that you might think that they have nefarious intentions?
Try to do this for an entire day. See whether it alters your perspective on the world.
Will do. It might be kinda tricky to think of it as a one on one thing- people in Boston are known to try and avoid talking to people they don't know as much as possible.
This does remind me of another incident that happened a couple of weeks ago.
We were all at the bar (including our drummer which is a rare thing) and through the normal sort of bumping into people, we got a pretty good crowd going. One was Villager's best friend (who's also Discordian), and another was a friend of our drummers who is black. Well, everyone was leaning in and talking because, you know, bars get noisy, and the black guy touches her shoulder, and she bristles for a moment. So he says, "It's ok, I know it's scary cuz I'm black." "Well, I'm blind, so I didn't even know." We all busted out laughing, because if you look at her face for more than 3 seconds that fact is apparent, and that's what this guy was now doing, smiled to himself and went, "well, now I feel like an asshole. I got nothing on that."
I've just realized, on my floor at least, I'm an ethnic minority now.
Quote from: Cain on January 11, 2012, 07:53:39 AM
I've just realized, on my floor at least, I'm an ethnic minority now.
(http://i748.photobucket.com/albums/xx128/ChuckFukmuk/smileys/uhhuh.gif)
WORST. CHICKSTACHE. EVER.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 11, 2012, 01:48:05 PM
WORST. CHICKSTACHE. EVER.
Yeah, that wouldn't even make a good man 'tach. It looks more like a dirty sanchez than proper facial hair.
The girl at the top looks deeply uncomfortable.
Probably because she knows that the other two children are possessed.
The one on the right certainly is.
Quote from: BadBeast on January 11, 2012, 01:25:08 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 11, 2012, 07:53:39 AM
I've just realized, on my floor at least, I'm an ethnic minority now.
(http://i748.photobucket.com/albums/xx128/ChuckFukmuk/smileys/uhhuh.gif)
There's really nothing like posting a racist gif to kill an otherwise reasonable conversation about race.
Quote from: Nigel on January 14, 2012, 10:32:03 PM
Quote from: BadBeast on January 11, 2012, 01:25:08 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 11, 2012, 07:53:39 AM
I've just realized, on my floor at least, I'm an ethnic minority now.
(http://i748.photobucket.com/albums/xx128/ChuckFukmuk/smileys/uhhuh.gif)
There's really nothing like posting a racist gif to kill an otherwise reasonable conversation about race.
I don't get it.
Both why the picture is supposed to be funny (is it?) or why it's racist.
The black adult of uncertain gender on the left looks to be bleeding from a headwound. Though if his head goes up that far it's HUGE! Is that the joke?
It's racist because of the transgressive context of taking a studio portrait of a black family and making it into a .gif in which all members of the family are doing a stereotypical head wag that is heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes. In fact, the whole reason it's an internet meme is because of the internet social more that "nothing is sacred"; it is therefore funny because it is transgressive.
Badbeast was showing off his irreverence by posting it in a thread about race which apparently he had decided wasn't funny, edgy, or badass enough.
Quote from: Nigel on January 15, 2012, 06:29:21 PM
It's racist because of the transgressive context of taking a studio portrait of a black family and making it into a .gif in which all members of the family are doing a stereotypical head wag that is heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes. In fact, the whole reason it's an internet meme is because of the internet social more that "nothing is sacred"; it is therefore funny because it is transgressive.
Badbeast was showing off his irreverence by posting it in a thread about race which apparently he had decided wasn't funny, edgy, or badass enough.
I don't see how it's racist either. And to be perfectly honest, " transgressive context of taking a studio portrait of a black family and making it into a .gif in which all members of the family are doing a stereotypical head wag that is heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes" means less than fuck all to me.
I posted it because I thought it was funny, not because*
I* decided the thread wasn't edgy, or badass enough.
I can live with the fact Nigel doesn't think it was funny. But to blame me for "killing the thread?" That's not true.
Quote from: BadBeast on January 15, 2012, 08:06:35 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 15, 2012, 06:29:21 PM
It's racist because of the transgressive context of taking a studio portrait of a black family and making it into a .gif in which all members of the family are doing a stereotypical head wag that is heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes. In fact, the whole reason it's an internet meme is because of the internet social more that "nothing is sacred"; it is therefore funny because it is transgressive.
Badbeast was showing off his irreverence by posting it in a thread about race which apparently he had decided wasn't funny, edgy, or badass enough.
I don't see how it's racist either. And to be perfectly honest, " transgressive context of taking a studio portrait of a black family and making it into a .gif in which all members of the family are doing a stereotypical head wag that is heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes" means less than fuck all to me.
I posted it because I thought it was funny, not because*I* decided the thread wasn't edgy, or badass enough.
I can live with the fact Nigel doesn't think it was funny. But to blame me for "killing the thread?" That's not true.
So because you thought the thread needed more funny.
How about this; if you don't have anything intelligent to add to a thread that I start with serious intent and in which serious discussion is happening, don't add anything. I am not entirely stunned, based on some of your other posts ITT, that you can't comprehend why that .gif is racist (despite the fact that its funniness relies on racism) but there are few enough serious discussions on the forum at any given time.
Please and thank you.
Hey, at least that gif could potentially be the jumping off point for the question of whether other people here see racism in it, and why or why not.
For the record I am not offended by the gif per se, and I do see humor in it, but the humor is completely dependent on racism (and would really only be appropriate in this context as a statement or sarcasm or irony).
Well, on that note, I personally wasn't aware that the "head-wagging" in the GIF was a racist stereotype heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes, but assumed it was a kind of gimmick-effect to make it look sort of 3D (seen a similar effect in other GIFs). Though now that you've pointed it out, I do see it.
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 15, 2012, 09:26:56 PM
Well, on that note, I personally wasn't aware that the "head-wagging" in the GIF was a racist stereotype heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes, but assumed it was a kind of gimmick-effect to make it look sort of 3D (seen a similar effect in other GIFs). Though now that you've pointed it out, I do see it.
I was wondering if it was funny or just baffling to people outside of the US... most of the humor is based in the idea that "here is a picture of black people animated to be doing that black thing".
It's also kind of funny in the "bad family photos" kind of way, but without that bit of cultural context it doesn't really make any more sense as a "funny picture" than, say:
(http://awkwardfamilyphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/cache/2012/01/awkardfamilyphoto-e1326444407647/3836271519.jpg)
Quote from: Nigel on January 15, 2012, 09:42:59 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 15, 2012, 09:26:56 PM
Well, on that note, I personally wasn't aware that the "head-wagging" in the GIF was a racist stereotype heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes, but assumed it was a kind of gimmick-effect to make it look sort of 3D (seen a similar effect in other GIFs). Though now that you've pointed it out, I do see it.
I was wondering if it was funny or just baffling to people outside of the US... most of the humor is based in the idea that "here is a picture of black people animated to be doing that black thing".
It's also kind of funny in the "bad family photos" kind of way, but without that bit of cultural context it doesn't really make any more sense as a "funny picture" than, say:
(http://awkwardfamilyphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/cache/2012/01/awkardfamilyphoto-e1326444407647/3836271519.jpg)
Okay, context or no, that picture is down right hilarious. I love the look on the grandmother's face. It just screams "I totally bought that KISS album for her." :lulz:
Honestly, a lot of US racial stereotypes do not cross the Atlantic well. Fried chicken and watermelon is another one that someone unfamiliar with US culture would not realise is racist.
Obviously it depends on a lot of factors in these days of the internet, and I sometimes feel I might be leading you guys to have high expectations concerning foreigners, since I'm fairly clued in when it comes to American culture. I suspect my own generation are probably more familiar with US pop culture than most (hell, our gangs even call the police "feds" now), but its an uneven distribution even then.
I primarily saw a really terrible family photo. I noticed the movement but it didnt immediately strike me as racist- i figured it was just some other weird internet thing that i dont understand and would think is stupid humor if i did understand it. Mostly because ive come to expect that from the internet- inane shit that other people find funny.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 15, 2012, 10:13:08 PM
I primarily saw a really terrible family photo. I noticed the movement but it didnt immediately strike me as racist- i figured it was just some other weird internet thing that i dont understand and would think is stupid humor if i did understand it. Mostly because ive come to expect that from the internet- inane shit that other people find funny.
You didn't grow up in America, did you? You came here from Ireland or something?
There are a few of things going on in that picture. One, it's a horribly unflattering picture of an unattractive black woman with a moustache and her family, all of whom appear to be victims of the '80's. Two, they've been gifified to be wagging their heads in a way that pretty much anyone who grew up in the States or Canada will generally recognize as the "Oh No You Di'int!" ghetto black girl head-bob. Three, I am not at all sure of why it would seem funny to place that picture in a thread about race unless it was specifically because the humor of the gif relies on racism, because otherwise it's just randomly posting an awkward photo of a black family in a thread about race.
Ive lived in boston my whole life. I never really knew too many people who werent white catholics until high school however. Perhaps thats the reason? I dont know. I basically saw that as the same as that gif of bds bopping his head. I can see its as racist now that you mention it though.
Though I certainly do not think BB is a racist, there's no question that the humor in that gif is completely racism-driven.
Well, except for the chickstache. That'd be funny in any skin tone. But that's probably sexist of me. :lulz:
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 15, 2012, 10:26:25 PM
Though I certainly do not think BB is a racist, there's no question that the humor in that gif is completely racism-driven.
Well, except for the chickstache. That'd be funny in any skin tone. But that's probably sexist of me. :lulz:
I don't think BB is a racist, I just think he's clueless.
The chickstache is funny for a given value of funny. The whole picture is funny because it's awkward as fuck. Adding the head-bob is funny because it's racist, if that makes sense. In the context of this thread it might be funny, depending on the surrounding posts.
Its a cringeworthy photo even without the animation. Anyway perhaps it was a bit of naivete on my part mixed in with my low expectations of internet humor.
Quote from: Nigel on January 15, 2012, 10:36:22 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 15, 2012, 10:26:25 PM
Though I certainly do not think BB is a racist, there's no question that the humor in that gif is completely racism-driven.
Well, except for the chickstache. That'd be funny in any skin tone. But that's probably sexist of me. :lulz:
I don't think BB is a racist, I just think he's clueless.
The chickstache is funny for a given value of funny. The whole picture is funny because it's awkward as fuck. Adding the head-bob is funny because it's racist, if that makes sense. In the context of this thread it might be funny, depending on the surrounding posts.
So was it funny? Or not funny? As for clueless, So I didn't grow up with the American tropes of what's racist and what isn't. Racism was primarily getting your head kicked in for being black, or even hanging out with black friends. And taking a stand against racism was to take to the streets in the Rock against Racism rallys of the late 80's, or the Anti Fascist rallys of the early 90's, and to be prepared to actually physically fight back against the Nazi Boneheads, or the National fucking Front. So to suggest I'm simply "clueless" rather than just "not particularly funny" makes me a little bit angry. Not very, but just a little bit!
Quote from: BadBeast on January 16, 2012, 12:13:28 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 15, 2012, 10:36:22 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 15, 2012, 10:26:25 PM
Though I certainly do not think BB is a racist, there's no question that the humor in that gif is completely racism-driven.
Well, except for the chickstache. That'd be funny in any skin tone. But that's probably sexist of me. :lulz:
I don't think BB is a racist, I just think he's clueless.
The chickstache is funny for a given value of funny. The whole picture is funny because it's awkward as fuck. Adding the head-bob is funny because it's racist, if that makes sense. In the context of this thread it might be funny, depending on the surrounding posts.
So was it funny? Or not funny? As for clueless, So I didn't grow up with the American tropes of what's racist and what isn't. Racism was primarily getting your head kicked in for being black, or even hanging out with black friends. And taking a stand against racism was to take to the streets in the Rock against Racism rallys of the late 80's, or the Anti Fascist rallys of the early 90's, and to be prepared to actually physically fight back against the Nazi Boneheads, or the National fucking Front. So to suggest I'm simply "clueless" rather than just "not particularly funny" makes me a little bit angry. Not very, but just a little bit!
It might or might not be funny, depending on context.
Why did you think it was funny to post it in this thread?
Something to do with Cain saying he was an ethnic minority on his landing, and the irony of having 4 black faces saying "uh huh" in agreement.
Quote from: BadBeast on January 16, 2012, 12:29:52 AM
Something to do with Cain saying he was an ethnic minority on his landing, and the irony of having 4 black faces saying "uh huh" in agreement.
Oh, OK. So basically we have a complete cultural gap here, because here in the US that head wag does not mean "uh-huh", it means "Bitch PLEASE". So it meant the opposite of what you intended, and in an offensive way to boot.
Here are a couple of racist Youtube videos for to compare and contrast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPkWyiiOMbQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_wJtVrGRmA&feature=related
I'm trying to find one that will exemplify the head-wagging thing so you can see what I'm talking about.
Being a horrible pedant I always think of 'racist' content as specifically saying that one racial group is inferior to another.
I can see an argument that the gif is, presenting black people as an item of mockery, therefore by implication, inferior to other races. I personally find that a stretch, but don't have a problem with others making that interpretation. I can see it as offensive.
There's also a cultural thing going on where I don't automatically find it upsetting because Aussies aren't exposed to African American culture, or share that history of racism with African Americans as a social group.
Edit; Cain's also said the same thing about non American cultures. I know that's happened once with a KFC ad that played on the competition between the Aussie cricket team and the NZ All Blacks. In Aus it was all seen as lolcricket, but in the US people who'd seen it on YouTube or whatever were offended by the black people/fried chicken connotations.
For the record, I totally understand what Nigel's beef with the GIF in the usage and context of the thread.
And it is so very unfortunately hilarious.
Because it is racist.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 16, 2012, 05:46:00 AM
For the record, I totally understand what Nigel's beef with the GIF in the usage and context of the thread.
And it is so very unfortunately hilarious.
Because it is racist.
:lol:
Quote from: Cain on January 15, 2012, 10:01:21 PM
Honestly, a lot of US racial stereotypes do not cross the Atlantic well. Fried chicken and watermelon is another one that someone unfamiliar with US culture would not realise is racist.
I really never got that either. "It's a black stereotype", but, that doesn't actually
explain anything.
Also:
(http://i.imgur.com/dxD3S.gif)
This is NOT FUNNY and TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATE because in Europe (Denmark, to be exact) some people's hair actually moves this way due to a genetic defect and it is why the Dutch invented "hair metal", a special kind of orthopeutic hair-braces. These devices made the victim subject of terrible public ridicule until we finally eradicated the gene with hairproduct called "countdown solution".
That's right, "Hair Metal" is in a fact terribly insensitive and stereotyping music genre created solely to point and laugh at this episode in our history that we'd rather forget. Why do you think the band's called "Europe" and their song "Final Countdown" huh?
This is why the girl holding the KISS album ... I just ... well I feel terrible for even posting this.
Just think about that next time somebody tells you "the theme from Final Countdown is now stuck on your head" ... if they're American, they couldn't know their
faux-pas1, but if a Eurospag tells you this, they're probably making fun of the Danish and are a horrible sort of people you should probably avoid (not that the Danish themselves are much better, of course).
1 btw there's a hilarious yet sad story behind the true origins of this term, but I'll explain that another time.
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 16, 2012, 02:44:05 PM
1 btw there's a hilarious yet sad story behind the true origins of this term, but I'll explain that another time.
Is that the one about the puppy with prosthetics?
Quote from: Nigel on January 11, 2012, 12:55:14 AM
Being able to not think about race is, in itself, a matter of white privilege, uncomfortable as that idea may seem.
Fuck, Nigel. I never thought of it that way.
QuoteThought experiment: every time you see a person of color, try to think about them being conscious of their own position as a member of a non-dominant race in this society. What might they be wondering your assumptions are about them? If they are a woman, are they worried you think they might be a prostitute, or might harass or rape them? If they are a man, are they worried that you might think that they have nefarious intentions?
Try to do this for an entire day. See whether it alters your perspective on the world.
That sucks, but I'd like to move towards a society where people of "other" race don't have to think about it either. Sometimes, I think the only way to do accomplish that is so many people to genuinely be in the "I don't think about it" category that it just
is that way.
Quote from: navkat on January 16, 2012, 05:25:43 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 11, 2012, 12:55:14 AM
Being able to not think about race is, in itself, a matter of white privilege, uncomfortable as that idea may seem.
Fuck, Nigel. I never thought of it that way.
QuoteThought experiment: every time you see a person of color, try to think about them being conscious of their own position as a member of a non-dominant race in this society. What might they be wondering your assumptions are about them? If they are a woman, are they worried you think they might be a prostitute, or might harass or rape them? If they are a man, are they worried that you might think that they have nefarious intentions?
Try to do this for an entire day. See whether it alters your perspective on the world.
That sucks, but I'd like to move towards a society where people of "other" race don't have to think about it either. Sometimes, I think the only way to do accomplish that is so many people to genuinely be in the "I don't think about it" category that it just is that way.
Nice utopian ideal, but completely unrealistic in the real world.
the only way for human society to move beyond racial issues is for everyone to fuck everyone else until we're all the same shade of light brown.
I could get behind that...and in front of it too.
Quote from: navkat on January 16, 2012, 05:25:43 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 11, 2012, 12:55:14 AM
Being able to not think about race is, in itself, a matter of white privilege, uncomfortable as that idea may seem.
Fuck, Nigel. I never thought of it that way.
QuoteThought experiment: every time you see a person of color, try to think about them being conscious of their own position as a member of a non-dominant race in this society. What might they be wondering your assumptions are about them? If they are a woman, are they worried you think they might be a prostitute, or might harass or rape them? If they are a man, are they worried that you might think that they have nefarious intentions?
Try to do this for an entire day. See whether it alters your perspective on the world.
That sucks, but I'd like to move towards a society where people of "other" race don't have to think about it either. Sometimes, I think the only way to do accomplish that is so many people to genuinely be in the "I don't think about it" category that it just is that way.
Good people not thinking about race helps prevent racism in the same way good people not thinking about rape helps prevent it.
I'd say the only way to suppress racism (you'll never actually get rid of it) is to marginalize racists.
Not officially, of course. It has to be a cultural movement, or it leads to bigger problems.
Man will always have a penchant for labelling, compartmentalizing, and stuffing away into dark little corners the undesirables. Whether it be done with labels of race, sexual orientation, land or origin, political ideology, physical disability, mental disability, etc., etc.,
Rog has it right. It's all about making that tucking away of undesirables, well, undesirable. It's tough though and has its ups and downs, as exhibited by the Islamaphobia that has been all the rage since 2001.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 16, 2012, 07:37:53 PM
I'd say the only way to suppress racism (you'll never actually get rid of it) is to marginalize racists.
Not officially, of course. It has to be a cultural movement, or it leads to bigger problems.
This is what I meant.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 16, 2012, 07:37:53 PM
I'd say the only way to suppress racism (you'll never actually get rid of it) is to marginalize racists.
Not officially, of course. It has to be a cultural movement, or it leads to bigger problems.
What do you do when racism is built right into the fabric of society?
You kick society's ass.
Also
QuoteI must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
Quote from: Cain on January 16, 2012, 10:50:03 PM
You kick society's ass.
Also
QuoteI must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
Very insightful, and more than a bit scathing. This why I believe in this holiday.
Quote from: Nigel on January 16, 2012, 10:48:40 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 16, 2012, 07:37:53 PM
I'd say the only way to suppress racism (you'll never actually get rid of it) is to marginalize racists.
Not officially, of course. It has to be a cultural movement, or it leads to bigger problems.
What do you do when racism is built right into the fabric of society?
You mean like everywhere? You work to marginalize it.
Improvement is better than standing still or going backwards. It'll never be perfect, but that's no reason not to DEMAND equality and take no substitutes.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 17, 2012, 12:26:25 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 16, 2012, 10:48:40 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 16, 2012, 07:37:53 PM
I'd say the only way to suppress racism (you'll never actually get rid of it) is to marginalize racists.
Not officially, of course. It has to be a cultural movement, or it leads to bigger problems.
What do you do when racism is built right into the fabric of society?
You mean like everywhere? You work to marginalize it.
Improvement is better than standing still or going backwards. It'll never be perfect, but that's no reason not to DEMAND equality and take no substitutes.
MITTENZ.
But if you marginalize it too much, then people who are self-aware enough to understand that they are themselves prejudiced will be less willing to talk about it and more inclined to pretend that they "don't see race" or whatever. If the penalty for being wrong is too high, people won't risk self improvement.
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 17, 2012, 12:42:11 AM
But if you marginalize it too much, then people who are self-aware enough to understand that they are themselves prejudiced will be less willing to talk about it and more inclined to pretend that they "don't see race" or whatever. If the penalty for being wrong is too high, people won't risk self improvement.
Given the option between "not seeing race" and "casually referring to Black people as niggers", which option is best?
Also, what would YOU suggest?
Yeah, man. Make that shit socially unacceptable.
How many times have you sat there uncomfortably and heard some asshole tell a racist joke in hushed tones because he thought he was among "friendlies?"
We need to start acting all "I don't get it. How is that funny?"
Also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=v4_COOh4VXw#t=21s
Quote from: Cain on January 16, 2012, 10:50:03 PM
You kick society's ass.
Also
QuoteI must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
That quote pretty much nails it.
Also, man, society has a big ass to take down, and it seems fucking DETERMINED to take itself back a couple centuries. Do you realize (other people, not you Cain, I know you realize) that the US hasn't been this conservative, with so little funding for social programs, since the nineteenth century?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 17, 2012, 12:44:04 AM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 17, 2012, 12:42:11 AM
But if you marginalize it too much, then people who are self-aware enough to understand that they are themselves prejudiced will be less willing to talk about it and more inclined to pretend that they "don't see race" or whatever. If the penalty for being wrong is too high, people won't risk self improvement.
Given the option between "not seeing race" and "casually referring to Black people as niggers", which option is best?
Also, what would YOU suggest?
"Not seeing race" is itself a racist invention. Whenever I hear that, I know I'm talking to a white person who is playing ostrich. Why wouldn't you see race? Only because skin color raises issues that may be difficult and objectionable to think about. Otherwise, it's a lot like saying "I don't see gender" or "I don't see hair color" or "I don't see clothes".
Plus, it's a lie. It may be a self-deluded lie, and the person may really believe that they don't see race. But it's a lie nonetheless.
Quote from: Nigel on January 17, 2012, 03:58:53 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 17, 2012, 12:44:04 AM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 17, 2012, 12:42:11 AM
But if you marginalize it too much, then people who are self-aware enough to understand that they are themselves prejudiced will be less willing to talk about it and more inclined to pretend that they "don't see race" or whatever. If the penalty for being wrong is too high, people won't risk self improvement.
Given the option between "not seeing race" and "casually referring to Black people as niggers", which option is best?
Also, what would YOU suggest?
"Not seeing race" is itself a racist invention. Whenever I hear that, I know I'm talking to a white person who is playing ostrich. Why wouldn't you see race? Only because skin color raises issues that may be difficult and objectionable to think about. Otherwise, it's a lot like saying "I don't see gender" or "I don't see hair color" or "I don't see clothes".
Plus, it's a lie. It may be a self-deluded lie, and the person may really believe that they don't see race. But it's a lie nonetheless.
I don't think it's a lie at all because I know what is meant but it's not an accurate description of what's going on, either
When you meet a person, do YOU see hair color? I mean, you see it, but do you really SEE it? Does it register as much more than a descriptor?
Well, it's that way for me with skin...mostly. There are some other sides and nuances to this.
As I mentioned in another thread, I see the black dude who's like, 80 in an army jacket. He's rattling on about grits and his wife and "by-the-way, what's a 15 year old girl like you doin in the Richmond VA bus terminal at three clock in th' morn?"
He's a character. He's a whole, human being, made up of a combination of variables, that's all. Some of those variables: black, old, southern accent, a little eccentric, probably a veteran, kind, friendly, talkative, probably "frugal class" (a term I coined for people who would be flat-out poor but who live closer to middle class because washing out ziploc bags and keeping the heat down to 68 doesn't bother them). I don't see RACE, per se. I see a complete, amusing, lovely, benevolent, mostly anonymous entity to drift in and out of my path. He was nice to me. That is all.
If he were young, black, wearing baggy pants and walked around clutching the side like he's trying to keep a gun from falling out the pants leg, shifty eyes...if he'd approached me with cat-calls and eyed me like I was the last pork chop on a plate full of chicken livers, you bet i'd be a little nervous around his ass.
If he was black, young (20s, 30s), baggy pants, clean shirt, smiling...nice smile. Genuine smile of a person with good humor for the world, neatly braided hair. Regular. Upright. He doesn't need to open his mouth and prove his "whiteness," he needs not say a word. He carries himself like "not a threat" and I've already dismissed the color issue. If he later approaches me, I've mostly gone colorblind...or at least color-fuzzy by then.
Now think about this:
Two weeks ago. Walmart at 2AM. I got snacky and craved brie and apples. One register open. Guy in front of me: white. Bloodshot eyes. Smelled of bourbon. His purchases indicative of a batchelor...I don't remember what they were. Chatted me up in the line, payed for his shit, left.
Guy behind me, I noticed only because I always look for the divider to place on the conveyor for the next person in line. Always. I put my shit on the belt, organize frozens/colds first, compact it and put the divider up and exchange a "thanks/you're welcome" nod with the next person.
He was black. Looked also like a batchelor. Working guy. Normal pants and shirt: dismissable. Nondescript. A few items, one of them beer or something.
I pay, leave. White bourbon guy is hanging around the exit, looking at the claw-game (put money in, try to claw out a stuffed animal?) As I started to leave, he started to leave behind me. I got the creeps. Pretended to stop and examine my receipt just inside the door.
Black workin dude soon followed. I followed him out the door and asked him to walk me to my car. I don't know a goddamned thing about either of those guys. Both drink alcohol, both are obv. Working class men. Both in fucking Walmart at two-thirty-in-the-fucking-morning. Why was black dude safe and white dude creepy? An amalgamation of looks, behavior and feeeeeeling.
By the way, Nigel, YOU factor into this story. It happened mere DAYS after our phone conversation wherein you stressed, STRESSED for me to "trust my gut." Ordinarily, I would have dismissed my creepiness for paranoia and walked to my car alone.
What would happen if the shoe were on the other foot? If black dude was creepy and white dude was kosher? I would have felt like a cunt asking white dude to walk me to my car, that's what. That's fucking stupid.
People need to be "felt out" based on appearance and how they carry themselves and the ASSOCIATIONS WE'VE MADE WITH THOSE "CATEGORIES" OF LOOKS AND BEHAVIOUR. Period. It's how we operate as animals and it's unfortunately WHY race issues are so pervasive. Race is something you can SEE and there are a fuckton of associations pre-made and ready to eat.
We need to be INTOLERANT of out-and-out racism...the jokes, the hushed perpetuation of backwards-assed attitudes, and TOLERANT of people's natural process as the stupidity gets (just like Roger said) MARGINALIZED.
Here's another weird fact: I've met some racist fuckers in the South but the prevailing attitude is such that I believe a white, blonde, blue-eyed baptist, pink-tervis-tumbler-full-of-bourbon-drinking, straw hat and lime-green capris wearing, mardi gras society G.R.I.T would have done the same thing I did...no matter how many times she's referred to the "canadians" from Pritchard under her breath from the comfort of her Neptune's Daughters society chair in the parking lot of the Civic Center on Fat Tuesday.
It's fucked up. I don't know how to solve it except to keep on keepin on. Erosion. Keep the tides turning in the right direction and handle the glaring, flagrant injustices and stupidity with candor and outrage.
Or kill me.
I'm willing to bet if we ever create a slave-caste based on hair colour, 200 years after it is abolished, people will still pay a lot of attention to hair colour.
Quote from: Cain on January 17, 2012, 05:24:04 PM
I'm willing to bet if we ever create a slave-caste based on hair colour, 200 years after it is abolished, people will still pay a lot of attention to hair colour.
You're probably right. That's not the point. I was saying not
me. For whatever reason, not me and not a bunch of us. We're not unicorns. We exist.
Let's go with that.
Quote from: Nigel on January 17, 2012, 03:58:53 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 17, 2012, 12:44:04 AM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 17, 2012, 12:42:11 AM
But if you marginalize it too much, then people who are self-aware enough to understand that they are themselves prejudiced will be less willing to talk about it and more inclined to pretend that they "don't see race" or whatever. If the penalty for being wrong is too high, people won't risk self improvement.
Given the option between "not seeing race" and "casually referring to Black people as niggers", which option is best?
Also, what would YOU suggest?
"Not seeing race" is itself a racist invention. Whenever I hear that, I know I'm talking to a white person who is playing ostrich. Why wouldn't you see race? Only because skin color raises issues that may be difficult and objectionable to think about. Otherwise, it's a lot like saying "I don't see gender" or "I don't see hair color" or "I don't see clothes".
Plus, it's a lie. It may be a self-deluded lie, and the person may really believe that they don't see race. But it's a lie nonetheless.
A lot of people won't get better. Seriously. They aren't capable of changing what they've been conditioned to be.
So which is better? The arrogant lie of "I don't see race", or having them act the way they really think?
You can't usually change peoples' thoughts, but you CAN sometimes keep them from smearing their poop on innocent bystanders.
In defense of some people who say they don't see race.... I say that quite often. In saying that I mean when I look at people that is not something I worry over.
Yes, their race is obvious, no one can argue that. So when people say they don't see something obvious, I've usually considered that to be saying that they don't consider that obvious to be a factor in their thoughts or opinions.
I'm not saying this is true for everyone, but it is, at least, for me.
Quote from: Khara on January 17, 2012, 08:11:22 PM
...
Yes, their race is obvious, no one can argue that. So when people say they don't see something obvious, I've usually considered that to be saying that they don't consider that obvious to be a factor in their thoughts or opinions.
...
i thought that was the point? it
is obvious to be a factor in their thoughts or opinions.
Quote from: Iptuous on January 17, 2012, 08:18:25 PM
Quote from: Khara on January 17, 2012, 08:11:22 PM
...
Yes, their race is obvious, no one can argue that. So when people say they don't see something obvious, I've usually considered that to be saying that they don't consider that obvious to be a factor in their thoughts or opinions.
...
i thought that was the point? it is obvious to be a factor in their thoughts or opinions.
Not always. When you deal with people of different races every day it tends to become the last thing you think about. When I walk up to a customer my first thought is never "Oh they're black".
oh, yeah. i can understand that.
i just meant that it should be recognized that their life experiences are going to be informed, in part, on their skin color. and i'm thinking that is what is meant by "saying 'i am colorblind' is racist", because if one denies that fact, one is stripping the significance from difficulties they may have experienced their whole life, in a sense.
Quote from: Iptuous on January 17, 2012, 08:58:26 PM
oh, yeah. i can understand that.
i just meant that it should be recognized that their life experiences are going to be informed, in part, on their skin color. and i'm thinking that is what is meant by "saying 'i am colorblind' is racist", because if one denies that fact, one is stripping the significance from difficulties they may have experienced their whole life, in a sense.
Also, being colorblind strips away most of the variety that makes life neat.
Going back a little bit i always found the black people fried chicken to be a weird one. Of course they do. Theyre humans. Kinda like "what you dont like fried chicken? Whats wrong with you?"
indeed. what a shitty curse to put on a group, saying "All people in group X really love awesome thing Y!"
then whenever they indulge in said awesome thing, the bigots get a chuckle and the person feels guilty for liking an awesome thing....
that's fucked up.
When you put it that way it suddenly makes sense. Fried chicken is one of the greatest things ever invented. Keep a group of people from fully enjoying things like that is a sure way to make life hell.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 17, 2012, 09:44:23 PM
When you put it that way it suddenly makes sense. Fried chicken is one of the greatest things ever invented. Keep a group of people from fully enjoying things like that is a sure way to make life hell.
Yep. Fuck that. Avoiding a stereotype because it's a stereotype is still just more dancing to Their tune.
Don't just eat that fried chicken. Eat the HELL out of it.
You know what's funny? I wanted KFC for my birthday.
WHAT? It was my fucking birthday.
Anyway, neither of the boy's girlfriends would eat it. They don't like fried chicken. So even stereotypes have their exceptions :lulz:
I was very happy... just meant more for me... :evil:
Naturally. I refuse to eat any seafood including lobstah and clam chowdah. Also i think corned beef and cabbage is the nastiest smelling shit. Ill eat the fuck out of bangers and mash or cranberry sauce though.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 17, 2012, 10:33:15 PM
Naturally. I refuse to eat any seafood including lobstah and clam chowdah. Also i think corned beef and cabbage is the nastiest smelling shit. Ill eat the fuck out of bangers and mash or cranberry sauce though.
You goddamn heathen! You are part of the Rebel Alliance, and a traitor! :crankey:
(On both accounts. You fucking weirdo. :lulz:)
Phox,
Does not care for cabbage unless with corned beef or as sauerkraut.
Quote from: Cain on January 17, 2012, 05:24:04 PM
I'm willing to bet if we ever create a slave-caste based on hair colour, 200 years after it is abolished, people will still pay a lot of attention to hair colour.
Yep.
But how does that diminish anything I've said? I'm not saying there aren't racists, I'm saying there really are those of us to whom, for the most part, it's a non issue.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 17, 2012, 08:00:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 17, 2012, 03:58:53 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 17, 2012, 12:44:04 AM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 17, 2012, 12:42:11 AM
But if you marginalize it too much, then people who are self-aware enough to understand that they are themselves prejudiced will be less willing to talk about it and more inclined to pretend that they "don't see race" or whatever. If the penalty for being wrong is too high, people won't risk self improvement.
Given the option between "not seeing race" and "casually referring to Black people as niggers", which option is best?
Also, what would YOU suggest?
"Not seeing race" is itself a racist invention. Whenever I hear that, I know I'm talking to a white person who is playing ostrich. Why wouldn't you see race? Only because skin color raises issues that may be difficult and objectionable to think about. Otherwise, it's a lot like saying "I don't see gender" or "I don't see hair color" or "I don't see clothes".
Plus, it's a lie. It may be a self-deluded lie, and the person may really believe that they don't see race. But it's a lie nonetheless.
A lot of people won't get better. Seriously. They aren't capable of changing what they've been conditioned to be.
So which is better? The arrogant lie of "I don't see race", or having them act the way they really think?
You can't usually change peoples' thoughts, but you CAN sometimes keep them from smearing their poop on innocent bystanders.
Honestly? I think that most of the people who claim not to see race (or who say that race makes no difference to them) are well-meaning people. They aren't stifling nasty racist thoughts; they are avoiding an unpleasant reality. They are, for the most part, choosing not to think about the reality of race. What I would prefer, honestly, is for people like this to consciously think about race, and the experiences of the people they share their existence with for whom race is something it is not possible to avoid being aware of. "Not-thinking" about race isn't the way to become comfortable with it any more than "not-thinking" about homosexuality is the way to become comfortable with it. Remember when it was OK to be gay, as long as you didn't ACT gay? Some people still feel that way.
Talking about some guy with pants around his ass and a sideways baseball cap... what is that? Navkat, I know you didn't mean it this way, but up there you basically said that you wouldn't be uncomfortable with a black guy talking to you as long as he didn't have the visible social marks of being "black" other than skin color. I think a lot of good, well-intentioned people do not understand how what they say translates. I think it's good and right and important to talk about it, because, just like you don't get better at swimming if you avoid the water, you do not get any more comfortable with people being different if you don't think about it.
That's not to say that people of color, for instance blacks, have not equally engaged in creating this false comfort zone of not-thinking. Blacks and other brown people have historically always tried to make their skin color as invisible as possible when they wanted to succeed in a white European dominated world... taking the "I'm not so different from you" approach. Gloria Bird and Joy Harjo talk about this a little in "Reinventing the Enemy's Language".
Quote from: Iptuous on January 17, 2012, 08:58:26 PM
oh, yeah. i can understand that.
i just meant that it should be recognized that their life experiences are going to be informed, in part, on their skin color. and i'm thinking that is what is meant by "saying 'i am colorblind' is racist", because if one denies that fact, one is stripping the significance from difficulties they may have experienced their whole life, in a sense.
Yes. That was the main gist of the OP.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 17, 2012, 09:09:08 PM
Going back a little bit i always found the black people fried chicken to be a weird one. Of course they do. Theyre humans. Kinda like "what you dont like fried chicken? Whats wrong with you?"
It derives not so much from black people liking fried chicken (and watermelon) but from the old blackface minstrel shows, in which white men would put on blackface and then perform extremely denigrating caricatures of negroes on the plantations of the South. These shows were incredibly popular in cities like New York, and the "negro-ness" of the actors was accentuated by having them overweeningly enthusiastic about foods that would have been specifically Southern at the time, most especially fried chicken and watermelon.
The reason those became negative stereotypes is not because black people loved fried chicken and watermelon, but because white people masqueraded as black people and
made fun of them loving fried chicken and watermelon. http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/huckfinn/minstrl.html
I often hear "I don't understand why" and it is my first clue that a big chunk of information is missing. I hope that helps to fill it.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 12:46:58 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 17, 2012, 09:09:08 PM
Going back a little bit i always found the black people fried chicken to be a weird one. Of course they do. Theyre humans. Kinda like "what you dont like fried chicken? Whats wrong with you?"
It derives not so much from black people liking fried chicken (and watermelon) but from the old blackface minstrel shows, in which white men would put on blackface and then perform extremely denigrating caricatures of negroes on the plantations of the South. These shows were incredibly popular in cities like New York, and the "negro-ness" of the actors was accentuated by having them overweeningly enthusiastic about foods that would have been specifically Southern at the time, most especially fried chicken and watermelon.
The reason those became negative stereotypes is not because black people loved fried chicken and watermelon, but because white people masqueraded as black people and made fun of them loving fried chicken and watermelon. http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/huckfinn/minstrl.html
I often hear "I don't understand why" and it is my first clue that a big chunk of information is missing. I hope that helps to fill it.
Well that makes a whole hell of a lot of sense. I just accepted it as this weird stereotype that made no sense because I was white and not from the South.
Ah. That does make a lot of sense now. And youre right- i probably have quite a few information gaps on this topic.
Here are a few examples that might help clarify a little bit about racism in America:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p_jxA4p1Wk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsIzUVavf6o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZvGNONdleg&feature=related
Fuck, now all the animal print clothing makes sense, and that's horrible.
AFAIK, I'm the only honkey here who's been on the other side of this.
And I sure as hell see race. And I am intimately acquainted with not being able to escape my race in social and professional settings. I've been jumped and had my ass kicked, had rocks thrown at me, been threatened with guns, been subject to arbitrarily high prices on merchandise, and been denied jobs for literally no other reason than the color of my skin. I'm aware that it's given me a perspective that most white people in Americanada/Europe/Australia won't ever have (and let me preempt anyone who is about to say some dumb shit like "BUT I LIVED IN THE GHETTO" by assuring you that it's not even remotely the same - you can take a bus out of the ghetto, not so much on an island) and it's high on the list of things I'm thankful for in regards to my unusual upbringing. And yeah, most white people in the "western world" who "don't see race" are probably well-meaning, but they're also not doing anything to advance the dialogue and help actually overcome the problem. I've had my life literally saved because somebody present in a bad situation did see race and realized that if they didn't come to my defense I was going to be murdered in cold blood for being white. Had I been black, in that same situation, they would likely have assumed that I was the victim of gang/drug-related violence just like almost all of the other homicide victims in the VI and looked the other way (like any smart person would).
In short, fuck the whole "I don't see race" thing. I know you guys mean well but it's the exact wrong way to go about it.
I might not get to see those for a day or two. Last time i was at my apt (almost a week ago. Damn.) the internet was out. Not sure if that has been rectified.
Quote from: Khara on January 17, 2012, 10:24:32 PM
You know what's funny? I wanted KFC for my birthday.
WHAT? It was my fucking birthday.
Anyway, neither of the boy's girlfriends would eat it. They don't like fried chicken. So even stereotypes have their exceptions :lulz:
I was very happy... just meant more for me... :evil:
Are they black? A lot of younger black people won't eat fried chicken and say they don't like it because of the stigma attached to the stereotype.
I'm not saying it's not possible that they just don't like it, of course, but that is really common these days. I know whole families who have never had fried chicken because the aversion runs so deep. Truly a shame, because I think the stuff is ambrosia and if it wasn't so fattening I'd be all over that shit.
That said, there is a reason there are two Popeyes in my neighborhood and none anywhere else in the city... lots of blacks came here from the South in the 60's and 70's, and they weren't allowed to buy houses elsewhere in Portland so they all ended up in the redline district. http://signonpdx.com/post/1021288778/redline-district
By the way, that show "Portlandia", if you've seen it, is shot entirely within the redline district, which is why it pisses me off so much that everyone shown in it, even extras, are white. The hide & seek episode was filmed at my school, which is
more than half black.
There aren't just two Popeyes' in your neighborhood, they're on the same block, or nearly so. Which is probably a reflection of how Portland deals with race in a larger sense.
but don't worry, in another year or two one of them will probably be turned into a new high-end gourmet fried chicken joint by the guys who run Clarklewis.
And yeah, fuck Portlandia in the ass with a sharp stick. I mean, it's not even funny AT ALL, in addition to be racist by omission.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 12:59:55 AM
AFAIK, I'm the only honkey here who's been on the other side of this.
And I sure as hell see race. And I am intimately acquainted with not being able to escape my race in social and professional settings. I've been jumped and had my ass kicked, had rocks thrown at me, been threatened with guns, been subject to arbitrarily high prices on merchandise, and been denied jobs for literally no other reason than the color of my skin. I'm aware that it's given me a perspective that most white people in Americanada/Europe/Australia won't ever have (and let me preempt anyone who is about to say some dumb shit like "BUT I LIVED IN THE GHETTO" by assuring you that it's not even remotely the same - you can take a bus out of the ghetto, not so much on an island) and it's high on the list of things I'm thankful for in regards to my unusual upbringing. And yeah, most white people in the "western world" who "don't see race" are probably well-meaning, but they're also not doing anything to advance the dialogue and help actually overcome the problem. I've had my life literally saved because somebody present in a bad situation did see race and realized that if they didn't come to my defense I was going to be murdered in cold blood for being white. Had I been black, in that same situation, they would likely have assumed that I was the victim of gang/drug-related violence just like almost all of the other homicide victims in the VI and looked the other way (like any smart person would).
In short, fuck the whole "I don't see race" thing. I know you guys mean well but it's the exact wrong way to go about it.
Right on.
It's funny, since early on I've assumed you aren't white, because although you look white, you seem to function more from a... dare I say it... colored perspective.
Quote from: BadBeast on January 15, 2012, 08:06:35 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 15, 2012, 06:29:21 PM
It's racist because of the transgressive context of taking a studio portrait of a black family and making it into a .gif in which all members of the family are doing a stereotypical head wag that is heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes. In fact, the whole reason it's an internet meme is because of the internet social more that "nothing is sacred"; it is therefore funny because it is transgressive.
Badbeast was showing off his irreverence by posting it in a thread about race which apparently he had decided wasn't funny, edgy, or badass enough.
I don't see how it's racist either. And to be perfectly honest, " transgressive context of taking a studio portrait of a black family and making it into a .gif in which all members of the family are doing a stereotypical head wag that is heavily associated with black women from US ghettoes" means less than fuck all to me.
I posted it because I thought it was funny, not because*I* decided the thread wasn't edgy, or badass enough.
I can live with the fact Nigel doesn't think it was funny. But to blame me for "killing the thread?" That's not true.
Um, BadBeast....
Have you ever heard of "mansplaining"? Well, what you said above was a bit like that, except replace the topic of women with race.
Just pointing it out.
That's not what I intended at all. I guess I failed at articulating my point well.
The "typical black" stuff isn't a problem. Someone carrying themselves in such a way that suggests they're carrying a gun in their pants and aren't on the up and up is. Body language. Other factors that equate to common sense fight or flight judgements. NECESSARY jugements.
If the third black man in my scenario had a holster on a belted pair of those same baggy pants and the second dude, it still wouldn't be a problem. He's carrying himself like a man who's just going about his private life. Chances are, he is. Maybe he's an off duty guard or a bondsman. Maybe he's just a private citizen with a concealed carry permit. Doesn't matter. He's not loitering around, holding his gun, which is shoved into his underwear through the bunched-up fabric of his shirt and pants so it doesn't slip down or so it's obvious he's posturing that it's there. He's not leering at me like I'm a piece of meat and he's perfectly okay with people understanding that he sees me as one. He's not behaving in a manner which is socially percieved as "sketchy."
And you know what? If he did, I'm pretty sure 80-year-old black dude would see it the same way and suggest in his ramblings that I stay right there and not go wandering near the thugs until my bus comes.
It's not about color at all. And it's not simply about cultural stuff like clothing choices or whatever. It's about a big, fuzzy picture that comes into focus only after someone's given me a reason to sharpen the viewfinder.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 01:06:31 AM
There aren't just two Popeyes' in your neighborhood, they're on the same block, or nearly so. Which is probably a reflection of how Portland deals with race in a larger sense.
but don't worry, in another year or two one of them will probably be turned into a new high-end gourmet fried chicken joint by the guys who run Clarklewis.
And yeah, fuck Portlandia in the ass with a sharp stick. I mean, it's not even funny AT ALL, in addition to be racist by omission.
They should just rename it yuppielandia and be done with it.
I know... I could walk to either of them from here. :lulz: They damn well better not open some crappy overpriced bullshit "gourmet" fucking chicken place, I will BURN IT TO THE GROUND. What those asshole yuppies did to Mississippi St. is just about criminal; it's actually the first time I've ever been really pissed about gentrification. Fucking developers.
Did you see a New Seasons is opening on Williams where the old Hostess factory used to be? I'm of mixed feelings; the MLK corridor has been mostly really good about rejecting giant out-of-state corporate development, and it's nice that it's a local business, but the owners of New Seasons are
douches.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 12:38:17 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 17, 2012, 08:00:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 17, 2012, 03:58:53 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 17, 2012, 12:44:04 AM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 17, 2012, 12:42:11 AM
But if you marginalize it too much, then people who are self-aware enough to understand that they are themselves prejudiced will be less willing to talk about it and more inclined to pretend that they "don't see race" or whatever. If the penalty for being wrong is too high, people won't risk self improvement.
Given the option between "not seeing race" and "casually referring to Black people as niggers", which option is best?
Also, what would YOU suggest?
"Not seeing race" is itself a racist invention. Whenever I hear that, I know I'm talking to a white person who is playing ostrich. Why wouldn't you see race? Only because skin color raises issues that may be difficult and objectionable to think about. Otherwise, it's a lot like saying "I don't see gender" or "I don't see hair color" or "I don't see clothes".
Plus, it's a lie. It may be a self-deluded lie, and the person may really believe that they don't see race. But it's a lie nonetheless.
A lot of people won't get better. Seriously. They aren't capable of changing what they've been conditioned to be.
So which is better? The arrogant lie of "I don't see race", or having them act the way they really think?
You can't usually change peoples' thoughts, but you CAN sometimes keep them from smearing their poop on innocent bystanders.
Honestly? I think that most of the people who claim not to see race (or who say that race makes no difference to them) are well-meaning people. They aren't stifling nasty racist thoughts; they are avoiding an unpleasant reality. They are, for the most part, choosing not to think about the reality of race. What I would prefer, honestly, is for people like this to consciously think about race, and the experiences of the people they share their existence with for whom race is something it is not possible to avoid being aware of. "Not-thinking" about race isn't the way to become comfortable with it any more than "not-thinking" about homosexuality is the way to become comfortable with it. Remember when it was OK to be gay, as long as you didn't ACT gay? Some people still feel that way.
Talking about some guy with pants around his ass and a sideways baseball cap... what is that? Navkat, I know you didn't mean it this way, but up there you basically said that you wouldn't be uncomfortable with a black guy talking to you as long as he didn't have the visible social marks of being "black" other than skin color. I think a lot of good, well-intentioned people do not understand how what they say translates. I think it's good and right and important to talk about it, because, just like you don't get better at swimming if you avoid the water, you do not get any more comfortable with people being different if you don't think about it.
That's not to say that people of color, for instance blacks, have not equally engaged in creating this false comfort zone of not-thinking. Blacks and other brown people have historically always tried to make their skin color as invisible as possible when they wanted to succeed in a white European dominated world... taking the "I'm not so different from you" approach. Gloria Bird and Joy Harjo talk about this a little in "Reinventing the Enemy's Language".
Nigel is one hundred percent dead on with this. Here's the thing: Most white people don't realize exactly how far non-whites go to make their skin color a non-issue. Take for instance the general difference in people's reactions when seeing an Arabic looking man in business casual or jeans and a T-shirt vs. the same man in traditional Saudi garb and a ghutrah. In the first instance, depending on where you are, you might assume that he's an American dude, out doing American stuff, but the second his clothes change he's
Arabic, and
Muslim, which was obvious before, but your preconceptions change. At my school, there are a fairly decent amount of Middle Eastern students, enough that I hear Arabic and Turkish around campus enough to pick out the difference between the two (though being a linguists no doubt helps), but I admit, I was some what surprised, at one point, when I saw a bunch of dudes hanging out wearing all decked out in their regalia because the Saudi Student Organization was having an event for Ramadan. It struck because
they don't wear that sort of stuff often (the women almost universally wear hijab regularly, so that doesn't strike me as out of the ordinary). However, it occurred to me that at least part of the reason that they don't wear it often, is because it marks them as immediately
Arabic/Muslim, at this school, there is a fair chance that in passing they might be taken as Indian to someone who doesn't know or can't tell the difference from the various clues, as there are number of Indian students as well. And let's face it, this isn't exactly the most tolerant area in the world, and I wasn't kidding about the prison called "Little Gitmo".
How many black people do you know who speak and act differently at work or school than when they are hanging out? How many black people do you know who feel comfortable
being black around you? <= questions directed at no one in particular.
The point is, Nigel's exactly right when she says that "not seeing race" is the same thing as saying that someone is "culturally white". Because if you don't see race, it doesn't matter if they are wearing their pants around their ankles, wearing 90 pounds of gold chains, a diamond studded grill, and a sideways baseball cap. But you know what, that's bullshit. Because if the guy is white, you are going to make assumptions about him. Those assumptions will be strikingly different than if he is black.
In part directly relevant to this thread: http://freethoughtblogs.com/crommunist/2012/01/16/shuffling-feet-a-black-mans-view-on-schroedingers-rapist/
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 01:08:00 AM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 12:59:55 AM
AFAIK, I'm the only honkey here who's been on the other side of this.
And I sure as hell see race. And I am intimately acquainted with not being able to escape my race in social and professional settings. I've been jumped and had my ass kicked, had rocks thrown at me, been threatened with guns, been subject to arbitrarily high prices on merchandise, and been denied jobs for literally no other reason than the color of my skin. I'm aware that it's given me a perspective that most white people in Americanada/Europe/Australia won't ever have (and let me preempt anyone who is about to say some dumb shit like "BUT I LIVED IN THE GHETTO" by assuring you that it's not even remotely the same - you can take a bus out of the ghetto, not so much on an island) and it's high on the list of things I'm thankful for in regards to my unusual upbringing. And yeah, most white people in the "western world" who "don't see race" are probably well-meaning, but they're also not doing anything to advance the dialogue and help actually overcome the problem. I've had my life literally saved because somebody present in a bad situation did see race and realized that if they didn't come to my defense I was going to be murdered in cold blood for being white. Had I been black, in that same situation, they would likely have assumed that I was the victim of gang/drug-related violence just like almost all of the other homicide victims in the VI and looked the other way (like any smart person would).
In short, fuck the whole "I don't see race" thing. I know you guys mean well but it's the exact wrong way to go about it.
Right on.
It's funny, since early on I've assumed you aren't white, because although you look white, you seem to function more from a... dare I say it... colored perspective.
That's funny, because I haven't really thought of ECH as neither "white" nor stereotypically "American". Even after knowing that he is in fact a honky from St. T, I still do not think of him in those terms.
Which is no disrespect intended to you, ECH, rather the opposite. I always assume that your observations about American culture and in particular race are from a completely different point of view from mine (which is true, and I haven't lived in the ghetto, but I used to spend the summers there, and I wouldn't presume that that is experience is anything like yours).
You know phox you bringing up the white guy who dresses like that is an interesting thing too.
It suddenly becomes socially acceptable to mock him and call him a whigger because hes not acting white. The fact that some people find the term whigger socially still acceptable blows my mind
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 01:08:00 AM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 12:59:55 AM
AFAIK, I'm the only honkey here who's been on the other side of this.
And I sure as hell see race. And I am intimately acquainted with not being able to escape my race in social and professional settings. I've been jumped and had my ass kicked, had rocks thrown at me, been threatened with guns, been subject to arbitrarily high prices on merchandise, and been denied jobs for literally no other reason than the color of my skin. I'm aware that it's given me a perspective that most white people in Americanada/Europe/Australia won't ever have (and let me preempt anyone who is about to say some dumb shit like "BUT I LIVED IN THE GHETTO" by assuring you that it's not even remotely the same - you can take a bus out of the ghetto, not so much on an island) and it's high on the list of things I'm thankful for in regards to my unusual upbringing. And yeah, most white people in the "western world" who "don't see race" are probably well-meaning, but they're also not doing anything to advance the dialogue and help actually overcome the problem. I've had my life literally saved because somebody present in a bad situation did see race and realized that if they didn't come to my defense I was going to be murdered in cold blood for being white. Had I been black, in that same situation, they would likely have assumed that I was the victim of gang/drug-related violence just like almost all of the other homicide victims in the VI and looked the other way (like any smart person would).
In short, fuck the whole "I don't see race" thing. I know you guys mean well but it's the exact wrong way to go about it.
Right on.
It's funny, since early on I've assumed you aren't white, because although you look white, you seem to function more from a... dare I say it... colored perspective.
The really funny part is that the way the unavoidable imprinting that takes place in childhood regarding that sort of stuff seems to have manifested in me comes in the form of me being generally inclined to be more distrustful of (Anglo-American) white people than of people of other races/cultures. It's stupid and silly and anytime I catch myself doing it I mentally slap myself and tell myself to smarten up, but it's there.
And I hope nobody took my post as some sort of appeal to authority, I just wanted to share a perspective that I doubt anyone else here has.
And yeah, I'm of two minds about the New Seasons on North Williams. Those are generally good jobs (I hope they're smart enough to hire from within the neighborhood) and that area was a food desert before, but how many of the people that live in close proximity to it are going to be able to afford to shop there?
Well I think all the colored people I've served with felt comfortable enough to be not-white around me, or they were deliberately acting such to mess with the silly white boy.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 18, 2012, 01:22:51 AM
You know phox you bringing up the white guy who dresses like that is an interesting thing too.
It suddenly becomes socially acceptable to mock him and call him a whigger because hes not acting white. The fact that some people find the term whigger socially still acceptable blows my mind
Oh man, yeah. That one gets me too.
I like to play dumb and reply with "what does wigger mean?"
Alot of people get as far as "well, you know...." then can't bring themselves to actually say it.
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 18, 2012, 01:26:40 AM
Well I think all the colored people I've served with felt comfortable enough to be not-white around me, or they were deliberately acting such to mess with the silly white boy.
Strictly supposition here as I've never served, but I would guess that the bonds created by unit cohesion are a great way to overcome any lingering racial issues between people.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 18, 2012, 01:22:51 AM
You know phox you bringing up the white guy who dresses like that is an interesting thing too.
It suddenly becomes socially acceptable to mock him and call him a whigger because hes not acting white. The fact that some people find the term whigger socially still acceptable blows my mind
Exactly. The base reaction from a white person on seeing the two: the white guy is perceived as obnoxious, but (mostly) harmless, and imitating black culture without actually being a part of it; the black guy is perceived as
black, possibly obnoxious and possibly harmless, depending on the attitude of the white person in question, in that order.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 01:30:56 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 18, 2012, 01:26:40 AM
Well I think all the colored people I've served with felt comfortable enough to be not-white around me, or they were deliberately acting such to mess with the silly white boy.
Strictly supposition here as I've never served, but I would guess that the bonds created by unit cohesion are a great way to overcome any lingering racial issues between people.
I would hazard to guess ECH is right on this one.
I think my assumptions about a white dude in a bunch of gold chains, carrying himself in a sketchy manner would be the same category as a black dude: a punk looking for trouble.
Phox is right about the middle eastern thing but it's also a good example of how marginalization works because as that style of dress becomes more and more common, it's less and less noticeable to me.
I don't know if I'm doing anything insensitive being the way I am but I am well meaning. I just don't see a whole lot of benefit in being uber-conscious of anything or anyone until they do something to catch my eye, freak me out or otherwise. Maybe comfortable non-consciousness is white privelege but it's one I'd like everyone to have.
Then again, I live my life running around in public in a pair of cat ears and tiaras and heart shaped sunglasses. I don't look over my shoulder often in fear of being thrown in the funny farm but I make sure I take that shit off real quick and throw it under my coat if I get pulled over by an officer.
I get where you're coming from, but...
I'd like everyone to have a Ferrari.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 01:40:21 AM
I get where you're coming from, but...
I'd like everyone to have a Ferrari.
I was about to say something in that vein. Yours is better though. :lulz:
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 01:30:56 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 18, 2012, 01:26:40 AM
Well I think all the colored people I've served with felt comfortable enough to be not-white around me, or they were deliberately acting such to mess with the silly white boy.
Strictly supposition here as I've never served, but I would guess that the bonds created by unit cohesion are a great way to overcome any lingering racial issues between people.
I suspect that is mostly what it is. That and while race is not invisible, it's not really noticed, or something. I don't know. It's hard to explain. There is racism in the Army, but there seems to be a hell of lot less tolerance for it. My unit's dinning facility use to have Soul Food Day, and people would be enthusiastic about eating food that reminded them of home. The only color that really seemed to matter was green.
Most of the boneheaded things I've seen done by black privates is the same kind of boneheaded things I've seen done by white privates, and that is because they are boneheaded privates
On the other hand I did have a funny incident involving Popeyes and a black soldier. He and a friend had gone to get some while we waited for a detail to start. At some point he had said as much, and said something along of "I figured as much" considering I had seen him eating it. He got all "why cuz I'm black?" To which I replied, "Um...no, because Popeyes is good." Then I realized he was messing with me. I think.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 01:36:54 AM
Then again, I live my life running around in public in a pair of cat ears and tiaras and heart shaped sunglasses. I don't look over my shoulder often in fear of being thrown in the funny farm but I make sure I take that shit off real quick and throw it under my coat if I get pulled over by an officer.
but, see, this is meaningless in this context because you CAN take that shit off and deal with the cops as a normal (white) person. The black guy who gets profiled and pulled over
can't take his skin off and stuff it under the front seat.
It's a completely false equivalence.
So what can I possibly do about it? Tell me and if it's practical and doesn't require I make ginormous sacrifices, I'll try it.
I try to be a good human being that treats others with a sort of assumed, blind respect. I mean I make the conscious choice to do this every time someone tries my patience or I want to be complacent when I should stop and help.
I meet people, get over the initial novelty of their differences (whatever those may be) and accept them. Bam. They become a ball of...just themselves. I think this is a pretty neat way to be and I always sort of liked this about myself. Now, you say it's wrong somehow. It's not doing enough. Tell me: what am I supposed to be doing?
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 01:45:27 AM
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 01:36:54 AM
Then again, I live my life running around in public in a pair of cat ears and tiaras and heart shaped sunglasses. I don't look over my shoulder often in fear of being thrown in the funny farm but I make sure I take that shit off real quick and throw it under my coat if I get pulled over by an officer.
but, see, this is meaningless in this context because you CAN take that shit off and deal with the cops as a normal (white) person. The black guy who gets profiled and pulled over can't take his skin off and stuff it under the front seat.
It's a completely false equivalence.
No, that's what I meant. I was playing devil's advocate to my own argument.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 01:55:24 AM
So what can I possibly do about it? Tell me and if it's practical and doesn't require I make ginormous sacrifices, I'll try it.
I try to be a good human being that treats others with a sort of assumed, blind respect. I mean I make the conscious choice to do this every time someone tries my patience or I want to be complacent when I should stop and help.
I meet people, get over the initial novelty of their differences (whatever those may be) and accept them. Bam. They become a ball of...just themselves. I think this is a pretty neat way to be and I always sort of liked this about myself. Now, you say it's wrong somehow. It's not doing enough. Tell me: what am I supposed to be doing?
Wait. No one said that's wrong. :?
yeah, I think we're miscommunicating here.
You're saying "I don't see race" when what you seem to mean is "I treat everyone with a basic level of respect until they give me a reason to think they don't deserve it."
The latter is awesome, admirable, and something you should obviously continue to do, but that's not what it means to "not see race".
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 02:12:20 AM
yeah, I think we're miscommunicating here.
You're saying "I don't see race" when what you seem to mean is "I treat everyone with a basic level of respect until they give me a reason to think they don't deserve it."
The latter is awesome, admirable, and something you should obviously continue to do, but that's not what it means to "not see race".
What ECH said.
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on January 18, 2012, 01:16:36 AM
In part directly relevant to this thread: http://freethoughtblogs.com/crommunist/2012/01/16/shuffling-feet-a-black-mans-view-on-schroedingers-rapist/
Oooh, that is an awesome blog! Bookmarking.
I want to address Navkat on a semi-tangential basis with some thoughts I was having earlier today: I have noticed (and this goes well beyond my noticing; it's well-observed enough that it's a common trope in TV and movies) that people who feel themselves to be outcasts or freaks of some kind in dominant society will often tend to gravitate toward other people who are marginalized by normative culture. They see "non-normative" as being a factor of kinship rather than alienation. I can see how that would alter your perceptions of race; it's still a factor, but in different ways.
Here is the thing my OP was trying to express; that the luxury of "not seeing race" is the exclusive domain of white privilege. It is part and parcel of white privilege.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 01:26:19 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 01:08:00 AM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 12:59:55 AM
AFAIK, I'm the only honkey here who's been on the other side of this.
And I sure as hell see race. And I am intimately acquainted with not being able to escape my race in social and professional settings. I've been jumped and had my ass kicked, had rocks thrown at me, been threatened with guns, been subject to arbitrarily high prices on merchandise, and been denied jobs for literally no other reason than the color of my skin. I'm aware that it's given me a perspective that most white people in Americanada/Europe/Australia won't ever have (and let me preempt anyone who is about to say some dumb shit like "BUT I LIVED IN THE GHETTO" by assuring you that it's not even remotely the same - you can take a bus out of the ghetto, not so much on an island) and it's high on the list of things I'm thankful for in regards to my unusual upbringing. And yeah, most white people in the "western world" who "don't see race" are probably well-meaning, but they're also not doing anything to advance the dialogue and help actually overcome the problem. I've had my life literally saved because somebody present in a bad situation did see race and realized that if they didn't come to my defense I was going to be murdered in cold blood for being white. Had I been black, in that same situation, they would likely have assumed that I was the victim of gang/drug-related violence just like almost all of the other homicide victims in the VI and looked the other way (like any smart person would).
In short, fuck the whole "I don't see race" thing. I know you guys mean well but it's the exact wrong way to go about it.
Right on.
It's funny, since early on I've assumed you aren't white, because although you look white, you seem to function more from a... dare I say it... colored perspective.
The really funny part is that the way the unavoidable imprinting that takes place in childhood regarding that sort of stuff seems to have manifested in me comes in the form of me being generally inclined to be more distrustful of (Anglo-American) white people than of people of other races/cultures. It's stupid and silly and anytime I catch myself doing it I mentally slap myself and tell myself to smarten up, but it's there.
And I hope nobody took my post as some sort of appeal to authority, I just wanted to share a perspective that I doubt anyone else here has.
And yeah, I'm of two minds about the New Seasons on North Williams. Those are generally good jobs (I hope they're smart enough to hire from within the neighborhood) and that area was a food desert before, but how many of the people that live in close proximity to it are going to be able to afford to shop there?
About half of them; mostly the white half.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 01:29:57 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 18, 2012, 01:22:51 AM
You know phox you bringing up the white guy who dresses like that is an interesting thing too.
It suddenly becomes socially acceptable to mock him and call him a whigger because hes not acting white. The fact that some people find the term whigger socially still acceptable blows my mind
Oh man, yeah. That one gets me too.
I like to play dumb and reply with "what does wigger mean?"
Alot of people get as far as "well, you know...." then can't bring themselves to actually say it.
:lulz:
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 18, 2012, 02:15:19 AM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 18, 2012, 02:12:20 AM
yeah, I think we're miscommunicating here.
You're saying "I don't see race" when what you seem to mean is "I treat everyone with a basic level of respect until they give me a reason to think they don't deserve it."
The latter is awesome, admirable, and something you should obviously continue to do, but that's not what it means to "not see race".
What ECH said.
What Phox said about what ECH said.
Okay, it's priveleged. I'm supposed to be behaving in a more conscious manner, right? So how? How does making myself painfully aware of the possible fears and plights of people based on arbitrary factors that others won't chill the fuck out about do anything other than become a game of supposition and awareness?
So it's naive for me to want everyone to feel comfortably non-consciousness...as naive as wishing everyone gets a pony. So does that mean it's perpetuating unfairness if I ride around on my magic hosrie before everyone has one? Gallop around, blissfully offering rides to people who don't even own stables?
IS MY BATSHIT RHETORIC MAKING SENSE HERE?
I'm saying that I still have faith that I'm a passive part of the solution. My personality, awareness, attitudes and intent are all decent and okay. I don't wanna fight. I don't wanna sit around thinking about it. I just wanna gallop around in glee.
This isn't an economic reality thing where ignoring the problem makes me part of it so the Ferrari metaphor makes no sense. This is an attitude thing in which acceptance plays a huge role. Can't I just exist as an example of that (more or less, with some flaws that I correct as I see em) thereby adding to the body of the "not problem?"
Doesn't it take a bunch of star-bellied sneeches and plain-bellied sneeches alike going "it doesn't matter one way or another" to make the man with the machine leave the island?
In this context, the man with the machine won't ever leave the island.
And if you think "Ferrari" was a bad analogy, feel free to substitute it with "unicorn".
As for what you can actively do, I'm not sure I have an answer there. But I know that ignoring the problem and/or pretending it doesn't exist will not make the problem actually go away.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 02:31:42 AM
Okay, it's priveleged. I'm supposed to be behaving in a more conscious manner, right? So how? How does making myself painfully aware of the possible fears and plights of people based on arbitrary factors that others won't chill the fuck out about do anything other than become a game of supposition and awareness?
So it's naive for me to want everyone to feel comfortably non-consciousness...as naive as wishing everyone gets a pony. So does that mean it's perpetuating unfairness if I ride around on my magic hosrie before everyone has one? Gallop around, blissfully offering rides to people who don't even own stables?
IS MY BATSHIT RHETORIC MAKING SENSE HERE?
I'm saying that I still have faith that I'm a passive part of the solution. My personality, awareness, attitudes and intent are all decent and okay. I don't wanna fight. I don't wanna sit around thinking about it. I just wanna gallop around in glee.
This isn't an economic reality thing where ignoring the problem makes me part of it so the Ferrari metaphor makes no sense. This is an attitude thing in which acceptance plays a huge role. Can't I just exist as an example of that (more or less, with some flaws that I correct as I see em) thereby adding to the body of the "not problem?"
Doesn't it take a bunch of star-bellied sneeches and plain-bellied sneeches alike going "it doesn't matter one way or another" to make the man with the machine leave the island?
You are not part of the problem (in a manner of speaking).
HOWEVER, that does not automatically make you part of the solution. What I'm getting from what you are saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that you are content to basically act there isn't a problem at all. (Perhaps that's a bit of an oversimplification),
It's all well and good that you go around and you accept people, and go forward. However: You cannot grant your white privilege to someone else.
If you haven't done so, read that blog that Kai posted. It is VERY informative as to why a simple "But I'M not part of the problem" =/= part of the solution.
Okay, maybe we are miscommunicating here. When I say "I don't see race," I don't actually mean I'm an autistic colorblind person. I mean, I'm not registering it much differently than I am hair color or whatever else. What I'm seeing much more prominently are factors that are reflective of things over which they have some control.
Much more prominently.
Black/white has waaaaaay less to do with scary/friendly than behaviour, posture, clothing choices, etc.
Okay, maybe this is the problem. I go through life looking at people from the "might hurt me" versus "might turn out to be nice to me" perspective. I pretty much assume everyone is juging me. Maybe being The Weird Girl Nobody Liked makes me less equipped to understand what the big deal is. All I want are friends.
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 18, 2012, 02:44:20 AM
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 02:31:42 AM
Okay, it's priveleged. I'm supposed to be behaving in a more conscious manner, right? So how? How does making myself painfully aware of the possible fears and plights of people based on arbitrary factors that others won't chill the fuck out about do anything other than become a game of supposition and awareness?
So it's naive for me to want everyone to feel comfortably non-consciousness...as naive as wishing everyone gets a pony. So does that mean it's perpetuating unfairness if I ride around on my magic hosrie before everyone has one? Gallop around, blissfully offering rides to people who don't even own stables?
IS MY BATSHIT RHETORIC MAKING SENSE HERE?
I'm saying that I still have faith that I'm a passive part of the solution. My personality, awareness, attitudes and intent are all decent and okay. I don't wanna fight. I don't wanna sit around thinking about it. I just wanna gallop around in glee.
This isn't an economic reality thing where ignoring the problem makes me part of it so the Ferrari metaphor makes no sense. This is an attitude thing in which acceptance plays a huge role. Can't I just exist as an example of that (more or less, with some flaws that I correct as I see em) thereby adding to the body of the "not problem?"
Doesn't it take a bunch of star-bellied sneeches and plain-bellied sneeches alike going "it doesn't matter one way or another" to make the man with the machine leave the island?
You are not part of the problem (in a manner of speaking).
HOWEVER, that does not automatically make you part of the solution. What I'm getting from what you are saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that you are content to basically act there isn't a problem at all. (Perhaps that's a bit of an oversimplification),
It's all well and good that you go around and you accept people, and go forward. However: You cannot grant your white privilege to someone else.
If you haven't done so, read that blog that Kai posted. It is VERY informative as to why a simple "But I'M not part of the problem" =/= part of the solution.
I will. I've been working with the limitations of only a smartphone here so be patient with me. :)
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 02:47:26 AM
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 18, 2012, 02:44:20 AM
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 02:31:42 AM
Okay, it's priveleged. I'm supposed to be behaving in a more conscious manner, right? So how? How does making myself painfully aware of the possible fears and plights of people based on arbitrary factors that others won't chill the fuck out about do anything other than become a game of supposition and awareness?
So it's naive for me to want everyone to feel comfortably non-consciousness...as naive as wishing everyone gets a pony. So does that mean it's perpetuating unfairness if I ride around on my magic hosrie before everyone has one? Gallop around, blissfully offering rides to people who don't even own stables?
IS MY BATSHIT RHETORIC MAKING SENSE HERE?
I'm saying that I still have faith that I'm a passive part of the solution. My personality, awareness, attitudes and intent are all decent and okay. I don't wanna fight. I don't wanna sit around thinking about it. I just wanna gallop around in glee.
This isn't an economic reality thing where ignoring the problem makes me part of it so the Ferrari metaphor makes no sense. This is an attitude thing in which acceptance plays a huge role. Can't I just exist as an example of that (more or less, with some flaws that I correct as I see em) thereby adding to the body of the "not problem?"
Doesn't it take a bunch of star-bellied sneeches and plain-bellied sneeches alike going "it doesn't matter one way or another" to make the man with the machine leave the island?
You are not part of the problem (in a manner of speaking).
HOWEVER, that does not automatically make you part of the solution. What I'm getting from what you are saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that you are content to basically act there isn't a problem at all. (Perhaps that's a bit of an oversimplification),
It's all well and good that you go around and you accept people, and go forward. However: You cannot grant your white privilege to someone else.
If you haven't done so, read that blog that Kai posted. It is VERY informative as to why a simple "But I'M not part of the problem" =/= part of the solution.
I will. I've been working with the limitations of only a smartphone here so be patient with me. :)
S'all good. There's no rush, it's just a damn good example of where I think the gap between your point of view on this and ours is coming from.
There is no such thing as a "passive solution". I am not trying to say that you are part of the problem, either, but it is small (well, no, really) consolation for a brown person to hear a white person say "I don't see race". Non-consciousness of race has its own set of bugaboos, one of which is that most people of color identify with their race(s). Even mixed people like me want to have those parts of our identities recognized, acknowledged, and validated, and this is probably more true for us than it is true for most white people because of the large amount of baggage that comes along with being colored and/or mixed.
Telling people that you are not conscious of race or racial identity has probably about the same effect on us as someone telling you (in person) that they hadn't noticed that you were female. It's hard to pin down why that feels dismissive, but a great many, maybe even most, people feel dismissed to have plainly perceivable key elements of their identities ignored.
Here is an example of how being colored is a factor: every person I meet will at some point ask me what my ethnic heritage is. I have been asked probably thousands of times. This is a normal and expected part of my life. Most of the time it is a pleasant exchange, but sometimes it is not. Absolutely not one single person, including all the many many great people I've known who say they don't see race, has failed to ask me what my heritage is.
Another example: because of the current social discomfort around Latin American immigrants, I have noticed that people have started treating me differently. I look Mexican, sort of maybe.
Ech and nigel- a couple of weeks ago i was in a social situation where someone who i know is not antisemitic made a really bad jewish joke and someone caught me rolling my eyes and said oh kevin didnt like that and the joke teller (an irish immigrant who knows im irish) said oh.... Are you jewish? And i went yeah i am. And he was like sorry i didnt mean it that way (and he meant that he was just telling a bad blue collar joke). I had him going for about a half hour and he thought about it and he asked kevin how are you jewish if youre irish? (apparently i caused a lot of introspection :lulz:) and i explained if your mother is jewish you are too. He considered it nodded looked like he felt bad and i said im fucking with you. I was raised catholic by two irish catholics but i converted to celtic neopaganism. I just wanted you to be more mindful about your sense of humor.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 02:24:18 AM
Here is the thing my OP was trying to express; that the luxury of "not seeing race" is the exclusive domain of white privilege. It is part and parcel of white privilege.
See Stephen Colbert (the character) rightly making fun of this exact issue: http://www.colbertnation.com/video/tags/don%27t+see+color
So I saw an ad for http://twitter.com/obamatranslated. Its humor is based on racist stereotypes yes?
But that sounds pretty positive to me.
I'm going to make a huge assumption here for a moment and say that the "I don't see race" people are like me about it. I might be inclined to ask your heritage. It's not that I literally don't see the physical attributes that make you different than me, it's that it's not a prominent part of my consciousness. I might, at some point, be hanging out with you and catch something: a unique color in your eyes, a funny curve in your jawline, and find myself naturally, childishly curious about what factors: geography, lineage, etc gave you those things.
Okay, now the cultural identity stuff. This is a different matter altogether and one that makes this clearer to me. Yes, those things I do consciously see to a greater extent...but still sort of fuzzily.
It's funny, we talked about Object Permanence in another thread. No specifics but I'm no stranger to the concept. I have no clear ability to recall crisp pictures of people in my head. People become charicatures of themselves.
I *do* see people in terms of the lifestyles in which they participate. I see musician friends with their instruments and some loose stereotypical symbolism. Pop iconography. I see hippie friends as heads wrapped in 'do rags, smell patchouli in my mind for a moment. As I get to know people more intimately, these factors are replaced with more individual ones. That musician friend? Turns out he's a micro-brew fanatic? I see a bottle of beer somewhere in the mix. The hippie drives a Cube? I see his car zipping around.
What do I think about when someone says "I tie my identity to my black heritage?" Since this is a candid, "challenging discomfort" thread, I'll show you my pictures: I see a woman in african garb and a colorful headwrap. I see Louis Armstrong playing a trumpet with music notes around his head on the mural in the New Orleans bus depot. I see two black women in a kitchen, cooking together and talking about their men in exhuberant tones and laughing. I see the female RN who signed off on my clinical rotations in Pre-admit who told me stories about working her fingers to the bone as a single mom to make RN while her gospel music plays through her computer speakers. I see flashes of run-down neighborhoods with chain link fences and unkempt lawns. I see 80s model Cadillacs taking forever to warm up in cold driveways and little girls with their hair in three braids, held together by those "bolo" hair thingies and plastic barettes. I see boys playing basketball in the park in St Marks in NYC. I see LL Cool J in his boater's style hat and hear snippets of "Around The Way Girl" played on stoops in NY in the late 80s while kids play in the pirated fire-hydrants-cum-sprinklers.
Are these okay? Or are these as bad as blackface? These are, admittedly, much different images than what I'd call up in my head if someone who was black said "My brother and his friend are gonna end up getting themselves killed."
What do you see in your head when you think about me? When I say the word "raver?" When I say "Borderline Personality" or "ADD" or "possible mild Asperger's?" What about "Italian girl from New York?"
How much what we assume, looking at a person is all that bad? How much is by design? How much is an unfortunate negative association that's inextricably linked to certain aspects of the image and identity we've either chosen or accepted for ourselves? When I say "raver" do you see a joyful, dancing girl, spreading positivity, giving hugs and free lolipops to strangers? Or do you see a ridiculous, drug-addled, misguided nutjob, trying desperately to fill a hole inside with chemicals, listening to obnoxious music and wearing stupid pants?
Is BPD a chronic form of PTSD that I've overcome? Or do I carry the stigma of an unstable girl who was once a mess of razor blades and anorexia?
Does "New York Italian" mean anything beyond GTL?
**it seems there have been other posts since I composed this on my slow-ass smartphone so I'm going to stop here, post it anyway and ask for your forgiveness if it's redundant or untimely**
When you say "raver": I picture you in your goofy sunglasses dancing around to a silly song twirling glow sticks and generally having a good time.
When you say Borderline Personality: I think of how difficult that is to live with, and hope that you manage to live life to the fullest anyway. Whether it be dancing with your glow sticks, playing around at Mardi Gras, or riding in the back of an ambulance doin' what you do.
When you say "New York Italian": I think "never would have guessed". Then, eh maybe a bit in the nose, but that's probably confirmation bias, since I didn't see it before. Certainly didn't come across in your voice.
Navkat- i think of you as unusual girl living in the south in a shitty situation who listens to bad music. Note that unusual is not a bad thing here its an admiring sort of unusual and bad music can be equally applied to anyone (one cannot dispute tastes). How am i seen? Am i an irish dude a bostonian a guy in a sort of metal band a metalhead one of those rare pagans who isnt a pachouli smelling hippie a guy who struggles with alcohol consumption and has very strong emotional reactions to death and politics? Were all complex like that. What this thread is helping me realize is that being white isnt part of a white persons bip. Being not white is. I can think of myself as not white but irish because i have the luxury of that. And realizing that im only aware that im american outside of the us helps that too.
Example- i have dual citizenship with ireland. I was born in america. My cousin john is exactly the same as me in that regard. But he was raised there. So when i see this other american,i feel american
... As opposed to thinking i am an irishman with american citizenship and so is he. Conversely when i am talking to my non american grandfather i see a fellow irishman.
Eta- clarification: when i talk to john i feel difference. Hes irish and im american. When i talk to my grandfather were both irish. Strangely i make no connection with dad along those lines. Hes just dad.
<3 phox <3
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 18, 2012, 03:20:03 AM
Ech and nigel- a couple of weeks ago i was in a social situation where someone who i know is not antisemitic made a really bad jewish joke and someone caught me rolling my eyes and said oh kevin didnt like that and the joke teller (an irish immigrant who knows im irish) said oh.... Are you jewish? And i went yeah i am. And he was like sorry i didnt mean it that way (and he meant that he was just telling a bad blue collar joke). I had him going for about a half hour and he thought about it and he asked kevin how are you jewish if youre irish? (apparently i caused a lot of introspection :lulz:) and i explained if your mother is jewish you are too. He considered it nodded looked like he felt bad and i said im fucking with you. I was raised catholic by two irish catholics but i converted to celtic neopaganism. I just wanted you to be more mindful about your sense of humor.
That is, actually, awesome, in the sense the he and everyone who witnessed it may be (I hope) more thoughtful of the jokes they tell. Not just censoring of the people around them, but actually more thoughtful. It is totally OK to tell a shitty Jewish joke to Jewish friends; that's a whole other thing. It's the thinking that you can laugh at a joke because the butt of the joke isn't in the room that sucks.
Quote from: Telarus on January 18, 2012, 03:33:16 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 02:24:18 AM
Here is the thing my OP was trying to express; that the luxury of "not seeing race" is the exclusive domain of white privilege. It is part and parcel of white privilege.
See Stephen Colbert (the character) rightly making fun of this exact issue: http://www.colbertnation.com/video/tags/don%27t+see+color
Oh, these are GOOD. Like, holy shit, good.
Ohhhh. This one is especially good. Thank you, Telarus!
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/405561/january-09-2012/melissa-harris-perry
Exactly. I made it intentionally uncomfortable to send that message. I already knew that they have a jewish friend who would have laughed about it and made some irish and or catholic jokes in response. But man did like five people feel awkward as fuck. And i had friends there who knew i was in no way jewish who played along because they knew what i was doing (i even later made the joke that they could check my dick if they wanted when they werent sure if i was telling the truth when i said i wasnt jewish).
I might make it a point to do this sort of thing more often.
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 18, 2012, 03:50:20 AM
So I saw an ad for http://twitter.com/obamatranslated. Its humor is based on racist stereotypes yes?
Oh hell yes it is.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 04:25:01 AM
But that sounds pretty positive to me.
I'm going to make a huge assumption here for a moment and say that the "I don't see race" people are like me about it. I might be inclined to ask your heritage. It's not that I literally don't see the physical attributes that make you different than me, it's that it's not a prominent part of my consciousness. I might, at some point, be hanging out with you and catch something: a unique color in your eyes, a funny curve in your jawline, and find myself naturally, childishly curious about what factors: geography, lineage, etc gave you those things.
Okay, now the cultural identity stuff. This is a different matter altogether and one that makes this clearer to me. Yes, those things I do consciously see to a greater extent...but still sort of fuzzily.
It's funny, we talked about Object Permanence in another thread. No specifics but I'm no stranger to the concept. I have no clear ability to recall crisp pictures of people in my head. People become charicatures of themselves.
I *do* see people in terms of the lifestyles in which they participate. I see musician friends with their instruments and some loose stereotypical symbolism. Pop iconography. I see hippie friends as heads wrapped in 'do rags, smell patchouli in my mind for a moment. As I get to know people more intimately, these factors are replaced with more individual ones. That musician friend? Turns out he's a micro-brew fanatic? I see a bottle of beer somewhere in the mix. The hippie drives a Cube? I see his car zipping around.
What do I think about when someone says "I tie my identity to my black heritage?" Since this is a candid, "challenging discomfort" thread, I'll show you my pictures: I see a woman in african garb and a colorful headwrap. I see Louis Armstrong playing a trumpet with music notes around his head on the mural in the New Orleans bus depot. I see two black women in a kitchen, cooking together and talking about their men in exhuberant tones and laughing. I see the female RN who signed off on my clinical rotations in Pre-admit who told me stories about working her fingers to the bone as a single mom to make RN while her gospel music plays through her computer speakers. I see flashes of run-down neighborhoods with chain link fences and unkempt lawns. I see 80s model Cadillacs taking forever to warm up in cold driveways and little girls with their hair in three braids, held together by those "bolo" hair thingies and plastic barettes. I see boys playing basketball in the park in St Marks in NYC. I see LL Cool J in his boater's style hat and hear snippets of "Around The Way Girl" played on stoops in NY in the late 80s while kids play in the pirated fire-hydrants-cum-sprinklers.
Are these okay? Or are these as bad as blackface? These are, admittedly, much different images than what I'd call up in my head if someone who was black said "My brother and his friend are gonna end up getting themselves killed."
What do you see in your head when you think about me? When I say the word "raver?" When I say "Borderline Personality" or "ADD" or "possible mild Asperger's?" What about "Italian girl from New York?"
How much what we assume, looking at a person is all that bad? How much is by design? How much is an unfortunate negative association that's inextricably linked to certain aspects of the image and identity we've either chosen or accepted for ourselves? When I say "raver" do you see a joyful, dancing girl, spreading positivity, giving hugs and free lolipops to strangers? Or do you see a ridiculous, drug-addled, misguided nutjob, trying desperately to fill a hole inside with chemicals, listening to obnoxious music and wearing stupid pants?
Is BPD a chronic form of PTSD that I've overcome? Or do I carry the stigma of an unstable girl who was once a mess of razor blades and anorexia?
Does "New York Italian" mean anything beyond GTL?
**it seems there have been other posts since I composed this on my slow-ass smartphone so I'm going to stop here, post it anyway and ask for your forgiveness if it's redundant or untimely**
I'm sorry, but everything you've said, other than the parts where you talk about yourself, has been an expository of "but I have black friends". Also, in this context, as much sympathy as I might give you, your razor blades and anorexia are irrelevant.
Unless you are willing to posit that black girls don't experience anorexia or self-harm.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:15:25 AM
Ohhhh. This one is especially good. Thank you, Telarus!
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/405561/january-09-2012/melissa-harris-perry
Yeah, I had missed that one. Thanks Nigel.
As to Navkat's exposition, I don't think that is soley "but I have black friend". Our minds can only juxtaopse the experiences/situations/object-verb-system we have found ourselves in previously.
She has to be able to come to her own terms with it (with the caveat that now your conversations are now
part of her experiential pallette).
Another way of looking at it:
Race can be seen in terms of the signifier and signified. Skin colour is the signifier. Of course everyone sees the skin colour. What it signifies...well, that is a very complex issue. For racists, it signifies a level of hierarchy, inherent superiority or inferiority. We all know how that deal goes.
However, race can signify things, without those things being racist. Knowing the history of how people with that signifier have been treated, how stereotypes and other signifiers are used to pigeon-hole them into certain roles and character attributes, knowing how political power has been wielded against them, that necessarily entails recognizing race in the first place.
The non-recognition of race, the idea of just seeing people, would be great in a world without that historical baggage. But, unfortunately, we don't live in that world. We've just got this one, where racism was an endemic and structural form of oppression, which does still inform some of the mechanisms of political control and power (I believe class is possibly even more important, but as a white dude who does not suffer from the negative effects of racism, I of course have an element of bias there).
Trying to ignore race can, in effect, obliviate the more pernicious yet less hard to define and conceptually difficult forms of discrimination and persecution that can exist. To put it another way: if I was pulled over while driving, I probably wouldn't make too much of a fuss, even if I suspected I had not done anything to warrant it, because, as a rule, white guys don't get pulled over for no good reason. However, if I was in the car and it was a black friend who was driving and he had done nothing to warrant it, then I would be considerably more vocal in my protests, and may make a couple of snide comments that would undoubtedly get me tripping down every step to the holding cell. Because the act is different, because of the racial component and the racist approach the police take.
I guess what I'm trying to say is not that people should see without seeing race, but without seeing race is impossible, because assumptions like this are bound up in how we think, even if the assumption is the one that other people will be racist to people with different skin colour. The fact that we expect the police to be horribly discriminatory, or that Republicans will make awful racially charged statements (ie Gingrinch's assumption that it is mostly African-Americans on food stamps, when in fact it is more white Americans, or Santorum's quickly bitten-down upon remark about "black people taking your money") is because we do see race.
Seeing race is to understand its impact in the social, economic and political arena. And I'm sure no-one would disagree with that, but, as Nigel was saying, the "ignoring race" thing could be read as trying to ignore the history and social context of race, which is really only possible from a priviliged position within the system in the first place.
Quote from: Telarus on January 18, 2012, 07:52:59 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:15:25 AM
Ohhhh. This one is especially good. Thank you, Telarus!
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/405561/january-09-2012/melissa-harris-perry
Yeah, I had missed that one. Thanks Nigel.
As to Navkat's exposition, I don't think that is soley "but I have black friend". Our minds can only juxtaopse the experiences/situations/object-verb-system we have found ourselves in previously.
She has to be able to come to her own terms with it (with the caveat that now your conversations are now part of her experiential pallette).
Oh dear.
I don't get it. I'm starting to feel like I'm somehow digging myself into a hole and I don't know how or why. I'm actually starting to feel like making this much effort analyzing the matter is actually counter-productive somehow but I'm game to debate what I don't understand.
So, what am I missing? My aim here was to try to articulate how "I don't see race" could be a true sentiment even if it's not accurate or based on equal perception.
Then, my attempt was to reveal my perception and compare notes. Now I feel like a white people joke. Is it really that bad?
All anyone is saying is that ignoring race isn't a solution. Also that treating people equally regardless of race is not the same as not seeing race. I don't think anyone's intentionally trying to harsh on you. I dint think theres as much contention as confusion going on.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 18, 2012, 01:50:43 PM
All anyone is saying is that ignoring race isn't a solution. Also that treating people equally regardless of race is not the same as not seeing race. I don't think anyone's intentionally trying to harsh on you. I dint think theres as much contention as confusion going on.
Nono. I mean, dish it out, if it's necessary. I just don't understand how I'm fucking up.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 01:53:37 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 18, 2012, 01:50:43 PM
All anyone is saying is that ignoring race isn't a solution. Also that treating people equally regardless of race is not the same as not seeing race. I don't think anyone's intentionally trying to harsh on you. I dint think theres as much contention as confusion going on.
Nono. I mean, dish it out, if it's necessary. I just don't understand how I'm fucking up.
I think you're fucking up by getting confused.
All that's being said is ignoring race doesn't do any good because it's only from a privileged position that one is at liberty to ignore race.
If you're saying 'I ignore race' without trying to justify that as a solution, a lot of the criticism doesn't seem to be especially relevant.
Also from what I read some people have said that when you say 'I ignore race,' it's not really accurate; what you're really doing is withholding judgment on an individual until you can assess them individually, consciously disregardin race as a factor.
the deconstruction of your comment reduced to 'I have a black friend' seem to come out of you posing a fairly long comment were the point was kind of unclear; party because you seemed to be misunderstanding the original criticisms.
Nobody ignores race. Stevie Wonder and Jeff Healy don't ignore race.
Ignoring race would be ignoring culture.
It's more about how your bars react when you acknowledge and observe race.
And in some cases it is important to observe and acknowledge race. The obvious example is when one of another race is being harrassed.
But many other times, it isn't important and we may process that this person who looks different and comes from a different culture is experiencing the same kind of life moments that we experience on a day to day basis.
That's where I am with race. I see race. I see culture. sometimes it is important, sometimes it isn't. But never is it a criteria for downgrading or upgrading a person. It's just one of the bars of another person I recognize.
QuoteThat's where I am with race. I see race. I see culture. sometimes it is important, sometimes it isn't. But never is it a criteria for downgrading or upgrading a person. It's just one of the bars of another person I recognize.
That's kinda what I was getting at, with my post, only far more succint.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 18, 2012, 02:01:11 PM
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 01:53:37 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 18, 2012, 01:50:43 PM
All anyone is saying is that ignoring race isn't a solution. Also that treating people equally regardless of race is not the same as not seeing race. I don't think anyone's intentionally trying to harsh on you. I dint think theres as much contention as confusion going on.
Nono. I mean, dish it out, if it's necessary. I just don't understand how I'm fucking up.
I think you're fucking up by getting confused.
All that's being said is ignoring race doesn't do any good because it's only from a privileged position that one is at liberty to ignore race.
Got that. I mean, okay, yeah that's new perspective for me
QuoteIf you're saying 'I ignore race' without trying to justify that as a solution, a lot of the criticism doesn't seem to be especially relevant.
Well, I
was originally trying to justify it as a solution but I concede that there are some good reasons why it's not after listening to what others have to say.
What I'm saying now is that it's not a
lieQuoteAlso from what I read some people have said that when you say 'I ignore race,' it's not really accurate; what you're really doing is withholding judgment on an individual until you can assess them individually, consciously disregardin race as a factor.
Right. I admitted that...sort of. I mean, I admitted to the fact that it's not "blindness" per se. And then I tried to describe what it is: a comfortable lack of awareness...which we've now made clear is White Privelege.
Quotethe deconstruction of your comment reduced to 'I have a black friend' seem to come out of you posing a fairly long comment were the point was kind of unclear; party because you seemed to be misunderstanding the original criticisms.
And posting a lot of centrist perspective as well. I just don't understand how it was taken that way or what I'm doing wrong if it really
is that way somehow and I'm not seeing it.
I'm trying verrrry hard here to be candid, honest and consider there may be something I missed without falling into the "that's not ME!" trap or backpeddling in any way.
I think that is actually a problem with racists is that they don't see the culture along with the race. Or, they don't have an understanding any deeper than whatever superficial bullshit they see on TV. That has certainly been the case with anyone in America who has origins in the Middle East. That's the case in my area where your average racist doesn't see a difference between an African-American and a Somali refugee.
Because when you get a deeper understanding of cultures, you will have a better understanding of the true person, and very likely, discover you have far more in common with that person than you ever would have dreamed of.
Quote from: RWHN on January 18, 2012, 02:22:21 PM
I think that is actually a problem with racists is that they don't see the culture along with the race. Or, they don't have an understanding any deeper than whatever superficial bullshit they see on TV. That has certainly been the case with anyone in America who has origins in the Middle East. That's the case in my area where your average racist doesn't see a difference between an African-American and a Somali refugee.
Because when you get a deeper understanding of cultures, you will have a better understanding of the true person, and very likely, discover you have far more in common with that person than you ever would have dreamed of.
I feel that's unrealistic for your avg. "Workaday troubadour."
It's not anyone's job to seek "deeper understanding" of other people's worlds. You can't do that for every single micro-community AND OH GOD WHERE DOES IT STOP? THE IRISH? THE MANY DIFFERENT VERNACULARS OF THE ENGLISH?
Also, I think it's insulting unless it comes from a bona fide desire to gain a deeper understanding.
Why can't we just ask questions and try to do better and BE better every day? Why are we afraid of making mistakes? Gaffes? Fuck, I've said some dumb shit right here in this thread, I'm sure but that's how you figure shit out, right?
I realize as the "defacto" race, deeper understanding to my shit is imposed. Sorry about that. I also don't expect you to really have a deeper understanding of how they do shit in the south or NOLA or in Italian families. I just share. If you care to explore that, feel free. If you say something uninformed, I'll gently correct and inform. If you say something dumb or nasty, I'll less-than-gently correct.
Isn't that an okay system?
People interact with a shitton of new information every day.
Cultural understanding could easily be a part o the message people receive daily. If it's valued.
I think we can all agree you can see race when you meet someone, it's not really debatable it's just a fact. I personally feel the difference between a racist and your regular citizen is that a racist only sees race and they stop right there, your regular person, while seeing race does not make that a factor in basing their opinion on the person.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 02:37:55 PM
Quote from: RWHN on January 18, 2012, 02:22:21 PM
I think that is actually a problem with racists is that they don't see the culture along with the race. Or, they don't have an understanding any deeper than whatever superficial bullshit they see on TV. That has certainly been the case with anyone in America who has origins in the Middle East. That's the case in my area where your average racist doesn't see a difference between an African-American and a Somali refugee.
Because when you get a deeper understanding of cultures, you will have a better understanding of the true person, and very likely, discover you have far more in common with that person than you ever would have dreamed of.
I feel that's unrealistic for your avg. "Workaday troubadour."
It's not anyone's job to seek "deeper understanding" of other people's worlds. You can't do that for every single micro-community AND OH GOD WHERE DOES IT STOP? THE IRISH? THE MANY DIFFERENT VERNACULARS OF THE ENGLISH?
Also, I think it's insulting unless it comes from a bona fide desire to gain a deeper understanding.
Why can't we just ask questions and try to do better and BE better every day? Why are we afraid of making mistakes? Gaffes? Fuck, I've said some dumb shit right here in this thread, I'm sure but that's how you figure shit out, right?
I realize as the "defacto" race, deeper understanding to my shit is imposed. Sorry about that. I also don't expect you to really have a deeper understanding of how they do shit in the south or NOLA or in Italian families. I just share. If you care to explore that, feel free. If you say something uninformed, I'll gently correct and inform. If you say something dumb or nasty, I'll less-than-gently correct.
Isn't that an okay system?
When I say "deeper understanding", I'm not suggesting everyone needs to be able to write a 5 page thesis on the cultural background of every person they meet. It's like the example I gave. It should be fairly easy to understand, just through a short conversation, that a black person born and raised in America is very different from someone who was born and raised in Somalia and has been living in America for all of about 4 weeks.
And yes, you can learn more by asking questions, engaging in conversation. The racist won't do that. The racist will formulate their hypothesis and solidify their theory without gathering more input.
I agree with you on all toast points...except...
NO OFFENSE, GUISE, OKAY? BUT
Realistically, that's bullshit.
"Higher awareness?"
"Deeper understanding?" Wtf does that mean to the practical application of not being assholes to each other? It's contrived hogwash. It's catchphrases and watchwords. You may as well say "Give a hoot, don't pollute!" to people cause it's going to have the same effect...yes, even on the well-meaning "enlightened" ones. People get complacent.
I feel like running around oblivious is a much more honest incarnation of not being assholes and twats to each other. The best way to not be an asshole is...SURPRISE, to simply go about your business not being an asshole! If you fuck up, fix it. If you step on someone's foot, say "sorry." If you feel like you have to pass people in a tight space and you might be imposing, say "excuse me."
Do not be an asshole.
Do not tolerate people being flagrant assholes around you.
Why is this such a big deal?
I have yet to read Kai's thingy btw.
NO OFFENSE, GUISE. EXCUSE ME. SORRY.
Okay.
Oh, god. My ass is gonna get sooo reamed.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, I SAID "NO OFFENSE" OKAY? THAT'S LIKE OLLY OLLY OXEN FREE BUT MORE RACIST.
jesus, I'm gonna get flamed.
i don't see any reason to ream you because, fundamentally, i think you're right.
if people are going to stop being assholes, then they should... um. stop being assholes.
the nuance that others are trying to express shouldn't be denigrated though, because it is pertinent.
Quote from: Iptuous on January 18, 2012, 03:50:23 PM
i don't see any reason to ream you because, fundamentally, i think you're right.
if people are going to stop being assholes, then they should... um. stop being assholes.
the nuance that others are trying to express shouldn't be denigrated though, because it is pertinent.
Absolutely. If you can get people to turn the lightswitch on cause you're slick like that aaaand it's not making you feel like :argh!: all the time, go for it.
I personally don't feel like
I'm gonna be helping matters much by doing anything but being passive about it and taking down fools as they present themselves. I mean, do you even really want that? Some self-righteous, priveleged-ass white girl runnin her mouth with half the facts, trying to change minds about empathizing with people's "black heritage?"
I expect to get TOLD if I'm fuckin' up. I will do my best to not be an asshole about it.
I'm also not lying when I say "I don't see race" in those concrete terms. I'm sorry if that hurts feelings. I'm happy to
look though if there's something you want to express. I promise, promise, promise I will assimilate any parts of yourself you're willing to reveal to me with voracious hunger and glee...no different than being introduced to a new artist or a new cuisine.
That reminds me: fuck, I could go for some Phō right now. /ADD
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 04:12:35 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on January 18, 2012, 03:50:23 PM
i don't see any reason to ream you because, fundamentally, i think you're right.
if people are going to stop being assholes, then they should... um. stop being assholes.
the nuance that others are trying to express shouldn't be denigrated though, because it is pertinent.
Absolutely. If you can get people to turn the lightswitch on cause you're slick like that aaaand it's not making you feel like :argh!: all the time, go for it.
I personally don't feel like I'm gonna be helping matters much by doing anything but being passive about it and taking down fools as they present themselves. I mean, do you even really want that? Some self-righteous, priveleged-ass white girl runnin her mouth with half the facts, trying to change minds about empathizing with people's "black heritage?"
I expect to get TOLD if I'm fuckin' up. I will do my best to not be an asshole about it.
I'm also not lying when I say "I don't see race" in those concrete terms. I'm sorry if that hurts feelings. I'm happy to look though if there's something you want to express. I promise, promise, promise I will assimilate any parts of yourself you're willing to reveal to me with voracious hunger and glee...no different than being introduced to a new artist or a new cuisine.
That reminds me: fuck, I could go for some Phō right now. /ADD
is it the frequent inclusion of tripe in Pho that this reminded you of?
:lol:
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 01:25:43 PM
Quote from: Telarus on January 18, 2012, 07:52:59 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:15:25 AM
Ohhhh. This one is especially good. Thank you, Telarus!
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/405561/january-09-2012/melissa-harris-perry
Yeah, I had missed that one. Thanks Nigel.
As to Navkat's exposition, I don't think that is soley "but I have black friend". Our minds can only juxtaopse the experiences/situations/object-verb-system we have found ourselves in previously.
She has to be able to come to her own terms with it (with the caveat that now your conversations are now part of her experiential pallette).
Oh dear.
I don't get it. I'm starting to feel like I'm somehow digging myself into a hole and I don't know how or why. I'm actually starting to feel like making this much effort analyzing the matter is actually counter-productive somehow but I'm game to debate what I don't understand.
So, what am I missing? My aim here was to try to articulate how "I don't see race" could be a true sentiment even if it's not accurate or based on equal perception.
Then, my attempt was to reveal my perception and compare notes. Now I feel like a white people joke. Is it really that bad?
You could start with recognizing that this is not the "White people explain how they aren't racist" thread, and stop doing it.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 03:20:35 PM
I agree with you on all toast points...except...
NO OFFENSE, GUISE, OKAY? BUT
Realistically, that's bullshit.
"Higher awareness?"
"Deeper understanding?" Wtf does that mean to the practical application of not being assholes to each other? It's contrived hogwash. It's catchphrases and watchwords. You may as well say "Give a hoot, don't pollute!" to people cause it's going to have the same effect...yes, even on the well-meaning "enlightened" ones. People get complacent.
I feel like running around oblivious is a much more honest incarnation of not being assholes and twats to each other. The best way to not be an asshole is...SURPRISE, to simply go about your business not being an asshole! If you fuck up, fix it. If you step on someone's foot, say "sorry." If you feel like you have to pass people in a tight space and you might be imposing, say "excuse me."
Do not be an asshole.
Do not tolerate people being flagrant assholes around you.
Why is this such a big deal?
I have yet to read Kai's thingy btw.
NO OFFENSE, GUISE. EXCUSE ME. SORRY.
Okay.
Seriously honey, you need to shut the fuck up. I don't know if you simply don't understand, but yes, you are being offensive AS FUCK.
"It's hard to think about other people's pain so I'm not gonna. That's good, right? I'm going to call it part of the solution and assert that if everybody just didn't think about other people's pain, the world would be a perfect place."
Coming from the Ivory tower I never see racism, we're composed of a load of different races.
Classism and intellectual snobbery are far more common in academia then racism ever is.
Quote from: Cain on January 18, 2012, 08:21:05 AM
Another way of looking at it:
Race can be seen in terms of the signifier and signified. Skin colour is the signifier. Of course everyone sees the skin colour. What it signifies...well, that is a very complex issue. For racists, it signifies a level of hierarchy, inherent superiority or inferiority. We all know how that deal goes.
However, race can signify things, without those things being racist. Knowing the history of how people with that signifier have been treated, how stereotypes and other signifiers are used to pigeon-hole them into certain roles and character attributes, knowing how political power has been wielded against them, that necessarily entails recognizing race in the first place.
The non-recognition of race, the idea of just seeing people, would be great in a world without that historical baggage. But, unfortunately, we don't live in that world. We've just got this one, where racism was an endemic and structural form of oppression, which does still inform some of the mechanisms of political control and power (I believe class is possibly even more important, but as a white dude who does not suffer from the negative effects of racism, I of course have an element of bias there).
Trying to ignore race can, in effect, obliviate the more pernicious yet less hard to define and conceptually difficult forms of discrimination and persecution that can exist. To put it another way: if I was pulled over while driving, I probably wouldn't make too much of a fuss, even if I suspected I had not done anything to warrant it, because, as a rule, white guys don't get pulled over for no good reason. However, if I was in the car and it was a black friend who was driving and he had done nothing to warrant it, then I would be considerably more vocal in my protests, and may make a couple of snide comments that would undoubtedly get me tripping down every step to the holding cell. Because the act is different, because of the racial component and the racist approach the police take.
I guess what I'm trying to say is not that people should see without seeing race, but without seeing race is impossible, because assumptions like this are bound up in how we think, even if the assumption is the one that other people will be racist to people with different skin colour. The fact that we expect the police to be horribly discriminatory, or that Republicans will make awful racially charged statements (ie Gingrinch's assumption that it is mostly African-Americans on food stamps, when in fact it is more white Americans, or Santorum's quickly bitten-down upon remark about "black people taking your money") is because we do see race.
Seeing race is to understand its impact in the social, economic and political arena. And I'm sure no-one would disagree with that, but, as Nigel was saying, the "ignoring race" thing could be read as trying to ignore the history and social context of race, which is really only possible from a priviliged position within the system in the first place.
I like this post, a lot.
I was going to say something along the lines of, "Of
course we see race. The question is,
now what?"
That is to say, in practical terms, and obviously physical terms, you
are going to perceive different races. Now,
how is that going to change your behavior?
Of course, speaking as a white middle-class guy, this question may only be of importance to me. But I still think it's important.
I've been debating on whether to post in this thread or not. Because I was convinced that I was not someone who thought of race as an issue. I can understand where navkat is coming from, because that is pretty much my process in dealing with people.
However, reading through this thread I have come to realize that I do notice it. Just not on a conscious level. Having sat and thought about it, I can see little things that I have done in response to seeing someone. Things I will try and be more attentive of and stop doing.
So, thanks for this thread and causing me to look a little closer at myself.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 04:24:35 PM
"It's hard to think about other people's pain so I'm not gonna. That's good, right? I'm going to call it part of the solution and assert that if everybody just didn't think about other people's pain, the world would be a perfect place."
Whoahhhh...okay, this isn't about people's pain. If there's some injustice going on, yeah, tap me on the shoulder and I'll come roll up my sleeves.
If there's something that's bothering you in your heart TELL US. TELL US CLUELESS WHITE PEOPLE WHAT WE CAN DO. Or how it is that you feel that you need us to know.
I just feel that it's disengenuous for me to sit here and make promises I can't keep about always being mindful, always excercising thought and caution...and actually, I feel like it's more respectful that way. I don't operate under the pretense that I can speak for you or even 100% understand what the fuck is going on.
I am sorry that some of us were born without the responsibility to explain and express and correct and get beaten down year after year by the exhausting presence of insensitivity and ignorance. I empathize. But all I can do on my end is LISTEN and SELF CORRECT.
I AM TRYING TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW.
I
do feel that erosion is a powerful medium for change--that a lot can be accomplished by being a contributing factor in a society whose attitudes have changed and whose tolerance for bullshit has lowered...just by existing in that headspace. Maybe that's idealistic. Maybe it's naive. Maybe it's stupid. I've been accused of all three.
And I am sorry if I have offended you or hurt your feelings, Nigel. You can't know what a lump in my throat that gives me. I like you. I don't want you to dislike me.
All I can do is be candidly honest.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 04:23:11 PM
Seriously honey, you need to shut the fuck up. I don't know if you simply don't understand, but yes, you are being offensive AS FUCK.
Could you explain why, for the people reading along trying to make sense of this thread?
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 04:54:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 04:24:35 PM
"It's hard to think about other people's pain so I'm not gonna. That's good, right? I'm going to call it part of the solution and assert that if everybody just didn't think about other people's pain, the world would be a perfect place."
Whoahhhh...okay, this isn't about people's pain. If there's some injustice going on, yeah, tap me on the shoulder and I'll come roll up my sleeves.
If there's something that's bothering you in your heart TELL US. TELL US CLUELESS WHITE PEOPLE WHAT WE CAN DO. Or how it is that you feel that you need us to know.
I just feel that it's disengenuous for me to sit here and make promises I can't keep about always being mindful, always excercising thought and caution...and actually, I feel like it's more respectful that way. I don't operate under the pretense that I can speak for you or even 100% understand what the fuck is going on.
I am sorry that some of us were born without the responsibility to explain and express and correct and get beaten down year after year by the exhausting presence of insensitivity and ignorance. I empathize. But all I can do on my end is LISTEN and SELF CORRECT.
I AM TRYING TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW.
I do feel that erosion is a powerful medium for change--that a lot can be accomplished by being a contributing factor in a society whose attitudes have changed and whose tolerance for bullshit has lowered...just by existing in that headspace. Maybe that's idealistic. Maybe it's naive. Maybe it's stupid. I've been accused of all three.
And I am sorry if I have offended you or hurt your feelings, Nigel. You can't know what a lump in my throat that gives me. I like you. I don't want you to dislike me.
All I can do is be candidly honest.
It
is about people's pain. Think about it. How many times ave you bumped into a random black person you don't know? What are the odds that they reacted towards you by making themselves appear as non-threatening/non-black as possible? Fairly good, I'd say.
A couple of years ago, I was chilling at a little ice cream stand on The Strip, it was about 8 or 9 o'clock and dark. I was just sort of enjoying my Sundae, and a group of black people came up to me. I didn't think anything of it, cause one of the dudes was in one of my classes, so I figured he recognized me or whatever and was going to say hi. Well, a middle aged fellow, who appeared quite drunk, began chatting me up about ice cream for no apparent reason. The guy in my class, said "Don't worry, we aren't a threat." and seemed rather nervous and embarrassed by his companion's behavior. I said it was cool, and chatted with them for a few minutes until they finally manged to get the drunk fellow to come along to wherever they were originally headed. I waved good bye and went back to eating my ice cream.
Here's the thing: A stereotypical white person, being approached at random by a group of black people, may very well view them as a threat. Hence why my classmate felt inclined to say that they weren't. Me personally, it didn't even occur to me that that might be the case. But it occurred to THEM.
So, the point that is trying to be made, navkat, is that while your outlook works from your perspective. It doesn't do any good to the hundreds of thousands of black people who don't know you personally. It is, inherently, a privileged position. While I am not sure what you can
do to actively alleviate it. I generally try to be conscientious that I don't do anything that might seem like a defensive gesture when I am walking down the hall and being approached by a non-white person. I'll keep my pace, make eye contact, smile, not fiddle with my phone, whatever. I do not know if that does anything to help most of the time. But smiling at a person generally brightens their day anyway, so maybe it also helps them see that their "otherness" is not important to me? I honestly don't know.
I think the smiling thing is that people like to see other people being happy. It satisfies you in a way that makes you go "good for that dude." or "that is one happy dude." and of course if someone is more outwardly happy then that like if they do a little dance and sing "today is awesome!" you have to laugh. Because not only do you feel good for this random person but theyre also being funny.
/tangent
@Phox
Okay, that clears some things up for me. Let me repeat back to you what I received:
What you're saying is black people are in a position right now (REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY GOT THERE) of feeling nervous and defensive about how they "come off" to whites and as a result, they find themselves behaving in apologetic ways and being burdened with the non-liberty of excercising caution and self-censorship (cognitive slavery) which is painful.
The second message I received as logically implied is:
Because of this cognitive hardship (which is an injustice, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT GOT THERE OR WHOSE FAULT IT IS OR ISN'T ), we, as the members of the other, diametrically facing side of this equation, have the responsibility out of politeness, consideration and basic, human decency to share in some of this burden by being mindful not to unnecessarily trigger or exacerbate it NOT MUCH DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU WOULD AVOID TALKING ABOUT DEATH AT THANKSGIVING DINNER WHEN ONE OF YOUR GUESTS JUST LOST HIS WIFE. Have a hand in not putting people in any awkward situations that can be avoided?
Okay. That being the case, I can see how that sounds equitable and righteous.
There is also a rebelious girl inside, screaming "Fuck no! The answer to discomfort and self-censorship is NOT more self-censorship! The point is to find a way to create a situation where ice-cream-guy and his friend KNOW and are AWARE of the fact that that apology was unnecessary (because it was with you). Ice-cream dudes should know he's got friends and we should be getting past this now, not perpetuating it on the other side!"
But I do realize how 1. Unrealistic and 2. Arrogant that sounds. I don't mean to be...but technically, the rebelious girl is right. Nobody should have to do that mental slavery shit.
But that's like telling me to "Grow up and stop having daddy issues," right? 30 years in the Skinner Box and still pulling that lever when the buzzer goes off.
Have I got the right motorcycle firmly nestled in my crotch now?
This whole thread gives me the distinct impression that I should accept that racism (the white imposed on ethnic kind) is somehow my fault. Well fuck that. I'm not racist. I didn't oppress anyone for hundreds of years. Racism is retarded. If someone I know says something racist or abuses a minority I'll step on them. That's as far as it goes. Change my attitude? Fuck off. If you think my attitude is wrong, fuck you. I was born white. Lucky me. I was born male. Double lucky me. I'm not gay. Yippee I got it so easy I can't even begin to imagine how lucky I got it. I aint going to apologise for being lucky. You want something from me? Fine, just ask. I aint promising fuck all but I might be persuaded. So what do you want me to do? If the answer to that question is feel guilty about being born lucky, tho, you can forget it. I don't do shame.
So here is a question. Where I live my children and I are the minority. I have found, on more than one occasion, that the prejudice is rarely, if ever, in our favor. Yet if I bring it to anyone's attention, I'm the one called racist.
For example, when we were robbed recently the black officer actually asked "What did you expect, moving into this neighborhood?" My response was "What? Because I'm white I should expect to be robbed?" to which he just shrugged.
I think anytime anyone regardless of race or religion is treated with prejudice it is wrong.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 07:02:33 PM
This whole thread gives me the distinct impression that I should accept that racism (the white imposed on ethnic kind) is somehow my fault. Well fuck that. I'm not racist. I didn't oppress anyone for hundreds of years. Racism is retarded. If someone I know says something racist or abuses a minority I'll step on them. That's as far as it goes. Change my attitude? Fuck off. If you think my attitude is wrong, fuck you. I was born white. Lucky me. I was born male. Double lucky me. I'm not gay. Yippee I got it so easy I can't even begin to imagine how lucky I got it. I aint going to apologise for being lucky. You want something from me? Fine, just ask. I aint promising fuck all but I might be persuaded. So what do you want me to do? If the answer to that question is feel guilty about being born lucky, tho, you can forget it. I don't do shame.
Coming from a line of 800 years of oppression I hope that peoples who are relatively new to the Racism Scene appreciated that we were persecuted long before they were.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 07:02:33 PM
This whole thread gives me the distinct impression that I should accept that racism (the white imposed on ethnic kind) is somehow my fault. Well fuck that. I'm not racist. I didn't oppress anyone for hundreds of years. Racism is retarded. If someone I know says something racist or abuses a minority I'll step on them. That's as far as it goes. Change my attitude? Fuck off. If you think my attitude is wrong, fuck you. I was born white. Lucky me. I was born male. Double lucky me. I'm not gay. Yippee I got it so easy I can't even begin to imagine how lucky I got it. I aint going to apologise for being lucky. You want something from me? Fine, just ask. I aint promising fuck all but I might be persuaded. So what do you want me to do? If the answer to that question is feel guilty about being born lucky, tho, you can forget it. I don't do shame.
That is not even vaguely the point of this thread, but that's a very common response to the subject of race being brought up. I think it's why so many people avoid it.
The point of this thread was actually just to discuss how so many people avoid thinking about it, and present that lack of thought as if it's a virtue. It's not a virtue. It's not a sin, either, but there is nothing intrinsically moral about not thinking about race, and I wanted to point out that the luxury of it not being a factor in your life is, in fact, a luxury. And now people are thinking and talking about race even though it may make them uncomfortable, and that's all I was going for.
Does the OP give you the sense that I am somehow blaming white people for the fact that I'm not white?
I just like it when people are conscious. It's better to know, in my opinion, than it is to not know. The mere act of consciousness might actually change the world for the better, whereas being passive and unconscious never will.
Is there any reason to be concious of it or care if you wouldn't encounter it on a daily, monthly or even yearly basis?
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 07:02:33 PM
This whole thread gives me the distinct impression that I should accept that racism (the white imposed on ethnic kind) is somehow my fault. Well fuck that. I'm not racist. I didn't oppress anyone for hundreds of years. Racism is retarded. If someone I know says something racist or abuses a minority I'll step on them. That's as far as it goes. Change my attitude? Fuck off. If you think my attitude is wrong, fuck you. I was born white. Lucky me. I was born male. Double lucky me. I'm not gay. Yippee I got it so easy I can't even begin to imagine how lucky I got it. I aint going to apologise for being lucky. You want something from me? Fine, just ask. I aint promising fuck all but I might be persuaded. So what do you want me to do? If the answer to that question is feel guilty about being born lucky, tho, you can forget it. I don't do shame.
This is more or less what it's taken me pages to convey. I can see both sides: the basic, human kindness and generosity side...the "sharing the burden" side and the "Fuck no! That's lame!" side.
Here's a devil's advocate argument: Guilt aside, how different is screeching "I'm white and I don't owe it to ANYONE to "watch my step" just because I was born with the advantage!" From the 1% screetching "I'm rich and I don't owe it to ANYONE to pay more taxes just because I was born with the advantage!" ?
I can see both sides of this.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 04:54:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 04:24:35 PM
"It's hard to think about other people's pain so I'm not gonna. That's good, right? I'm going to call it part of the solution and assert that if everybody just didn't think about other people's pain, the world would be a perfect place."
Whoahhhh...okay, this isn't about people's pain. If there's some injustice going on, yeah, tap me on the shoulder and I'll come roll up my sleeves.
If there's something that's bothering you in your heart TELL US. TELL US CLUELESS WHITE PEOPLE WHAT WE CAN DO. Or how it is that you feel that you need us to know.
I just feel that it's disengenuous for me to sit here and make promises I can't keep about always being mindful, always excercising thought and caution...and actually, I feel like it's more respectful that way. I don't operate under the pretense that I can speak for you or even 100% understand what the fuck is going on.
I am sorry that some of us were born without the responsibility to explain and express and correct and get beaten down year after year by the exhausting presence of insensitivity and ignorance. I empathize. But all I can do on my end is LISTEN and SELF CORRECT.
I AM TRYING TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW.
I do feel that erosion is a powerful medium for change--that a lot can be accomplished by being a contributing factor in a society whose attitudes have changed and whose tolerance for bullshit has lowered...just by existing in that headspace. Maybe that's idealistic. Maybe it's naive. Maybe it's stupid. I've been accused of all three.
And I am sorry if I have offended you or hurt your feelings, Nigel. You can't know what a lump in my throat that gives me. I like you. I don't want you to dislike me.
All I can do is be candidly honest.
So far, you have used this thread as a platform from which to launch a series of apologia about how you're not racist, and how by not thinking about race you believe yourself to be making a positive change.
There is NOTHING WRONG with not thinking about race. Putting it out of your mind is not bad, it doesn't make you racist by default. Please stop seeing everything in such binary terms; I am not saying that you are part of the problem. In fact, you have plenty of your own problems to deal with and I would never expect or demand that you tackle social equality for brown people when you are not even able to attain it for yourself.
What I am saying is different. I am saying that
"not part of the problem" =/= "part of the solution".I am trying to think of how I can simplify this.
Can I say "white people" without anyone getting defensive?
White people often, as I have been trying to point out, say that they don't see/think about race.
1. This is not true, no matter how much you try to redefine the terms.
2. It is also not a virtue. It's not a sin, either, but there is
nothing inherently virtuous or moral about not seeing/thinking about race.
3. It is not part of the solution to race problems.
There is a difference between SEEING race and ACTING on race. There is nothing whatsoever about noticing that someone is black, anymore than there is something wrong with being black. And that fine little distinction is very important.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:28:28 PM
There is a difference between SEEING race and ACTING on race. There is nothing whatsoever about noticing that someone is black, anymore than there is something wrong with being black. And that fine little distinction is very important.
I think, through my occasional veil of ignorance, that this is the main point of the OP. It's also 169% TROOFPASTE (which means I fully agree with it).
Quote from: Faust on January 18, 2012, 04:28:30 PM
Coming from the Ivory tower I never see racism, we're composed of a load of different races.
Classism and intellectual snobbery are far more common in academia then racism ever is.
Some kinds of tribal allegiances take priority over race as social identifiers. Academia, military, role-playing games... if someone is in your tribe, that takes precedence over secondary identifiers.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 18, 2012, 07:30:19 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:28:28 PM
There is a difference between SEEING race and ACTING on race. There is nothing whatsoever about noticing that someone is black, anymore than there is something wrong with being black. And that fine little distinction is very important.
I think, through my occasional veil of ignorance, that this is the main point of the OP. It's also 169% TROOFPASTE (which means I fully agree with it).
:)
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 18, 2012, 05:58:10 PM
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 04:54:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 04:24:35 PM
"It's hard to think about other people's pain so I'm not gonna. That's good, right? I'm going to call it part of the solution and assert that if everybody just didn't think about other people's pain, the world would be a perfect place."
Whoahhhh...okay, this isn't about people's pain. If there's some injustice going on, yeah, tap me on the shoulder and I'll come roll up my sleeves.
If there's something that's bothering you in your heart TELL US. TELL US CLUELESS WHITE PEOPLE WHAT WE CAN DO. Or how it is that you feel that you need us to know.
I just feel that it's disengenuous for me to sit here and make promises I can't keep about always being mindful, always excercising thought and caution...and actually, I feel like it's more respectful that way. I don't operate under the pretense that I can speak for you or even 100% understand what the fuck is going on.
I am sorry that some of us were born without the responsibility to explain and express and correct and get beaten down year after year by the exhausting presence of insensitivity and ignorance. I empathize. But all I can do on my end is LISTEN and SELF CORRECT.
I AM TRYING TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW.
I do feel that erosion is a powerful medium for change--that a lot can be accomplished by being a contributing factor in a society whose attitudes have changed and whose tolerance for bullshit has lowered...just by existing in that headspace. Maybe that's idealistic. Maybe it's naive. Maybe it's stupid. I've been accused of all three.
And I am sorry if I have offended you or hurt your feelings, Nigel. You can't know what a lump in my throat that gives me. I like you. I don't want you to dislike me.
All I can do is be candidly honest.
It is about people's pain. Think about it. How many times ave you bumped into a random black person you don't know? What are the odds that they reacted towards you by making themselves appear as non-threatening/non-black as possible? Fairly good, I'd say.
A couple of years ago, I was chilling at a little ice cream stand on The Strip, it was about 8 or 9 o'clock and dark. I was just sort of enjoying my Sundae, and a group of black people came up to me. I didn't think anything of it, cause one of the dudes was in one of my classes, so I figured he recognized me or whatever and was going to say hi. Well, a middle aged fellow, who appeared quite drunk, began chatting me up about ice cream for no apparent reason. The guy in my class, said "Don't worry, we aren't a threat." and seemed rather nervous and embarrassed by his companion's behavior. I said it was cool, and chatted with them for a few minutes until they finally manged to get the drunk fellow to come along to wherever they were originally headed. I waved good bye and went back to eating my ice cream.
Here's the thing: A stereotypical white person, being approached at random by a group of black people, may very well view them as a threat. Hence why my classmate felt inclined to say that they weren't. Me personally, it didn't even occur to me that that might be the case. But it occurred to THEM.
So, the point that is trying to be made, navkat, is that while your outlook works from your perspective. It doesn't do any good to the hundreds of thousands of black people who don't know you personally. It is, inherently, a privileged position. While I am not sure what you can do to actively alleviate it. I generally try to be conscientious that I don't do anything that might seem like a defensive gesture when I am walking down the hall and being approached by a non-white person. I'll keep my pace, make eye contact, smile, not fiddle with my phone, whatever. I do not know if that does anything to help most of the time. But smiling at a person generally brightens their day anyway, so maybe it also helps them see that their "otherness" is not important to me? I honestly don't know.
I think this post explains things really well.
Quote from: Khara on January 18, 2012, 07:03:15 PM
So here is a question. Where I live my children and I are the minority. I have found, on more than one occasion, that the prejudice is rarely, if ever, in our favor. Yet if I bring it to anyone's attention, I'm the one called racist.
For example, when we were robbed recently the black officer actually asked "What did you expect, moving into this neighborhood?" My response was "What? Because I'm white I should expect to be robbed?" to which he just shrugged.
I think anytime anyone regardless of race or religion is treated with prejudice it is wrong.
What is the question?
Quote from: Faust on January 18, 2012, 07:20:47 PM
Is there any reason to be concious of it or care if you wouldn't encounter it on a daily, monthly or even yearly basis?
You mean if there are no brown people where you live? Then no, not really. The whole point of knowingly thinking about it is to help people connect with other people and to erode race boundaries, and there's really no point if there are no people of other races around to connect with.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 07:27:05 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 07:02:33 PM
This whole thread gives me the distinct impression that I should accept that racism (the white imposed on ethnic kind) is somehow my fault. Well fuck that. I'm not racist. I didn't oppress anyone for hundreds of years. Racism is retarded. If someone I know says something racist or abuses a minority I'll step on them. That's as far as it goes. Change my attitude? Fuck off. If you think my attitude is wrong, fuck you. I was born white. Lucky me. I was born male. Double lucky me. I'm not gay. Yippee I got it so easy I can't even begin to imagine how lucky I got it. I aint going to apologise for being lucky. You want something from me? Fine, just ask. I aint promising fuck all but I might be persuaded. So what do you want me to do? If the answer to that question is feel guilty about being born lucky, tho, you can forget it. I don't do shame.
This is more or less what it's taken me pages to convey. I can see both sides: the basic, human kindness and generosity side...the "sharing the burden" side and the "Fuck no! That's lame!" side.
Here's a devil's advocate argument: Guilt aside, how different is screeching "I'm white and I don't owe it to ANYONE to "watch my step" just because I was born with the advantage!" From the 1% screetching "I'm rich and I don't owe it to ANYONE to pay more taxes just because I was born with the advantage!" ?
I can see both sides of this.
You are both missing the point on a monumental scale. Somehow you defaulted to defensive mode (Someone's talking about race; they must be trying to make me feel guilty!) and got stuck there. Try to get out of defensive mode and realize that this isn't about blame. It's not even about changing your behavior. It's about changing your thinking to include consciousness of other people's experience.
If you are not interested in other people's experience, why are you here? Why are you Discordian?
Quote from: Khara on January 18, 2012, 07:03:15 PM
So here is a question. Where I live my children and I are the minority. I have found, on more than one occasion, that the prejudice is rarely, if ever, in our favor. Yet if I bring it to anyone's attention, I'm the one called racist.
For example, when we were robbed recently the black officer actually asked "What did you expect, moving into this neighborhood?" My response was "What? Because I'm white I should expect to be robbed?" to which he just shrugged.
I think anytime anyone regardless of race or religion is treated with prejudice it is wrong.
Wow. The point isn't "because I'm white, I should expect to be robbed" but rather a whoooole slew of fucked up attitudes on behalf of the cop:
1. Because you're white, you don't belong in that neighborhood
2. That hood (where whites don't belong and therefore, must be populated with non-whites) is one where robbery is expected and normal
3. Only non-whites have a good reason/excuse for being in a neighborhood where robbery is expected and normal
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 07:42:23 PM
Quote from: Khara on January 18, 2012, 07:03:15 PM
So here is a question. Where I live my children and I are the minority. I have found, on more than one occasion, that the prejudice is rarely, if ever, in our favor. Yet if I bring it to anyone's attention, I'm the one called racist.
For example, when we were robbed recently the black officer actually asked "What did you expect, moving into this neighborhood?" My response was "What? Because I'm white I should expect to be robbed?" to which he just shrugged.
I think anytime anyone regardless of race or religion is treated with prejudice it is wrong.
Wow. The point isn't "because I'm white, I should expect to be robbed" but rather a whoooole slew of fucked up attitudes on behalf of the cop:
1. Because you're white, you don't belong in that neighborhood
2. That hood (where whites don't belong and therefore, must be populated with non-whites) is one where robbery is expected and normal
3. Only non-whites have a good reason/excuse for being in a neighborhood where robbery is expected and normal
Yep. You nailed it.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:28:28 PM
What I am saying is different. I am saying that "not part of the problem" =/= "part of the solution".
I am trying to think of how I can simplify this.
Can I say "white people" without anyone getting defensive?
White people often, as I have been trying to point out, say that they don't see/think about race.
1. This is not true, no matter how much you try to redefine the terms.
2. It is also not a virtue. It's not a sin, either, but there is nothing inherently virtuous or moral about not seeing/thinking about race.
3. It is not part of the solution to race problems.
I have to disagree with this. while I would admit that being more proactive about it might help the solution come quicker it's still a step in the right direction. Imagine if all white people felt like this? There wouldn't be a problem would there? I'm not dumb enough to think I don't see the colour of someone I'm talking to but if it doesn't sway my judgement of them as a person then yes, I am part of the solution. Both in the - one less potential racist in the world - sense and as an example to and/or antagonist of any racists or would be racists who want to gain my approval.
not part of the problem = less problem by a factor of 1
Thing is, I'm pretty sure racism is a symptom of a greater problem, that problem being that the vast majority of the human race are fucking idiots. Racism is a fucking idiot position. Any smart person knows this.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 07:43:48 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:28:28 PM
What I am saying is different. I am saying that "not part of the problem" =/= "part of the solution".
I am trying to think of how I can simplify this.
Can I say "white people" without anyone getting defensive?
White people often, as I have been trying to point out, say that they don't see/think about race.
1. This is not true, no matter how much you try to redefine the terms.
2. It is also not a virtue. It's not a sin, either, but there is nothing inherently virtuous or moral about not seeing/thinking about race.
3. It is not part of the solution to race problems.
I have to disagree with this. while I would admit that being more proactive about it might help the solution come quicker it's still a step in the right direction. Imagine if all white people felt like this? There wouldn't be a problem would there? I'm not dumb enough to think I don't see the colour of someone I'm talking to but if it doesn't sway my judgement of them as a person then yes, I am part of the solution. Both in the - one less potential racist in the world - sense and as an example to and/or antagonist of any racists or would be racists who want to gain my approval.
not part of the problem = less problem by a factor of 1
Thing is, I'm pretty sure racism is a symptom of a greater problem, that problem being that the vast majority of the human race are fucking idiots. Racism is a fucking idiot position. Any smart person knows this.
"Imagine if" is pretty useless in this context.
People seem to be wanting a pat on the back for not being offensive.
They seem to want to think that by
not doing a bad thing, they are doing a good thing. That does not, actually, compute. :argh!:
There is nothing offensive about "not thinking about race". There is nothing offensive about "thinking about race", either. Since neither are offensive, there is nothing inherently better about one than about the other, except that in the wake of European expansion white people have the option of "not thinking about race" and brown people don't.
Am I doing a good thing by not kicking my dog or robbing a liquor store right now?
Am I reducing crime by not committing a crime?
"I could be adding to the problem, but I'm not; therefore I am reducing the problem" is bad math.
That's what Roger was trying to say.
What *I* was saying is that I'll gladly be proactive if I'm needed to do so or see a situation where I should step in but meantime being mostly oblivious is actually emulatory (is that a word?) of where normal for everyone should be and actually works towards normalizing.
It's my "Hey, I'm cool, you're cool. We're both cool!" attitude.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:50:56 PM
Am I doing a good thing by not kicking my dog or robbing a liquor store right now?
Am I reducing crime by not committing a crime?
"I could be adding to the problem, but I'm not; therefore I am reducing the problem" is bad math.
That's fair.
So we're doing the bare minimum that's expected out of us, basically.
The arrogance of saying "Hey, I'm doing you a favor by not telling black jokes. ISN'T THAT ENOUGH FOR YOU PEOPLE?"
That is kinda unhelpful and messed up when you look at it that way.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 07:42:23 PM
Quote from: Khara on January 18, 2012, 07:03:15 PM
So here is a question. Where I live my children and I are the minority. I have found, on more than one occasion, that the prejudice is rarely, if ever, in our favor. Yet if I bring it to anyone's attention, I'm the one called racist.
For example, when we were robbed recently the black officer actually asked "What did you expect, moving into this neighborhood?" My response was "What? Because I'm white I should expect to be robbed?" to which he just shrugged.
I think anytime anyone regardless of race or religion is treated with prejudice it is wrong.
Wow. The point isn't "because I'm white, I should expect to be robbed" but rather a whoooole slew of fucked up attitudes on behalf of the cop:
1. Because you're white, you don't belong in that neighborhood
2. That hood (where whites don't belong and therefore, must be populated with non-whites) is one where robbery is expected and normal
3. Only non-whites have a good reason/excuse for being in a neighborhood where robbery is expected and normal
Alternatively:
1) Because you clearly don't like getting robbed, you don't belong
2) This place has a statistically observable higher instance of crimes like theft
3) If you don't like getting robbed, maybe you should not live somewhere with a pre-existing high crime rate
It's easy for white folks to jump on the "OTHER PEOPLE ARE RACIST TOO!" idea, but the fact is that even if you have to deal with racial prejudice in your local area as a white person, chances are pretty good that a) your family hasn't been subjected to those pressures for hundreds of years, resulting in fewer opportunities for socio-economic advancement and b) it's just your local area, and you still reap the benefits of being a white person in a predominantly white society on a larger scale.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:50:56 PM
Am I doing a good thing by not kicking my dog or robbing a liquor store right now?
Am I reducing crime by not committing a crime?
"I could be adding to the problem, but I'm not; therefore I am reducing the problem" is bad math.
Fair enough on the math thing I concede that point but with the dog and the liquor store you are doing what's right. Ignoring someones skin colour is doing what's right. I don't lead (or even follow) moral crusades so that's all you're going to get out of me. Aside from if someone I'm hanging out with gets all racist on my ass I'll tear them to shreds. That's not a token gesture, btw, I attack any form of stupidity on sight. It's just the way I'm wired. Making idiots feel stupid is something I can rarely resist.
So I'm the one in the wrong? Is that what is being said here?
I want to be really clear before the accusations of my being a bitch start flying.
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 07:55:35 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:50:56 PM
Am I doing a good thing by not kicking my dog or robbing a liquor store right now?
Am I reducing crime by not committing a crime?
"I could be adding to the problem, but I'm not; therefore I am reducing the problem" is bad math.
That's fair.
So we're doing the bare minimum that's expected out of us, basically.
The arrogance of saying "Hey, I'm doing you a favor by not telling black jokes. ISN'T THAT ENOUGH FOR YOU PEOPLE?"
Yep. Now you get it.
Thinking/saying that you're part of the solution because you're not adding to the problem is a false equation.
It would be like a man saying to you, "I'm totally not sexist; I don't even hit my wife. If everybody treated women the way I do, sexism wouldn't even be an issue; therefore, I am helping to end domestic violence".
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 08:18:59 PM
Yep. Now you get it.
Thinking/saying that you're part of the solution because you're not adding to the problem is a false equation.
It would be like a man saying to you, "I'm totally not sexist; I don't even hit my wife. If everybody treated women the way I do, sexism wouldn't even be an issue; therefore, I am helping to end domestic violence".
So because I feel that the officer was being racist is a direct result of my living in a neighborhood (try to find one in this city that doesn't have a high crime rate btw) that has a high crime rate? Not that he was in the wrong, but I am wrong for being upset with what he said and for living where I do?
When my children are not accepted into programs because of their color, it is my fault for having them in a city school where they are the minority? Not that myself or my kids are being profiled?
Is that what you are saying?
Quote from: Khara on January 18, 2012, 08:18:54 PM
So I'm the one in the wrong? Is that what is being said here?
I want to be really clear before the accusations of my being a bitch start flying.
No; the cop was. But on a larger level, the cop's attitudes are far more reflective of anti-black racism than anti-white racism. He was engaging in two wrongs: victim-blaming about you, and racism about the neighborhood. but he was also essentially saying that white people don't belong in black neighborhoods because black neighborhoods are bad. He may himself have been black, but that's one of the funny things about racism; in a situation where racism is systemic throughout culture, many people end up being racist against themselves.
At the beginning of your post, you said that you had a question. I was wondering what that question was, because it didn't make it into your post?
Quote from: Khara on January 18, 2012, 08:23:45 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 08:18:59 PM
Yep. Now you get it.
Thinking/saying that you're part of the solution because you're not adding to the problem is a false equation.
It would be like a man saying to you, "I'm totally not sexist; I don't even hit my wife. If everybody treated women the way I do, sexism wouldn't even be an issue; therefore, I am helping to end domestic violence".
So because I feel that the officer was being racist is a direct result of my living in a neighborhood (try to find one in this city that doesn't have a high crime rate btw) that has a high crime rate? Not that he was in the wrong, but I am wrong for being upset with what he said and for living where I do?
When my children are not accepted into programs because of their color, it is my fault for having them in a city school where they are the minority? Not that myself or my kids are being profiled?
Is that what you are saying?
Uh... no. What are you on about now?
Quote from: Khara on January 18, 2012, 08:23:45 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 08:18:59 PM
Yep. Now you get it.
Thinking/saying that you're part of the solution because you're not adding to the problem is a false equation.
It would be like a man saying to you, "I'm totally not sexist; I don't even hit my wife. If everybody treated women the way I do, sexism wouldn't even be an issue; therefore, I am helping to end domestic violence".
So because I feel that the officer was being racist is a direct result of my living in a neighborhood (try to find one in this city that doesn't have a high crime rate btw) that has a high crime rate? Not that he was in the wrong, but I am wrong for being upset with what he said and for living where I do?
When my children are not accepted into programs because of their color, it is my fault for having them in a city school where they are the minority? Not that myself or my kids are being profiled?
Is that what you are saying?
I think that quote was a response to P3nt, not you Khara
Quote from: Sita on January 18, 2012, 08:27:36 PM
Quote from: Khara on January 18, 2012, 08:23:45 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 08:18:59 PM
Yep. Now you get it.
Thinking/saying that you're part of the solution because you're not adding to the problem is a false equation.
It would be like a man saying to you, "I'm totally not sexist; I don't even hit my wife. If everybody treated women the way I do, sexism wouldn't even be an issue; therefore, I am helping to end domestic violence".
So because I feel that the officer was being racist is a direct result of my living in a neighborhood (try to find one in this city that doesn't have a high crime rate btw) that has a high crime rate? Not that he was in the wrong, but I am wrong for being upset with what he said and for living where I do?
When my children are not accepted into programs because of their color, it is my fault for having them in a city school where they are the minority? Not that myself or my kids are being profiled?
Is that what you are saying?
I think that quote was a response to P3nt, not you Khara
It was a response to Navkat, actually. I didn't notice that Khara had posted four seconds before I did. I'll edit my post with a quote to make it more clear.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 08:15:28 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:50:56 PM
Am I doing a good thing by not kicking my dog or robbing a liquor store right now?
Am I reducing crime by not committing a crime?
"I could be adding to the problem, but I'm not; therefore I am reducing the problem" is bad math.
Fair enough on the math thing I concede that point but with the dog and the liquor store you are doing what's right. Ignoring someones skin colour is doing what's right. I don't lead (or even follow) moral crusades so that's all you're going to get out of me. Aside from if someone I'm hanging out with gets all racist on my ass I'll tear them to shreds. That's not a token gesture, btw, I attack any form of stupidity on sight. It's just the way I'm wired. Making idiots feel stupid is something I can rarely resist.
Nobody is asking any more or any less of you.
When someone says to you "I'm basically a decent human being and not a shitheel!", what's their point?
Hell, from now on I think that's how I'll respond.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 10:01:49 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 08:15:28 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:50:56 PM
Am I doing a good thing by not kicking my dog or robbing a liquor store right now?
Am I reducing crime by not committing a crime?
"I could be adding to the problem, but I'm not; therefore I am reducing the problem" is bad math.
Fair enough on the math thing I concede that point but with the dog and the liquor store you are doing what's right. Ignoring someones skin colour is doing what's right. I don't lead (or even follow) moral crusades so that's all you're going to get out of me. Aside from if someone I'm hanging out with gets all racist on my ass I'll tear them to shreds. That's not a token gesture, btw, I attack any form of stupidity on sight. It's just the way I'm wired. Making idiots feel stupid is something I can rarely resist.
Nobody is asking any more or any less of you.
When someone says to you "I'm basically a decent human being and not a shitheel!", what's their point?
Hell, from now on I think that's how I'll respond.
For some reason it's a kneejerk reaction when racism or any other "ism" comes up. I need whoever to understand they aint talking about me. It aint guilt but it's something similar, something defensive. Probably something to do with why this is an uncomfortable topic. Well done Nigel - once again you have me rooting around in my head looking for answers. I'll let you know if I dig up anything interesting.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 10:48:53 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 10:01:49 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 18, 2012, 08:15:28 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 07:50:56 PM
Am I doing a good thing by not kicking my dog or robbing a liquor store right now?
Am I reducing crime by not committing a crime?
"I could be adding to the problem, but I'm not; therefore I am reducing the problem" is bad math.
Fair enough on the math thing I concede that point but with the dog and the liquor store you are doing what's right. Ignoring someones skin colour is doing what's right. I don't lead (or even follow) moral crusades so that's all you're going to get out of me. Aside from if someone I'm hanging out with gets all racist on my ass I'll tear them to shreds. That's not a token gesture, btw, I attack any form of stupidity on sight. It's just the way I'm wired. Making idiots feel stupid is something I can rarely resist.
Nobody is asking any more or any less of you.
When someone says to you "I'm basically a decent human being and not a shitheel!", what's their point?
Hell, from now on I think that's how I'll respond.
For some reason it's a kneejerk reaction when racism or any other "ism" comes up. I need whoever to understand they aint talking about me. It aint guilt but it's something similar, something defensive. Probably something to do with why this is an uncomfortable topic. Well done Nigel - once again you have me rooting around in my head looking for answers. I'll let you know if I dig up anything interesting.
Thanks! :)
I'm such a tool ITT.
Quote from: navkat on January 19, 2012, 04:57:51 AM
I'm such a tool ITT.
No biggie. The important thing (IMO) is that you were able to move past the defensiveness and see another perspective. That's pretty much the most bipedal thing anyone can do.
Hey P3nt, what the fuck is your sig from? :lulz:
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 06:40:41 PM
@Phox
Okay, that clears some things up for me. Let me repeat back to you what I received:
What you're saying is black people are in a position right now (REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY GOT THERE) of feeling nervous and defensive about how they "come off" to whites and as a result, they find themselves behaving in apologetic ways and being burdened with the non-liberty of excercising caution and self-censorship (cognitive slavery) which is painful.
The second message I received as logically implied is:
Because of this cognitive hardship (which is an injustice, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT GOT THERE OR WHOSE FAULT IT IS OR ISN'T ), we, as the members of the other, diametrically facing side of this equation, have the responsibility out of politeness, consideration and basic, human decency to share in some of this burden by being mindful not to unnecessarily trigger or exacerbate it NOT MUCH DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU WOULD AVOID TALKING ABOUT DEATH AT THANKSGIVING DINNER WHEN ONE OF YOUR GUESTS JUST LOST HIS WIFE. Have a hand in not putting people in any awkward situations that can be avoided?
Okay. That being the case, I can see how that sounds equitable and righteous.
There is also a rebelious girl inside, screaming "Fuck no! The answer to discomfort and self-censorship is NOT more self-censorship! The point is to find a way to create a situation where ice-cream-guy and his friend KNOW and are AWARE of the fact that that apology was unnecessary (because it was with you). Ice-cream dudes should know he's got friends and we should be getting past this now, not perpetuating it on the other side!"
But I do realize how 1. Unrealistic and 2. Arrogant that sounds. I don't mean to be...but technically, the rebelious girl is right. Nobody should have to do that mental slavery shit.
But that's like telling me to "Grow up and stop having daddy issues," right? 30 years in the Skinner Box and still pulling that lever when the buzzer goes off.
Have I got the right motorcycle firmly nestled in my crotch now?
For what's it worth, I think that you got the point here. And I think it should be pretty clear by now that Nigel's point with this thread is
1. Saying that you "do not see race" is an arrogant, privileged position. (i.e. you have the luxury of not seeing race).
2. Actually accepting people without consideration for race is not a bad thing, and "effectively not seeing race" is an acceptable state to be in.
3. The fact that you accept people regardless of race, while an awesome and correct thing to do, does not in and of itself do anything to decrease racism, nor does it matter to the random black person in the street. They are not aware that being themselves is good enough for you, because it is
not good enough for everyone.
(Beaten death, but bears repeating).
That said, I don't really think that it's self-censorship to be aware of what you're doing in a given situation and try to take other people's perceptions into account. It's common courtesy in other situations to be mindful of your actions, why should this be different?
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 05:23:03 AM
Quote from: navkat on January 18, 2012, 06:40:41 PM
@Phox
Okay, that clears some things up for me. Let me repeat back to you what I received:
What you're saying is black people are in a position right now (REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY GOT THERE) of feeling nervous and defensive about how they "come off" to whites and as a result, they find themselves behaving in apologetic ways and being burdened with the non-liberty of excercising caution and self-censorship (cognitive slavery) which is painful.
The second message I received as logically implied is:
Because of this cognitive hardship (which is an injustice, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT GOT THERE OR WHOSE FAULT IT IS OR ISN'T ), we, as the members of the other, diametrically facing side of this equation, have the responsibility out of politeness, consideration and basic, human decency to share in some of this burden by being mindful not to unnecessarily trigger or exacerbate it NOT MUCH DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU WOULD AVOID TALKING ABOUT DEATH AT THANKSGIVING DINNER WHEN ONE OF YOUR GUESTS JUST LOST HIS WIFE. Have a hand in not putting people in any awkward situations that can be avoided?
Okay. That being the case, I can see how that sounds equitable and righteous.
There is also a rebelious girl inside, screaming "Fuck no! The answer to discomfort and self-censorship is NOT more self-censorship! The point is to find a way to create a situation where ice-cream-guy and his friend KNOW and are AWARE of the fact that that apology was unnecessary (because it was with you). Ice-cream dudes should know he's got friends and we should be getting past this now, not perpetuating it on the other side!"
But I do realize how 1. Unrealistic and 2. Arrogant that sounds. I don't mean to be...but technically, the rebelious girl is right. Nobody should have to do that mental slavery shit.
But that's like telling me to "Grow up and stop having daddy issues," right? 30 years in the Skinner Box and still pulling that lever when the buzzer goes off.
Have I got the right motorcycle firmly nestled in my crotch now?
For what's it worth, I think that you got the point here. And I think it should be pretty clear by now that Nigel's point with this thread is
1. Saying that you "do not see race" is an arrogant, privileged position. (i.e. you have the luxury of not seeing race).
2. Actually accepting people without consideration for race is not a bad thing, and "effectively not seeing race" is an acceptable state to be in.
3. The fact that you accept people regardless of race, while an awesome and correct thing to do, does not in and of itself do anything to decrease racism, nor does it matter to the random black person in the street. They are not aware that being themselves is good enough for you, because it is not good enough for everyone.
(Beaten death, but bears repeating).
That said, I don't really think that it's self-censorship to be aware of what you're doing in a given situation and try to take other people's perceptions into account. It's common courtesy in other situations to be mindful of your actions, why should this be different?
That's a good summation, Phox.
I also wanted to add (not that I think anyone is thinking this) that I didn't come to this thread from the position of a high horse. Race is almost impossibly hard to talk about with many white folks, especially online, because it's... well, difficult. There's a lot of auto-response that comes into play. But as a mixed-race person (1/8 black, 3/8 Native, 1/2 Orkadian) race has always been an issue in my life, literally as far back as I remember. Nowadays being mixed is really well accepted, but there was still huge stigma when I was a kid and it was difficult to grow up in a black neighborhood and be rejected by other black kids because I was too white. And too black to be a proper indian, and... just not white. At all. Because you can be black if you're half black and Native if you're half indian, but for reasons that I first puzzled over in kindergarten, you can't be white if you're half white. Or 3/4 white. So it's always been a presence in my life... and I am really happy and grateful that it's less of a big deal now than it was 30 years ago. That my mixed kids are in school with other mixed kids. Because you can bet anything that my "functionally white" son is crucially aware of race and probably feels a little awkward about being blonde and blue-eyed (I have funny stories about the other moms at his school assuming I was his nanny) when his mom and sister are clearly some kind of not-white, and we're gratefully past the days of hushed whispers that Grandma had a nigger in the closet.
Plus, it's good that he's aware because he might blacken up when he gets older, like my brother did.
I really wanted to share that piece of my existence with a community that I have grown to respect tremendously, and I thought you guys would probably not let me down. And you didn't. :) Thanks!
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 05:05:34 AM
Quote from: navkat on January 19, 2012, 04:57:51 AM
I'm such a tool ITT.
No biggie. The important thing (IMO) is that you were able to move past the defensiveness and see another perspective. That's pretty much the most bipedal thing anyone can do.
Hey P3nt, what the fuck is your sig from? :lulz:
It was that spanish troll guy that was here a couple of weeks back. Started a thread about how the world would be a better place if all women became hookers or something like that. :lulz:
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 19, 2012, 07:28:04 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 05:05:34 AM
Quote from: navkat on January 19, 2012, 04:57:51 AM
I'm such a tool ITT.
No biggie. The important thing (IMO) is that you were able to move past the defensiveness and see another perspective. That's pretty much the most bipedal thing anyone can do.
Hey P3nt, what the fuck is your sig from? :lulz:
It was that spanish troll guy that was here a couple of weeks back. Started a thread about how the world would be a better place if all women became hookers or something like that. :lulz:
Kinda wish that dude would come back for teh lulz. :lulz:
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 19, 2012, 07:28:04 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 05:05:34 AM
Quote from: navkat on January 19, 2012, 04:57:51 AM
I'm such a tool ITT.
No biggie. The important thing (IMO) is that you were able to move past the defensiveness and see another perspective. That's pretty much the most bipedal thing anyone can do.
Hey P3nt, what the fuck is your sig from? :lulz:
It was that spanish troll guy that was here a couple of weeks back. Started a thread about how the world would be a better place if all women became hookers or something like that. :lulz:
Oh yeah, that guy. :lulz:
Hey Nigel, I wanted to thank you. I noticed this morning during my commute (I live in a neighboorhood that has I high density of Dominican/Haitian/Latino/Otherwise Black/Certainly Not White families), that I was conscious of myself and how I was thinking, acting, and behaving, in a good way, not in an "autopilot" way. Which then, as I got off the train in the very White financial block when my job is, I continued to be conscious and aware of who the people around me are, and how I behave and act. Then I recalled LessWrong's Fundamental Attribution Error (http://lesswrong.com/lw/hz/correspondence_bias/), which basically says that humans tend to make too big a deal between someone's immediate behaviors and their inner personalities. And that started a cascade of increased self-awareness.
So yeah, thanks.
Aw! :) You're welcome, and thank you!
http://yoisthisracist.com
I found this hella funny blog by a "non -white" person. I thought it was appropriate.
Also the comments about Arizona were funny. Basically people tweet or ask "is this racist?" style questions and the guy (I think he's male) answers.
Using humour to counter raacism is a good thing, imho.
Quote from: Pixie on January 19, 2012, 10:20:02 PM
http://yoisthisracist.com
I found this hella funny blog by a "non -white" person. I thought it was appropriate.
Also the comments about Arizona were funny. Basically people tweet or ask "is this racist?" style questions and the guy (I think he's male) answers.
Using humour to counter raacism is a good thing, imho.
Using humour to counter anything is a good thing.
Quote from: Pixie on January 19, 2012, 10:20:02 PM
http://yoisthisracist.com
I found this hella funny blog by a "non -white" person. I thought it was appropriate.
Also the comments about Arizona were funny. Basically people tweet or ask "is this racist?" style questions and the guy (I think he's male) answers.
Using humour to counter raacism is a good thing, imho.
:lulz: That was great! I liked this one:
QuoteAnonymous asked: Today I got called cracker by a black guy. Is that racist?
Yo, I mean, kind of. Did he also make you 9 times more likely to go to prison at some point in your life? That would make it worse.
Quote from: Pixie on January 19, 2012, 10:20:02 PM
http://yoisthisracist.com
I found this hella funny blog by a "non -white" person. I thought it was appropriate.
Also the comments about Arizona were funny. Basically people tweet or ask "is this racist?" style questions and the guy (I think he's male) answers.
Using humour to counter raacism is a good thing, imho.
Using humour to counter anything and everything is a good thing.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 19, 2012, 10:51:22 PM
Quote from: Pixie on January 19, 2012, 10:20:02 PM
http://yoisthisracist.com
I found this hella funny blog by a "non -white" person. I thought it was appropriate.
Also the comments about Arizona were funny. Basically people tweet or ask "is this racist?" style questions and the guy (I think he's male) answers.
Using humour to counter raacism is a good thing, imho.
Using humour to counter anything is a good thing.
Beat me again.
Ok, this has to be the BEST part of that blog so far.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PToqVW4n86U
The guy in it is a great storyteller, and yet it still seems to make a really valid point.
Quote from: Pixie on January 20, 2012, 12:26:57 AM
Ok, this has to be the BEST part of that blog so far.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PToqVW4n86U
The guy in it is a great storyteller, and yet it still seems to make a really valid point.
That is so fucking horrible. It fucking doesn't process why someone would do that shit to fucking kids.
but I can't stop fucking laughing.
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 12:42:40 AM
Quote from: Pixie on January 20, 2012, 12:26:57 AM
Ok, this has to be the BEST part of that blog so far.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PToqVW4n86U
The guy in it is a great storyteller, and yet it still seems to make a really valid point.
That is so fucking horrible. It fucking doesn't process why someone would do that shit to fucking kids.
but I can't stop fucking laughing.
I watched it twice. I laughed my ass off. Horrormirth comedy gold.
Quote from: Pixie on January 20, 2012, 12:26:57 AM
Ok, this has to be the BEST part of that blog so far.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PToqVW4n86U
The guy in it is a great storyteller, and yet it still seems to make a really valid point.
:lol: I've seen this before, it's HYSTERICAL!
Ok, I've probably bought these before.... (http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv3hvaXFel1r602aro1_500.jpg)
this HAS to be some of the most racist shit I have seen. And just noticed that it is racist. Fuck Tesco!
I'm buying other chips on gaming night from now on...
Just ask my GF and she said "Possibly," and "The couch"
ETA
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lvjs6z2SWm1r602aro1_500.jpg)
:lulz:
Quote from: Pixie on January 20, 2012, 12:56:19 AM
Ok, I've probably bought these before.... (http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv3hvaXFel1r602aro1_500.jpg)
this HAS to be some of the most racist shit I have seen. And just noticed that it is racist. Fuck Tesco!
I'm buying other chips on gaming night from now on...
Wait, that's actually for real?
Wow. If a US supermarket sold that, it'd probably be out of business in a week. Except in Arizona, where they'd probably sell out of those chips in one day.
So, I feel like a tool.
QuoteAnonymous asked: Lord of the Rings? Why there are no brothers on Middle Earth?
Oh, they're there, they're just the bad guys. Only.
Yeah, that shit is racist as fuck, by the way.
If you haven't already done so, you should read "The Last Ringbearer". It's available for free download in PDF and tells the story of the War of the Ring from Mordor's perspective. It's relevant to this discussion.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:53:30 AM
If you haven't already done so, you should read "The Last Ringbearer". It's available for free download in PDF and tells the story of the War of the Ring from Mordor's perspective. It's relevant to this discussion.
Thanks, I needed a new book to read.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:14:19 AM
Quote from: Pixie on January 20, 2012, 12:56:19 AM
Ok, I've probably bought these before.... (http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv3hvaXFel1r602aro1_500.jpg)
this HAS to be some of the most racist shit I have seen. And just noticed that it is racist. Fuck Tesco!
I'm buying other chips on gaming night from now on...
Wait, that's actually for real?
Wow. If a US supermarket sold that, it'd probably be out of business in a week. Except in Arizona, where they'd probably sell out of those chips in one day.
Yea, these are for real. We don't have a Mexican population to speak of in this country, which is why you cannot get decent tacos. And probably why Tesco's can get away with this shit.
(Note to self: IF ever bitten by the restaurant bug again, consider opening a taco truck in the UK)
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 03:07:10 AM
(Note to self: IF ever bitten by the restaurant bug again, consider opening a taco truck in the UK)
:lulz: Brilliant.
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 01:37:55 AM
So, I feel like a tool.
QuoteAnonymous asked: Lord of the Rings? Why there are no brothers on Middle Earth?
Oh, they're there, they're just the bad guys. Only.
Yeah, that shit is racist as fuck, by the way.
Yeah. A bit on the sexist side, too. Weren't any women with roles bigger than "trophy woman," from what I recall.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 20, 2012, 06:45:05 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 01:37:55 AM
So, I feel like a tool.
QuoteAnonymous asked: Lord of the Rings? Why there are no brothers on Middle Earth?
Oh, they're there, they're just the bad guys. Only.
Yeah, that shit is racist as fuck, by the way.
Yeah. A bit on the sexist side, too. Weren't any women with roles bigger than "trophy woman," from what I recall.
Evidently being a white male does make a lot of shit not noticeable. However, without doing a re-read, which I will do, I am going to out on a limb and posit that despite the lacking of strong female characters it probably isn't sexist. Unless sexist by omission.
Well it IS racist, but, you know, that's justified in the context that there ARE pure evil races in that universe, unlike ours.
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 07:02:48 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 20, 2012, 06:45:05 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 01:37:55 AM
So, I feel like a tool.
QuoteAnonymous asked: Lord of the Rings? Why there are no brothers on Middle Earth?
Oh, they're there, they're just the bad guys. Only.
Yeah, that shit is racist as fuck, by the way.
Yeah. A bit on the sexist side, too. Weren't any women with roles bigger than "trophy woman," from what I recall.
Evidently being a white male does make a lot of shit not noticeable. However, without doing a re-read, which I will do, I am going to out on a limb and posit that despite the lacking of strong female characters it probably isn't sexist. Unless sexist by omission.
Only a bit sexist. More like sterotypical trophy woman thing. -shrug- Am not explaining well.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 20, 2012, 07:08:06 AM
Well it IS racist, but, you know, that's justified in the context that there ARE pure evil races in that universe, unlike ours.
Aside from the made up Elves and Orcs, there were the Easterlings and other races of man. The evil ones were all nonwhite ones if I'm not mistaken.
Personally I tend to draw a distinction between unfortunate implications or stereotypes and actual racism.
I don't find LOTR racist (other than the obvious in world context of evil races). I really dOnt use the term racist unless something seems like it really has an agenda (conscious or not) of devaluing people of a certain race. So Tarzan, where raised by monkeys White boy can teach himself to read but the filthy black savages get shot off by the dozen like the animals they are; sure. Racist as fuck. But a work like Little Women or others with the stock 'oh Lordy me!' black charactertures- I find that dated and offensive, but even though it's a porteyal or an idea that's clearly inappropriate, I wouldn't have said it's racist in that there's no attempt to devalue one race below another.
I think I've said before; there's still an argument that these kinds of works, LOTR included carry the implications of racist ideology and to a point (obviously in some works less so in others) can be seen as in themselves racist. I might not agree with you there exactly but I'll usually agree that its offensive.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:53:30 AM
If you haven't already done so, you should read "The Last Ringbearer". It's available for free download in PDF and tells the story of the War of the Ring from Mordor's perspective. It's relevant to this discussion.
Downloaded, thanks.
Tolkein himself felt he made a mistake in portraying the Orcs as fully evil, as revealed by his personal letters, and he felt putting them beyond the possibility of redemption went right against his beliefs as a Catholic. Tolkein himself wasn't racist, (the Southron affinity for Sauron was more likely due to proximity to Mordor, and their skin colour due to it being a lot hotter down there), but he did recognize how people could read racist tropes into his works. And indeed, because Tolkein was then horribly abused by at least two generations of hack writers, most of whom ripped him off while lacking any of his own imagination, standard fantasy had some rather disturbing racial elements (and, according to Michael Moorcock, an occasionally fascist aesthetic).
Something that was brilliantly highlighted by the American Sci-Fi writer Norman Spinrad, incidentally, in his The Iron Dream short story. In this, after WWI, Hitler moves to America and becomes an artist, illustrating pulp novels and sci-fi adventures, and then eventually writing his own sci-fi and fantasy stories, all of course informed by his fascist worldview.
Fantasy is rather popular on the right, for a number of reasons. Some paramilitary training camps in Italy were named after locations in LOTR, for example. The simple good/evil dichotomy that exists in most stories of the genre, the setting is an idealized Western Europe in medieval times, and most of the good guys are white and secretly nobility. In fact, now I think of it, I can only think of one fantasy series that has more non-white characters than white ones (y'know, like reality), that the nonwhites are portrayed as main characters, and they're not portrayed as being mostly evil, and that's Steven Erikson's books, which break with typical fantasy conventions on a number of points.
Then again, I don't read much fantasy, precisely because of the above.
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 07:02:48 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 20, 2012, 06:45:05 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 01:37:55 AM
So, I feel like a tool.
QuoteAnonymous asked: Lord of the Rings? Why there are no brothers on Middle Earth?
Oh, they're there, they're just the bad guys. Only.
Yeah, that shit is racist as fuck, by the way.
Yeah. A bit on the sexist side, too. Weren't any women with roles bigger than "trophy woman," from what I recall.
Evidently being a white male does make a lot of shit not noticeable. However, without doing a re-read, which I will do, I am going to out on a limb and posit that despite the lacking of strong female characters it probably isn't sexist. Unless sexist by omission.
Um...
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 20, 2012, 07:32:18 AM
Personally I tend to draw a distinction between unfortunate implications or stereotypes and actual racism.
I don't find LOTR racist (other than the obvious in world context of evil races). I really dOnt use the term racist unless something seems like it really has an agenda (conscious or not) of devaluing people of a certain race. So Tarzan, where raised by monkeys White boy can teach himself to read but the filthy black savages get shot off by the dozen like the animals they are; sure. Racist as fuck. But a work like Little Women or others with the stock 'oh Lordy me!' black charactertures- I find that dated and offensive, but even though it's a porteyal or an idea that's clearly inappropriate, I wouldn't have said it's racist in that there's no attempt to devalue one race below another.
I think I've said before; there's still an argument that these kinds of works, LOTR included carry the implications of racist ideology and to a point (obviously in some works less so in others) can be seen as in themselves racist. I might not agree with you there exactly but I'll usually agree that its offensive.
Oh wow. Really?
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 08:31:00 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 07:02:48 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 20, 2012, 06:45:05 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 01:37:55 AM
So, I feel like a tool.
QuoteAnonymous asked: Lord of the Rings? Why there are no brothers on Middle Earth?
Oh, they're there, they're just the bad guys. Only.
Yeah, that shit is racist as fuck, by the way.
Yeah. A bit on the sexist side, too. Weren't any women with roles bigger than "trophy woman," from what I recall.
Evidently being a white male does make a lot of shit not noticeable. However, without doing a re-read, which I will do, I am going to out on a limb and posit that despite the lacking of strong female characters it probably isn't sexist. Unless sexist by omission.
Um...
Or am I just talking out my ass?
Ever read John Norman's Chronicles of Gor? Gotta be the most outrageous sexist shit, a planet where he is transformed into a Hero, of the "He Man" type, and all the Women are Slaveys, and quite fulfilled and happy doing occasional sidekick duties, getting slain, fucked, or both, on top of all that oiling up, and pleasing Master. Got to read at least one chapter just to see this Utopian Big gaystrap fetish world, with oiled bimbos, noble enemies. and where real men always carry whips to keep their chickslaveharems in order.
Almost forgot, there's every racial stereotype in there too, from Arab ish slave Traders, Persian ish houris, and Mongolian ish stinky barbarian hordes. Always always everyone sells you their Women, noble savages from far off lands, "Blah blah blah, wanna buy an oily chick from far away"?
I don't want to give too much away, and spoil what would otherwise be a fascinating discovery of how real women want to be owned by emotionally stunted bulked up WWR rejects with whips and quests, and big golden/magic/broken swords.
Sorry Nigel I'm really not sure how to take that 'really'.
Quote from: BadBeast on January 20, 2012, 09:22:13 AM
Ever read John Norman's Chronicles of Gor? Gotta be the most outrageous sexist shit, a planet where he is transformed into a Hero, of the "He Man" type, and all the Women are Slaveys, and quite fulfilled and happy doing occasional sidekick duties, getting slain, fucked, or both, on top of all that oiling up, and pleasing Master. Got to read at least one chapter just to see this Utopian Big gaystrap fetish world, with oiled bimbos, noble enemies. and real men always carry whips to keep their chickslaveharems in order.
Who needs to read them, the Vallejo cover art is all you need to know. In Tolkien's defence, re: sexism, he was writing about world war 1. Not a lot of women on the frontline back then.
LOTR? A loose coalition of rustic Nordic folks, consolidated into Vassal States, with the tacit and shaky, but ancient lineage of the Kings of Gondor about to return from shamed exile, from the Old Days.
Just in the nick of time to knit them all into a War Machine, and wage War on the only truly multicultural, and industrial Nation in Middle Earth, Mordor.
Orcs, Trolls, free men of the East, Balrogs, Corsairs, Southrons, the new Uruk Hai, all pulling together to fight the oppressive Socio-Economic Feudalist alliance of the meddling Valar Gandalf, his fucking Magic keeping Mordors industrial/Tech industry unmarketable, Gondor, Rohan, The moody fucking Elves, the greedy Dwarves, and their pet Hobbits. Oh, and the fucking Ents too.
Mordor, marginalised politically and economically by the Rohan Gondor Alliance, sanctioned by Elrond half Elven's meddling elitist
triumverate of Ringbearers.
There is the dream of the day that an Uruk Hai child can safely walk the narrow streets of Minas Tirith without getting tarred, feathered, lit up, and pushed off 'Denethor's leap' for being a half thing, not Orc, not Elf, not Man, but despised for being all three.
With their cry, "It takes a Coalition of Feudalist Nobilty
to hold us back"
They swarm out across the Morgul Vale, all willing to give their lives for the Country that believed in them, Mordor, and the Noble Lord Sauron, hacked up and left for dead by Isildur of Gondor, barely recognisable as a man, he kept the dream alive all these years.
After all, All they want is their Day In The Sun, and a forty hour week. And the 'Relocation' of all the Elves, back to where they come from.
Not Racist? Much? :lulz:
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 20, 2012, 09:27:05 AM
Quote from: BadBeast on January 20, 2012, 09:22:13 AM
Ever read John Norman's Chronicles of Gor? Gotta be the most outrageous sexist shit, a planet where he is transformed into a Hero, of the "He Man" type, and all the Women are Slaveys, and quite fulfilled and happy doing occasional sidekick duties, getting slain, fucked, or both, on top of all that oiling up, and pleasing Master. Got to read at least one chapter just to see this Utopian Big gaystrap fetish world, with oiled bimbos, noble enemies. and real men always carry whips to keep their chickslaveharems in order.
Who needs to read them, the Vallejo cover art is all you need to know.
Funnily enough, that's just what inspired me to first pick up "Captives of Gor" in the first place!
Quote from: BadBeast on January 20, 2012, 10:19:56 AM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 20, 2012, 09:27:05 AM
Quote from: BadBeast on January 20, 2012, 09:22:13 AM
Ever read John Norman's Chronicles of Gor? Gotta be the most outrageous sexist shit, a planet where he is transformed into a Hero, of the "He Man" type, and all the Women are Slaveys, and quite fulfilled and happy doing occasional sidekick duties, getting slain, fucked, or both, on top of all that oiling up, and pleasing Master. Got to read at least one chapter just to see this Utopian Big gaystrap fetish world, with oiled bimbos, noble enemies. and real men always carry whips to keep their chickslaveharems in order.
Who needs to read them, the Vallejo cover art is all you need to know.
Funnily enough, that's just what inspired me to first pick up "Captives of Gor" in the first place!
And you thought you were getting female emancipation??? :lulz:
(http://www.zayix.com/GameLibrary/E-books/Fiction/N-O/Norman,%20John/07%20-%20Captive%20Of%20Gor.jpg)
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 20, 2012, 10:23:49 AM
Quote from: BadBeast on January 20, 2012, 10:19:56 AM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 20, 2012, 09:27:05 AM
Quote from: BadBeast on January 20, 2012, 09:22:13 AM
Ever read John Norman's Chronicles of Gor? Gotta be the most outrageous sexist shit, a planet where he is transformed into a Hero, of the "He Man" type, and all the Women are Slaveys, and quite fulfilled and happy doing occasional sidekick duties, getting slain, fucked, or both, on top of all that oiling up, and pleasing Master. Got to read at least one chapter just to see this Utopian Big gaystrap fetish world, with oiled bimbos, noble enemies. and real men always carry whips to keep their chickslaveharems in order.
Who needs to read them, the Vallejo cover art is all you need to know.
Funnily enough, that's just what inspired me to first pick up "Captives of Gor" in the first place!
And you thought you were getting female emancipation??? :lulz:
(http://www.zayix.com/GameLibrary/E-books/Fiction/N-O/Norman,%20John/07%20-%20Captive%20Of%20Gor.jpg)
To my credit, I never thought that!
Quote from: BadBeast on January 20, 2012, 09:22:13 AM
Ever read John Norman's Chronicles of Gor? Gotta be the most outrageous sexist shit, a planet where he is transformed into a Hero, of the "He Man" type, and all the Women are Slaveys, and quite fulfilled and happy doing occasional sidekick duties, getting slain, fucked, or both, on top of all that oiling up, and pleasing Master. Got to read at least one chapter just to see this Utopian Big gaystrap fetish world, with oiled bimbos, noble enemies. and where real men always carry whips to keep their chickslaveharems in order.
Almost forgot, there's every racial stereotype in there too, from Arab ish slave Traders, Persian ish houris, and Mongolian ish stinky barbarian hordes. Always always everyone sells you their Women, noble savages from far off lands, "Blah blah blah, wanna buy an oily chick from far away"?
I don't want to give too much away, and spoil what would otherwise be a fascinating discovery of how real women want to be owned by emotionally stunted bulked up WWR rejects with whips and quests, and big golden/magic/broken swords.
I had heard of them, but only really about the sexist angle, and not so much the racist one.
Then again, I suppose the sexism is so horrific that the racism almost seems like an afterthought.
Many's the 48 year old virgin who learned all about women from John Norman's progressive gender alignment program. Thinly disguised as fantasy for the easily pleased.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 20, 2012, 09:23:24 AM
Sorry Nigel I'm really not sure how to take that 'really'.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that it was meant as "Really? How did you get your head up your own ass that quickly?"
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 11:49:58 AM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 20, 2012, 09:23:24 AM
Sorry Nigel I'm really not sure how to take that 'really'.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that it was meant as "Really? How did you get your head up your own ass that quickly?"
I was assuming those lines.
Really I was just being horribly pedantic. The short version is I dont feel like LOTR is racist or meant to be.
ETA: And really considering some of the other ideas, I don't know how much I really agree with myself, thinking about it. It's late though, and I'll think more later.
I tend to agree. I've always understood that LOTR was Tolkien's attempt to sort of create a mythology for England and wasn't meant to be taken as allegory for the, at the time, modern day. I'm not sure the lack of strong female characters means anything compared to any other literary works of the time which also had a lack of strong female characters. I tend to think of it as more of a "sign of the times" than anything else. I imagine if Tolkien was alive today and was starting to write LOTR in the context of modern day as it exists today, it would look a bit different.
I'm also going to do a quick flip and say that recognising an offensive portrayal and saying it's not racist is kinda dumb. And I came out pretty dickish, so I apologise.
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
Quote from: RWHN on January 20, 2012, 01:23:32 PM
I tend to agree. I've always understood that LOTR was Tolkien's attempt to sort of create a mythology for England and wasn't meant to be taken as allegory for the, at the time, modern day. I'm not sure the lack of strong female characters means anything compared to any other literary works of the time which also had a lack of strong female characters. I tend to think of it as more of a "sign of the times" than anything else. I imagine if Tolkien was alive today and was starting to write LOTR in the context of modern day as it exists today, it would look a bit different.
Those times were racist and sexist.
Lord of the Rings has quite a few strong female characters. In fact the majority of women characters I can think of have awesome moments of strength and courage. They aren't as numerous or as central to the plot as the members of the Fellowship, but they exist and they have crowning moments of awesome. They are definitely not portrayed as simpering, subservient weaklings or 'happy slaves' ala Gor.
I could go into more detail if people really want, but it seems tangential to the main point of the thread. I don't think anyone really cares.
So yeah. It might be racist, but it is definitely not a sexist work.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:40:18 PM
Quote from: RWHN on January 20, 2012, 01:23:32 PM
I tend to agree. I've always understood that LOTR was Tolkien's attempt to sort of create a mythology for England and wasn't meant to be taken as allegory for the, at the time, modern day. I'm not sure the lack of strong female characters means anything compared to any other literary works of the time which also had a lack of strong female characters. I tend to think of it as more of a "sign of the times" than anything else. I imagine if Tolkien was alive today and was starting to write LOTR in the context of modern day as it exists today, it would look a bit different.
Those times were racist and sexist.
Sure, but I still don't think there was any racism or sexism built into LOTR. There are strong, powerful female characters in the story. Galadriel anyone? And I don't really see any racist commentary in the book either. Indeed, we see races coming together for a common cause to defeat evil. We see initial distrust between an elf and a dwarf melt away as they learn more about each other through their journey. Just not seeing the racism or sexism.
You see traditionally white depicted races banding together to defeat orcs, trolls and humans who disagreed with them and had darker skin colour. The latter never really got asked if they wanted to join the coalition of the willing.
But does that necessarily equate to racism or is that just more reflective of the concept of brightness equals good and darkness equals evil? Is it just a white hat black hat scenario?
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:40:18 PM
Quote from: RWHN on January 20, 2012, 01:23:32 PM
I tend to agree. I've always understood that LOTR was Tolkien's attempt to sort of create a mythology for England and wasn't meant to be taken as allegory for the, at the time, modern day. I'm not sure the lack of strong female characters means anything compared to any other literary works of the time which also had a lack of strong female characters. I tend to think of it as more of a "sign of the times" than anything else. I imagine if Tolkien was alive today and was starting to write LOTR in the context of modern day as it exists today, it would look a bit different.
Those times were racist and sexist.
Not like today then much?
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 03:14:19 PM
But does that necessarily equate to racism or is that just more reflective of the concept of brightness equals good and darkness equals evil? Is it just a white hat black hat scenario?
More of a "Me Boss, you worky plenty hard yes?" scenario
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 03:14:19 PM
But does that necessarily equate to racism or is that just more reflective of the concept of brightness equals good and darkness equals evil? Is it just a white hat black hat scenario?
Intentionally? Probably not. But see ECH for that. There are uncomfortable undertones to it, and less talented authors than Tolkein made it almost entirely explicit.
Fair enough- unintentional racism is still racist.
Quote from: RWHN on January 20, 2012, 03:02:02 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:40:18 PM
Quote from: RWHN on January 20, 2012, 01:23:32 PM
I tend to agree. I've always understood that LOTR was Tolkien's attempt to sort of create a mythology for England and wasn't meant to be taken as allegory for the, at the time, modern day. I'm not sure the lack of strong female characters means anything compared to any other literary works of the time which also had a lack of strong female characters. I tend to think of it as more of a "sign of the times" than anything else. I imagine if Tolkien was alive today and was starting to write LOTR in the context of modern day as it exists today, it would look a bit different.
Those times were racist and sexist.
Sure, but I still don't think there was any racism or sexism built into LOTR. There are strong, powerful female characters in the story. Galadriel anyone? And I don't really see any racist commentary in the book either. Indeed, we see races coming together for a common cause to defeat evil. We see initial distrust between an elf and a dwarf melt away as they learn more about each other through their journey. Just not seeing the racism or sexism.
Actually I agree that it's not particularly sexist.
but really? All the white-skinned races are good guys and all the dark-skinned races are evil. Nope, no racism there.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 08:45:34 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 08:31:00 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 07:02:48 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 20, 2012, 06:45:05 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 01:37:55 AM
So, I feel like a tool.
QuoteAnonymous asked: Lord of the Rings? Why there are no brothers on Middle Earth?
Oh, they're there, they're just the bad guys. Only.
Yeah, that shit is racist as fuck, by the way.
Yeah. A bit on the sexist side, too. Weren't any women with roles bigger than "trophy woman," from what I recall.
Evidently being a white male does make a lot of shit not noticeable. However, without doing a re-read, which I will do, I am going to out on a limb and posit that despite the lacking of strong female characters it probably isn't sexist. Unless sexist by omission.
Um...
Or am I just talking out my ass?
While whether Tolkein's work qualifies as sexist is debatable, but I do want to point out that "omission" totally, depending on the context, qualifies as an "-ism". Portlandia is racist by omission, for example.
Tolkien shared rooms at University with CS Lewis, and he was writing LOTR, in the same room at the same time that Lewis was writing The LTW&TW.
But at least Tolkien didn't go down the "Talking animals for Jesus" route.
What does that have to do with racism?
Srsly, though the implicit racism in LOTR is both relevant and interesting, if this thread gets jacked into a Tolkein wankfest my rage will be legendary.
I don't think they shared rooms but I could be wrong.
I do know that Tolkein hated CS Lewis' fantasy stories because he believed all fantasy should be informed first by ancient myth and legend, and second should not involve the modern world (or indeed, Earth). Because doing so encouraged people to draw inferences into the work he did not want to be drawn.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
IT'S NOT RACIST IF EVERYBODY OWNS BLACK SLAVES!
\
:mullet:
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
FWIW, the coalition of baddies in LOTR wasn't devoid of white races. The Wild Men were a white-skinned race.
Not to mention the corruption of Saruman, Grima Wormtounge... While it has never been completely resolved, one evolution backstory for the orcs was that they were elves who were corrupted and enslaved. I think the idea that hanging around a dark, evil place like Mordor is going to cause physical changes as their "soul" changed. But Saruman didn't become non-white when he turned evil.
So I dunno, I just don't see an out and out statement in that story that "everything that is good is white and everything that is bad is non-white"
That, and we're talking about fantastical creatures that don't exist in the real world. At a certain level I think some Law of Fives might come into play.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
I wouldn't expect them to. But what I don't get is why, if you point out that there is a racist or sexist theme in books from an earlier era, there's always at least a couple of people who say "yeah but it's just a reflection of their era".
So? Nobody's proposing that we go back in time and lynch Tolkien for being exactly like all the other white guys of his era. Just pointing out that, as a product of his era, there are racist themes in his writing.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 03:40:51 PM
IT'S NOT RACIST IF EVERYBODY OWNS BLACK SLAVES!
\
:mullet:
:lulz:
To be fair, I have seen people try to dismiss the work of early American icons on the basis that they owned slaves. That, IMO, is a lot like trying to dismiss the work of Martin Luther King Jr. because he cheated on his wife.
Quote from: RWHN on January 20, 2012, 03:52:56 PM
FWIW, the coalition of baddies in LOTR wasn't devoid of white races. The Wild Men were a white-skinned race.
Not to mention the corruption of Saruman, Grima Wormtounge... While it has never been completely resolved, one evolution backstory for the orcs was that they were elves who were corrupted and enslaved. I think the idea that hanging around a dark, evil place like Mordor is going to cause physical changes as their "soul" changed. But Saruman didn't become non-white when he turned evil.
So I dunno, I just don't see an out and out statement in that story that "everything that is good is white and everything that is bad is non-white"
That, and we're talking about fantastical creatures that don't exist in the real world. At a certain level I think some Law of Fives might come into play.
This is a fascinating combination of apologia and the exact sort of threadjack I was trying to avoid.
Well done.
:argh!:
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
I wouldn't expect them to. But what I don't get is why, if you point out that there is a racist or sexist theme in books from an earlier era, there's always at least a couple of people who say "yeah but it's just a reflection of their era".
At times it's an important distinction to draw. In discussing the racism in Gone With the Wind versus, say, the racism in Birth of a Nation--those are two very different birds.
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
I wouldn't expect them to. But what I don't get is why, if you point out that there is a racist or sexist theme in books from an earlier era, there's always at least a couple of people who say "yeah but it's just a reflection of their era".
So? Nobody's proposing that we go back in time and lynch Tolkien for being exactly like all the other white guys of his era. Just pointing out that, as a product of his era, there are racist themes in his writing.
Because a lot of people do seem to think along the lines of the bolded.
You hear it a lot as a way of tearing people down. XYZ had views which we do not agree with in the modern day, therefore any merit their ideas/actions may have had must be ignored or discredited.
If you declare that something is a
racist work then that is a fairly significant claim and can be seen as a reflection on anyone who enjoys that work.
Particularly when the author (in this case) has said that he wishes he'd been more careful to avoid people making that interpretation, it is also an unfair claim on the way the author's mind works.
If Tolkein specifically said he wishes he had written it to avoid any unfortunate racist implications, it seems to me that the chances are
he was not a racist and it would be a damn shame if 'The Lord of the Rings perpetuates racist sterotypes' becomes the lasting legacy of the work.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
No, but to take that person from 1750, bring them here, culturally debrief them of how things are in today's world, we might find that people might not have been quite so all encompassingly racist as we are sometimes led to believe.
Acting in a certain way might be understandable if a person knows no better way to behave. But once they are educated and shown why for instance, owning Slaves is a reprehensible act of outrage upon your fellow man, they should be as capable as the next man of taknig this one step further, and paying off his workforce with some of the money they've made for him.
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on January 20, 2012, 04:06:37 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
I wouldn't expect them to. But what I don't get is why, if you point out that there is a racist or sexist theme in books from an earlier era, there's always at least a couple of people who say "yeah but it's just a reflection of their era".
So? Nobody's proposing that we go back in time and lynch Tolkien for being exactly like all the other white guys of his era. Just pointing out that, as a product of his era, there are racist themes in his writing.
Because a lot of people do seem to think along the lines of the bolded.
You hear it a lot as a way of tearing people down. XYZ had views which we do not agree with in the modern day, therefore any merit their ideas/actions may have had must be ignored or discredited.
If you declare that something is a racist work then that is a fairly significant claim and can be seen as a reflection on anyone who enjoys that work.
Particularly when the author (in this case) has said that he wishes he'd been more careful to avoid people making that interpretation, it is also an unfair claim on the way the author's mind works.
If Tolkein specifically said he wishes he had written it to avoid any unfortunate racist implications, it seems to me that the chances are he was not a racist and it would be a damn shame if 'The Lord of the Rings perpetuates racist sterotypes' becomes the lasting legacy of the work.
THIS
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
I wouldn't expect them to. But what I don't get is why, if you point out that there is a racist or sexist theme in books from an earlier era, there's always at least a couple of people who say "yeah but it's just a reflection of their era".
So? Nobody's proposing that we go back in time and lynch Tolkien for being exactly like all the other white guys of his era. Just pointing out that, as a product of his era, there are racist themes in his writing.
Sure. But it's important to see that...From the paternalistic racism of
Casablanca to the apologist racism of
Song of the South, if a certain type of people aren't shown this shit, it isn't real for them.
Also, the portrayal of the "moderate racist" as a dumbass in
All in the Family did a lot, IMO, to make the moderates feel silly about what racism they had.
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:35:03 PM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 08:45:34 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 08:31:00 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 07:02:48 AM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 20, 2012, 06:45:05 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 20, 2012, 01:37:55 AM
So, I feel like a tool.
QuoteAnonymous asked: Lord of the Rings? Why there are no brothers on Middle Earth?
Oh, they're there, they're just the bad guys. Only.
Yeah, that shit is racist as fuck, by the way.
Yeah. A bit on the sexist side, too. Weren't any women with roles bigger than "trophy woman," from what I recall.
Evidently being a white male does make a lot of shit not noticeable. However, without doing a re-read, which I will do, I am going to out on a limb and posit that despite the lacking of strong female characters it probably isn't sexist. Unless sexist by omission.
Um...
Or am I just talking out my ass?
While whether Tolkein's work qualifies as sexist is debatable, but I do want to point out that "omission" totally, depending on the context, qualifies as an "-ism". Portlandia is racist by omission, for example.
Makes total sense.
I'm proposing we go back in time and lynch Tolkein. Let's kick the arse of that twee, Oxbridge nerd.
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on January 20, 2012, 04:06:37 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
I wouldn't expect them to. But what I don't get is why, if you point out that there is a racist or sexist theme in books from an earlier era, there's always at least a couple of people who say "yeah but it's just a reflection of their era".
So? Nobody's proposing that we go back in time and lynch Tolkien for being exactly like all the other white guys of his era. Just pointing out that, as a product of his era, there are racist themes in his writing.
Because a lot of people do seem to think along the lines of the bolded.
You hear it a lot as a way of tearing people down. XYZ had views which we do not agree with in the modern day, therefore any merit their ideas/actions may have had must be ignored or discredited.
If you declare that something is a racist work then that is a fairly significant claim and can be seen as a reflection on anyone who enjoys that work.
Particularly when the author (in this case) has said that he wishes he'd been more careful to avoid people making that interpretation, it is also an unfair claim on the way the author's mind works.
If Tolkein specifically said he wishes he had written it to avoid any unfortunate racist implications, it seems to me that the chances are he was not a racist and it would be a damn shame if 'The Lord of the Rings perpetuates racist sterotypes' becomes the lasting legacy of the work.
What the fuck does this line of conversation have to do with anything?
LOTR is a textbook case of unintentional, unfortunate implications. This is not to say that Tolkien himself was racist, that his literary works should be dismissed on those grounds, or that the attitudes of the times did nothing to influence his writing either.
Everyone who is talking about Tolkein, please STFU or start a new thread ( I might even participate in it) or eat a gun or whatever. You are not adding anything of any value to this thread.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 04:38:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PM
I've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
I'm getting that too.
That and "It's only racist if it's not the cultural norm for the era".
I'll buy that. But even through the cultural norm may not excuse the behavior, it sure as fuck is an explanation. Expecting someone in 1750 to have todays standard's of race relation is not terribly realistic. Yes, it happened, but it wasn't by any means standard.
I wouldn't expect them to. But what I don't get is why, if you point out that there is a racist or sexist theme in books from an earlier era, there's always at least a couple of people who say "yeah but it's just a reflection of their era".
So? Nobody's proposing that we go back in time and lynch Tolkien for being exactly like all the other white guys of his era. Just pointing out that, as a product of his era, there are racist themes in his writing.
Sure. But it's important to see that...From the paternalistic racism of Casablanca to the apologist racism of Song of the South, if a certain type of people aren't shown this shit, it isn't real for them.
Also, the portrayal of the "moderate racist" as a dumbass in All in the Family did a lot, IMO, to make the moderates feel silly about what racism they had.
Yes, it is totally important to point out unconscious, generally-accepted racist or sexist themes in literature and film, even (maybe especially) older literature and film. Change happens through consciousness.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 03:30:43 PMQuote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 02:39:37 PMI've noticed a fairly consistent theme, which is that there are a fair amount of people who are under the mistaken impression that "it's only racist if it's intentional".
Totally makes sense, the only (rare) times when I'm being racist are completely unintentional.
I can sort of imagine how/why people like to rationalize that.
Personally, I don't, for the same reason there's nobody else to blame but me when I unintentionally knock over fragile shit, best intentions or not.
I was playing with ideas on this.
Firstly I did the most horrific job of articulating myself before. I'm nit denying that what I was sayi g was in itself a bit dickish, but I also didnt say what I meant clearly.
I bring up Little Women because there's a fairly poorly drawn black character in there. She's always portrayed as a loving, decent good natured person, but it's pretty clear her character owes more to black stereotypes than to any kind o well rounded character development.
I have difficulty seeing this as a racist porteyal because nothing about it seems to suggest that through her character I am being encouraged to think of her as unequal. I understand that stereotypes can degrade a person by reducing them to a series of disparaging cliches or to be disregarded as 'all the same' or made into an item of mockery, but even then I can't really see the portrayal as any worse than a book featuring a poorly characterised homosexual as typically effeminate or an Asian character who watches too much anime and is intelligent. Is poorly drawn equivalent to racist, if the tropes resorted to are race based? I still dont really think so.
Unless...
The unless is coming. I have to go over something else first.
I guess a reason I react the way I did is because I have unconciously had a view of specifically what the point of identifying racism in literature was. I figured it was about being able to recognise when a reader was being asked to accept a view that one race was superior to another (regardless of intent; while I get what ECH is saying, I've never thought that something not meant to be racist is by the virtue, not racist). So by that view, I don't feel like Little Women is explicitly or implicity asking me to value Hannah any less than the other characters (I've actually made a complete twat of myself now... I read Hannah's speech as an approximation of the African American accent but I just double checked and she's Irish). Anyway, the point I'm making is I felt that a poorly developed character supported by racial stereotypes, or a workthat could be perceived as racist if you look hard enough such as LOTR do not a racist novel make.
What Nigel has said though gave me a wider idea; that the whole purpose of identifying rascism is not just to see predjudice being promoted but to understand the extent to which these kinds of assumptions are woven into the fabric of our media. So in that case I can see the sense in regarding works which dont really promote prejudice but could be deconstructed in a way that does (again I see LOTR fitting in this catorgory) being regarded as racist.
I think my hesitation came from thinking alon the lines that racist works are something I should be able to disregard as ideologically shit, wheras if the point is to be aware of any possible implicit prejudice, there's no need to disregard everything I read, just a need to be aware of how unconcioys predjudice can manifest.
I'm also possible being really overly complex in saying really simple stuff, so I'll tldr it for clarity.
Tldr; I agree it's inmportant to be able to identify predjudice when it's not overt, but a work like LOTR really isn't racist in the same way a work like Tarzan is because while you can identify those implications in LOTR it isn't promoting a racist ideology as Tarzan is. I would think characters who have drawn on stereotypes would also be more like LOTR in the sense that the works don't push a racist perspective (I'm not talking about works where a character IS nothing but a stereotype, or where those Sterotypical elements reduce a character to mockery or unimportance).
I am having a hard time extracting your point from that. Can you clarify? In my opinion, consciously recognizing and naming passive racism is an important step forward; are you agreeing or disagreeing with that?
Last night I watched "Top Dog", a surprisingly well filmed (for what it was, the cinematography was good) Chuck Norris + Lovable Canine Badass vs the Evil White Supremacists movie.
With my fiance's 12 yr old (who has lagging social coping skills).
This thread came in surprisingly handy to get some clear basic concepts about discrimination and how racism is imbedded in our cultural momentum (& how to approach that as a mostly caucasian + native american kid :kingmeh:).
Then we got to watch Chuck Norris kick some neoNazi ass when they tried to blow up the inter-faith conference. :fnord:
Thanks everybody.
Nigel- i just realized that i know a youtube clip of an irish asian and some of the perceptions white irish sometimes have of him. Its (like a bunch of his other clips) in irish but has subtitles. And some of the comments he gets are nasty too along the lines of hes butchering the language. Except hes actually irish. Will post later when im home.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 25, 2012, 09:25:34 PM
Nigel- i just realized that i know a youtube clip of an irish asian and some of the perceptions white irish sometimes have of him. Its (like a bunch of his other clips) in irish but has subtitles. And some of the comments he gets are nasty too along the lines of hes butchering the language. Except hes actually irish. Will post later when im home.
Oh cool! I'm looking forward to it.
:|
Quote from: Nigel on January 25, 2012, 04:05:11 PM
I am having a hard time extracting your point from that. Can you clarify? In my opinion, consciously recognizing and naming passive racism is an important step forward; are you agreeing or disagreeing with that?
Agree.
But I'm feeling frustrated because I feel like this thread is saying if you can interpret it as racist in some way, it's a racist work. Which seems pointless because if thats the way to do it, anything ever written is a racist work.
Well, most people are racist so that's not really a stretch.
Racism doesn't have to be conscious or overt. It just means that you allow a person's race to influence how you look at them as a person.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 26, 2012, 01:24:24 AM
:|Quote from: Nigel on January 25, 2012, 04:05:11 PM
I am having a hard time extracting your point from that. Can you clarify? In my opinion, consciously recognizing and naming passive racism is an important step forward; are you agreeing or disagreeing with that?
Agree.
But I'm feeling frustrated because I feel like this thread is saying if you can interpret it as racist in some way, it's a racist work. Which seems pointless because if thats the way to do it, anything ever written is a racist work.
Can you explain what, specifically, in this thread is making you feel that way, maybe by pulling some quotes? And is it really a feeling, or is it a thought? I think that's an important distinction.
In my opinion, one of the reasons it's valuable to point out ingrained racism is actually to help make it less ingrained. It's less likely, if people point out the embedded (and most likely unconscious) racism in Tolkien's work, that writers will continue unconsciously embedding racism into their work.
Who would you rather be, the guy who is conscious that making all your villains dark-skinned is going to be seen as racist, or the guy who is happily oblivious and publishes a book in which all of the villains are dark-skinned?
I think the LOTR discussion is what started to irritate me. I still don't believe it's racist because that work has a very specific meaning in my mind; the idea that any race is superior or inferior to another. So yeah there's dark creatures and light creatures but it feels like a stretch to me that the normal way to read that is White humans are better than black humans.
YES Tolkein should have been aware of the implications that could be read into his work and either changed it or decided to cop the flack.
YES as an author I want to make sure I avoid writing that could be seen in any way as racist.
YES as I have said pretty clearly, I agree racism can be implicit and unintentional.
But you know, if I write about balck and white people fighting green goblins, well couldn't that be maybe interpreted as fighting the thrd race; an allegory for Asians? Is Zoolander racist because of the 'black janitor makeup' scene? Is the Lion King racist because the hyenas are obviously the post ww1 Germans rallying behind the Hitler figure of Scar? So on.
I feel like there's a point at which 'identifying racism' in media becomes. Lo5ing. I'm not saying it's not there. I'm not saying it needs to be intentional. I'm not saying it needs to be obvious. But for my money, unfortunate implications are not racism.
I'm not even sure there's a clear disagreement here. We all think that works should take care to avoid unpleasant implications, that racism should be avoided in a work, that Tolkein made some bad choices in writing that led to his works being interpreted in an unintended racist way. I just dont feel like you can dismiss a work as racist singularly because it CAN BE SEEN AS racist.
I don't think anybody was trying to dismiss it.
I mean, I love LOTR. The fact that there is implicit racism in it doesn't negate the quality of the storytelling, it's just an aspect of it that's better acknowledged than ignored.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 26, 2012, 02:21:31 AM
I think the LOTR discussion is what started to irritate me. I still don't believe it's racist because that work has a very specific meaning in my mind; the idea that any race is superior or inferior to another. So yeah there's dark creatures and light creatures but it feels like a stretch to me that the normal way to read that is White humans are better than black humans.
YES Tolkein should have been aware of the implications that could be read into his work and either changed it or decided to cop the flack.
YES as an author I want to make sure I avoid writing that could be seen in any way as racist.
YES as I have said pretty clearly, I agree racism can be implicit and unintentional.
But you know, if I write about balck and white people fighting green goblins, well couldn't that be maybe interpreted as fighting the thrd race; an allegory for Asians? Is Zoolander racist because of the 'black janitor makeup' scene? Is the Lion King racist because the hyenas are obviously the post ww1 Germans rallying behind the Hitler figure of Scar? So on.
I feel like there's a point at which 'identifying racism' in media becomes. Lo5ing. I'm not saying it's not there. I'm not saying it needs to be intentional. I'm not saying it needs to be obvious. But for my money, unfortunate implications are not racism.
I'm not even sure there's a clear disagreement here. We all think that works should take care to avoid unpleasant implications, that racism should be avoided in a work, that Tolkein made some bad choices in writing that led to his works being interpreted in an unintended racist way. I just dont feel like you can dismiss a work as racist singularly because it CAN BE SEEN AS racist.
I didn't see a single person dismissing the Lord of the Rings as racist simply because that aspect has racist implications. I did see a number of people (including myself) saying that it bothers them when people try to dismiss an entire work, or the work of significant historical figures, due to an element of racism.
And yes, I do believe that it is racism... albeit perhaps unconscious racism... to make the bad guys dark-skinned and the good guys light-skinned. That not-insignificant detail did stand out to me as a kid, and it bothered me. It wasn't incidental, and it was a repeated theme throughout the book. Elves are fair: Uruk-Hai are dark. The human good guys are light-skinned, mostly with yellow hair and blue eyes, the human bad guys are dark-skinned. Orcs are "A grim, dark band... swart, slant-eyed". Good is light/fair/blond/blue eyed, evil is brown with nappy hair. Furthermore, most disturbingly, it inextricably links good and evil with race.
It doesn't get a whole lot more directly racist than that.
When was the last time you read the books? It might be a good time to re-read them; you might be surprised at what you see with a new awareness.
That said, I also don't believe that he was promulgating any kind of racist agenda, either. I think that he was simply trying to make the bad guys ugly and the good guys appealing using imagery that was familiar and comfortable, and that was the imagery at hand, so deeply ingrained into him due to its dominance in culture that he didn't even question it.
Which is exactly why we are questioning it.
Sorry for the delay. Funny enough, I was talking to a black female friend about this same thread. She's upstairs putting Picklesson to sleep.
Anyway:
Here's the Irish dude, he's Filipino, rather than Asian, and the relevant bit starts around 2:13:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVYrOn7j7eo&feature=channel_video_title
Now mind you, you can hear his accent, even if he's not speaking English. And just before this, he's saying it's a shame that Irish is dying. And in this clip he mentions that he's Irish. He identifies as both Filipino and Irish.
Now, I can't remember which clip it was, since he has a few in Irish, but he uses the phrase "Nil me muinteoir" which is incorrect, since it means "I am in a temporary sort of sense, not a teacher" where he should have said "Ni muinteoir me" (I am not a teacher [permanently, as far as I as the speaker can tell but maybe down the line I'll change my mind. Who knows, let's drink more and I'll make a temporary decision])" But people gave him shit about it. It's an honest mistake since English doesn't make that distinction. I am not a teacher vs I am not a teacher. And he admitted that he hasn't spoken in Irish in several years. And I've seen shit comments on his videos but encouraging ones for American or Canadian women trying hard to speak Irish and it's nothing but encouraging. He's some foreign fuck butchering the language for a slip up or two, except that he's an Irish born Irish citizen. He could run for president. I, as a pure (as it gets) Irish citizen, would not be able to vote for him, since I am a Bostonian.
You know what?
I am some foreign fuck who is entitled to citizenship. Those Americans and Canadians who are botching it? Put your dicks away. They aren't fucking you.
This dude is Irish. Here's the proof. Talking about Irish politics. In English. With and Irish accent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH3xbYpQo28
Ok, there's not anything i really disagree with in the last few posts.
I'll admit I haven't read the books for years and was kind of relying on the movies.
I always imagined the dwarfs as having darkish earth-colored skin, and the orcs and goblins coming in all the colors of boogers (usually not dark unless you have a sinus infection), although I don't remember any actual descriptions about them. On the other other hand, I always thought of the people from the Earthsea as looking basically Irish (the main character was a goat or sheepherd on an island! That's basically Ireland, right?) Until recently, where I saw in an interview Ursula K. le Guin saying how stupid it was that fantasy worlds always had characters of real-world ethnicities, which was why she made the main race of Earthsea novels dark-skinned, red-haired peoples. So maybe I just tend to gloss over appearance descriptions?
Placid Dingo, if you haven't already done so you should REALLY read The Last Ringbearer.
As a fan of LOTR, I found it an enjoyable read in its own right, but it also does a great job of turning your perspective of that fictional world on its head and making you take notice of of the inherent (though almost certainly unconscious) racism in the original depiction.
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 26, 2012, 03:18:01 AM
I always imagined the dwarfs as having darkish earth-colored skin, and the orcs and goblins coming in all the colors of boogers (usually not dark unless you have a sinus infection), although I don't remember any actual descriptions about them. On the other other hand, I always thought of the people from the Earthsea as looking basically Irish (the main character was a goat or sheepherd on an island! That's basically Ireland, right?) Until recently, where I saw in an interview Ursula K. le Guin saying how stupid it was that fantasy worlds always had characters of real-world ethnicities, which was why she made the main race of Earthsea novels dark-skinned, red-haired peoples. So maybe I just tend to gloss over appearance descriptions?
Yeah, LOTR was pretty explicit in its physical descriptions of the different races, though it may be to your credit that you ignored that in favor of a more equitable distribution of skin tones among the major races.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 02:51:00 AM
Sorry for the delay. Funny enough, I was talking to a black female friend about this same thread. She's upstairs putting Picklesson to sleep.
Anyway:
Here's the Irish dude, he's Filipino, rather than Asian, and the relevant bit starts around 2:13:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVYrOn7j7eo&feature=channel_video_title
Now mind you, you can hear his accent, even if he's not speaking English. And just before this, he's saying it's a shame that Irish is dying. And in this clip he mentions that he's Irish. He identifies as both Filipino and Irish.
Now, I can't remember which clip it was, since he has a few in Irish, but he uses the phrase "Nil me muinteoir" which is incorrect, since it means "I am in a temporary sort of sense, not a teacher" where he should have said "Ni muinteoir me" (I am not a teacher [permanently, as far as I as the speaker can tell but maybe down the line I'll change my mind. Who knows, let's drink more and I'll make a temporary decision])" But people gave him shit about it. It's an honest mistake since English doesn't make that distinction. I am not a teacher vs I am not a teacher. And he admitted that he hasn't spoken in Irish in several years. And I've seen shit comments on his videos but encouraging ones for American or Canadian women trying hard to speak Irish and it's nothing but encouraging. He's some foreign fuck butchering the language for a slip up or two, except that he's an Irish born Irish citizen. He could run for president. I, as a pure (as it gets) Irish citizen, would not be able to vote for him, since I am a Bostonian.
You know what?
I am some foreign fuck who is entitled to citizenship. Those Americans and Canadians who are botching it? Put your dicks away. They aren't fucking you.
This dude is Irish. Here's the proof. Talking about Irish politics. In English. With and Irish accent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH3xbYpQo28
Very interesting, thanks for the links!
I'm listening now, and he sounds 100% Irish.
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 02:46:11 AM
That said, I also don't believe that he was promulgating any kind of racist agenda, either. I think that he was simply trying to make the bad guys ugly and the good guys appealing using imagery that was familiar and comfortable, and that was the imagery at hand, so deeply ingrained into him due to its dominance in culture that he didn't even question it.
Which is exactly why we are questioning it.
Next to the light/dark theme, there was also a lot of stuff going around about rising above ancient grudges and prejudices to work together for a common goal. The humans, elves, and dwarves basically all hated or mistrusted each to the point where they were willing to watch as the others' cities fell to Sauron one by one at the beginning of the series, and it wasn't until they started working together that things got better. Aside from Legolas' and Gimli's friendship subplot, you even have a straight-up interracial marriage between Aragorn and Arwen.
Placid Dingo, I'm glad we seem to have come to consensus. I did want to address something you brought up: racism in Little Women. You drew the comparison between Tolkein's evil hordes of brown races and Louisa May Alcott's black maid in the March household, who you stated is clearly drawn from stereotypes about black women. There are a few holes in your comparison's credibility.
First off, the maid was Irish.
Second, the only non-white character in the book is Laurie, the wealthy neighbor boy who falls in love with Jo and later marries Amy. It is not actually clear what race Laurie is; I would guess probably Indian or Middle Eastern. He is described as having black eyes, brown skin, and curly black hair.
Third, the book is set, if you remember, during the Civil War. The father of the girls is away fighting for the North.
Fourth, the book is essentially a memoir, and the maid is not based on a stereotype (not even an Irish one) but drawn from Alcott's memory of the maid she grew up with. She was, if I recall, described in the book as being young and pretty with dark curly hair and pale skin, and was always swooning over some boy or another.
Lastly, Louisa May Alcott was a vehement abolitionist who wrote a book on American racism. http://www.amazon.com/Louisa-May-Alcott-Race-Slavery/dp/1555533078/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1327549262&sr=1-1
I can honestly not think of a single worse comparison.
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 26, 2012, 03:40:08 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 02:46:11 AM
That said, I also don't believe that he was promulgating any kind of racist agenda, either. I think that he was simply trying to make the bad guys ugly and the good guys appealing using imagery that was familiar and comfortable, and that was the imagery at hand, so deeply ingrained into him due to its dominance in culture that he didn't even question it.
Which is exactly why we are questioning it.
Next to the light/dark theme, there was also a lot of stuff going around about rising above ancient grudges and prejudices to work together for a common goal. The humans, elves, and dwarves basically all hated or mistrusted each to the point where they were willing to watch as the others' cities fell to Sauron one by one at the beginning of the series, and it wasn't until they started working together that things got better. Aside from Legolas' and Gimli's friendship subplot, you even have a straight-up interracial marriage between Aragorn and Arwen.
We need a :requia: emoticon.
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 03:34:10 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 02:51:00 AM
Sorry for the delay. Funny enough, I was talking to a black female friend about this same thread. She's upstairs putting Picklesson to sleep.
Anyway:
Here's the Irish dude, he's Filipino, rather than Asian, and the relevant bit starts around 2:13:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVYrOn7j7eo&feature=channel_video_title
Now mind you, you can hear his accent, even if he's not speaking English. And just before this, he's saying it's a shame that Irish is dying. And in this clip he mentions that he's Irish. He identifies as both Filipino and Irish.
Now, I can't remember which clip it was, since he has a few in Irish, but he uses the phrase "Nil me muinteoir" which is incorrect, since it means "I am in a temporary sort of sense, not a teacher" where he should have said "Ni muinteoir me" (I am not a teacher [permanently, as far as I as the speaker can tell but maybe down the line I'll change my mind. Who knows, let's drink more and I'll make a temporary decision])" But people gave him shit about it. It's an honest mistake since English doesn't make that distinction. I am not a teacher vs I am not a teacher. And he admitted that he hasn't spoken in Irish in several years. And I've seen shit comments on his videos but encouraging ones for American or Canadian women trying hard to speak Irish and it's nothing but encouraging. He's some foreign fuck butchering the language for a slip up or two, except that he's an Irish born Irish citizen. He could run for president. I, as a pure (as it gets) Irish citizen, would not be able to vote for him, since I am a Bostonian.
You know what?
I am some foreign fuck who is entitled to citizenship. Those Americans and Canadians who are botching it? Put your dicks away. They aren't fucking you.
This dude is Irish. Here's the proof. Talking about Irish politics. In English. With and Irish accent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH3xbYpQo28
Very interesting, thanks for the links!
I'm listening now, and he sounds 100% Irish.
As a dual citizen with an Irish father, he is Irish. His command of the language is superior to my granmother's. And let's face it. If someone talks shit about ANYONE regardless of their background talking shit about them speaking Irish, they don't actually care about the language. Think about it this way. If they move to our American country they need to learn English. If they aren't Irish, they can't speak Irish.
No fuck that shit. Seriously. Our language is dying. If ANYONE wants to learn it, they have my support. I had to learn to
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 26, 2012, 03:54:11 AM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on January 26, 2012, 03:40:08 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 02:46:11 AM
That said, I also don't believe that he was promulgating any kind of racist agenda, either. I think that he was simply trying to make the bad guys ugly and the good guys appealing using imagery that was familiar and comfortable, and that was the imagery at hand, so deeply ingrained into him due to its dominance in culture that he didn't even question it.
Which is exactly why we are questioning it.
Next to the light/dark theme, there was also a lot of stuff going around about rising above ancient grudges and prejudices to work together for a common goal. The humans, elves, and dwarves basically all hated or mistrusted each to the point where they were willing to watch as the others' cities fell to Sauron one by one at the beginning of the series, and it wasn't until they started working together that things got better. Aside from Legolas' and Gimli's friendship subplot, you even have a straight-up interracial marriage between Aragorn and Arwen.
We need a :requia: emoticon.
I understand what he's saying... it's just not directly relevant.
However, the books do make a good case study in unconscious systemic racism expressed in the writing of someone who was consciously and purposefully against racism. I think that should tell us a lot; if even Tolkein was not immune, we all are susceptible if we aren't conscious of it.
I have no defence; I actually double checked it writing it and saw she was Irish.
The point I was making though is a character who owes a debt to stereotypes without itself being offensive or dismissive doesn't make a work racist. I could agree it does have the same kind of unconcious racism I guess.
ECH consider it on the list.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 04:09:55 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 03:34:10 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 02:51:00 AM
Sorry for the delay. Funny enough, I was talking to a black female friend about this same thread. She's upstairs putting Picklesson to sleep.
Anyway:
Here's the Irish dude, he's Filipino, rather than Asian, and the relevant bit starts around 2:13:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVYrOn7j7eo&feature=channel_video_title
Now mind you, you can hear his accent, even if he's not speaking English. And just before this, he's saying it's a shame that Irish is dying. And in this clip he mentions that he's Irish. He identifies as both Filipino and Irish.
Now, I can't remember which clip it was, since he has a few in Irish, but he uses the phrase "Nil me muinteoir" which is incorrect, since it means "I am in a temporary sort of sense, not a teacher" where he should have said "Ni muinteoir me" (I am not a teacher [permanently, as far as I as the speaker can tell but maybe down the line I'll change my mind. Who knows, let's drink more and I'll make a temporary decision])" But people gave him shit about it. It's an honest mistake since English doesn't make that distinction. I am not a teacher vs I am not a teacher. And he admitted that he hasn't spoken in Irish in several years. And I've seen shit comments on his videos but encouraging ones for American or Canadian women trying hard to speak Irish and it's nothing but encouraging. He's some foreign fuck butchering the language for a slip up or two, except that he's an Irish born Irish citizen. He could run for president. I, as a pure (as it gets) Irish citizen, would not be able to vote for him, since I am a Bostonian.
You know what?
I am some foreign fuck who is entitled to citizenship. Those Americans and Canadians who are botching it? Put your dicks away. They aren't fucking you.
This dude is Irish. Here's the proof. Talking about Irish politics. In English. With and Irish accent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH3xbYpQo28
Very interesting, thanks for the links!
I'm listening now, and he sounds 100% Irish.
As a dual citizen with an Irish father, he is Irish. His command of the language is superior to my granmother's. And let's face it. If someone talks shit about ANYONE regardless of their background talking shit about them speaking Irish, they don't actually care about the language. Think about it this way. If they move to our American country they need to learn English. If they aren't Irish, they can't speak Irish.
No fuck that shit. Seriously. Our language is dying. If ANYONE wants to learn it, they have my support. I had to learn to
Phone problems?
I agree completely. It's like all the dead and dying indian languages here. And if his being Irish was even a question, just listening to him talk should resolve it, because he sounds Irish.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on January 26, 2012, 04:11:04 AM
I have no defence; I actually double checked it writing it and saw she was Irish.
The point I was making though is a character who owes a debt to stereotypes without itself being offensive or dismissive doesn't make a work racist. I could agree it does have the same kind of unconcious racism I guess.
ECH consider it on the list.
Absolutely nobody in this thread has said that Lord of the Rings is a racist work.
However, I would like you to consider whether, if you were black, and had black children, you would perhaps be more willing to dismiss it as a whole due to the inclusion of racist themes?
This is a consideration for those of us with children of color; how comfortable would you be with your brown child reading a book that portrays its good characters as white and its bad characters as brown?
I get that; I agree there's issues there; I did feel like people were saying 'this book is racist' and that's where I felt a niggling disagreement.
I understand that to have black kids that would change your views on works. I do try to look frOm different points of view. I know I've had a lot of moments with watching films or series with friends of different ethnicities or religions and wondering how they take certain parts.
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 04:12:38 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 04:09:55 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 03:34:10 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 02:51:00 AM
Sorry for the delay. Funny enough, I was talking to a black female friend about this same thread. She's upstairs putting Picklesson to sleep.
Anyway:
Here's the Irish dude, he's Filipino, rather than Asian, and the relevant bit starts around 2:13:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVYrOn7j7eo&feature=channel_video_title
Now mind you, you can hear his accent, even if he's not speaking English. And just before this, he's saying it's a shame that Irish is dying. And in this clip he mentions that he's Irish. He identifies as both Filipino and Irish.
Now, I can't remember which clip it was, since he has a few in Irish, but he uses the phrase "Nil me muinteoir" which is incorrect, since it means "I am in a temporary sort of sense, not a teacher" where he should have said "Ni muinteoir me" (I am not a teacher [permanently, as far as I as the speaker can tell but maybe down the line I'll change my mind. Who knows, let's drink more and I'll make a temporary decision])" But people gave him shit about it. It's an honest mistake since English doesn't make that distinction. I am not a teacher vs I am not a teacher. And he admitted that he hasn't spoken in Irish in several years. And I've seen shit comments on his videos but encouraging ones for American or Canadian women trying hard to speak Irish and it's nothing but encouraging. He's some foreign fuck butchering the language for a slip up or two, except that he's an Irish born Irish citizen. He could run for president. I, as a pure (as it gets) Irish citizen, would not be able to vote for him, since I am a Bostonian.
You know what?
I am some foreign fuck who is entitled to citizenship. Those Americans and Canadians who are botching it? Put your dicks away. They aren't fucking you.
This dude is Irish. Here's the proof. Talking about Irish politics. In English. With and Irish accent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH3xbYpQo28
Very interesting, thanks for the links!
I'm listening now, and he sounds 100% Irish.
As a dual citizen with an Irish father, he is Irish. His command of the language is superior to my granmother's. And let's face it. If someone talks shit about ANYONE regardless of their background talking shit about them speaking Irish, they don't actually care about the language. Think about it this way. If they move to our American country they need to learn English. If they aren't Irish, they can't speak Irish.
No fuck that shit. Seriously. Our language is dying. If ANYONE wants to learn it, they have my support. I had to learn to
Phone problems?
I agree completely. It's like all the dead and dying indian languages here. And if his being Irish was even a question, just listening to him talk should resolve it, because he sounds Irish.
No, drink problems. Eh, we're in a potential eviction situation again. I'll be happy when this shit is over. But the short of it is that this guy is obviously Irish. It just goes to show this race thing is bollocks. He's Filipino but he's Irish as fuck.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 06:08:37 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 04:12:38 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 04:09:55 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 03:34:10 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 02:51:00 AM
Sorry for the delay. Funny enough, I was talking to a black female friend about this same thread. She's upstairs putting Picklesson to sleep.
Anyway:
Here's the Irish dude, he's Filipino, rather than Asian, and the relevant bit starts around 2:13:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVYrOn7j7eo&feature=channel_video_title
Now mind you, you can hear his accent, even if he's not speaking English. And just before this, he's saying it's a shame that Irish is dying. And in this clip he mentions that he's Irish. He identifies as both Filipino and Irish.
Now, I can't remember which clip it was, since he has a few in Irish, but he uses the phrase "Nil me muinteoir" which is incorrect, since it means "I am in a temporary sort of sense, not a teacher" where he should have said "Ni muinteoir me" (I am not a teacher [permanently, as far as I as the speaker can tell but maybe down the line I'll change my mind. Who knows, let's drink more and I'll make a temporary decision])" But people gave him shit about it. It's an honest mistake since English doesn't make that distinction. I am not a teacher vs I am not a teacher. And he admitted that he hasn't spoken in Irish in several years. And I've seen shit comments on his videos but encouraging ones for American or Canadian women trying hard to speak Irish and it's nothing but encouraging. He's some foreign fuck butchering the language for a slip up or two, except that he's an Irish born Irish citizen. He could run for president. I, as a pure (as it gets) Irish citizen, would not be able to vote for him, since I am a Bostonian.
You know what?
I am some foreign fuck who is entitled to citizenship. Those Americans and Canadians who are botching it? Put your dicks away. They aren't fucking you.
This dude is Irish. Here's the proof. Talking about Irish politics. In English. With and Irish accent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH3xbYpQo28
Very interesting, thanks for the links!
I'm listening now, and he sounds 100% Irish.
As a dual citizen with an Irish father, he is Irish. His command of the language is superior to my granmother's. And let's face it. If someone talks shit about ANYONE regardless of their background talking shit about them speaking Irish, they don't actually care about the language. Think about it this way. If they move to our American country they need to learn English. If they aren't Irish, they can't speak Irish.
No fuck that shit. Seriously. Our language is dying. If ANYONE wants to learn it, they have my support. I had to learn to
Phone problems?
I agree completely. It's like all the dead and dying indian languages here. And if his being Irish was even a question, just listening to him talk should resolve it, because he sounds Irish.
No, drink problems. Eh, we're in a potential eviction situation again. I'll be happy when this shit is over. But the short of it is that this guy is obviously Irish. It just goes to show this race thing is bollocks. He's Filipino but he's Irish as fuck.
And when it comes down to it, I'm an American learning this language. Saving my culture. My supposed to be language if not for a quirk of history.
Not sure where I went wrong here, but I know I'm thinking about it alot.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 06:12:50 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 06:08:37 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 04:12:38 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 04:09:55 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2012, 03:34:10 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 26, 2012, 02:51:00 AM
Sorry for the delay. Funny enough, I was talking to a black female friend about this same thread. She's upstairs putting Picklesson to sleep.
Anyway:
Here's the Irish dude, he's Filipino, rather than Asian, and the relevant bit starts around 2:13:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVYrOn7j7eo&feature=channel_video_title
Now mind you, you can hear his accent, even if he's not speaking English. And just before this, he's saying it's a shame that Irish is dying. And in this clip he mentions that he's Irish. He identifies as both Filipino and Irish.
Now, I can't remember which clip it was, since he has a few in Irish, but he uses the phrase "Nil me muinteoir" which is incorrect, since it means "I am in a temporary sort of sense, not a teacher" where he should have said "Ni muinteoir me" (I am not a teacher [permanently, as far as I as the speaker can tell but maybe down the line I'll change my mind. Who knows, let's drink more and I'll make a temporary decision])" But people gave him shit about it. It's an honest mistake since English doesn't make that distinction. I am not a teacher vs I am not a teacher. And he admitted that he hasn't spoken in Irish in several years. And I've seen shit comments on his videos but encouraging ones for American or Canadian women trying hard to speak Irish and it's nothing but encouraging. He's some foreign fuck butchering the language for a slip up or two, except that he's an Irish born Irish citizen. He could run for president. I, as a pure (as it gets) Irish citizen, would not be able to vote for him, since I am a Bostonian.
You know what?
I am some foreign fuck who is entitled to citizenship. Those Americans and Canadians who are botching it? Put your dicks away. They aren't fucking you.
This dude is Irish. Here's the proof. Talking about Irish politics. In English. With and Irish accent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH3xbYpQo28
Very interesting, thanks for the links!
I'm listening now, and he sounds 100% Irish.
As a dual citizen with an Irish father, he is Irish. His command of the language is superior to my granmother's. And let's face it. If someone talks shit about ANYONE regardless of their background talking shit about them speaking Irish, they don't actually care about the language. Think about it this way. If they move to our American country they need to learn English. If they aren't Irish, they can't speak Irish.
No fuck that shit. Seriously. Our language is dying. If ANYONE wants to learn it, they have my support. I had to learn to
Phone problems?
I agree completely. It's like all the dead and dying indian languages here. And if his being Irish was even a question, just listening to him talk should resolve it, because he sounds Irish.
No, drink problems. Eh, we're in a potential eviction situation again. I'll be happy when this shit is over. But the short of it is that this guy is obviously Irish. It just goes to show this race thing is bollocks. He's Filipino but he's Irish as fuck.
And when it comes down to it, I'm an American learning this language. Saving my culture. My supposed to be language if not for a quirk of history.
My dad is Irish, and speaks virtually none. All I know how to say is kiss my arse, close the door please and turn out the light please. I'd love to learn, but the pronunciation of the written Irish leaves me baffled.
It's not that hard:
dún-mharú
is pronounced:
dune varoo
It looks weird as fuck, but the spelling rules are more consistent then they are in English.
Also, how the hell did I manage to become this hung over on so little liquor?
Doesn't necessarily belong here, but this letter from a former slave to his former master is politely, scathingly delightful: http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/01/to-my-old-master.html
Quote from: Nigel on February 01, 2012, 07:30:19 PM
Doesn't necessarily belong here, but this letter from a former slave to his former master is politely, scathingly delightful: http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/01/to-my-old-master.html
Speaking as an avid poison-pen writer, I am humbled by the awesomeness. :lulz:
That is fucking stellar.
100% PURE O :mittens: NAGE.
THAT is how you do it. :lulz: :golfclap: Beautiful!
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2012, 07:43:43 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 01, 2012, 07:30:19 PM
Doesn't necessarily belong here, but this letter from a former slave to his former master is politely, scathingly delightful: http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/01/to-my-old-master.html
Speaking as an avid poison-pen writer, I am humbled by the awesomeness. :lulz:
It's truly a work of art. I could feel the burning from 147 years away.
Another form of racism: White people instinctively feel that Black people are cooler than they are. There may be something to this, speaking objectively, because when you put the screws to people, when you CLAMP DOWN on them, weirdness - which is almost always cool in some way or another - oozes out the sides.
That's how we got R&B, Blues, Rock N Roll, dance (Soul Train could never have been masterminded by a straight White male. It was too fucking FABULOUS.), nerdcore, really good comedy, Liberace, Hank Sr, Gloria Gaynor, and Johnny Cash.
Sometimes, the people in question just snap in half, which is never a pretty sight. But when they don't, you get amazing things. Since most of the obvious squeezing in this country is exerted on minorities, particularly Black people, the perception - right or wrong - is that they're cooler.
I don't think it's necessarily that black people are automatically cool, more that white people are usually terribly lame.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 07, 2012, 07:29:46 PM
Another form of racism: White people instinctively feel that Black people are cooler than they are. There may be something to this, speaking objectively, because when you put the screws to people, when you CLAMP DOWN on them, weirdness - which is almost always cool in some way or another - oozes out the sides.
That's how we got R&B, Blues, Rock N Roll, dance (Soul Train could never have been masterminded by a straight White male. It was too fucking FABULOUS.), nerdcore, really good comedy, Liberace, Hank Sr, Gloria Gaynor, and Johnny Cash.
Sometimes, the people in question just snap in half, which is never a pretty sight. But when they don't, you get amazing things. Since most of the obvious squeezing in this country is exerted on minorities, particularly Black people, the perception - right or wrong - is that they're cooler.
I think this is a very valid observation, and also applicable for gays and other similarly marginalized groups... as you noted.
I'm going to posit that the myth of the BBC falls under that category as well.
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 07:01:57 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 07, 2012, 07:29:46 PM
Another form of racism: White people instinctively feel that Black people are cooler than they are. There may be something to this, speaking objectively, because when you put the screws to people, when you CLAMP DOWN on them, weirdness - which is almost always cool in some way or another - oozes out the sides.
That's how we got R&B, Blues, Rock N Roll, dance (Soul Train could never have been masterminded by a straight White male. It was too fucking FABULOUS.), nerdcore, really good comedy, Liberace, Hank Sr, Gloria Gaynor, and Johnny Cash.
Sometimes, the people in question just snap in half, which is never a pretty sight. But when they don't, you get amazing things. Since most of the obvious squeezing in this country is exerted on minorities, particularly Black people, the perception - right or wrong - is that they're cooler.
I think this is a very valid observation, and also applicable for gays and other similarly marginalized groups... as you noted.
I was going to make this a full out rant, but it occurred to me the other night that the "clamping down" part of the process involves a hell of a lot of personal misery on the part of the group in question, and that all of this misery is
personal and very, very real to the people it happens to.
And suddenly I didn't feel like a sociological genius, anymore.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on February 08, 2012, 01:21:19 PM
I'm going to posit that the myth of the BBC falls under that category as well.
so, it's my understanding that this is, in fact, a myth. (based on research studies that i've heard about)
that gets me wondering why it is born out in porn, then. i mean there's
some porn with white guys that have massive cocks, but not a ton. (big, to be sure, but not massive) there is, however, a
bunch of BBC porn.
is this because the market doesn't want to see white guys that are extremely endowed? does it make white porn watchers feel lesser if it's another white guy so well hung, but if it's a black guy they can shrug it off because, "well, he's one of them"?
that's all i could figure.
Quote from: Iptuous on February 08, 2012, 02:50:25 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on February 08, 2012, 01:21:19 PM
I'm going to posit that the myth of the BBC falls under that category as well.
so, it's my understanding that this is, in fact, a myth. (based on research studies that i've heard about)
that gets me wondering why it is born out in porn, then. i mean there's some porn with white guys that have massive cocks, but not a ton. (big, to be sure, but not massive) there is, however, a bunch of BBC porn.
is this because the market doesn't want to see white guys that are extremely endowed? does it make white porn watchers feel lesser if it's another white guy so well hung, but if it's a black guy they can shrug it off because, "well, he's one of them"?
that's all i could figure.
Holy shit, right up until I read your reply I was trying to think up myths involving the British Broadcasting Corporation. It was confusing.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 08, 2012, 01:48:36 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 07:01:57 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 07, 2012, 07:29:46 PM
Another form of racism: White people instinctively feel that Black people are cooler than they are. There may be something to this, speaking objectively, because when you put the screws to people, when you CLAMP DOWN on them, weirdness - which is almost always cool in some way or another - oozes out the sides.
That's how we got R&B, Blues, Rock N Roll, dance (Soul Train could never have been masterminded by a straight White male. It was too fucking FABULOUS.), nerdcore, really good comedy, Liberace, Hank Sr, Gloria Gaynor, and Johnny Cash.
Sometimes, the people in question just snap in half, which is never a pretty sight. But when they don't, you get amazing things. Since most of the obvious squeezing in this country is exerted on minorities, particularly Black people, the perception - right or wrong - is that they're cooler.
I think this is a very valid observation, and also applicable for gays and other similarly marginalized groups... as you noted.
I was going to make this a full out rant, but it occurred to me the other night that the "clamping down" part of the process involves a hell of a lot of personal misery on the part of the group in question, and that all of this misery is personal and very, very real to the people it happens to.
And suddenly I didn't feel like a sociological genius, anymore.
It's still a valid observation... misery does generate some of the most interesting and compelling art and cultural artifacts.
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 03:49:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 08, 2012, 01:48:36 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 07:01:57 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 07, 2012, 07:29:46 PM
Another form of racism: White people instinctively feel that Black people are cooler than they are. There may be something to this, speaking objectively, because when you put the screws to people, when you CLAMP DOWN on them, weirdness - which is almost always cool in some way or another - oozes out the sides.
That's how we got R&B, Blues, Rock N Roll, dance (Soul Train could never have been masterminded by a straight White male. It was too fucking FABULOUS.), nerdcore, really good comedy, Liberace, Hank Sr, Gloria Gaynor, and Johnny Cash.
Sometimes, the people in question just snap in half, which is never a pretty sight. But when they don't, you get amazing things. Since most of the obvious squeezing in this country is exerted on minorities, particularly Black people, the perception - right or wrong - is that they're cooler.
I think this is a very valid observation, and also applicable for gays and other similarly marginalized groups... as you noted.
I was going to make this a full out rant, but it occurred to me the other night that the "clamping down" part of the process involves a hell of a lot of personal misery on the part of the group in question, and that all of this misery is personal and very, very real to the people it happens to.
And suddenly I didn't feel like a sociological genius, anymore.
It's still a valid observation... misery does generate some of the most interesting and compelling art and cultural artifacts.
I'm developing the opinion that it is the only really reliable source of said culture.
Everyone I know that produces great art, for example, is a big bundle of damaged wiring. In fact, everyone I know that's interesting at all is a collection of PTSD and/or persecution, real or imagined.
I'd like to add that the statement reversed is not true. Not everyone I know that has issues is interesting.
if we run with the assumption that suffering is requisite for (at least some) great art:
on the individual level, this does not excuse a person from putting the clamps on anybody, obviously.
but in the aggregate, to what extent might the production of great art exonerate the cruelty of mankind? certainly not fully, but...
if we could 'just all get along' someday and also provide for everyone such that there was no real suffering, and our creative spigot started spewing nothing but crappy pop art, how would the loss compare to the gain?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 08, 2012, 05:32:31 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 03:49:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 08, 2012, 01:48:36 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 07:01:57 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 07, 2012, 07:29:46 PM
Another form of racism: White people instinctively feel that Black people are cooler than they are. There may be something to this, speaking objectively, because when you put the screws to people, when you CLAMP DOWN on them, weirdness - which is almost always cool in some way or another - oozes out the sides.
That's how we got R&B, Blues, Rock N Roll, dance (Soul Train could never have been masterminded by a straight White male. It was too fucking FABULOUS.), nerdcore, really good comedy, Liberace, Hank Sr, Gloria Gaynor, and Johnny Cash.
Sometimes, the people in question just snap in half, which is never a pretty sight. But when they don't, you get amazing things. Since most of the obvious squeezing in this country is exerted on minorities, particularly Black people, the perception - right or wrong - is that they're cooler.
I think this is a very valid observation, and also applicable for gays and other similarly marginalized groups... as you noted.
I was going to make this a full out rant, but it occurred to me the other night that the "clamping down" part of the process involves a hell of a lot of personal misery on the part of the group in question, and that all of this misery is personal and very, very real to the people it happens to.
And suddenly I didn't feel like a sociological genius, anymore.
It's still a valid observation... misery does generate some of the most interesting and compelling art and cultural artifacts.
I'm developing the opinion that it is the only really reliable source of said culture.
Everyone I know that produces great art, for example, is a big bundle of damaged wiring. In fact, everyone I know that's interesting at all is a collection of PTSD and/or persecution, real or imagined.
Which leads me to conclude:
1) I have some bad wiring I haven't uncovered yet.
2) I'm a nerurological McGuyver.
3) I ain't no artist.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 08, 2012, 07:10:47 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 08, 2012, 05:32:31 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 03:49:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 08, 2012, 01:48:36 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 07:01:57 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 07, 2012, 07:29:46 PM
Another form of racism: White people instinctively feel that Black people are cooler than they are. There may be something to this, speaking objectively, because when you put the screws to people, when you CLAMP DOWN on them, weirdness - which is almost always cool in some way or another - oozes out the sides.
That's how we got R&B, Blues, Rock N Roll, dance (Soul Train could never have been masterminded by a straight White male. It was too fucking FABULOUS.), nerdcore, really good comedy, Liberace, Hank Sr, Gloria Gaynor, and Johnny Cash.
Sometimes, the people in question just snap in half, which is never a pretty sight. But when they don't, you get amazing things. Since most of the obvious squeezing in this country is exerted on minorities, particularly Black people, the perception - right or wrong - is that they're cooler.
I think this is a very valid observation, and also applicable for gays and other similarly marginalized groups... as you noted.
I was going to make this a full out rant, but it occurred to me the other night that the "clamping down" part of the process involves a hell of a lot of personal misery on the part of the group in question, and that all of this misery is personal and very, very real to the people it happens to.
And suddenly I didn't feel like a sociological genius, anymore.
It's still a valid observation... misery does generate some of the most interesting and compelling art and cultural artifacts.
I'm developing the opinion that it is the only really reliable source of said culture.
Everyone I know that produces great art, for example, is a big bundle of damaged wiring. In fact, everyone I know that's interesting at all is a collection of PTSD and/or persecution, real or imagined.
Which leads me to conclude:
1) I have some bad wiring I haven't uncovered yet.
2) I'm a nerurological McGuyver.
3) I ain't no artist.
1 & 2.
You aren't
normal, LMNO. You're a Big Gay Cowboy. Normal people shit themselves in church because of you and the few weirdos who are like you. You're a reprehensible freak, and I admire that.
Quote from: Iptuous on February 08, 2012, 06:21:55 PM
if we run with the assumption that suffering is requisite for (at least some) great art:
on the individual level, this does not excuse a person from putting the clamps on anybody, obviously.
but in the aggregate, to what extent might the production of great art exonerate the cruelty of mankind? certainly not fully, but...
if we could 'just all get along' someday and also provide for everyone such that there was no real suffering, and our creative spigot started spewing nothing but crappy pop art, how would the loss compare to the gain?
Guernica didn't make up for all the people who died in the Spanish civil war, and I'm not saying it was a good trade, but the world would be poorer without it...Mostly because humans will NEVER remove suffering, because we are wired for punishment. And if we HAVE to live like that, we may as well get Roy Orbison instead of Taylor Swift, right?
I don't think you necessarily have to be miserable to produce great art (and I know that's not what you were saying, I'm just musing, here) but I really haven't known any artists who weren't pretty damn squeezed by SOMETHING. Maybe even just themselves. Not necessarily unhappy, but definitely... something. And incredibly hard on themselves, too.
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 08:29:01 PM
I don't think you necessarily have to be miserable to produce great art (and I know that's not what you were saying, I'm just musing, here) but I really haven't known any artists who weren't pretty damn squeezed by SOMETHING. Maybe even just themselves. Not necessarily unhappy, but definitely... something. And incredibly hard on themselves, too.
Misery isn't necessary, pressure is.
Now that is something I can get behind.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 08, 2012, 08:29:34 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 08:29:01 PM
I don't think you necessarily have to be miserable to produce great art (and I know that's not what you were saying, I'm just musing, here) but I really haven't known any artists who weren't pretty damn squeezed by SOMETHING. Maybe even just themselves. Not necessarily unhappy, but definitely... something. And incredibly hard on themselves, too.
Misery isn't necessary, pressure is.
BAM! I think you nailed it.
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 08:46:03 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 08, 2012, 08:29:34 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 08, 2012, 08:29:01 PM
I don't think you necessarily have to be miserable to produce great art (and I know that's not what you were saying, I'm just musing, here) but I really haven't known any artists who weren't pretty damn squeezed by SOMETHING. Maybe even just themselves. Not necessarily unhappy, but definitely... something. And incredibly hard on themselves, too.
Misery isn't necessary, pressure is.
BAM! I think you nailed it.
When I moved to The Big City from that Godawful mining town, I figured I'd take 6 months off and write.
I couldn't produce a fucking thing. No pressure, no stress, makes Roger a Lazy Boy. Or, more to the point, Roger Has Nothing To Write About.
I think you have to have the right amount of pressure too. If you have too much pressure, things get just as stuck if you have no pressure. No pressure= trickle. Too much pressure= blockage.
The other thing too, is that everyone suffers at some point. I think the difference between artists and non-artists is the way they channel it. And let's all face it, a happy love song (which is all too common) is not as satisfying to listen to as a sad love song. Or an angry love song. If you're mellow and listening to mellow music, it's kinda like, "Ok, I'm relaxed and this is sonic wallpaper" All the good music makes you go either "fuck yeah!" or "fuck it!" or at least along the happy lines "let's fuck!"
Twid,
Just realized that "fuck" is central to good art and music.
Evidence:
Happy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsW8rXPcnM0
Sad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_2pGaPPOHI&ob=av2n
Angry (and sad [and fake live]): WARNING- 15 minutes long
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW-JIFK8nOs
^skip to 8 minute mark for gist.
and /off topic
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
A friend that I mentioned earlier in this thread ("You're the colored people because you change colors") and you would have some things in common. He despised the stereotype. He'd rail against it. And he was to a degree shunned for it, within his own community. He was the black kid in the ghetto who played D&D and listened to Heavy Metal and Doom Metal. My first Type O Negative concert was with him. Of course I was going to take him, he was my best friend at the time and he fucking loved Type O. When I got my license and was able to drive him home from work, he insisted on cranking the Metal up just to let everyone know that HE was home (we were also coworkers for a time-got him the job). And he'd get shit for it. "You're a white guy trapped in a black man's body." Because he liked what he liked. I remember him saying once, "Just because I'm black and I choose to speak proper English doesn't mean I'm any less black. It just means I just don't want to be fucking stupid."
In retrospect, he made a lot of references to being black, and I never really thought of it other than, ok, that's just Vinny emphasizing a point. (Once in Salem, "I'm a Witch AND a Negro! You don't see that every day!" -Vinny when we Bostonians were heckling tour guides for shits and giggles). But then again, after this thread... "I'm a Witch AND an Irishman! You see that..... frequently in these parts....."
I dunno, I'm still trying to sort this all out. I'm also trying to figure out if people I know well who aren't white I recognize as just people, or if I see them as non-white. And why should familiarity matter? So what if I don't see that Vinny's black? What about that guy on the bus? And now I'm observing it, and are my observations contaminated because I know what I'm doing?
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 09, 2012, 06:09:11 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
A friend that I mentioned earlier in this thread ("You're the colored people because you change colors") and you would have some things in common. He despised the stereotype. He'd rail against it. And he was to a degree shunned for it, within his own community. He was the black kid in the ghetto who played D&D and listened to Heavy Metal and Doom Metal. My first Type O Negative concert was with him. Of course I was going to take him, he was my best friend at the time and he fucking loved Type O. When I got my license and was able to drive him home from work, he insisted on cranking the Metal up just to let everyone know that HE was home (we were also coworkers for a time-got him the job). And he'd get shit for it. "You're a white guy trapped in a black man's body." Because he liked what he liked. I remember him saying once, "Just because I'm black and I choose to speak proper English doesn't mean I'm any less black. It just means I just don't want to be fucking stupid."
In retrospect, he made a lot of references to being black, and I never really thought of it other than, ok, that's just Vinny emphasizing a point. (Once in Salem, "I'm a Witch AND a Negro! You don't see that every day!" -Vinny when we Bostonians were heckling tour guides for shits and giggles). But then again, after this thread... "I'm a Witch AND an Irishman! You see that..... frequently in these parts....."
I dunno, I'm still trying to sort this all out. I'm also trying to figure out if people I know well who aren't white I recognize as just people, or if I see them as non-white. And why should familiarity matter? So what if I don't see that Vinny's black? What about that guy on the bus? And now I'm observing it, and are my observations contaminated because I know what I'm doing?
This guy kind of sounds needlessly confrontational. I feel more that internalization of idiotic stereotypes created by an industry that cares nothing for these people is destroying black people as a whole. I care less that I have to deal with it personally, because I can. It's others I'm worried about.
I used to make it a habit to just say really racist things about white people when I was around a bunch of them to see whether anyone would ever call me a racist. Maybe one person ever did in the years I spent doing it. The hypocrisy is astounding in a culture such as this.
As for if I really talked about my race all the time? I'm not really sure. Aside from those times I was being racist on purpose I wouldn't really think much of it.
This whole race perception issue is really whether we can bring ourselves to overcome instinctual racism and in-group favoring. I would say that perhaps your observation isn't contaminated. The fact that you are at least trying to correct it is sufficient at the moment.
Amusingly relevant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzprLDmdRlc
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 09, 2012, 06:09:11 AM
A friend that I mentioned earlier in this thread ("You're the colored people because you change colors") and you would have some things in common. He despised the stereotype. He'd rail against it. And he was to a degree shunned for it, within his own community. He was the black kid in the ghetto who played D&D and listened to Heavy Metal and Doom Metal. My first Type O Negative concert was with him. Of course I was going to take him, he was my best friend at the time and he fucking loved Type O. When I got my license and was able to drive him home from work, he insisted on cranking the Metal up just to let everyone know that HE was home (we were also coworkers for a time-got him the job). And he'd get shit for it. "You're a white guy trapped in a black man's body." Because he liked what he liked. I remember him saying once, "Just because I'm black and I choose to speak proper English doesn't mean I'm any less black. It just means I just don't want to be fucking stupid."
That's too bad he gets that kind of flak. I know the metal scene is, by and large, a fairly white scene but, and I know you know this, there have been some pretty influential black musicians in the scene as well. Vernon Reid and Rocky George are a couple of amazing black metal guitarists that come to mind, not to mention the huge influence Jimi Hendrix had on metal.
I wager it is probably even more difficult for a black person who is into country music. I mean, not only is it perceived as "white people" music, but it has that extra baggage associated with it because of its roots in Southern US. Although, there have also been some neo-nazi/white power sects within the metal community as well.
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
All of the things you speak of here are issues that completely chap my hide. I really loathe the widespread and completely false idea that being educated is a "white" quality.
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black,
How could you be, say, 78% Black?
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:07:38 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
All of the things you speak of here are issues that completely chap my hide. I really loathe the widespread and completely false idea that being educated is a "white" quality.
...I'm not too keen on the thought that anything outside of "Standard English" is indicative of lack of intellect, either.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:11:16 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black,
How could you be, say, 78% Black?
YOU ASKED FOR IT!
He could be 78.125% if he had three black grandparents and one 1/8 black grandparent.
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:11:16 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black,
How could you be, say, 78% Black?
YOU ASKED FOR IT!
He could be 78.125% if he had three black grandparents and one 1/8 black grandparent.
How many generations would that take? I mean, to get to that "recipe"?
Quote from: NoLeDeMiel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:09 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:07:38 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
All of the things you speak of here are issues that completely chap my hide. I really loathe the widespread and completely false idea that being educated is a "white" quality.
...I'm not too keen on the thought that anything outside of "Standard English" is indicative of lack of intellect, either.
Yep, that's a pretty damn insular and provincial assumption.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:22:38 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:11:16 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black,
How could you be, say, 78% Black?
YOU ASKED FOR IT!
He could be 78.125% if he had three black grandparents and one 1/8 black grandparent.
How many generations would that take? I mean, to get to that "recipe"?
Six. It actually doesn't take long at all... something the BIA was keeping in mind when it held that children can only count the blood quantum of ONE of their tribes toward their tribal membership qualifications. In just a few generations of tribal intermarriage (common before colonization), there were (and are) full-blood indians who lacked enough of a single tribe blood quantum to be legally indian by BIA standards. Genocide through attrition.
I'm an eighth black, or 12.5%; my great-grandmother was straight up black, and my grandchildren will be only 3.125% black.
Basically, if his grandma was an octoroon or high-yellow, or just referred to as a "yellow", and she married a black man and had a daughter who married a black man, the resulting child would be 78.125% black.
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:27:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:22:38 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:11:16 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black,
How could you be, say, 78% Black?
YOU ASKED FOR IT!
He could be 78.125% if he had three black grandparents and one 1/8 black grandparent.
How many generations would that take? I mean, to get to that "recipe"?
Six. It actually doesn't take long at all... something the BIA was keeping in mind when it held that children can only count the blood quantum of ONE of their tribes toward their tribal membership qualifications. In just a few generations of tribal intermarriage (common before colonization), there were (and are) full-blood indians who lacked enough of a single tribe blood quantum to be legally indian by BIA standards. Genocide through attrition.
I'm an eighth black, or 12.5%; my great-grandmother was straight up black, and my grandchildren will be only 3.125% black.
Basically, if his grandma was an octoroon or high-yellow, or just referred to as a "yellow", and she married a black man and had a daughter who married a black man, the resulting child would be 78.125% black.
My sarcasm...Slain by an inconvenient fact. :sad:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:30:48 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:27:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:22:38 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:11:16 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black,
How could you be, say, 78% Black?
YOU ASKED FOR IT!
He could be 78.125% if he had three black grandparents and one 1/8 black grandparent.
How many generations would that take? I mean, to get to that "recipe"?
Six. It actually doesn't take long at all... something the BIA was keeping in mind when it held that children can only count the blood quantum of ONE of their tribes toward their tribal membership qualifications. In just a few generations of tribal intermarriage (common before colonization), there were (and are) full-blood indians who lacked enough of a single tribe blood quantum to be legally indian by BIA standards. Genocide through attrition.
I'm an eighth black, or 12.5%; my great-grandmother was straight up black, and my grandchildren will be only 3.125% black.
Basically, if his grandma was an octoroon or high-yellow, or just referred to as a "yellow", and she married a black man and had a daughter who married a black man, the resulting child would be 78.125% black.
My sarcasm...Slain by an inconvenient fact. :sad:
I saw it as a
challenge.
Also as a way to procrastinate doing homework while I thought it through.
Black people cannot use chopsticks. Any time you see a black person using chopsticks, you must congratulate them on how you don't really see them as black and for transcending their hetitage.
Also, Asian people love golf.
Quote from: NoLeDeMiel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:09 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:07:38 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
All of the things you speak of here are issues that completely chap my hide. I really loathe the widespread and completely false idea that being educated is a "white" quality.
...I'm not too keen on the thought that anything outside of "Standard English" is indicative of lack of intellect, either.
Was it the part where I mentioned grammar? I didn't say anyone was stupid because they didn't use "standard english". They said I was white because I did use "standard English", which is entirely different.
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 10, 2012, 02:15:42 AM
Quote from: NoLeDeMiel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:09 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:07:38 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
All of the things you speak of here are issues that completely chap my hide. I really loathe the widespread and completely false idea that being educated is a "white" quality.
...I'm not too keen on the thought that anything outside of "Standard English" is indicative of lack of intellect, either.
Was it the part where I mentioned grammar? I didn't say anyone was stupid because they didn't use "standard english". They said I was white because I did use "standard English", which is entirely different.
Guilty much? She isn't saying let alone implying you are or have been, but is commenting on the fact that some people equate using non-standard English, such as Ebonics, is an indicator of low intelligence and education.
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 10, 2012, 02:15:42 AM
Quote from: NoLeDeMiel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:09 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:07:38 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
All of the things you speak of here are issues that completely chap my hide. I really loathe the widespread and completely false idea that being educated is a "white" quality.
...I'm not too keen on the thought that anything outside of "Standard English" is indicative of lack of intellect, either.
Was it the part where I mentioned grammar? I didn't say anyone was stupid because they didn't use "standard english". They said I was white because I did use "standard English", which is entirely different.
:? I was agreeing with your observations. It's a double whammy; when people say that we are "essentially white" because we speak with the mannerisms and grammar of the academically trained, they are both asserting that education is a "white" trait, and implying that people who aren't "white" are uneducated/stupid.
The worst thing about that is that it's self-fulfilling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat).
Quote from: Xooxe on February 10, 2012, 06:17:40 PM
The worst thing about that is that it's self-fulfilling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat).
Yep. Anxiety reduces performance.
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:11:16 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black,
How could you be, say, 78% Black?
YOU ASKED FOR IT!
He could be 78.125% if he had three black grandparents and one 1/8 black grandparent.
That's assuming that the three black parents were 100% black without any margin of error or impurities. Taking into account standard deviation he could be less black then he thinks he is.
Can we get a bell curve up in this place, maybe a flowchart? Mods?
Quote from: Faust on February 11, 2012, 07:26:53 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 10, 2012, 12:11:16 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black,
How could you be, say, 78% Black?
YOU ASKED FOR IT!
He could be 78.125% if he had three black grandparents and one 1/8 black grandparent.
That's assuming that the three black parents were 100% black without any margin of error or impurities. Taking into account standard deviation he could be less black then he thinks he is.
Can we get a bell curve up in this place, maybe a flowchart? Mods?
Well, it was a theoretical question; real-world application would really have to assume some deviation.
Sorry I was just joking, I find any % ethnicity ridiculous, it just seems like a a silly thing to quantify or attach a metric to.
I was just told on FB to "stop worrying about Gay Marriage, and start helping people with trans-rights", by some spag I used to know in the CotSG.
I asked "shouldn't I support both?"
She went berserk, short answer no, her cause is far more important than Gay Marriage, etc, etc, yada, yada, yada.
This is why bigotry still thrives. Because damn near everyone who thinks it ought to be fought is too busy pimping their own agenda to form a coalition of any real numbers.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 11, 2012, 05:46:13 PM
I was just told on FB to "stop worrying about Gay Marriage, and start helping people with trans-rights", by some spag I used to know in the CotSG.
I asked "shouldn't I support both?"
She went berserk, short answer no, her cause is far more important than Gay Marriage, etc, etc, yada, yada, yada.
This is why bigotry still thrives. Because damn near everyone who thinks it ought to be fought is too busy pimping their own agenda to form a coalition of any real numbers.
That fits perfectly with my last entry in Common Walls.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 11, 2012, 05:46:13 PM
I was just told on FB to "stop worrying about Gay Marriage, and start helping people with trans-rights", by some spag I used to know in the CotSG.
I asked "shouldn't I support both?"
She went berserk, short answer no, her cause is far more important than Gay Marriage, etc, etc, yada, yada, yada.
This is why bigotry still thrives. Because damn near everyone who thinks it ought to be fought is too busy pimping their own agenda to form a coalition of any real numbers.
There's a lot of this. I've yet encounter a transperson who doesn't go hysterical at the drop of a hat.
Quote from: Faust on February 11, 2012, 05:36:46 PM
Sorry I was just joking, I find any % ethnicity ridiculous, it just seems like a a silly thing to quantify or attach a metric to.
Silly, or genocidal, depending on the reasons for attaching a metric to it. Unfortunately, when governments do it it's more likely to be genocidal than silly.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 11, 2012, 05:46:13 PM
I was just told on FB to "stop worrying about Gay Marriage, and start helping people with trans-rights", by some spag I used to know in the CotSG.
I asked "shouldn't I support both?"
She went berserk, short answer no, her cause is far more important than Gay Marriage, etc, etc, yada, yada, yada.
This is why bigotry still thrives. Because damn near everyone who thinks it ought to be fought is too busy pimping their own agenda to form a coalition of any real numbers.
Luckily, I usually alienate the shit out of people like that right away with my views on transgenderism, and then I don't have to talk to them.
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 04:07:59 PM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 10, 2012, 02:15:42 AM
Quote from: NoLeDeMiel on February 10, 2012, 12:21:09 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 10, 2012, 12:07:38 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 09, 2012, 05:29:28 AM
Ethnically I'm at least 75% black, the other bit being cuban. I speak in such a manner that I get frequently called white. This was a major problem for me growing up. After elementary school everyone started dividing up into their little groups. I would hang out with people who were 'geeks' as well as old friends from elementary. As we grew up groups became more stratified. Race became a major part of the identities of many of my peers. I really didn't get it and I guess I still don't. Throughout high school and into my college years people would call me 'white' and an 'oreo'. When I questioned the justification for these claims no one had any substantial warrants. No one would admit what an openly racist and idiotic thing that was to say. One of the other black kids I hung around with when I was a freshman called me white once. I was at the top of the class and he was hovering around a C+. He said I was white because I talked like 'them' and acted like 'them'. It was obvious he was under the assumption that if one does not meet conventional stereotypes about black culture and black people, then that person cannot be called 'authentically black', whatever the hell that means. Many white persons I have known have said the same things. Of course I'm not black because I like progressive rock. I'm not black because I'm on the chess team. I'm not black because I try to use grammar all the time. The last time this happened I barely held my self back from choking this person while yelling at him about race relations. I have much more to say on this topic but I'll leave it at this: this kind of internalization of anti-intellectualism and negative racial stereotypes ,prevalent in black culture today especially, is destructive to us all.
______________________
When I treat people I always try to treat them according to their actions, rather than those things they have no control over. You can't help that you are a pale dullard( white person) and it would be unfair for me to yell at you for the crappiness of your DNA.
______________________
Racial profiling really sucks. Mostly because it leads us to internalize narratives about different races. A prominent example is the racial profiling of those with an ethnic background in the middle-east in America. I've heard people say,"Oh I'm not racist but, If its only one race of people doing that thing then its only fair to only harass them. Anyone who bothered to think would see the inherent stupidity of such an opinion but it is clear that if one really wanted to arbitrarily restrict the freedoms of certain people based on the color of their skin, the first group on the list would be White people.
______________________
Lastly is racial realism which really chaps my hide. People who say, "Oh I'm not being racist, Its just that some races are genetically better than others. We should be separated because of that". This type of statement is blantantly false, as anyone who has studied genetics will tell you, race is culture based, not based on genetics, but also ignorant of the way the world actually functions.
All of the things you speak of here are issues that completely chap my hide. I really loathe the widespread and completely false idea that being educated is a "white" quality.
...I'm not too keen on the thought that anything outside of "Standard English" is indicative of lack of intellect, either.
Was it the part where I mentioned grammar? I didn't say anyone was stupid because they didn't use "standard english". They said I was white because I did use "standard English", which is entirely different.
:? I was agreeing with your observations. It's a double whammy; when people say that we are "essentially white" because we speak with the mannerisms and grammar of the academically trained, they are both asserting that education is a "white" trait, and implying that people who aren't "white" are uneducated/stupid.
Err sorry.
The CotSG person, whom I have known online since 1998, has unfriended me because I insisted that both Gay & Trans rights should both be equally advanced.
Obviously, her being able to throw a self-righteous shit over the issue is more important than any actual progress. This is of course feeding directly into the hands of people who oppose LGBT rights, as it both splits the effort, and makes LGBT people look like a pack of attention whores...IE, it's just handing the bastards ammunition.
Quote from: Cain on February 10, 2012, 01:04:27 AM
Black people cannot use chopsticks. Any time you see a black person using chopsticks, you must congratulate them on how you don't really see them as black and for transcending their hetitage.
Also, Asian people love golf.
What?! :eek:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 12, 2012, 04:53:44 AM
The CotSG person, whom I have known online since 1998, has unfriended me because I insisted that both Gay & Trans rights should both be equally advanced.
Obviously, her being able to throw a self-righteous shit over the issue is more important than any actual progress. This is of course feeding directly into the hands of people who oppose LGBT rights, as it both splits the effort, and makes LGBT people look like a pack of attention whores...IE, it's just handing the bastards ammunition.
Good riddance.
Why waste your time on someone who is openly against equal rights?
QUESTION: WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS?
http://ghettohikes.tumblr.com/
I am going to refrain from posting my own impressions because I want to hear what you guys think about it first.
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 04:28:21 PM
QUESTION: WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS?
http://ghettohikes.tumblr.com/
I am going to refrain from posting my own impressions because I want to hear what you guys think about it first.
My first impression is that this Mr. Cody gets to bring some extremely fun and witty kids on hikes.
My gut on the "is it racist" question is no, because the humor comes from people being out of their element and not their race. Also this is perfect in ways I can't articulate:
QuoteRocks, sticks, rivers needa come out here with my fuckin art supplies, paint alllllll this beautiful shit.
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 04:28:21 PM
QUESTION: WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS?
http://ghettohikes.tumblr.com/
I am going to refrain from posting my own impressions because I want to hear what you guys think about it first.
I don't see any implication on race anywhere, is this somehow related to the topic? I don't like the colloquial dialect of the students but only because I want to take a big red marker to it.
Quote from: Faust on February 12, 2012, 04:43:04 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 04:28:21 PM
QUESTION: WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS?
http://ghettohikes.tumblr.com/
I am going to refrain from posting my own impressions because I want to hear what you guys think about it first.
I don't see any implication on race anywhere, is this somehow related to the topic? I don't like the colloquial dialect of the students but only because I want to take a big red marker to it.
Any racial implications are American-specific so the connection is probably pretty inscrutable for all the non-Americans here.
Someone posted this on my board and it got some really interesting reactions and started a bit of a debate, so I was just curious to see what the brain trust here has to say about it.
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 05:36:44 PM
Quote from: Faust on February 12, 2012, 04:43:04 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 04:28:21 PM
QUESTION: WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS?
http://ghettohikes.tumblr.com/
I am going to refrain from posting my own impressions because I want to hear what you guys think about it first.
I don't see any implication on race anywhere, is this somehow related to the topic? I don't like the colloquial dialect of the students but only because I want to take a big red marker to it.
Any racial implications are American-specific so the connection is probably pretty inscrutable for all the non-Americans here.
Someone posted this on my board and it got some really interesting reactions and started a bit of a debate, so I was just curious to see what the brain trust here has to say about it.
Is the dialect-language specific to black people? I'm not sure, but I once heard about something called "Black English Vernacular", so that might be it. Or maybe there's references to drumsticks and cantaloupe flying over my head again :)
Anyway, this guy is taking kids from poor neighbourhoods (judging by "ghetto") on nature hikes. From that I'd normally assume that he really cares about the kids and any racism would be unintentional. But I could also be wrong about this.
One thing I
do wonder about is, if these are things the kids
say, what's up with all the spelling mistakes? I mean it's one thing to write down some words phonetically, like "MOTHAFUCKA" or "MATIN' SEASONS" (actually he doesn't even get those down correctly), but there's some misspelled words where I really wonder how the kid pronounced to write it that way, like ".. BURIED OUT HERR" and ".. ACTN LIKE HE DIDNT. OVER THERE WIT A .."
Of course there's always the possibility that whoever wrote that Tumblr is dylexic like a mothfukcer himself.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 12, 2012, 07:54:23 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 05:36:44 PM
Quote from: Faust on February 12, 2012, 04:43:04 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 04:28:21 PM
QUESTION: WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS?
http://ghettohikes.tumblr.com/
I am going to refrain from posting my own impressions because I want to hear what you guys think about it first.
I don't see any implication on race anywhere, is this somehow related to the topic? I don't like the colloquial dialect of the students but only because I want to take a big red marker to it.
Any racial implications are American-specific so the connection is probably pretty inscrutable for all the non-Americans here.
Someone posted this on my board and it got some really interesting reactions and started a bit of a debate, so I was just curious to see what the brain trust here has to say about it.
Is the dialect-language specific to black people? I'm not sure, but I once heard about something called "Black English Vernacular", so that might be it. Or maybe there's references to drumsticks and cantaloupe flying over my head again :)
Anyway, this guy is taking kids from poor neighbourhoods (judging by "ghetto") on nature hikes. From that I'd normally assume that he really cares about the kids and any racism would be unintentional. But I could also be wrong about this.
One thing I do wonder about is, if these are things the kids say, what's up with all the spelling mistakes? I mean it's one thing to write down some words phonetically, like "MOTHAFUCKA" or "MATIN' SEASONS" (actually he doesn't even get those down correctly), but there's some misspelled words where I really wonder how the kid pronounced to write it that way, like ".. BURIED OUT HERR" and ".. ACTN LIKE HE DIDNT. OVER THERE WIT A .."
Of course there's always the possibility that whoever wrote that Tumblr is dylexic like a mothfukcer himself.
The spelling mistakes are deliberate and are intended to be pronounced as written... I can hear it in my head and it's perfect. Yes, urban kids from poor neighborhoods, mostly black, speaking in a "ghetto" (which in the US is often used synonymously with "poor black neighborhood") vernacular. It's pretty safe to assume that most of them are black.
I thought it was hilarious and that the kids were clever and funny. Two of my friends (both white) thought it was racist. One of the most interesting things, to me, about their conclusion was the immediate and unquestioned assumption that the author is white.
Speaking as a white liberal, there is nothing more terrifying to us than the idea that a black person might think we're the racist assholes we've been warned about. That can lead to some retarded places, like jumping on calling other people racist to prove our not-racist-ness.
My initial assumption was that it was a black author playing on the "urban" stereotype for kicks. Weird. I thought it was pretty funny, but I tend to think that intelligent, witty humor written in that vernacular is funny because it subverts the stereotype.
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on February 12, 2012, 08:53:36 PM
Speaking as a white liberal, there is nothing more terrifying to us than the idea that a black person might think we're the racist assholes we've been warned about. That can lead to some retarded places, like jumping on calling other people racist to prove our not-racist-ness.
Yeah, I kind of think that's what happened with my friends. Also, the tendency for white people to be uncomfortable with things that make them think about someone else's blackness. :lulz:
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 08:23:59 PM
The spelling mistakes are deliberate and are intended to be pronounced as written... I can hear it in my head and it's perfect. Yes, urban kids from poor neighborhoods, mostly black, speaking in a "ghetto" (which in the US is often used synonymously with "poor black neighborhood") vernacular. It's pretty safe to assume that most of them are black.
I thought it was hilarious and that the kids were clever and funny. Two of my friends (both white) thought it was racist. One of the most interesting things, to me, about their conclusion was the immediate and unquestioned assumption that the author is white.
That is really interesting. I didn't think there was any racist intent, and I thought a lot of the stuff was really funny. But your comment here just made me realize that I also assumed that the blog author is white.
Weird. Introspection time!
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on February 12, 2012, 09:07:40 PM
My initial assumption was that it was a black author playing on the "urban" stereotype for kicks. Weird. I thought it was pretty funny, but I tend to think that intelligent, witty humor written in that vernacular is funny because it subverts the stereotype.
Yes, it does, which I kind of appreciate because that stereotype has got to go.
One thing I found REALLY interesting when I googled to see what other kinds of discussions were happening about this blog was how many people commented on how he was "trying to make the kids sound stupid". I went WOW, where does that come from? People are clearly assuming that he is highlighting their ignorance, and not capturing their witticisms, based purely on the vernacular. It seems obvious to me that the kids know they're being funny... no, that kid does not actually think that is actual jam leaking out of the tree, nor that someone has brought a piece of toast hiking... and blog dude thinks they're hysterical, which is a sign of a good teacher. My friend who posted it is a French teacher and she's constantly quoting the hilarious/silly things her kids say because she loves them.
Quote from: Cainad on February 12, 2012, 09:18:46 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 08:23:59 PM
The spelling mistakes are deliberate and are intended to be pronounced as written... I can hear it in my head and it's perfect. Yes, urban kids from poor neighborhoods, mostly black, speaking in a "ghetto" (which in the US is often used synonymously with "poor black neighborhood") vernacular. It's pretty safe to assume that most of them are black.
I thought it was hilarious and that the kids were clever and funny. Two of my friends (both white) thought it was racist. One of the most interesting things, to me, about their conclusion was the immediate and unquestioned assumption that the author is white.
That is really interesting. I didn't think there was any racist intent, and I thought a lot of the stuff was really funny. But your comment here just made me realize that I also assumed that the blog author is white.
Weird. Introspection time!
Yay!
I have to admit, I totally assumed the writer is white too, but I think that's more of a function of my experience with hiking and "nature enthusiasts" in general. I used to go camping up in the White Mountains in NH every summer, and northern New England DOES NOT HAVE BLACK PEOPLE. I've got a friend that moved to Boston from Maine, and he's constantly having problems with race - not because he's racist, but because it's a completely alien concept to him.
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 09:19:39 PM
Quote from: Cainad on February 12, 2012, 09:18:46 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 08:23:59 PM
The spelling mistakes are deliberate and are intended to be pronounced as written... I can hear it in my head and it's perfect. Yes, urban kids from poor neighborhoods, mostly black, speaking in a "ghetto" (which in the US is often used synonymously with "poor black neighborhood") vernacular. It's pretty safe to assume that most of them are black.
I thought it was hilarious and that the kids were clever and funny. Two of my friends (both white) thought it was racist. One of the most interesting things, to me, about their conclusion was the immediate and unquestioned assumption that the author is white.
That is really interesting. I didn't think there was any racist intent, and I thought a lot of the stuff was really funny. But your comment here just made me realize that I also assumed that the blog author is white.
Weird. Introspection time!
Yay!
30 seconds later, I realized that the unconscious reason for this assumption was that some part of me believes that only a white spag would find the quips of (presumably black) children speaking in ghetto-isms funny enough to put on a blog.
Which says something about my own unconscious assumptions, both about blacks and what I think of other white people.
Oh look, another Black Iron Bar! Didn't see you there; here's your pink slip. Your services are no longer required.
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on February 12, 2012, 09:26:31 PM
I have to admit, I totally assumed the writer is white too, but I think that's more of a function of my experience with hiking and "nature enthusiasts" in general. I used to go camping up in the White Mountains in NH every summer, and northern New England DOES NOT HAVE BLACK PEOPLE. I've got a friend that moved to Boston from Maine, and he's constantly having problems with race - not because he's racist, but because it's a completely alien concept to him.
I grew up in northern New York State, which is similarly super-white. When I moved downstate and into other places, I had more than a few uncomfortable learning experiences (mostly through interactions with other, more race-aware white people, funnily enough) that made me realize what a big deal racism continues to be. It's easy to feel enlightened and racism-free when you grew up without any actual colored people to interact with.
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 08:23:59 PMThe spelling mistakes are deliberate and are intended to be pronounced as written... I can hear it in my head and it's perfect. Yes, urban kids from poor neighborhoods, mostly black, speaking in a "ghetto" (which in the US is often used synonymously with "poor black neighborhood") vernacular. It's pretty safe to assume that most of them are black.
I thought it was hilarious and that the kids were clever and funny. Two of my friends (both white) thought it was racist. One of the most interesting things, to me, about their conclusion was the immediate and unquestioned assumption that the author is white.
I did wonder whether the author was black or white, but concluded that there was no evidence pointing to one or the other, or Asian, for that matter. My initial mental picture was white, but that's just my default, because mentally picturing a person of indeterminate skin colour takes some effort :) Though after I considered it I'm doing exactly that ... which is weird. Kind of like a dream image where you never see someone's face :) :)
I really don't think the phonetic spelling is "perfect" though. You can hear it in your head because you know exactly what it sounds like. If it was "perfect" I could too, but there's some inconsistencies that throw me off somehow. Anyway it's just a matter of style and I mostly pointed it out because I was looking at it with an extra critical eye, since you asked whether it's racist. Speaking of style, the all-caps doesn't help either :P
And as you say, most probably it's just a good teacher sharing witty remarks of his kids.
I imagined both the kids and the author as white. In pretty much all my mental pictures any portrayal is white. I don't think there are any impactions to that other than I'm not very imaginative and that I am white (I think).
As a mental exercise for the next week I'm going to imagine both my own self image and any characters in situations I'm in with diverse characters.
Years ago I did the same thing with the mental image of being a woman and I've been less self concious around them ever since.
As an interesting aside the most ethnically diverse mental portrayals I've had have been while masturbating. It's odd that I've never considered it for anything else before.
Quote from: Cainad on February 12, 2012, 09:18:46 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 08:23:59 PM
The spelling mistakes are deliberate and are intended to be pronounced as written... I can hear it in my head and it's perfect. Yes, urban kids from poor neighborhoods, mostly black, speaking in a "ghetto" (which in the US is often used synonymously with "poor black neighborhood") vernacular. It's pretty safe to assume that most of them are black.
I thought it was hilarious and that the kids were clever and funny. Two of my friends (both white) thought it was racist. One of the most interesting things, to me, about their conclusion was the immediate and unquestioned assumption that the author is white.
That is really interesting. I didn't think there was any racist intent, and I thought a lot of the stuff was really funny. But your comment here just made me realize that I also assumed that the blog author is white.
Weird. Introspection time!
I thought it was funny, because the vernacular juxtaposed against the content was awesome, but then I wondered if thinking it was funny was me being unconciously racist, and I felt bad.
Also, on assuming the writer is white: If it isn't made clear to me in the beginning, I assume the speaker/writer is white because I'm white. If I find out the speaker is not, I'm like "Oh! Well, neat. Or something." and then I'm asking the judges if I should be feeling anything other than a blip as my inner narration alters to include this information. Even then, I forget most times.
I dissected this a long time ago, because I noticed it back then that I always thought that way and was interested. That's probably my white privilege showing again, though.
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 04:26:51 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 12, 2012, 04:53:44 AM
The CotSG person, whom I have known online since 1998, has unfriended me because I insisted that both Gay & Trans rights should both be equally advanced.
Obviously, her being able to throw a self-righteous shit over the issue is more important than any actual progress. This is of course feeding directly into the hands of people who oppose LGBT rights, as it both splits the effort, and makes LGBT people look like a pack of attention whores...IE, it's just handing the bastards ammunition.
Good riddance.
Why waste your time on someone who is openly against equal rights?
On the other hand, I just got a screeching, towering tirade to which I cannot respond, as I've been blocked.
:lulz:
I think that means I win.
What about groups that are trying to end what they term "Israeli Apartheid"? Though it is also a political topic I think it has large implications for race here and into the future. Here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ac1SnQfOfw&feature=related is a little video on the subject. I am inclined to agree with the ending of Israeli apartheid as well as institutionalized racism and oppression anywhere. Though many Israel supporters accuse these groups of antisemitism. What do you dudes think?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 13, 2012, 02:16:58 AM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 04:26:51 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 12, 2012, 04:53:44 AM
The CotSG person, whom I have known online since 1998, has unfriended me because I insisted that both Gay & Trans rights should both be equally advanced.
Obviously, her being able to throw a self-righteous shit over the issue is more important than any actual progress. This is of course feeding directly into the hands of people who oppose LGBT rights, as it both splits the effort, and makes LGBT people look like a pack of attention whores...IE, it's just handing the bastards ammunition.
Good riddance.
Why waste your time on someone who is openly against equal rights?
On the other hand, I just got a screeching, towering tirade to which I cannot respond, as I've been blocked.
:lulz:
I think that means I win.
Definitely. :lulz:
I don't think there's anything unusual about assuming the author is white... I assumed he is black, but he could just as easily be white. I almost never assume someone is my own race, partly because I am a not-totally-common (thought not especially rare) combo. The thing I thought was interesting on the part of those two friends was the assumption that he was white and racist. One of them went so far as to say that he made that assumption "because of demographics", and when I asked him what he meant he explained that because blacks are underrepresented in teaching (true) and on the internet (true) and also in "outdoorsy" type jobs (sounds like made-up bullshit), his assumption was that the teacher was most likely white. There is some validity to that line of thinking, but it requires a lot of assumptions and it seems silly to me to get all fired up thinking someone's being racist without actually knowing anything about them at all.
Very true.
I heard some talk today about how somewhere, at some restaurant, the people who do the cutting and the chopping and all the prep work are called "Mexicans" and to do this work is to "mexican it." You slap an ed on the end to make it past tense.
Now, I really wouldn't like to start making this thread into "Hey, is this racist?" but that one kind of offended me enough that I would say anything at all to anyone and I'm not sure if I'm being overly sensitive, what with all people gotta work no matter their ethnicity or nationality.
I do not know if there are any surrounding in jokes or circumstances, or even if it continues to happen, only that it did and it was brought up and used in a circumstance where I was aware of it.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on February 13, 2012, 07:03:22 AM
Very true.
I heard some talk today about how somewhere, at some restaurant, the people who do the cutting and the chopping and all the prep work are called "Mexicans" and to do this work is to "mexican it." You slap an ed on the end to make it past tense.
Now, I really wouldn't like to start making this thread into "Hey, is this racist?" but that one kind of offended me enough that I would say anything at all to anyone and I'm not sure if I'm being overly sensitive, what with all people gotta work no matter their ethnicity or nationality.
I do not know if there are any surrounding in jokes or circumstances, or even if it continues to happen, only that it did and it was brought up and used in a circumstance where I was aware of it.
Yeah, now,
that sounds racist (probably). Mostly because undoubtedly the origin of it is that most kitchen staff actually ARE Mexican these days. Though if it's a kitchen in-joke maybe it's not racist since it's people joking about themselves.
Although my daughter found an illustrated chart of emotions and one of them was "Mexican", and that seemed funny and not racist to me.
Oh, I was just looking up internet demographics and Blacks and Hispanics are no longer underrepresented, in fact they're overrepresented on both Twitter and Facebook, and the percentages are increasing really really fast.
LOOK OUT INTERNET, WE'RE COMING FOR YOUR DAUGHTERS, LOL!
Quote from: Nigel on February 13, 2012, 07:07:56 AM
LOOK OUT INTERNET, WE'RE COMING FOR YOUR DAUGHTERS, LOL!
HIDE YO KIDS HIDE YO WIFE.
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 09:19:39 PM
Quote from: Cainad on February 12, 2012, 09:18:46 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 12, 2012, 08:23:59 PM
The spelling mistakes are deliberate and are intended to be pronounced as written... I can hear it in my head and it's perfect. Yes, urban kids from poor neighborhoods, mostly black, speaking in a "ghetto" (which in the US is often used synonymously with "poor black neighborhood") vernacular. It's pretty safe to assume that most of them are black.
I thought it was hilarious and that the kids were clever and funny. Two of my friends (both white) thought it was racist. One of the most interesting things, to me, about their conclusion was the immediate and unquestioned assumption that the author is white.
That is really interesting. I didn't think there was any racist intent, and I thought a lot of the stuff was really funny. But your comment here just made me realize that I also assumed that the blog author is white.
Weird. Introspection time!
Yay!
This I think stems from the human tendency to build fictional characters based on our own body-image. I noticed this in Manga and Anime. In the beginning of these industries the Japanese characters are drawn with a certain exaggerated style (the "big-eyed anime style") which reduces racial distinctiveness and every other culture/race in the series is defined as how it differs from this style. Specifically, if the series was about Japanese people, then those character would get the standard treatment, and the "other" would be different. If it was about German, (or generalized pseudo-European fantasy) then the main population would get the standard treatment, with the "others" differing. Presumably so that the reader would more easily get emotionally invested in the protagonist(s).
I read some research that this was one of the results of being conquered so suddenly and violently by the Caucasians with A Bombs and Warships. The report I did actually focused on the manifestation of huge battle mecha/robots as a fetish-ization of the American naval war-machine (of which Macross and then Evangelion are prime examples), but called out both the battle-mecha-fetish and the "generalizing" of facial traits in anime/maga as some of the cultural traumas of a nation who's mythology so relied upon the Eternal Victory narrative being defeated.
Here's a blog that touches on the manga thing:
http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2009/11/anime_film_characters_do_we_pe.php
If you're interested in that angle Telarus, watch and read up on Akira and Godzilla if you haven't already.
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on February 13, 2012, 07:03:22 AM
Very true.
I heard some talk today about how somewhere, at some restaurant, the people who do the cutting and the chopping and all the prep work are called "Mexicans" and to do this work is to "mexican it." You slap an ed on the end to make it past tense.
Now, I really wouldn't like to start making this thread into "Hey, is this racist?" but that one kind of offended me enough that I would say anything at all to anyone and I'm not sure if I'm being overly sensitive, what with all people gotta work no matter their ethnicity or nationality.
I do not know if there are any surrounding in jokes or circumstances, or even if it continues to happen, only that it did and it was brought up and used in a circumstance where I was aware of it.
Interestingly enough, if it's a good restaurant with serious cooks there's a pretty good chance that's meant as a compliment within the context of professional kitchen culture. Everything else being equal, I'll hire a latino over a white person every time and I know I'm not the only chef who feels that way.
The UK has a very similar thing when it comes to Poles. Most employers I have spoken to, especially in the services or manufacturing industry, prefer to hire Poles when possible, even if they are only going to be temporary staff, because they're generally see as having a superior work ethic and positive attitude when compared with English workers.
I can't say I'd disagree with that general outlook, either.
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 13, 2012, 04:24:37 AM
What about groups that are trying to end what they term "Israeli Apartheid"? Though it is also a political topic I think it has large implications for race here and into the future.
That is a purely political topic.
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 01:23:33 PM
The UK has a very similar thing when it comes to Poles. Most employers I have spoken to, especially in the services or manufacturing industry, prefer to hire Poles when possible, even if they are only going to be temporary staff, because they're generally see as having a superior work ethic and positive attitude when compared with English workers.
I can't say I'd disagree with that general outlook, either.
We had a lot of that here too, but what I saw in retail was "won't complain about illegal conditions" and "will leave with out a fuss when not wanted" as opposed to positive attitudes.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on February 13, 2012, 01:14:22 PM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on February 13, 2012, 07:03:22 AM
Very true.
I heard some talk today about how somewhere, at some restaurant, the people who do the cutting and the chopping and all the prep work are called "Mexicans" and to do this work is to "mexican it." You slap an ed on the end to make it past tense.
Now, I really wouldn't like to start making this thread into "Hey, is this racist?" but that one kind of offended me enough that I would say anything at all to anyone and I'm not sure if I'm being overly sensitive, what with all people gotta work no matter their ethnicity or nationality.
I do not know if there are any surrounding in jokes or circumstances, or even if it continues to happen, only that it did and it was brought up and used in a circumstance where I was aware of it.
Interestingly enough, if it's a good restaurant with serious cooks there's a pretty good chance that's meant as a compliment within the context of professional kitchen culture. Everything else being equal, I'll hire a latino over a white person every time and I know I'm not the only chef who feels that way.
Oh, really? Huh. Thanks for clearing that up, ECH.
Quote from: Nigel on February 13, 2012, 06:49:07 AMThe thing I thought was interesting on the part of those two friends was the assumption that he was white and racist. One of them went so far as to say that he made that assumption "because of demographics", and when I asked him what he meant he explained that because blacks are underrepresented in teaching (true) and on the internet (true) and also in "outdoorsy" type jobs (sounds like made-up bullshit), his assumption was that the teacher was most likely white. There is some validity to that line of thinking, but it requires a lot of assumptions and it seems silly to me to get all fired up thinking someone's being racist without actually knowing anything about them at all.
Are these by any chance the same people that took part in the iPad-for-school discussion? Because I'm detecting a pattern here.
(granted, it's pattern of thinking that is common to a lot of people and I probably am occasionally guilty of it as well--though I try
really hard not to because--well not even because I loathe it so much but rather because I enjoy puncturing such beliefs watching people deflate while the pus spills out)
It's about making up bullshit rationalizations to hide behind because you don't like what you
really think or feel, both from others as from yourself.
In this example, it really seems that they perceived their own inner reactions to these kids quotes as racist and felt bad about that. Whether they actually were racist or not does not matter, maybe they just felt the quotes were hilarious but felt bad for laughing at black kids. "So I'm being racist! ONOZ That can't be, I'm not racist! It's the author's fault! Therefore, the author must be racist." From this conclusion they work backwords making up whatever bullshit rationalisations to make it work ---> QED
(btw in case I happen to be absolutely wrong about your friends, my apologies, but there's people that
do think like this--often in the flash of half a second--and then it's about those people)
Also wolfgang, semitic is not synonymous with jewish. Arabs are also semites.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 13, 2012, 05:16:22 PM
Quote from: Nigel on February 13, 2012, 06:49:07 AMThe thing I thought was interesting on the part of those two friends was the assumption that he was white and racist. One of them went so far as to say that he made that assumption "because of demographics", and when I asked him what he meant he explained that because blacks are underrepresented in teaching (true) and on the internet (true) and also in "outdoorsy" type jobs (sounds like made-up bullshit), his assumption was that the teacher was most likely white. There is some validity to that line of thinking, but it requires a lot of assumptions and it seems silly to me to get all fired up thinking someone's being racist without actually knowing anything about them at all.
Are these by any chance the same people that took part in the iPad-for-school discussion? Because I'm detecting a pattern here.
(granted, it's pattern of thinking that is common to a lot of people and I probably am occasionally guilty of it as well--though I try really hard not to because--well not even because I loathe it so much but rather because I enjoy puncturing such beliefs watching people deflate while the pus spills out)
It's about making up bullshit rationalizations to hide behind because you don't like what you really think or feel, both from others as from yourself.
In this example, it really seems that they perceived their own inner reactions to these kids quotes as racist and felt bad about that. Whether they actually were racist or not does not matter, maybe they just felt the quotes were hilarious but felt bad for laughing at black kids. "So I'm being racist! ONOZ That can't be, I'm not racist! It's the author's fault! Therefore, the author must be racist." From this conclusion they work backwords making up whatever bullshit rationalisations to make it work ---> QED
(btw in case I happen to be absolutely wrong about your friends, my apologies, but there's people that do think like this--often in the flash of half a second--and then it's about those people)
Actually, I think you're absolutely right. Some of these are people I've known for 20 years, so they're an ingrained part of my social circle, but they aren't all particularly good at critically examining their own reactions. One of them is currently butthurt at me for "misrepresenting what he said" because I couldn't resist making fun of him a little for the whole "black people are underrepresented" thing.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 13, 2012, 06:06:06 PM
Also wolfgang, semitic is not synonymous with jewish. Arabs are also semites.
Many of the pro-Israel people however do accuse these groups who call Israel an apartheid state of being antisemitic though.
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 13, 2012, 09:06:42 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 13, 2012, 06:06:06 PM
Also wolfgang, semitic is not synonymous with jewish. Arabs are also semites.
Many of the pro-Israel people however do accuse these groups who call Israel an apartheid state of being antisemitic though.
That's because they - and many other people - are fucking retarded.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 13, 2012, 09:28:22 PM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 13, 2012, 09:06:42 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 13, 2012, 06:06:06 PM
Also wolfgang, semitic is not synonymous with jewish. Arabs are also semites.
Many of the pro-Israel people however do accuse these groups who call Israel an apartheid state of being antisemitic though.
That's because they - and many other people - are fucking retarded.
Just because the mentally handicapped don't really know what you are talking about isn't a reason to sully their good name.
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 14, 2012, 12:08:29 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 13, 2012, 09:28:22 PM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 13, 2012, 09:06:42 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 13, 2012, 06:06:06 PM
Also wolfgang, semitic is not synonymous with jewish. Arabs are also semites.
Many of the pro-Israel people however do accuse these groups who call Israel an apartheid state of being antisemitic though.
That's because they - and many other people - are fucking retarded.
Just because the mentally handicapped don't really know what you are talking about isn't a reason to sully their good name.
NO.
Mentally handicapped people have BRAIN DAMAGE. People with fully-functioning brains that do really stupid shit are RETARDS. There is a rather large difference.
Then in that case they aren't all retards. Some of them are probably being paid to say things that stupid, which makes them prostitutes.
Actually maybe crappy actors is more precise. Prostitutes provide a valuable service for this country. They are patriots; heroes even.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 12:10:22 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 14, 2012, 12:08:29 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 13, 2012, 09:28:22 PM
Quote from: Wolfgang Absolutus on February 13, 2012, 09:06:42 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 13, 2012, 06:06:06 PM
Also wolfgang, semitic is not synonymous with jewish. Arabs are also semites.
Many of the pro-Israel people however do accuse these groups who call Israel an apartheid state of being antisemitic though.
That's because they - and many other people - are fucking retarded.
Just because the mentally handicapped don't really know what you are talking about isn't a reason to sully their good name.
NO.
Mentally handicapped people have BRAIN DAMAGE. People with fully-functioning brains that do really stupid shit are RETARDS. There is a rather large difference.
Damn straight. I would never insult a mentally handicapped person by comparing them to a fucking RETARD.
As in: "His potential for mental prowess and acuity was retarded by his obsession with objectivism."
Quote from: Alty on February 14, 2012, 02:45:57 AM
As in: "His potential for mental prowess and acuity was retarded by his obsession with objectivism."
Or: "He was a straight A student, but was retarded enough to text while driving. They buried him in a coffee can."
The latter is pretty much motorcycle.
As per the tentative Aneristic Illustions agreement, I post this here:
http://politics.salon.com/2012/02/09/cpac_welcomes_white_nationalists/singleton/
Three noted white supremacy enthusiasts to host anti-diversity panel at conservative conferenceQuoteThe National Review's John Derbyshire, a stock "pervert Tory" character from a Martin Amis novel sprung to life and given a sinecure at the National Review, is hosting a panel on "multiculturalism" (boo hiss) featuring two of America's most detestable sacks of shit: Peter Brimelow, founder of white supremacist site VDARE, and Robert Vandervoort, the director of some sort of "don't make me press one for English" nativist group and a white nationalist from way back.
...the fact that these panelists are all well-compensated members in good standing of the conservative movement instead of shrieking their "defense of Western Civilization" nonsense for free from a bench outside a subway station does suggest that something has gone wrong with the American experiment.
Just found this:
QuoteA rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face and arms began to swell.
(and Whitey's on the moon)
I can't pay no doctor bill.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
Ten years from now I'll be payin' still.
(while Whitey's on the moon)
The man jus' upped my rent las' night.
('cause Whitey's on the moon)
No hot water, no toilets, no lights.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
I wonder why he's uppi' me?
('cause Whitey's on the moon?)
I wuz already payin' 'im fifty a week.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Taxes takin' my whole damn check,
Junkies makin' me a nervous wreck,
The price of food is goin' up,
An' as if all that shit wuzn't enough:
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face an' arm began to swell.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
Was all that money I made las' year
(for Whitey on the moon?)
How come there ain't no money here?
(Hmm! Whitey's on the moon)
Y'know I jus' 'bout had my fill
(of Whitey on the moon)
I think I'll sen' these doctor bills,
Airmail special
(to Whitey on the moon)
That would be Mr Gil Scott-Heron and Malcolm X. I think we can have some fun with this in a modern context.
Quote from: Faust on February 13, 2012, 01:56:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 01:23:33 PM
The UK has a very similar thing when it comes to Poles. Most employers I have spoken to, especially in the services or manufacturing industry, prefer to hire Poles when possible, even if they are only going to be temporary staff, because they're generally see as having a superior work ethic and positive attitude when compared with English workers.
I can't say I'd disagree with that general outlook, either.
We had a lot of that here too, but what I saw in retail was "won't complain about illegal conditions" and "will leave with out a fuss when not wanted" as opposed to positive attitudes.
Both happen here, though i must admit that working with people who speak neither dutch or english is fucking frustrating no matter how hard they work.
Also, constantly being called 'kurva' by one specific smug looking pole is getting on my nerves. I know what it means, i just don't want to get blood on my fists today.
Hmmm, ok better idea: next time he starts cursing at me again i will fucking overpower him with creative cursewords. I will insult relatives/organs/friends/principles he didnt even know he had.
I think i will start off with calling him a cutesy little brony, just because he looks like manliness is important to him.
Just start telling Polack jokes. :lulz:
(I don't know if that's a "thing" in Belgium like it is in America, but if it isn't just take any Norwegian joke and replace "Norwegian/Norway" with "Polack/Poland")
For example: Why don't they have ice cubes in Poland? The girl with the recipe died.
If that doesn't work, just start asking him to "move over there, please" until he finally asks you why yo keep asking him to move. then tell him you need liebensraum.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on February 15, 2012, 11:35:29 PM
If that doesn't work, just start asking him to "move over there, please" until he finally asks you why yo keep asking him to move. then tell him you need liebensraum.
:lol:
make that option 1
Quote from: :regret: on February 15, 2012, 11:31:06 PM
Quote from: Faust on February 13, 2012, 01:56:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 01:23:33 PM
The UK has a very similar thing when it comes to Poles. Most employers I have spoken to, especially in the services or manufacturing industry, prefer to hire Poles when possible, even if they are only going to be temporary staff, because they're generally see as having a superior work ethic and positive attitude when compared with English workers.
I can't say I'd disagree with that general outlook, either.
We had a lot of that here too, but what I saw in retail was "won't complain about illegal conditions" and "will leave with out a fuss when not wanted" as opposed to positive attitudes.
Both happen here, though i must admit that working with people who speak neither dutch or english is fucking frustrating no matter how hard they work.
Also, constantly being called 'kurva' by one specific smug looking pole is getting on my nerves. I know what it means, i just don't want to get blood on my fists today.
Hmmm, ok better idea: next time he starts cursing at me again i will fucking overpower him with creative cursewords. I will insult relatives/organs/friends/principles he didnt even know he had.
I think i will start off with calling him a cutesy little brony, just because he looks like manliness is important to him.
what does "kurva" mean? Google Translate won't tell me....
It varies with context, but generally means something like: slut, bitch, whore.
Also Faust, that is likely true for a number of industries. Our town's major employer was, in that regard, actually rather good, as far as I could tell. Everyone worked the same amount of time, same pay, same conditions etc. Some of them also worked for Lidl though, a story with a much less happy ending (the company that labour law forgot is not a pleasant employer regardless of background).
Also ECH, I don't believe it is a thing over here, but it certainly shouldn't dissuade anyone from trying to make it a thing.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 15, 2012, 07:22:45 PM
Just found this:
QuoteA rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face and arms began to swell.
(and Whitey's on the moon)
I can't pay no doctor bill.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
Ten years from now I'll be payin' still.
(while Whitey's on the moon)
The man jus' upped my rent las' night.
('cause Whitey's on the moon)
No hot water, no toilets, no lights.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
I wonder why he's uppi' me?
('cause Whitey's on the moon?)
I wuz already payin' 'im fifty a week.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Taxes takin' my whole damn check,
Junkies makin' me a nervous wreck,
The price of food is goin' up,
An' as if all that shit wuzn't enough:
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face an' arm began to swell.
(but Whitey's on the moon)
Was all that money I made las' year
(for Whitey on the moon?)
How come there ain't no money here?
(Hmm! Whitey's on the moon)
Y'know I jus' 'bout had my fill
(of Whitey on the moon)
I think I'll sen' these doctor bills,
Airmail special
(to Whitey on the moon)
That would be Mr Gil Scott-Heron and Malcolm X. I think we can have some fun with this in a modern context.
I think Hawkwind already have. I only got a quarter of the way through reading it, and this track started ringing in my head.
But instead of "Whitey's on the moon" it's "Uncle Sam's on Mars".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY26AxL0Igo
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on February 15, 2012, 11:35:29 PM
If that doesn't work, just start asking him to "move over there, please" until he finally asks you why yo keep asking him to move. then tell him you need liebensraum.
:horrormirth:
Quote from: :regret: on February 15, 2012, 11:31:06 PM
Quote from: Faust on February 13, 2012, 01:56:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 01:23:33 PM
The UK has a very similar thing when it comes to Poles. Most employers I have spoken to, especially in the services or manufacturing industry, prefer to hire Poles when possible, even if they are only going to be temporary staff, because they're generally see as having a superior work ethic and positive attitude when compared with English workers.
I can't say I'd disagree with that general outlook, either.
We had a lot of that here too, but what I saw in retail was "won't complain about illegal conditions" and "will leave with out a fuss when not wanted" as opposed to positive attitudes.
Both happen here, though i must admit that working with people who speak neither dutch or english is fucking frustrating no matter how hard they work.
Also, constantly being called 'kurva' by one specific smug looking pole is getting on my nerves. I know what it means, i just don't want to get blood on my fists today.
Hmmm, ok better idea: next time he starts cursing at me again i will fucking overpower him with creative cursewords. I will insult relatives/organs/friends/principles he didnt even know he had.
I think i will start off with calling him a cutesy little brony, just because he looks like manliness is important to him.
I read there's something boiling in Poland they don't like us very much, because, well mainly because of some shit Wilders said, but some other politicians also made faux-pas's. Except they never thought much of it because apparently they figured the Polish wouldn't hear them saying it, except they did :lol:
Remember that over-the-top-badwrong Wilders misquotes idea we had a few years back? We should get to that.
Geert Wilders: "did you know that Irish people, I am not making this up, that Irish people have more genes in common with a potato than a human? There's no evidence for this, but it's a scientific fact."
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 21, 2012, 09:54:04 PM
Quote from: :regret: on February 15, 2012, 11:31:06 PM
Quote from: Faust on February 13, 2012, 01:56:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 01:23:33 PM
The UK has a very similar thing when it comes to Poles. Most employers I have spoken to, especially in the services or manufacturing industry, prefer to hire Poles when possible, even if they are only going to be temporary staff, because they're generally see as having a superior work ethic and positive attitude when compared with English workers.
I can't say I'd disagree with that general outlook, either.
We had a lot of that here too, but what I saw in retail was "won't complain about illegal conditions" and "will leave with out a fuss when not wanted" as opposed to positive attitudes.
Both happen here, though i must admit that working with people who speak neither dutch or english is fucking frustrating no matter how hard they work.
Also, constantly being called 'kurva' by one specific smug looking pole is getting on my nerves. I know what it means, i just don't want to get blood on my fists today.
Hmmm, ok better idea: next time he starts cursing at me again i will fucking overpower him with creative cursewords. I will insult relatives/organs/friends/principles he didnt even know he had.
I think i will start off with calling him a cutesy little brony, just because he looks like manliness is important to him.
I read there's something boiling in Poland they don't like us very much, because, well mainly because of some shit Wilders said, but some other politicians also made faux-pas's. Except they never thought much of it because apparently they figured the Polish wouldn't hear them saying it, except they did :lol:
Remember that over-the-top-badwrong Wilders misquotes idea we had a few years back? We should get to that.
Some really horrible stuff has happened to Poland because of the en masse emigration for work. Ireland realised it's economy was going to develop and now Irish and UK developers own something like 30% of all houses on sale over there.
That artificially rose the prices of houses to nearly an Irish equivalent, but the income in poland is so much lower then here that Polands own people cannot afford to ever buy a house in their own country.
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2012, 10:15:07 PM
Geert Wilders: "did you know that Irish people, I am not making this up, that Irish people have more genes in common with a potato than a human? There's no evidence for this, but it's a scientific fact."
WHAT. :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2012, 10:15:07 PM
Geert Wilders: "did you know that Irish people, I am not making this up, that Irish people have more genes in common with a potato than a human? There's no evidence for this, but it's a scientific fact."
Ahahahahaha! That's amazing!
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2012, 10:15:07 PM
Geert Wilders: "did you know that Irish people, I am not making this up, that Irish people have more genes in common with a potato than a human? There's no evidence for this, but it's a scientific fact."
Chris Morris rocks.
(but it was lobsters :P)
Cain youre fucking with us right?
I mean its still hilarious if you are or arent i just want to be sure why im laughing.
I'm absolutely going to use that line the next time someone starts earnestly spouting "facts" about gay people in my presence. :lulz:
Being from an Irish family will only it that much more hilarious.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 21, 2012, 11:23:46 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2012, 10:15:07 PM
Geert Wilders: "did you know that Irish people, I am not making this up, that Irish people have more genes in common with a potato than a human? There's no evidence for this, but it's a scientific fact."
Chris Morris rocks.
(but it was lobsters :P)
Oh yes, but if you can't work a potato gag into a racist screed against the Irish....well, then you're just not trying in my book.
Quote from: Twid, not Billy. on February 21, 2012, 11:33:55 PM
Cain youre fucking with us right?
I mean its still hilarious if you are or arent i just want to be sure why im laughing.
Yes, of course.
But all of you do need to watch this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brass_Eye#Paedophilia_special_.282001.29).
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 21, 2012, 11:23:46 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2012, 10:15:07 PM
Geert Wilders: "did you know that Irish people, I am not making this up, that Irish people have more genes in common with a potato than a human? There's no evidence for this, but it's a scientific fact."
Chris Morris rocks.
(but it was lobsters :P)
Beg to differ. It was crabs. And paedophiles.
eta: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZDGWICVQ3w&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLE27BDAF640BBCFC1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVKf-HGzBSs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFMsx0mjWrM&feature=related
INDEED ALL OF YOU
You used to be able to see the entire show in 3 parts on YouTube.
Quote from: BadBeast on February 22, 2012, 11:14:51 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 21, 2012, 11:23:46 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2012, 10:15:07 PM
Geert Wilders: "did you know that Irish people, I am not making this up, that Irish people have more genes in common with a potato than a human? There's no evidence for this, but it's a scientific fact."
Chris Morris rocks.
(but it was lobsters :P)
Beg to differ. It was crabs. And paedophiles.
eta:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-lroPLKs58
But it's SCIENTIFIC FACT, nonetheless.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 22, 2012, 11:21:11 AM
INDEED ALL OF YOU
You used to be able to see the entire show in 3 parts on YouTube.
Still can. Links fixt.
So, apparently, there is some Supreme Court hearing going down soon, which will almost certainly end affirmative action in higher education.
I suppose the bright side of this is that at least it will stop a certain vocal contingent of whiners trying to claim the mantle of racial victimhood from those who are actually underrepresented and systematically selected against.
Quote from: Cain on February 23, 2012, 06:27:15 PM
So, apparently, there is some Supreme Court hearing going down soon, which will almost certainly end affirmative action in higher education.
I suppose the bright side of this is that at least it will stop a certain vocal contingent of whiners trying to claim the mantle of racial victimhood from those who are actually underrepresented and systematically selected against.
Yes, now they can go back to simply quitely excluding Those People.
Quote from: Cain on February 23, 2012, 06:27:15 PM
So, apparently, there is some Supreme Court hearing going down soon, which will almost certainly end affirmative action in higher education.
I suppose the bright side of this is that at least it will stop a certain vocal contingent of whiners trying to claim the mantle of racial victimhood from those who are actually underrepresented and systematically selected against.
More on this, please? I am interested... I haven't heard anything about it yet.
http://prospect.org/article/end-affirmative-action-college
QuoteAs my colleague Jamelle Bouie noted yesterday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Fisher v. UT Austin, a challenge to the use of affirmative action for undergraduate admissions at the University of Texas. I wish I could make a case for more optimism, but I have to agree with the conventional wisdom that Grutter v. Bollinger, the case that upheld that affirmative action was allowed in higher education so long as it was done to promote diversity, is likely to be overruled and the use of affirmative action in higher education therefore made flatly unconstitutional.
To start with the less-bad news first, readers may find it ominous that Justice Elena Kagan has recused herself from the case. But this means less than it might appear at first. The 5th Circuit opinion the Supreme Court is reviewing upheld the constitutionality of the program. Because of this, if the Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4, the program would be sustained and Grutter would remain good law. While the best outcome would be a majority opinion clearly re-affirming Bollinger, a tie would be acceptable.
The bad news is that Kagan's recusal probably doesn't matter because her vote will be irrelevant. Everything points to there being five votes to overrule Grutter. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas are sure votes—not only did they dissent in Grutter, they have consistently held that all affirmative action programs are unconstitutional (even though this is flagrantly inconsistent with the "originalism" they claim guides their interpretation of the Constitution). Samuel Alito and John Roberts were not on the Court when Grutter was decided in 2003, but the 2007 Parents Involved ruling, authored by Roberts and joined by Alito, is an ominous sign. Chief Justice Roberts's Young Republican debate society koan "[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race" strongly suggests that the two George W. Bush appointees will adhere to the Scalia/Thomas absolutist position.
If you squint really hard, you might see a ray of hope in Anthony Kennedy. He dissented in Grutter, which would seem to settle the question. But in Parents Involved, given the opprtunity to provide five clear votes for the position that affirmative action programs always violate the 14th Amendment he didn't quite go all the way, arguing that there might be some narrow cases in which affirmative action might be constitutionally permissible. Since the primary UT system uses a proxy measure for race—granting admission to the top 10 percent of every high school class in Texas rather than explicitly considering a student's race per se—Kennedy might see the case as distinguishable from Grutter (and Gratz, in which Kennedy joined an opinion that struck down the University of Michigan's undergraduate affirmative action program). The Supreme Court could write a narrow opinion holding that the supplemental pool for students that Abigail Noel Fisher was part of after missing the 10 percent cutoff (and which does consider race) violates the Constitution without considering the broader UT admissions system. Doing so may permit ruling in favor of Fisher without seeing a need to overrule Grutter.
Having said this, if Kennedy isn't as certain a vote to strike down the UT program as the other four Republican appointees, he's close. The question is not so much whether the Court will rule against the UT as how it will do so. I'm generally not a big fan of "judicial minimalism," but if the Court just ruled against the UT without overruling Grutter explicitly, I would consider that the best outcome that could be hoped for. My guess is that the Supreme Court is taking the case so it can overrule Grutter and hold that affirmative action programs are never constitutional.
NOTHING TO SEE HERE. GO BACK TO YOUR SECOND CLASS CITIZEN STATUS.
/
:remaincalm:
Quote from: Cain on February 24, 2012, 07:12:56 AM
http://prospect.org/article/end-affirmative-action-college
QuoteAs my colleague Jamelle Bouie noted yesterday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Fisher v. UT Austin, a challenge to the use of affirmative action for undergraduate admissions at the University of Texas. I wish I could make a case for more optimism, but I have to agree with the conventional wisdom that Grutter v. Bollinger, the case that upheld that affirmative action was allowed in higher education so long as it was done to promote diversity, is likely to be overruled and the use of affirmative action in higher education therefore made flatly unconstitutional.
To start with the less-bad news first, readers may find it ominous that Justice Elena Kagan has recused herself from the case. But this means less than it might appear at first. The 5th Circuit opinion the Supreme Court is reviewing upheld the constitutionality of the program. Because of this, if the Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4, the program would be sustained and Grutter would remain good law. While the best outcome would be a majority opinion clearly re-affirming Bollinger, a tie would be acceptable.
The bad news is that Kagan's recusal probably doesn't matter because her vote will be irrelevant. Everything points to there being five votes to overrule Grutter. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas are sure votes—not only did they dissent in Grutter, they have consistently held that all affirmative action programs are unconstitutional (even though this is flagrantly inconsistent with the "originalism" they claim guides their interpretation of the Constitution). Samuel Alito and John Roberts were not on the Court when Grutter was decided in 2003, but the 2007 Parents Involved ruling, authored by Roberts and joined by Alito, is an ominous sign. Chief Justice Roberts's Young Republican debate society koan "[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race" strongly suggests that the two George W. Bush appointees will adhere to the Scalia/Thomas absolutist position.
If you squint really hard, you might see a ray of hope in Anthony Kennedy. He dissented in Grutter, which would seem to settle the question. But in Parents Involved, given the opprtunity to provide five clear votes for the position that affirmative action programs always violate the 14th Amendment he didn't quite go all the way, arguing that there might be some narrow cases in which affirmative action might be constitutionally permissible. Since the primary UT system uses a proxy measure for race—granting admission to the top 10 percent of every high school class in Texas rather than explicitly considering a student's race per se—Kennedy might see the case as distinguishable from Grutter (and Gratz, in which Kennedy joined an opinion that struck down the University of Michigan's undergraduate affirmative action program). The Supreme Court could write a narrow opinion holding that the supplemental pool for students that Abigail Noel Fisher was part of after missing the 10 percent cutoff (and which does consider race) violates the Constitution without considering the broader UT admissions system. Doing so may permit ruling in favor of Fisher without seeing a need to overrule Grutter.
Having said this, if Kennedy isn't as certain a vote to strike down the UT program as the other four Republican appointees, he's close. The question is not so much whether the Court will rule against the UT as how it will do so. I'm generally not a big fan of "judicial minimalism," but if the Court just ruled against the UT without overruling Grutter explicitly, I would consider that the best outcome that could be hoped for. My guess is that the Supreme Court is taking the case so it can overrule Grutter and hold that affirmative action programs are never constitutional.
Hot damn. Thanks Cain. This is directly relevant to next week's project.
This story filled me with delight:
(http://i.imgur.com/upuAg.jpg)
That's great Nigel!
I love that.
Question: Is Robert Downey Jr in blackface in Tropic Thunder racist, or is it satire on the entire premiss of blackface by behaving a highly stereotypical behavior and being called out on it by the black rap artist?
In short, racist joke or joke using race?
I'm leaning towards satire.
Quote from: Pope Coyote of the Wolffnords on February 28, 2012, 06:04:52 AM
Question: Is Robert Downey Jr in blackface in Tropic Thunder racist, or is it satire on the entire premiss of blackface by behaving a highly stereotypical behavior and being called out on it by the black rap artist?
In short, racist joke or joke using race?
I'm leaning towards satire.
It seemed like a pretty clear cut satire to me.
Quote from: Pope Coyote of the Wolffnords on February 28, 2012, 06:04:52 AM
Question: Is Robert Downey Jr in blackface in Tropic Thunder racist, or is it satire on the entire premiss of blackface by behaving a highly stereotypical behavior and being called out on it by the black rap artist?
In short, racist joke or joke using race?
I'm leaning towards satire.
It was to show how disconnected from reality hollywood is. In his mind he was a method actor learning what it is to be black, to any outside observer all they see is a horrible racial stereotype.
As far as texts go the is it racist question shits me a bit because I feel like to cut works into hey that's racist and no that's ok is embracing a bit of a false dichotomy.
The question, does this promote racist values, seems useful.
So does 'what kinds of interpretations could be made of this work beyond what is made explicit.
To look at something with the intention of labelling it one way or the other doesn't seem so useful.
Anyway. That's not why I came back to this thread. I though you all might like this; Why I'm a black male feminist.- http://www.theroot.com/views/why-i-am-male-feminist?page=0,0
Quote from: Placid Dingo on March 01, 2012, 07:13:54 AM
As far as texts go the is it racist question shits me a bit because I feel like to cut works into hey that's racist and no that's ok is embracing a bit of a false dichotomy.
The question, does this promote racist values, seems useful.
So does 'what kinds of interpretations could be made of this work beyond what is made explicit.
To look at something with the intention of labelling it one way or the other doesn't seem so useful.
Anyway. That's not why I came back to this thread. I though you all might like this; Why I'm a black male feminist.- http://www.theroot.com/views/why-i-am-male-feminist?page=0,0
I agree... "is it racist?" is far too cut and dried. Many people have condemned Twain's writings for "being racist" when in fact it was an accurate description of racism in the time when it was written, by an author who condemned the racist system (and I felt, even reading Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn as a child, that the description alone conveyed a condemnation-- there is, for example, a vivid description of alienation and tragedy in Injun Joe, despite his existence as a villain in the story). Many works can contain racist elements or reflect racist attitudes without being racist tracts.
I will look at that link.
That was an incredibly moving article for me. Thanks for posting it!
So the other night I discovered that not only does my ex still considers me (and apparently, most of the black people in the Pacific NW) "culturally white", but he has no idea that our daughter identifies as African American.
I don't have the heart to tell her that she's not legally black.
Quote from: Nigel on March 02, 2012, 05:17:11 AM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on March 01, 2012, 07:13:54 AM
As far as texts go the is it racist question shits me a bit because I feel like to cut works into hey that's racist and no that's ok is embracing a bit of a false dichotomy.
The question, does this promote racist values, seems useful.
So does 'what kinds of interpretations could be made of this work beyond what is made explicit.
To look at something with the intention of labelling it one way or the other doesn't seem so useful.
Anyway. That's not why I came back to this thread. I though you all might like this; Why I'm a black male feminist.- http://www.theroot.com/views/why-i-am-male-feminist?page=0,0
I agree... "is it racist?" is far too cut and dried. Many people have condemned Twain's writings for "being racist" when in fact it was an accurate description of racism in the time when it was written, by an author who condemned the racist system (and I felt, even reading Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn as a child, that the description alone conveyed a condemnation-- there is, for example, a vivid description of alienation and tragedy in Injun Joe, despite his existence as a villain in the story). Many works can contain racist elements or reflect racist attitudes without being racist tracts.
I will look at that link.
Absolutely. Clemens was notoriously sickened by racism and it was, in fact, a matter at the very heart of his struggle with cynicism about his fellow man until his death.
I believe it is absolutely necessary for people to feel comfortable speaking their mind and calling things exactly as they see them. Far too much injustice and invalidation occurs because of our need to sugar-coat history when sometimes, just
saying the ugly has the power to disinfect the wound.
In fact, we all need to get more comfortable saying "I don't understand. I think ___ about this. What am I missing?" And people need to start being comfortable with listening and responding to people's perception, knowledge and ownership of their ignorance (No, ignorance isn't wrong! Willful ignorance is wrong!) without the knee-jerk screams of "Nazi!"
And in fact, I tend to think people who are first to jump on someone's honest mistakes with an aggro reaction just might have their own issues to examine. I've seen many a white person scream "That's racist!" and act all offended/refuse to calm the fuck down when the black people in the room weren't even that upset by the remark that sparked the outburst. Fucking up and talking about is is how we learn. Beating people with a stick for making a mistake just encourages them try to hide their mistakes.
Quote from: Nigel on March 09, 2012, 03:23:25 PM
So the other night I discovered that not only does my ex still considers me (and apparently, most of the black people in the Pacific NW) "culturally white", but he has no idea that our daughter identifies as African American.
I don't have the heart to tell her that she's not legally black.
The phrase "culturally white" is so fucking stupid it makes my eye twitch.
but fuck it, from now on I'm culturally black.
Also, I'd like to see him go talk that shit on the corner of 19th and Yesler.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 09, 2012, 04:01:58 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 09, 2012, 03:23:25 PM
So the other night I discovered that not only does my ex still considers me (and apparently, most of the black people in the Pacific NW) "culturally white", but he has no idea that our daughter identifies as African American.
I don't have the heart to tell her that she's not legally black.
The phrase "culturally white" is so fucking stupid it makes my eye twitch.
but fuck it, from now on I'm culturally black.
Actually, I could probably believe that.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 09, 2012, 04:01:58 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 09, 2012, 03:23:25 PM
So the other night I discovered that not only does my ex still considers me (and apparently, most of the black people in the Pacific NW) "culturally white", but he has no idea that our daughter identifies as African American.
I don't have the heart to tell her that she's not legally black.
The phrase "culturally white" is so fucking stupid it makes my eye twitch.
but fuck it, from now on I'm culturally black.
Oh god. I know. It's... fucking horrible.
I tried to calmly and reasonably explain why that's such an epically fucked-up thing to say, and he JUST WOULDN'T GET IT.
When I went in to pay, I actually had a guy tell me that I did a great job of "handling that asshole" and that he wouldn't have been able to resist the urge to punch him in the face.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 09, 2012, 04:03:32 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 09, 2012, 04:01:58 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 09, 2012, 03:23:25 PM
So the other night I discovered that not only does my ex still considers me (and apparently, most of the black people in the Pacific NW) "culturally white", but he has no idea that our daughter identifies as African American.
I don't have the heart to tell her that she's not legally black.
The phrase "culturally white" is so fucking stupid it makes my eye twitch.
but fuck it, from now on I'm culturally black.
Actually, I could probably believe that.
Yeah, I assumed that ECH was black or native for the longest time. Even after I met him, because appearances can be deceiving.
He is clearly culturally black. :lulz:
So, possibly the most offensive part of the evening is when I said "You see, when you state that educated and articulate black people are culturally white, you are designating education and articulation as necessarily white qualities" and my ex said "YES, that's exactly what I mean!"
I
can't
even
:mad:
The one good thing: I get to write a play about this, and it will be performed around Portland at least a dozen times next season.
Quote from: Nigel on March 09, 2012, 04:09:49 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 09, 2012, 04:03:32 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 09, 2012, 04:01:58 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 09, 2012, 03:23:25 PM
So the other night I discovered that not only does my ex still considers me (and apparently, most of the black people in the Pacific NW) "culturally white", but he has no idea that our daughter identifies as African American.
I don't have the heart to tell her that she's not legally black.
The phrase "culturally white" is so fucking stupid it makes my eye twitch.
but fuck it, from now on I'm culturally black.
Actually, I could probably believe that.
Yeah, I assumed that ECH was black or native for the longest time. Even after I met him, because appearances can be deceiving.
He is clearly culturally black. :lulz:
So, possibly the most offensive part of the evening is when I said "You see, when you state that educated and articulate black people are culturally white, you are designating education and articulation as necessarily white qualities" and my ex said "YES, that's exactly what I mean!"
I
can't
even
:mad:
You DAMN RIGHT it is!
\
:redneck2:
jesus. what a dick.
so, does he mean that education and the concomitant articulateness (actually a word. i checked) are associated with white people due to a system that denied it to black people historically, or that its association is due to an intrinsic aspect of the races? if you said 'necessarily white qualities' it seems that it would be the latter, but id hope that the BOD is justified...
What's really amazing to me is that he believes that, despite all the examples to the contrary, i.e. educated articulate black people and dumb-as-fuck drawling white people.
Quote from: Nigel on March 09, 2012, 04:09:49 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 09, 2012, 04:03:32 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 09, 2012, 04:01:58 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 09, 2012, 03:23:25 PM
So the other night I discovered that not only does my ex still considers me (and apparently, most of the black people in the Pacific NW) "culturally white", but he has no idea that our daughter identifies as African American.
I don't have the heart to tell her that she's not legally black.
The phrase "culturally white" is so fucking stupid it makes my eye twitch.
but fuck it, from now on I'm culturally black.
Actually, I could probably believe that.
Yeah, I assumed that ECH was black or native for the longest time. Even after I met him, because appearances can be deceiving.
He is clearly culturally black. :lulz:
So, possibly the most offensive part of the evening is when I said "You see, when you state that educated and articulate black people are culturally white, you are designating education and articulation as necessarily white qualities" and my ex said "YES, that's exactly what I mean!"
I
can't
even
:mad:
Woooooow
Quote from: Iptuous on March 09, 2012, 04:21:23 PM
jesus. what a dick.
so, does he mean that education and the concomitant articulateness (actually a word. i checked) are associated with white people due to a system that denied it to black people historically, or that its association is due to an intrinsic aspect of the races? if you said 'necessarily white qualities' it seems that it would be the latter, but id hope that the BOD is justified...
Well, he's linking it to culture, so essentially what he's saying is that education is a white cultural phenomenon.
He seems absolutely unable to grasp the concept that education is largely a function of class, not race, and that the reason that fewer black people have historically attained high levels of education in America is because they were blocked from the upper classes.
There is also the problem of conflating race and culture. Black is not a culture, and White is not a culture. There are subcultures that are predominantly White or predominantly Black, but even in those there is crossover... trailer trash, for example. Is "trailer" a race-linked culture?
There's also the conflation of "Southern" with "Black". Here in the NW, there is a cultural difference between Black families who have been here a few generations, and Black families who moved here from the South in the last 50 years (There has been a large influx from the South, starting in the 60's). Much of what he is mistaking for "Black" is actually "Southern".
Not to say that there aren't distinct and recognizable subcultures within various regional and racial groupings, or that the subcultures may be partially defined by race, but the subcultures are not defining qualities
of race.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 09, 2012, 04:23:42 PM
What's really amazing to me is that he believes that, despite all the examples to the contrary, i.e. educated articulate black people and dumb-as-fuck drawling white people.
Annnnnnd this.
I cannot believe I was married to that man.
[EDIT: Oops, Nigel beat me to the education point...sorta.]
What suddenly occurs to me is that this very concept might be part of the reason why racial equality (and therefore, race becoming a non-issue) in this country is taking an agonizingly long time in this country.
White people receiving a good education & speaking articulately = expected
Black people receiving a good education & speaking articulately = BONUS if it happens but not a luxury we can always afford to make a reality.
Aside: Working-class neighborhoods in this country are becoming more and more multi-cultural and blended so money-pocket neighborhoods like Schaumberg, IL = good education. Everywhere else = subpar education.
HAY: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x918882
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 09, 2012, 04:23:42 PM
What's really amazing to me is that he believes that, despite all the examples to the contrary, i.e. educated articulate black people and dumb-as-fuck drawling white people.
you're certainly not calling a linguistic drawl a test for intelligence are you? :p
Nigel, it sounds like the problem on his part is an inability to see that correlation is not causation. how does he persist in his claim after you point out the obvious truths that you spell out here?
Quote from: Iptuous on March 09, 2012, 04:44:56 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 09, 2012, 04:23:42 PM
What's really amazing to me is that he believes that, despite all the examples to the contrary, i.e. educated articulate black people and dumb-as-fuck drawling white people.
you're certainly not calling a linguistic drawl a test for intelligence are you? :p
Nigel, it sounds like the problem on his part is an inability to see that correlation is not causation. how does he persist in his claim after you point out the obvious truths that you spell out here?
He persists by being big, loud and obnoxious until everyone gives up trying to talk to him.
Holy shit, I just realized that he and ECH must NEVER meet because I think ECH wouldn't be able to resist the urge to beat the crap out of him.
never say never.
i mean, don't say never.
i mean... ECH should beat the crap out of him.
Quote from: Iptuous on March 09, 2012, 04:51:57 PM
never say never.
i mean, don't say never.
i mean... ECH should beat the crap out of him.
I was thinking precisely that. :lulz:
In all honesty though, has your ex ever been outside of the PNW? I ask particularly because you say that he conflates a lot of "Southern" culture with "Black" culture, and it makes me think that he is very culturally... isolated? i don't think that's necessarily the right word, but it will do for now.
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on March 09, 2012, 10:39:52 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 09, 2012, 04:51:57 PM
never say never.
i mean, don't say never.
i mean... ECH should beat the crap out of him.
I was thinking precisely that. :lulz:
In all honesty though, has your ex ever been outside of the PNW? I ask particularly because you say that he conflates a lot of "Southern" culture with "Black" culture, and it makes me think that he is very culturally... isolated? i don't think that's necessarily the right word, but it will do for now.
He's traveled, but he's from Beaverton.
He thinks he's very sophisticated and cosmopolitan because he's been to Italy. :lulz:
Beaverton: It's not quite Lake Oswego!
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 10, 2012, 12:11:06 AM
Beaverton: It's not quite Lake Oswego!
Perfect description! :lulz:
Ah. Every time I think about this "culturally white" I think "how is that a thing?" Seriously. :?
perhaps it means like Uncle Ruckus from Boondocks?
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wJ1-zHF8DiA/0.jpg)
I just realized: by your ex's theory, Nelson Mandela is culturally white.
And, just saying, so is Samuel L Jackson.
So, yeah.
I am culturally Naavi.
Also black people = poop is an analogy which never gets old:
(http://i.imgur.com/pRNtn.jpg)
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 10, 2012, 04:08:47 AM
I just realized: by your ex's theory, Nelson Mandela is culturally white.
And, just saying, so is Samuel L Jackson.
So, yeah.
I'm going to have to point this out to him.
Also, Cain, "culturally Naavi" :lulz:
This might have been covered before, but I'm a forgetfulspag
Is there a not-racist word for "mulatto"? Cause I'm pretty sure that's an awful racist word, but I don't know anything else that communicates the idea clearly, and I don't want to offend anyone by saying things like "mulatto girls are the hottest." And they totally are.
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 11, 2012, 08:45:31 PM
This might have been covered before, but I'm a forgetfulspag
Is there a not-racist word for "mulatto"? Cause I'm pretty sure that's an awful racist word, but I don't know anything else that communicates the idea clearly, and I don't want to offend anyone by saying things like "mulatto girls are the hottest." And they totally are.
"Mixed".
It actually describes any admixture, whereas "Mulatto" is specifically half-black, half-white. It goes:
1/2 black = Mulatto
1/4 black = Quadroon
1/8 black = Octoroon or High Yellow
1/16 black = Hexideciroon, "A Little Dirty" or "Russell"
"mixed-race" or "multi-ethnic" sound a little overly PC but they both get the job done.
And yeah, they totally are.
"Mixed race" could just as easily apply to "half-asian," though.
Although half-asian chicks are pretty hot, too...
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 11, 2012, 09:24:01 PM
"Mixed race" could just as easily apply to "half-asian," though.
Although half-asian chicks are pretty hot, too...
Is there some kind of problem with "half-black"?
For that matter, how often do you find yourself making blanket statements about the sexual desirability of various races? Because, honestly, I'm thinking that if this is a linguistic need you frequently find yourself struggling with, there may be other issues you need to address.
Quote from: Nigel on March 11, 2012, 09:28:13 PM
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 11, 2012, 09:24:01 PM
"Mixed race" could just as easily apply to "half-asian," though.
Although half-asian chicks are pretty hot, too...
Is there some kind of problem with "half-black"?
For that matter, how often do you find yourself making blanket statements about the sexual desirability of various races? Because, honestly, I'm thinking that if this is a linguistic need you frequently find yourself struggling with, there may be other issues you need to address.
I don't see how it's too much different from "I like blonde chicks" or "native american girls have sexy cheek bones" or "arab women have the most beautiful fucking hair ever" or "asian women remind me too much of creepy porn." Physical attraction is based on physical characteristics, and race is one way of grouping together people with similar physical traits.
And you're right, half-black is a perfectly acceptable term. I guess the hyphen just makes it feel a little clumsy.
Well, it becomes an issue when racial requirements figure into your dating plans, like, in the words of one of our more notorious posters, "I wouldn't date anyone less than 15/16th's white". Mercifully, the question of how they would figure out the borderline cases was not brought up, due to a bunch of whole other racist comments concerning rape and Black History Month and so on.
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 11, 2012, 09:37:35 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 11, 2012, 09:28:13 PM
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 11, 2012, 09:24:01 PM
"Mixed race" could just as easily apply to "half-asian," though.
Although half-asian chicks are pretty hot, too...
Is there some kind of problem with "half-black"?
For that matter, how often do you find yourself making blanket statements about the sexual desirability of various races? Because, honestly, I'm thinking that if this is a linguistic need you frequently find yourself struggling with, there may be other issues you need to address.
I don't see how it's too much different from "I like blonde chicks" or "native american girls have sexy cheek bones" or "arab women have the most beautiful fucking hair ever" or "asian women remind me too much of creepy porn." Physical attraction is based on physical characteristics, and race is one way of grouping together people with similar physical traits.
And you're right, half-black is a perfectly acceptable term. I guess the hyphen just makes it feel a little clumsy.
It's not different from the middle two of those statements; they are also blanket statements about the sexual desirability of various races. Which brings me back to the question, do you often find yourself making blanket statements about the sexual desirability of various races? If so, why? I'm just confused by why that would be a common conversation.
Mind you, your genitals are not bound by the typical rules of social good behavior; there is no affirmative action in sexual attraction. But it is a little weird to say things like "Asian women remind me too much of creepy porn" because you are categorically dismissing all Asian women, rather than being open to meeting and relating to them as individuals.
Also, newsflash; almost nobody likes it when you tell them that they're attractive because of their race. Nobody. You can say "you have beautiful hair!" and it's a compliment, but it feels weird and creepy when someone says "mixed-race girls have the most beautiful hair!". Do we? All of us? Oh, that's nice. We're interchangeable.
Racial generalizations can be useful in certain contexts. In a medical context, for example, you can say that black women are at higher risk for heart disease, and that's valid. In a social setting, however, saying shit like "Native American girls have beautiful cheekbones" just makes you that one creepy-ass white guy.
In my head, there is a major disconnect between "this huge swath of humanity doesn't do much for me visually" and "I would never consider getting to know someone from this huge swath of humanity."
And no, this is not a conversation that comes up basically ever, I just figured this was an acceptable place to ask the question since it's not something you bring up in polite company.
I understand wondering whether there is a socially acceptable word for mixed-race people. I was just curious about the example you gave.
It might be helpful to keep in mind that in general, there are very few occasions when the exact percentage of someone's ancestry is relevant. In almost all cases where it is relevant, it is for directly racist reasons. For example, the reason there are specific words for the percentage of African descent in a person's lineage is because they were words used on the auction block. Light-skinned black mixes, usually the offspring of a slave owner and his slaves, were especially desirable for house servants and sex partners, and fetched the highest prices. It was said that a high-yellow such as myself made the best "mistresses".
If you're not buying or selling people based on their breed, for the most part there's no need for a special name for it.
I think it can get just plain silly after awhile. I had an ex-gf who has long, flaming red hair, and a pasy, snow-white complexion.
You never would've guessed she was part Native American, Russian, and French. Not a drop of Irish in her whatsoever.
So I don't even know why people factor race into the equation at all. Seems kind of nonsensical to me.
Indeed.
I am very attracted to women with olive/tan skin, dark hair, dark eyes, and curves. I give not a shit if they're asian, latina, native american, persian, or what have you.
Mulatto doesn't sound racist to me. Sounds like a coffee or dessert
Quote from: Nigel on March 11, 2012, 10:30:57 PM
I understand wondering whether there is a socially acceptable word for mixed-race people. I was just curious about the example you gave.
It might be helpful to keep in mind that in general, there are very few occasions when the exact percentage of someone's ancestry is relevant. In almost all cases where it is relevant, it is for directly racist reasons. For example, the reason there are specific words for the percentage of African descent in a person's lineage is because they were words used on the auction block. Light-skinned black mixes, usually the offspring of a slave owner and his slaves, were especially desirable for house servants and sex partners, and fetched the highest prices. It was said that a high-yellow such as myself made the best "mistresses".
If you're not buying or selling people based on their breed, for the most part there's no need for a special name for it.
There's the part my brain was overlooking that takes it from "socially awkward" to "offensive." Now I feel dirty
and stupid.
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2012, 11:54:20 PM
Mulatto doesn't sound racist to me. Sounds like a coffee or dessert
It does sound delicious! And an Octoroon sounds like a crunchy cookie.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:08:02 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2012, 11:54:20 PM
Mulatto doesn't sound racist to me. Sounds like a coffee or dessert
It does sound delicious! And an Octoroon sounds like a crunchy cookie.
I actually thought that they were when I was younger.
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 12, 2012, 12:29:42 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 11, 2012, 10:30:57 PM
I understand wondering whether there is a socially acceptable word for mixed-race people. I was just curious about the example you gave.
It might be helpful to keep in mind that in general, there are very few occasions when the exact percentage of someone's ancestry is relevant. In almost all cases where it is relevant, it is for directly racist reasons. For example, the reason there are specific words for the percentage of African descent in a person's lineage is because they were words used on the auction block. Light-skinned black mixes, usually the offspring of a slave owner and his slaves, were especially desirable for house servants and sex partners, and fetched the highest prices. It was said that a high-yellow such as myself made the best "mistresses".
If you're not buying or selling people based on their breed, for the most part there's no need for a special name for it.
There's the part my brain was overlooking that takes it from "socially awkward" to "offensive." Now I feel dirty and stupid.
Don't feel dirty and stupid... you asked, which meant you were seeking knowledge in order to NOT be offensive. That's a good thing. Sometimes it just takes hearing the right things for everything to click.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:08:02 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2012, 11:54:20 PM
Mulatto doesn't sound racist to me. Sounds like a coffee or dessert
It does sound delicious! And an Octoroon sounds like a crunchy cookie.
I like to dunk my octoroons in a nice big cup of mulatto.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:08:02 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2012, 11:54:20 PM
Mulatto doesn't sound racist to me. Sounds like a coffee or dessert
It does sound delicious! And an Octoroon sounds like a crunchy cookie.
I would punch a fucking girl scout for another one of them bitches...oh wait, that's a Samoa...oh wait, no it's not. They renamed the Samoas to "Caramel Delights" because they sounded racist.
Ho hum.
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.slashfood.com/media/2008/03/samoa.jpg)
Even more fucked up: "colored folk" being racist against other same-colored folk:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_based_on_skin_color#Brown_paper_bag_test
Just like the skirt test in the 60s where they would make us bitches kneel on the floor n shit to make sure our skirts touched the floor! Except more demeaning! :horrormirth:!!!
I hear white kids around here describing their friends as "redbones" and "yellowbones". They don't seem to mean it in a racist way, but isn't that kind of fucked up?
Quote from: navkat on March 12, 2012, 04:06:23 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:08:02 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2012, 11:54:20 PM
Mulatto doesn't sound racist to me. Sounds like a coffee or dessert
It does sound delicious! And an Octoroon sounds like a crunchy cookie.
I would punch a fucking girl scout for another one of them bitches...oh wait, that's a Samoa...oh wait, no it's not. They renamed the Samoas to "Caramel Delights" because they sounded racist.
Ho hum.
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.slashfood.com/media/2008/03/samoa.jpg)
Even more fucked up: "colored folk" being racist against other same-colored folk:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_based_on_skin_color#Brown_paper_bag_test
Just like the skirt test in the 60s where they would make us bitches kneel on the floor n shit to make sure our skirts touched the floor! Except more demeaning! :horrormirth:!!!
I'm holding a brand new box of Samoas.
That's funny, cause I was forced to buy Caramel dLites here in 'Bama...maybe cuzza all them NeoCons around here, protectin my free speech n shit.
http://www.chacha.com/question/why-did-girl-scout-cookies-rename-samoas-to-caramel-delight
Quote from: navkat on March 12, 2012, 04:18:14 AM
That's funny, cause I was forced to buy Caramel dLites here in 'Bama...maybe cuzza all them NeoCons around here, protectin my free speech n shit.
http://www.chacha.com/question/why-did-girl-scout-cookies-rename-samoas-to-caramel-delight
That is so weird. This is the second box I've had since they started selling cookies this season.
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 04:22:18 AM
Quote from: navkat on March 12, 2012, 04:18:14 AM
That's funny, cause I was forced to buy Caramel dLites here in 'Bama...maybe cuzza all them NeoCons around here, protectin my free speech n shit.
http://www.chacha.com/question/why-did-girl-scout-cookies-rename-samoas-to-caramel-delight
That is so weird. This is the second box I've had since they started selling cookies this season.
I should punch you in the FAYCE and eat your cookies.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 03:11:13 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:08:02 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2012, 11:54:20 PM
Mulatto doesn't sound racist to me. Sounds like a coffee or dessert
It does sound delicious! And an Octoroon sounds like a crunchy cookie.
I like to dunk my octoroons in a nice big cup of mulatto.
That's what I was thinking! :lulz:
Quote from: navkat on March 12, 2012, 04:06:23 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:08:02 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2012, 11:54:20 PM
Mulatto doesn't sound racist to me. Sounds like a coffee or dessert
It does sound delicious! And an Octoroon sounds like a crunchy cookie.
I would punch a fucking girl scout for another one of them bitches...oh wait, that's a Samoa...oh wait, no it's not. They renamed the Samoas to "Caramel Delights" because they sounded racist.
Ho hum.
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.slashfood.com/media/2008/03/samoa.jpg)
Even more fucked up: "colored folk" being racist against other same-colored folk:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_based_on_skin_color#Brown_paper_bag_test
Just like the skirt test in the 60s where they would make us bitches kneel on the floor n shit to make sure our skirts touched the floor! Except more demeaning! :horrormirth:!!!
It is fucked up. And, weirdly, I've experienced it plenty. In addition, there's this complicating factor, which is that my school is over 50% black, AND AND AND... the other light-skinned black girls seek me out, because there's this kinship recognition thing going on, AND
it's actually oddly comforting to be surrounded by people who are a similar racial blend as me.
And then I find myself wondering if that's racist.
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 04:11:00 AM
I hear white kids around here describing their friends as "redbones" and "yellowbones". They don't seem to mean it in a racist way, but isn't that kind of fucked up?
It's one of those things that might or might not be. Like, recognizing and verbalizing a fucked-up something that already exists in society and turning it into a "claiming" can be empowering rather than denigrating (ie. the queer community reclaiming "queer) or it can be a perpetuation.
Quote from: navkat on March 12, 2012, 04:18:14 AM
That's funny, cause I was forced to buy Caramel dLites here in 'Bama...maybe cuzza all them NeoCons around here, protectin my free speech n shit.
http://www.chacha.com/question/why-did-girl-scout-cookies-rename-samoas-to-caramel-delight
I can see both sides, really. On one hand, it's hard to argue that the box of cookies is actually denigrating to Samoans, because it seems like such an innocuous thing. I mean, calling a type of cookies "Jews" would be pretty odd, but what if they were called "Israels" because of a coincidence of ingredients with something traditionally associated with Israel?
However, when people complain and say "we find this denigrating", the thing to remember is that they may have historical reasons to find it denigrating that you and I completely lack the context to even have any idea about. A really great example of this is the Australian KFC ad with Australian black people enjoying the shit out of fried chicken, and spreading goodwill at a football game by sharing it. In Australia, to Australians, the message was simply "This wonderful recipe of fried chicken is so delicious that everyone will lay down their territorial differences and feast in brotherhood". But in the U.S., there is a specific and deeply reinforced racial mockery associated with black people eating fried chicken that is so intense that the commercial appeared profoundly racist here, and generated intense outrage, even though everyone else in the entire world was all "WTF? How is that racist? We don't get it."
So, my takeaway message is basically that you don't know what you don't know, and I may never actually understand why calling a delicious cookie "Samoas" is offensive to Samoans, but they say it is, and since I have other things to do besides research their cultural heritage (interesting as it may be) I will just assume that they have good reasons for it and leave it at that.
They should have renamed them "Tongas" and watched the Samoans REALLY lose their shit. :lulz:
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 05:14:58 AM
They should have renamed them "Tongas" and watched the Samoans REALLY lose their shit. :lulz:
OSHIT
:lulz:
I think I'll ask some Samoans I know about this.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 04:54:48 AM
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 04:11:00 AM
I hear white kids around here describing their friends as "redbones" and "yellowbones". They don't seem to mean it in a racist way, but isn't that kind of fucked up?
It's one of those things that might or might not be. Like, recognizing and verbalizing a fucked-up something that already exists in society and turning it into a "claiming" can be empowering rather than denigrating (ie. the queer community reclaiming "queer) or it can be a perpetuation.
Every time I've heard it, it's been complimentary, like "He's fine, kinda tall, he's yellowbone..."
It just seems kind of dicey hearing white kids do it, maybe everybody is alright with it here but it might not go over so well in another region.
I'd never heard the term "redbone" until I started hanging out in VA but everyone here uses it and it doesn't seem to have any negative connotations or racial baggage attached to it.
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 08:39:52 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 04:54:48 AM
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 04:11:00 AM
I hear white kids around here describing their friends as "redbones" and "yellowbones". They don't seem to mean it in a racist way, but isn't that kind of fucked up?
It's one of those things that might or might not be. Like, recognizing and verbalizing a fucked-up something that already exists in society and turning it into a "claiming" can be empowering rather than denigrating (ie. the queer community reclaiming "queer) or it can be a perpetuation.
Every time I've heard it, it's been complimentary, like "He's fine, kinda tall, he's yellowbone..."
It just seems kind of dicey hearing white kids do it, maybe everybody is alright with it here but it might not go over so well in another region.
I've never heard those terms before in my life, to tell the truth. I don't know what to make of them at all.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 02:46:52 PM
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 08:39:52 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 04:54:48 AM
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 04:11:00 AM
I hear white kids around here describing their friends as "redbones" and "yellowbones". They don't seem to mean it in a racist way, but isn't that kind of fucked up?
It's one of those things that might or might not be. Like, recognizing and verbalizing a fucked-up something that already exists in society and turning it into a "claiming" can be empowering rather than denigrating (ie. the queer community reclaiming "queer) or it can be a perpetuation.
Every time I've heard it, it's been complimentary, like "He's fine, kinda tall, he's yellowbone..."
It just seems kind of dicey hearing white kids do it, maybe everybody is alright with it here but it might not go over so well in another region.
I've never heard those terms before in my life, to tell the truth. I don't know what to make of them at all.
Same here... redbone and yellowbone... I have no idea what the heck it would even begin to mean.
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
Well, yeah. It kind of makes you an object - or a flavor - to that sort of person.
I've only heard the term redbone used once, to describe a black woman, by a few black friends of mine. To be honest I don't even recall what the woman looked like. I think she might have had reddish hair.
A quick search later and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redbone_%28ethnicity%29
QuoteIt had various meanings according to locality, most implying race mixture or miscegenation[1]. The racial mix is usually referred to as Tri-racial and may be any combination of the following: Native American, European Caucasian (i.e. English, French, Irish, Welsh, Portuguese, Spanish), Asians, or Moor, Turk, and any of the various African sub-groups[2].
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 12, 2012, 03:32:00 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
Well, yeah. It kind of makes you an object - or a flavor - to that sort of person.
Yeah, that's what bothers me.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:49:44 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 12, 2012, 03:32:00 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
Well, yeah. It kind of makes you an object - or a flavor - to that sort of person.
Yeah, that's what bothers me.
Yeah.
That and the old Richard Pryor character "Mudbone"...I'd be leery of anything that has a variety called "mud".
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
In that context, yeah, but I've never heard it used in the context of denoting sexual attractiveness. At least in the Tidewater area, it seems to just be a slang word for "part black, part something else".
In short, if not a single black person that I know finds the term offensive, I don't see why I should.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:26:02 PM
In short, if not a single black person that I know finds the term offensive, I don't see why I should.
Maybe nobody you know, but http://www.skincaretalk.com/t/12928/redbone-yellowbone#post_179656
Stuff that's acceptable between friends or in a single community can be wildly different from the norm.
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 04:48:42 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:26:02 PM
In short, if not a single black person that I know finds the term offensive, I don't see why I should.
Maybe nobody you know, but http://www.skincaretalk.com/t/12928/redbone-yellowbone#post_179656
So one guy says he thinks the terms are stupid, but I don't see anyone on there saying they think it's a racist term. There is, IMO, a rather large gulf between "stupid" and "offensive".
Mind you I don't and wouldn't use either term myself, I just don't see any evidence of them being racist terms. It'd be like thinking it was racist if someone said I had a ruddy complexion.
Considering that we live in a country where the use of the word "niggardly" is considered racist, I'm not even gonna go near Redbone/Yellowbone.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 12, 2012, 06:11:09 PM
Considering that we live in a country where the use of the word "niggardly" is considered racist,
I think that's more a function of illiteracy than anything else.
A combination of illiteracy and white people being so scared to be perceived as racist that they'll err on the side of caution to the point of ridiculousness.
I don't worry about that, since I couldn't give less of a fuck if someone mistakenly thinks I'm a racist. I know what's in my heart and am confident in that. And anyone that thinks I'm a racist obviously doesn't know the first thing about me anyway.
Actually in all fairness I do harbor some internal racism, it's just all directed at white people. but on a case-by-case basis some of you are OK. :lulz:
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 06:24:30 PM
A combination of illiteracy and white people being so scared to be perceived as racist that they'll err on the side of caution to the point of ridiculousness.
I don't worry about that, since I couldn't give less of a fuck if someone mistakenly thinks I'm a racist. I know what's in my heart and am confident in that. And anyone that thinks I'm a racist obviously doesn't know the first thing about me anyway.
Actually in all fairness I do harbor some internal racism, it's just all directed at white people. but on a case-by-case basis some of you are OK. :lulz:
Does hating the human race count as racism?
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:25:12 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
In that context, yeah, but I've never heard it used in the context of denoting sexual attractiveness. At least in the Tidewater area, it seems to just be a slang word for "part black, part something else".
Without sexual connotation I find it less disturbing. Out here we just call it "light". I mean, I am not a huge fan of the common Black practice of categorizing people by skin tone because it's a social hierarchy thing and I know where it came from, but other than that it's not overtly offensive. I guess. Mixed feelings here. (Oh fuck, undeliberate pun! I'm going to leave it.)
The social hierarchy issues associated with skin tone and hair texture are really bothersome. I won't go into the nuances of it right now, but there is a fucked up social dynamic within black communities that is directly descended from the way people were valued in the slave days. A light girl on a plantation would become a house servant because she was more "presentable", so she would be groomed and educated to a certain degree, and possibly even treated with affection (she would probably also be subjected to frequent rape, but hey).
The cultural residue of the higher value (and better treatment) of light-skinned mixes translates to higher social status to this day, and frequently that social status is accompanied by resentment and distrust (often unconscious) on the part of darker-skinned people. Weird dynamic all around. The result is that a weird cliquishness forms around skin tone, and dark girls often won't even try to befriend light girls because they think we're stuck up. And then we often don't approach them because we think they're aloof. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
I did not know that. I thought it was just a descriptor used. "Which black guy?" 'Oh the tall light-skinned guy." which is how I've had people described to me by black people.
Huh, Wikipedia says that "Redbone" is an ethnic group: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redbone_%28ethnicity%29
That actually makes sense. A shit ton more sense than it just being a word for a skin tone.
My grandmother's family was from the Carolinas, so probably I'm technically a redbone. :lulz:
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:10:36 PM
I did not know that. I thought it was just a descriptor used. "Which black guy?" 'Oh the tall light-skinned guy." which is how I've had people described to me by black people.
It's also a descriptor. It's just one that's loaded with cultural connotations, like "Ginger" is.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:15:04 PM
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:10:36 PM
I did not know that. I thought it was just a descriptor used. "Which black guy?" 'Oh the tall light-skinned guy." which is how I've had people described to me by black people.
It's also a descriptor. It's just one that's loaded with cultural connotations, like "Ginger" is.
Wait, ginger has other stuff going with it? So I can legit lose my shit when people call me one?
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:15:50 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:15:04 PM
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:10:36 PM
I did not know that. I thought it was just a descriptor used. "Which black guy?" 'Oh the tall light-skinned guy." which is how I've had people described to me by black people.
It's also a descriptor. It's just one that's loaded with cultural connotations, like "Ginger" is.
Wait, ginger has other stuff going with it? So I can legit lose my shit when people call me one?
Why not? I do.
Especially when they make comments about gingers being hot-tempered.
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 04:48:42 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:26:02 PM
In short, if not a single black person that I know finds the term offensive, I don't see why I should.
Maybe nobody you know, but http://www.skincaretalk.com/t/12928/redbone-yellowbone#post_179656
Man, that thread is a perfect example of the obsession with categorizing people by skin tone. Check out the girls who are annoyed by caramel girls calling themselves light. :lol:
I see you as culturally white, no matter how ginger you may be.
Quote from: Cain on March 12, 2012, 07:20:37 PM
I see you as culturally white, no matter how ginger you may be.
ARRRRRR, YOU YOU...You are absolutely right. In fact, I fit just about every descriptor of being culturally White.
Advantaged childhood.
Decent education.
Somewhat complacent.
I don't think about race much, because I'm not impacted by it.
Most of my concerns are definitely first-world problems (SHIT! I'm down to ONE car!)
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 12, 2012, 07:19:34 PM
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:15:50 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:15:04 PM
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:10:36 PM
I did not know that. I thought it was just a descriptor used. "Which black guy?" 'Oh the tall light-skinned guy." which is how I've had people described to me by black people.
It's also a descriptor. It's just one that's loaded with cultural connotations, like "Ginger" is.
Wait, ginger has other stuff going with it? So I can legit lose my shit when people call me one?
Why not? I do.
Especially when they make comments about gingers being hot-tempered.
I already lose my shit when people ask me if I am Irish.
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:30:47 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 12, 2012, 07:19:34 PM
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:15:50 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:15:04 PM
Quote from: Guru Coyote on March 12, 2012, 07:10:36 PM
I did not know that. I thought it was just a descriptor used. "Which black guy?" 'Oh the tall light-skinned guy." which is how I've had people described to me by black people.
It's also a descriptor. It's just one that's loaded with cultural connotations, like "Ginger" is.
Wait, ginger has other stuff going with it? So I can legit lose my shit when people call me one?
Why not? I do.
Especially when they make comments about gingers being hot-tempered.
I already lose my shit when people ask me if I am Irish.
Most Welshmen do, for reasons that escape me.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:25:12 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
In that context, yeah, but I've never heard it used in the context of denoting sexual attractiveness. At least in the Tidewater area, it seems to just be a slang word for "part black, part something else".
Without sexual connotation I find it less disturbing. Out here we just call it "light". I mean, I am not a huge fan of the common Black practice of categorizing people by skin tone because it's a social hierarchy thing and I know where it came from, but other than that it's not overtly offensive. I guess. Mixed feelings here. (Oh fuck, undeliberate pun! I'm going to leave it.)
The social hierarchy issues associated with skin tone and hair texture are really bothersome. I won't go into the nuances of it right now, but there is a fucked up social dynamic within black communities that is directly descended from the way people were valued in the slave days. A light girl on a plantation would become a house servant because she was more "presentable", so she would be groomed and educated to a certain degree, and possibly even treated with affection (she would probably also be subjected to frequent rape, but hey).
The cultural residue of the higher value (and better treatment) of light-skinned mixes translates to higher social status to this day, and frequently that social status is accompanied by resentment and distrust (often unconscious) on the part of darker-skinned people. Weird dynamic all around. The result is that a weird cliquishness forms around skin tone, and dark girls often won't even try to befriend light girls because they think we're stuck up. And then we often don't approach them because we think they're aloof. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
I saw it in my own circles, growing up. As an "outsider," I was sort of exempt from a lot of racial role-assignment because I was left completely out of any hierarchy. As a result, I "got around." Sort of a social nomad, I got to see the "inside" of a lot of different groups from the outside, follow?
So I'd see black girls picking on one another for everything from lip-size to who has a "gap." ...A crotch-gap where the thighs touch but there's a little triangle of space, and "who got a bubble-butt." The girls would get black and latina fashion magazines and
rip the models to shreds. People of all colors making fun of each other for everything from "who shops at Brent City," to (please excuse my candor) "bodega niggas who can't afford new sneakahs."
Girls would join kickline and cheerleading, only to mercilessly make fun of each other for what jiggled and what color it was. Latinas and latinos making fun--and then later, extremely violent beatings--for who looks like a "Salvie" (El Salvadorian) and for having "Puerto Rican ears." (WTF?) You had P.R. people getting KKK-level racist about blacks and latinos that "should go back to their
own country."
Don't even get me started on the Asian population: Japanese hate Chinese. Taiwanese distinguish themselves from everyone else.
Everyone hates the Koreans.
Then you had the white stoners. Now, believe me when I say that I'm not biased against my own race. I've traveled enough and got around the Island and the City enough to understand that it was different in other places but to me, it seemed like the white people I grew up with were the least-smart, least honest and sometimes the trashiest fuckers to walk the earth. Now, I know there were waaaay worse areas of Brentwood but these motherfuckers would have multi-race friends at school they'd act cool with and then ride around town all summer, stealing radios, stealing bikes, acting like punks, talking about carrying a "nigger be good stick." Sometimes it was the "Spick be good stick." They could afford to be stupid so they were.
Kids, left alone too much by working parents. Latch-key kids, all of us (in Reaganomics-speak, that roughly translates into: "We needed a word to make it okay for 2-income families to leave 7-year-old kids alone because they can't afford daycare so we made one up.") Listening to "L.I.H.C." Willfully ignorant. "Who the fuck is Jack Kerra-whack? Let's get a bottle of Cisco from the Shitgo and go hang out in the convent. God, Jenn, why you gotta use so much big words?" Italian pride. Irish Pride. Fucking white boys who'd never been to either place...whose
parents had never been further than Jersey, most likely.
Gay-bashing. All races. Jai (David) Rodriguez went to my school--my sister's class. It's different now but until 1996, it was still very not cool for people to be gay. I used to volunteer at an organization called LIGaLY in Bay Shore. People from the Island act today like they never even
heard of gay-bashing but I took the phonecalls on the crisis line. I hugged people who cried on me for hours because they had to be a "minority" (a word that was spat out by whites the way one would spit out the word "nigger,")
and gay...or even
worse, lesbian. I think the latinos were the cruelest about that.
People are fucked up creatures to each other. Racism is just a
brand. And I'm grateful for it, really because we have
words for it. We can define it, call it what it is and fucking make contact with something tangible when we punch it upside its ugly head. Make progress that we can see.
What do we call the nasty shit people do to each other that has no name? At the root of allllll this racism and classism and gayism, skinnyism and smartism from the outside aaaand within one's own group, is simply this: "I have shit that hurts so bad, I want to lash out so I've spun an intricate web for myself (or climbed into one pre-made) of reasons why the scapegoat can be you."
There's a few bars in our BIP, right there. All of us. Every fucking one of us.
Quote from: navkat on March 12, 2012, 08:42:35 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:25:12 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
In that context, yeah, but I've never heard it used in the context of denoting sexual attractiveness. At least in the Tidewater area, it seems to just be a slang word for "part black, part something else".
Without sexual connotation I find it less disturbing. Out here we just call it "light". I mean, I am not a huge fan of the common Black practice of categorizing people by skin tone because it's a social hierarchy thing and I know where it came from, but other than that it's not overtly offensive. I guess. Mixed feelings here. (Oh fuck, undeliberate pun! I'm going to leave it.)
The social hierarchy issues associated with skin tone and hair texture are really bothersome. I won't go into the nuances of it right now, but there is a fucked up social dynamic within black communities that is directly descended from the way people were valued in the slave days. A light girl on a plantation would become a house servant because she was more "presentable", so she would be groomed and educated to a certain degree, and possibly even treated with affection (she would probably also be subjected to frequent rape, but hey).
The cultural residue of the higher value (and better treatment) of light-skinned mixes translates to higher social status to this day, and frequently that social status is accompanied by resentment and distrust (often unconscious) on the part of darker-skinned people. Weird dynamic all around. The result is that a weird cliquishness forms around skin tone, and dark girls often won't even try to befriend light girls because they think we're stuck up. And then we often don't approach them because we think they're aloof. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
I saw it in my own circles, growing up. As an "outsider," I was sort of exempt from a lot of racial role-assignment because I was left completely out of any hierarchy. As a result, I "got around." Sort of a social nomad, I got to see the "inside" of a lot of different groups from the outside, follow?
So I'd see black girls picking on one another for everything from lip-size to who has a "gap." ...A crotch-gap where the thighs touch but there's a little triangle of space, and "who got a bubble-butt." The girls would get black and latina fashion magazines and rip the models to shreds. People of all colors making fun of each other for everything from "who shops at Brent City," to (please excuse my candor) "bodega niggas who can't afford new sneakahs."
Girls would join kickline and cheerleading, only to mercilessly make fun of each other for what jiggled and what color it was. Latinas and latinos making fun--and then later, extremely violent beatings--for who looks like a "Salvie" (El Salvadorian) and for having "Puerto Rican ears." (WTF?) You had P.R. people getting KKK-level racist about blacks and latinos that "should go back to their own country."
Don't even get me started on the Asian population: Japanese hate Chinese. Taiwanese distinguish themselves from everyone else. Everyone hates the Koreans.
Then you had the white stoners. Now, believe me when I say that I'm not biased against my own race. I've traveled enough and got around the Island and the City enough to understand that it was different in other places but to me, it seemed like the white people I grew up with were the least-smart, least honest and sometimes the trashiest fuckers to walk the earth. Now, I know there were waaaay worse areas of Brentwood but these motherfuckers would have multi-race friends at school they'd act cool with and then ride around town all summer, stealing radios, stealing bikes, acting like punks, talking about carrying a "nigger be good stick." Sometimes it was the "Spick be good stick." They could afford to be stupid so they were.
Kids, left alone too much by working parents. Latch-key kids, all of us (in Reaganomics-speak, that roughly translates into: "We needed a word to make it okay for 2-income families to leave 7-year-old kids alone because they can't afford daycare so we made one up.") Listening to "L.I.H.C." Willfully ignorant. "Who the fuck is Jack Kerra-whack? Let's get a bottle of Cisco from the Shitgo and go hang out in the convent. God, Jenn, why you gotta use so much big words?" Italian pride. Irish Pride. Fucking white boys who'd never been to either place...whose parents had never been further than Jersey, most likely.
Gay-bashing. All races. Jai (David) Rodriguez went to my school--my sister's class. It's different now but until 1996, it was still very not cool for people to be gay. I used to volunteer at an organization called LIGaLY in Bay Shore. People from the Island act today like they never even heard of gay-bashing but I took the phonecalls on the crisis line. I hugged people who cried on me for hours because they had to be a "minority" (a word that was spat out by whites the way one would spit out the word "nigger,") and gay...or even worse, lesbian. I think the latinos were the cruelest about that.
People are fucked up creatures to each other. Racism is just a brand. And I'm grateful for it, really because we have words for it. We can define it, call it what it is and fucking make contact with something tangible when we punch it upside its ugly head. Make progress that we can see.
What do we call the nasty shit people do to each other that has no name? At the root of allllll this racism and classism and gayism, skinnyism and smartism from the outside aaaand within one's own group, is simply this: "I have shit that hurts so bad, I want to lash out so I've spun an intricate web for myself (or climbed into one pre-made) of reasons why the scapegoat can be you."
There's a few bars in our BIP, right there. All of us. Every fucking one of us.
Very well put.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:25:12 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
In that context, yeah, but I've never heard it used in the context of denoting sexual attractiveness. At least in the Tidewater area, it seems to just be a slang word for "part black, part something else".
Without sexual connotation I find it less disturbing. Out here we just call it "light". I mean, I am not a huge fan of the common Black practice of categorizing people by skin tone because it's a social hierarchy thing and I know where it came from, but other than that it's not overtly offensive. I guess. Mixed feelings here. (Oh fuck, undeliberate pun! I'm going to leave it.)
The social hierarchy issues associated with skin tone and hair texture are really bothersome. I won't go into the nuances of it right now, but there is a fucked up social dynamic within black communities that is directly descended from the way people were valued in the slave days. A light girl on a plantation would become a house servant because she was more "presentable", so she would be groomed and educated to a certain degree, and possibly even treated with affection (she would probably also be subjected to frequent rape, but hey).
The cultural residue of the higher value (and better treatment) of light-skinned mixes translates to higher social status to this day, and frequently that social status is accompanied by resentment and distrust (often unconscious) on the part of darker-skinned people. Weird dynamic all around. The result is that a weird cliquishness forms around skin tone, and dark girls often won't even try to befriend light girls because they think we're stuck up. And then we often don't approach them because we think they're aloof. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
I see Mexicans doing it too, favoring people with lighter skin and making comments like "My grandfather was Spanish, he had blue eyes" like it's somehow more special to have colonizing shitheels in the family than Indians.
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 09:11:51 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:25:12 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
In that context, yeah, but I've never heard it used in the context of denoting sexual attractiveness. At least in the Tidewater area, it seems to just be a slang word for "part black, part something else".
Without sexual connotation I find it less disturbing. Out here we just call it "light". I mean, I am not a huge fan of the common Black practice of categorizing people by skin tone because it's a social hierarchy thing and I know where it came from, but other than that it's not overtly offensive. I guess. Mixed feelings here. (Oh fuck, undeliberate pun! I'm going to leave it.)
The social hierarchy issues associated with skin tone and hair texture are really bothersome. I won't go into the nuances of it right now, but there is a fucked up social dynamic within black communities that is directly descended from the way people were valued in the slave days. A light girl on a plantation would become a house servant because she was more "presentable", so she would be groomed and educated to a certain degree, and possibly even treated with affection (she would probably also be subjected to frequent rape, but hey).
The cultural residue of the higher value (and better treatment) of light-skinned mixes translates to higher social status to this day, and frequently that social status is accompanied by resentment and distrust (often unconscious) on the part of darker-skinned people. Weird dynamic all around. The result is that a weird cliquishness forms around skin tone, and dark girls often won't even try to befriend light girls because they think we're stuck up. And then we often don't approach them because we think they're aloof. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
I see Mexicans doing it too, favoring people with lighter skin and making comments like "My grandfather was Spanish, he had blue eyes" like it's somehow more special to have colonizing shitheels in the family than Indians.
The Indios call them Gallegos, I am told, and despise them just as much.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 12, 2012, 06:38:28 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 06:24:30 PM
A combination of illiteracy and white people being so scared to be perceived as racist that they'll err on the side of caution to the point of ridiculousness.
I don't worry about that, since I couldn't give less of a fuck if someone mistakenly thinks I'm a racist. I know what's in my heart and am confident in that. And anyone that thinks I'm a racist obviously doesn't know the first thing about me anyway.
Actually in all fairness I do harbor some internal racism, it's just all directed at white people. but on a case-by-case basis some of you are OK. :lulz:
Does hating the human race count as racism?
No, that's speciesism.
Quote from: Waffle Iron on March 12, 2012, 09:23:52 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 12, 2012, 06:38:28 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 06:24:30 PM
A combination of illiteracy and white people being so scared to be perceived as racist that they'll err on the side of caution to the point of ridiculousness.
I don't worry about that, since I couldn't give less of a fuck if someone mistakenly thinks I'm a racist. I know what's in my heart and am confident in that. And anyone that thinks I'm a racist obviously doesn't know the first thing about me anyway.
Actually in all fairness I do harbor some internal racism, it's just all directed at white people. but on a case-by-case basis some of you are OK. :lulz:
Does hating the human race count as racism?
No, that's speciesism.
Oh, okay. Then I'm on solid ground.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 12, 2012, 09:12:39 PM
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 09:11:51 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:25:12 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
In that context, yeah, but I've never heard it used in the context of denoting sexual attractiveness. At least in the Tidewater area, it seems to just be a slang word for "part black, part something else".
Without sexual connotation I find it less disturbing. Out here we just call it "light". I mean, I am not a huge fan of the common Black practice of categorizing people by skin tone because it's a social hierarchy thing and I know where it came from, but other than that it's not overtly offensive. I guess. Mixed feelings here. (Oh fuck, undeliberate pun! I'm going to leave it.)
The social hierarchy issues associated with skin tone and hair texture are really bothersome. I won't go into the nuances of it right now, but there is a fucked up social dynamic within black communities that is directly descended from the way people were valued in the slave days. A light girl on a plantation would become a house servant because she was more "presentable", so she would be groomed and educated to a certain degree, and possibly even treated with affection (she would probably also be subjected to frequent rape, but hey).
The cultural residue of the higher value (and better treatment) of light-skinned mixes translates to higher social status to this day, and frequently that social status is accompanied by resentment and distrust (often unconscious) on the part of darker-skinned people. Weird dynamic all around. The result is that a weird cliquishness forms around skin tone, and dark girls often won't even try to befriend light girls because they think we're stuck up. And then we often don't approach them because we think they're aloof. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
I see Mexicans doing it too, favoring people with lighter skin and making comments like "My grandfather was Spanish, he had blue eyes" like it's somehow more special to have colonizing shitheels in the family than Indians.
The Indios call them Gallegos, I am told, and despise them just as much.
That one hasn't made it here yet, when it does at least I'll know what they're talking about now.
And we have white people who think Native Americans stop at the Rio Grand and Mexicans begin, I don't think they know what an Aztec is. And South Texas was Lipan Apache, a lot of the people here who identify as Mexican could be superimposed into a picture with Cochise's kids and you couldn't pick them out if you weren't familiar with the photo already. There's really no border at all, it's just political bs.
Peru had a similar thing - the upper class was pretty much "pureblood Spaniard", whatever that means (I suppose all those Moors and Visigoths kept to their own, amirite?), whereas the lower classes are mestizo - mixed Aymara and Spanish ancestery. As they are of much smaller build than the aristocratic Spanish (though that has much to do with a protein poor diet as anything), and of darker skin, and usually only speak broken Spanish, there was great value in being seen as lightskinned, as it held all the connotations of belonging to that aristocratic grouping.
The history of political involvement concerning the mestizos and Japanese-Peruvians is quite interesting - especially since the former tended to sympathise with the Shining Path, while one of the latter oversaw a near genocidal campaign against them.
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 09:26:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 12, 2012, 09:12:39 PM
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 09:11:51 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 12, 2012, 04:25:12 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 03:24:40 PM
I looked them up, and they're Southern terms that basically mean the same thing as high yellow, usually applied to females, with connotations of sexual attractiveness.
I find that uncomfortable on several levels, personally.
In that context, yeah, but I've never heard it used in the context of denoting sexual attractiveness. At least in the Tidewater area, it seems to just be a slang word for "part black, part something else".
Without sexual connotation I find it less disturbing. Out here we just call it "light". I mean, I am not a huge fan of the common Black practice of categorizing people by skin tone because it's a social hierarchy thing and I know where it came from, but other than that it's not overtly offensive. I guess. Mixed feelings here. (Oh fuck, undeliberate pun! I'm going to leave it.)
The social hierarchy issues associated with skin tone and hair texture are really bothersome. I won't go into the nuances of it right now, but there is a fucked up social dynamic within black communities that is directly descended from the way people were valued in the slave days. A light girl on a plantation would become a house servant because she was more "presentable", so she would be groomed and educated to a certain degree, and possibly even treated with affection (she would probably also be subjected to frequent rape, but hey).
The cultural residue of the higher value (and better treatment) of light-skinned mixes translates to higher social status to this day, and frequently that social status is accompanied by resentment and distrust (often unconscious) on the part of darker-skinned people. Weird dynamic all around. The result is that a weird cliquishness forms around skin tone, and dark girls often won't even try to befriend light girls because they think we're stuck up. And then we often don't approach them because we think they're aloof. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
I see Mexicans doing it too, favoring people with lighter skin and making comments like "My grandfather was Spanish, he had blue eyes" like it's somehow more special to have colonizing shitheels in the family than Indians.
The Indios call them Gallegos, I am told, and despise them just as much.
That one hasn't made it here yet, when it does at least I'll know what they're talking about now.
And we have white people who think Native Americans stop at the Rio Grand and Mexicans begin, I don't think they know what an Aztec is. And South Texas was Lipan Apache, a lot of the people here who identify as Mexican could be superimposed into a picture with Cochise's kids and you couldn't pick them out if you weren't familiar with the photo already. There's really no border at all, it's just political bs.
Yeah, this. People assume I'm Mexican all the time, and then people
apologize when I tell them I'm Native American. And since I'm 1/4 Apache, it's the same fucking thing.
Quote from: AnnaMaeBollocks on March 12, 2012, 09:11:51 PM
I see Mexicans doing it too, favoring people with lighter skin and making comments like "My grandfather was Spanish, he had blue eyes" like it's somehow more special to have colonizing shitheels in the family than Indians.
That was the way it was in my family. We were "Spanish" not "Mexican". We'd be corrected as kids if we said it wrong.
My great-grandpa was always alleged to have come from Spain (with his fair features and blue-eyes, of course). About 3 years ago a distant cousin got a hold of us with a genealogy she had worked on. Our branch of Rodriguez had lived in New Mexico and Southern Colorado
at least 2 generations before Grandpa Rodriguez moved up north in the 1910's.
Weird to me that it was such a big point of emphasis to state our origins were Spanish (and therefore more American than "Mexicans"), when any white family, except maybe the odd French one, was more recently immigrated to this section of America than we were.
Not quite as weird when I heard old-timers talk about the "No Dogs or Mexicans" signs that used to grace local store-fronts. This went on at the same time Rosa Parks was doing her thing in Selma. Learned about one of those things in school...the other...not so much.
Navkat, that was a pretty great rant. And now, National Brotherhood Week (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIlJ8ZCs4jY).
Thankyouverymuchforallthecrazy!
Dok's thread on St. Patrick's day got me thinking, but I felt this thread was more appropriate for the content that was spewing out, so here goes: In my town, being largely homogenous, cliques develop over stupid things, like heritage. (to the point it was just short of gang warfare when I was a kid). There were the Irish kids, there were the Italian kids, there were the German kids, there were the Polish kids, and then there were the regular kids. (Fun fact, in high school, there were also the Catholic kids, and one town over, there were the Black kids, bu they don't figure into this train of thought right now...)I was one of the Irish kids. Personally, it didn't really affect me much. I hung out with the regular kids and the German kids, and maybe the odd Italian or Pole, though, that was largely discouraged, because they lived on the Wrong StreetTM. But there were a few people who took these distinctions very seriously, and there would be fights over it and what not. Now, it would be social suicide to takes sides against your own when the fists started flying, even if you weren't really involved with the politics of it.
I remember when there was a big stir over some legitimate Mexicans coming into the neighborhood, and suddenly the Italians and the Poles were our friends (<= not joking). Oh sure, there was the Puerto Rican family, but they were okay. Those Mexicans, though, they were bad news. Don't ever play with them. Of course, at school, the score was different, and currying favor with the Mexican kid, who was automatically the coolest kid in class and whichever group had him at the time was walking tall. There were three brothers, and all of them abused this social status, naturally.
It turns out, that the three brothers are all losers as adults: Of course, this has nothing to do with the fact that they are Mexican, and everything to do with the fact that their social status amongst the underground elite; those who were most involved in the ethnic politics turned into the burnouts and the delinquents, because they fancied themselves to be like the '20s gangsters, running the town with the drugs and illicit hobbies. The problem was ALL they had was drugs. And then, once you get out of high school, that shit dries up in a place like this. Of the Mexican brothers, one's dead, one's in jail, and the other is a would-be drug kingpin in an otherwise uneventful backwater, but really, he's just strung out all the time with delusions of grandeur. As for the rest of those folks, as far as I know, they are all still there, working dead end jobs. if they are so fortunate, and wasting their time getting fucked up on drain cleaner.
In regards to the passive racism of the adults, I don't know, really. I imagine they still hold their prejudices, but on the other hand, there was a black family that moved in while I was still in high school, and an Indian family later, and as far as I am aware, they were fairly easily accepted.
I don't really have a point, nor do I know if this is actually relevant to this thread at all, but hey... I am not going to complain when the writing starts. :lol:
And going back to the OP:
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 09:21:09 PMOK. Now, I will talk about what it's like to be multi-racial. I will start with the fact that growing up, most of my white friends said things like "I don't think about race" and "I don't think of you as being non-white".
*shudders*
There's another one that gets said sometimes, it goes:
"I'm colorblind, I don't see race."
How do you look at a person and notice their face, build, gestures, what they're wearing and everything else and not SEE any ethnic features? I mean, yeah, it would be wrong to
judge them by that, or presume anything, but not SEE it? No way.
Phox: What are "regular" kids?
and
Where I grew up, I think it was weed that brought the races together and got everybody voluntarily hanging out with each other, not integration. When your part of town dried up, you went and hung out in the other part and vice versa, that's what finally did it.
Quote from: Anna Mae Bollocks on March 20, 2012, 06:38:22 AM
Phox: What are "regular" kids?
and
Where I grew up, I think it was weed that brought the races together and got everybody voluntarily hanging out with each other, not integration. When your part of town dried up, you went and hung out in the other part and vice versa, that's what finally did it.
The "regular" kids, were the kids whose families did not strongly associate with any of the ethnic groups. (That's not to say that they weren't German, Irish, Polish, etc., they just didn't lay claim to that background, nor live in the neighborhoods that distinguished the groups.) Since it used to be a big time coal mining town, I'd imagine that the ethnic neighborhoods (that seems weird to say) were where the miners lived. I do know that previously there was a ton of social status based on being a miner or a townie, and when the mines closed, that distinction was lost, so they grabbed on to the next most identifiable thing.
Part of that, I suspect, is that people with very little else to lay claim to as a point of pride will fall back on their ancestry, despite it having nothing to do with their worth as people. So the kids who clung strongly to their genetic background were doing so because they had little else to bolster them, and probably little more was expected of them by their families. The gang-like or cultish identification with their heritage was just a symptom of the conditions that led them to become losers.
Quote from: Anna Mae Bollocks on March 20, 2012, 06:24:17 AM
And going back to the OP:
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 09:21:09 PMOK. Now, I will talk about what it's like to be multi-racial. I will start with the fact that growing up, most of my white friends said things like "I don't think about race" and "I don't think of you as being non-white".
*shudders*
There's another one that gets said sometimes, it goes:
"I'm colorblind, I don't see race."
How do you look at a person and notice their face, build, gestures, what they're wearing and everything else and not SEE any ethnic features? I mean, yeah, it would be wrong to judge them by that, or presume anything, but not SEE it? No way.
Yep. Drives me crazy because it's such smug self-deluded bullshit, and they say it like it makes them somehow
better people.
Quote from: Nigel on March 20, 2012, 03:29:12 PM
Quote from: Anna Mae Bollocks on March 20, 2012, 06:24:17 AM
And going back to the OP:
Quote from: Nigel on January 04, 2012, 09:21:09 PMOK. Now, I will talk about what it's like to be multi-racial. I will start with the fact that growing up, most of my white friends said things like "I don't think about race" and "I don't think of you as being non-white".
*shudders*
There's another one that gets said sometimes, it goes:
"I'm colorblind, I don't see race."
How do you look at a person and notice their face, build, gestures, what they're wearing and everything else and not SEE any ethnic features? I mean, yeah, it would be wrong to judge them by that, or presume anything, but not SEE it? No way.
Yep. Drives me crazy because it's such smug self-deluded bullshit, and they say it like it makes them somehow better people.
I love how Colbert really pokes this common liberal bullshit statement.
As for me personally, well see my sig ;-)
Quote from: Nigel on March 20, 2012, 03:28:13 PM
Part of that, I suspect, is that people with very little else to lay claim to as a point of pride will fall back on their ancestry, despite it having nothing to do with their worth as people. So the kids who clung strongly to their genetic background were doing so because they had little else to bolster them, and probably little more was expected of them by their families. The gang-like or cultish identification with their heritage was just a symptom of the conditions that led them to become losers.
I agree completely, Nigel, though I wonder if it's not also partly the result of raising your children to be yourself, as some of the people who were into it when they were younger were either smart enough to get out young or just naturally grew out of the bullshit, and a few of the losers otherwise had the talent to come out ahead, but either lacked the ambition, or simply never tried.
One of the good things to come out of the way I was raised... I was taught that God made people of all colors, just like he made fruits and veggies of all kinds, so humans could enjoy variety. I wasn't taught to "not see" but rather to see and love it all.
Hey so I had this though earlier today during my history class.
I think that idea that aliens had ANYTHING to do with ancient structures may be rooted in racism. Basically, these smudgy people in places that aren't Europe COULD never have possibly built those structures so it HAS to be aliens.
Thoughts?
That's possibly part of it. For some people.
Then again, I'm reminded of the likes of David Icke....when he said giant, shapeshifting reptilian aliens were response, he really meant it. If their objections seem especially hung up on "but they're primitive" aspects, regardless of proof otherwise, then it's certainly a possibility that cannot be ruled out.
You sometimes see this kind of thing when it comes to 9/11 as well. Especially from "white nationalist" types. "A bunch of idiot ragheads humbled the USA? Hah, hardly. Jews and their globalist allies though..."
Quote from: Cain on April 26, 2012, 10:40:03 PM
That's possibly part of it. For some people.
Then again, I'm reminded of the likes of David Icke....when he said giant, shapeshifting reptilian aliens were response, he really meant it. If their objections seem especially hung up on "but they're primitive" aspects, regardless of proof otherwise, then it's certainly a possibility that cannot be ruled out.
You sometimes see this kind of thing when it comes to 9/11 as well. Especially from "white nationalist" types. "A bunch of idiot ragheads humbled the USA? Hah, hardly. Jews and their globalist allies though..."
DAMNIT I can't quite get out what I want to say with regards to that. But it does seem to be a similar effect.
Quote from: Nigel on March 12, 2012, 05:07:49 AMI can see both sides, really. On one hand, it's hard to argue that the box of cookies is actually denigrating to Samoans, because it seems like such an innocuous thing. I mean, calling a type of cookies "Jews" would be pretty odd, but what if they were called "Israels" because of a coincidence of ingredients with something traditionally associated with Israel?
We had those. Called "Jew cookies" (sorta). They're delicious.
We also had a sort of cream filled chocolate .. thing (I don't like em much) called "nigger kisses". Yes, really. Now the equivalent word in Dutch is not nearly as sensitive as it is in the USA (to my initial confusion many years ago when I just got here).
But then some sort of PC campaign took off, with a big media stink, and the manufacturer changed the name.
Later on, some evidence surfaced that it might have been a sort of weird viral marketing campaign to create brand awareness (while additionally getting rid of the awkward name).
I'm not actually sure if the Jew cookies are still called that, though.
Bump for the hell of it.
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 06, 2013, 03:19:50 PM
Bump for the hell of it.
"Functionally White" still gives me the jimjams, same as "legally Black".
There are a lot of people interested in the next doctor from BBC's Doctor who being black (or a woman (or a black woman)).
Personally, I don't care if they get a black guy as long as they get as much of a weirdo as all of the preceding actors.
The look of doctors regenerations have never been fully explained, but tend to be a reflection of his personality.
Of course his race wouldn't be changing even if he was black, because his race would still be Time Lord.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 06, 2013, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 06, 2013, 03:19:50 PM
Bump for the hell of it.
"Functionally White" still gives me the jimjams, same as "legally Black".
They're both weird concepts that can only really exist in a culture with deeply entrenched racism.
Quote from: Faust on June 06, 2013, 03:59:20 PM
There are a lot of people interested in the next doctor from BBC's Doctor who being black (or a woman (or a black woman)).
Personally, I don't care if they get a black guy as long as they get as much of a weirdo as all of the preceding actors.
The look of doctors regenerations have never been fully explained, but tend to be a reflection of his personality.
Of course his race wouldn't be changing even if he was black, because his race would still be Time Lord.
If the next Doctor is Black, I hope they have an enormous afro. I am so in love with afros right now.
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 06, 2013, 04:04:57 PM
Quote from: Faust on June 06, 2013, 03:59:20 PM
There are a lot of people interested in the next doctor from BBC's Doctor who being black (or a woman (or a black woman)).
Personally, I don't care if they get a black guy as long as they get as much of a weirdo as all of the preceding actors.
The look of doctors regenerations have never been fully explained, but tend to be a reflection of his personality.
Of course his race wouldn't be changing even if he was black, because his race would still be Time Lord.
If the next Doctor is Black, I hope they have an enormous afro. I am so in love with afros right now.
The Doctor has always been the epitome of being British, so it might be a good opportunity for the UK to represent its black population on TV.
Are afro's a black thing in general or are they American? if the latter then he shouldn't have one.
Its possible for a Time Lord to switch genders, I believe there was a comment made during the Fourth Doctors travels with Romana. Also, one Time Lord mentioned by the Tenth or Eleventh Doctor had been a Lord/Lady (don't remember the name). Color is also obviously an option, Romana made a comment about maybe being blue in one regeneration.
I think we'd more likely see a black Doctor, rather than a female one... though a female Doctor with a lovestruck male companion would be an awesome change! However, my guess is the next Doctor will probably be a white guy.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on June 06, 2013, 04:56:29 PM
Its possible for a Time Lord to switch genders, I believe there was a comment made during the Fourth Doctors travels with Romana. Also, one Time Lord mentioned by the Tenth or Eleventh Doctor had been a Lord/Lady (don't remember the name). Color is also obviously an option, Romana made a comment about maybe being blue in one regeneration.
I think we'd more likely see a black Doctor, rather than a female one... though a female Doctor with a lovestruck male companion would be an awesome change! However, my guess is the next Doctor will probably be a white guy.
A woman could work really well if she could get the supercilious tone... Judy Dench? Too formal. Joanna Lumly would be perfect.
Quote from: Faust on June 06, 2013, 04:59:16 PM
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on June 06, 2013, 04:56:29 PM
Its possible for a Time Lord to switch genders, I believe there was a comment made during the Fourth Doctors travels with Romana. Also, one Time Lord mentioned by the Tenth or Eleventh Doctor had been a Lord/Lady (don't remember the name). Color is also obviously an option, Romana made a comment about maybe being blue in one regeneration.
I think we'd more likely see a black Doctor, rather than a female one... though a female Doctor with a lovestruck male companion would be an awesome change! However, my guess is the next Doctor will probably be a white guy.
A woman could work really well if she could get the supercilious tone... Judy Dench? Too formal. Joanna Lumly would be perfect.
The only downside is that they're both a bit older and the Doctor (generally) seems to be getting younger as he regenerates. What about the actress that played Gretel in the recent movie?
Not that I'm a Whosian, but Emily Blunt could probably do a good job as a female doctor.
Quote from: Faust on June 06, 2013, 04:07:00 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 06, 2013, 04:04:57 PM
Quote from: Faust on June 06, 2013, 03:59:20 PM
There are a lot of people interested in the next doctor from BBC's Doctor who being black (or a woman (or a black woman)).
Personally, I don't care if they get a black guy as long as they get as much of a weirdo as all of the preceding actors.
The look of doctors regenerations have never been fully explained, but tend to be a reflection of his personality.
Of course his race wouldn't be changing even if he was black, because his race would still be Time Lord.
If the next Doctor is Black, I hope they have an enormous afro. I am so in love with afros right now.
The Doctor has always been the epitome of being British, so it might be a good opportunity for the UK to represent its black population on TV.
Are afro's a black thing in general or are they American? if the latter then he shouldn't have one.
It's a Black thing, you may have heard it referred to as a "natural". The whole natural African hair thing has a lot of political/colonial issues tied up in it, as well as beauty image and health issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-textured_hair
If you google "hair politics" you will find a wealth of articles.
Ooooh this blog post is awesome! It's relevant to race AND privilege:
http://www.curlynikki.com/2013/03/afro-puffs-politics-and-privilege.html
Quote "So what? You wear your hair natural. Now, add darker skin to that. Add a different physique. How much harder do you think things would be for you? You've been acting like there is an equal playing field even among people who occupy the same category of oppression. The fact is that you're a skinny, light skinned Black girl with curly hair and that buys you lots of passes in your everyday life."
I felt like he had slapped me. My friend wasn't done yet. He continued, "What you've been doing is speaking on behalf of a group that you don't belong to. You don't know the experiences of darker skinned, heavier Black women because you are shielded by the politics of beauty."
Resistant to my friend's claim, I pushed. I explained that as a Black female, my looks don't conform to standard notions of beauty. I further stated that being Black in America didn't buy much in the way of social or political access. My friend responded by telling me that I was literally looking at this issue as if it were just Black and/or white and that I was ignoring the "degrees" of acceptance based on skin tone and physical appearance. Essentially, he was telling me that I was blinded by my own privilege.
Vas Blackwood would make a great Doctor.
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg) (http://s151.photobucket.com/user/Slesk/media/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg.html)
Quote from: Waffles, Viking Princess of Northern Belgium on June 06, 2013, 06:49:47 PM
Vas Blackwood would make a great Doctor.
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg) (http://s151.photobucket.com/user/Slesk/media/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg.html)
That dude looks familiar.
Quote from: six to the quixotic on June 06, 2013, 06:57:09 PM
Quote from: Waffles, Viking Princess of Northern Belgium on June 06, 2013, 06:49:47 PM
Vas Blackwood would make a great Doctor.
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg) (http://s151.photobucket.com/user/Slesk/media/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg.html)
That dude looks familiar.
He played Rory Breaker in Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels.
Not sure if this has been posted here before.
What kind of Asian are you? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWynJkN5HbQ&feature=player_embedded)
Followed up by the two actors reading racist ass comments left on the video.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/06/americans-unleash-their-inner-prejudice-on-the-whiteasian-stereotype-video-video/ (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/06/americans-unleash-their-inner-prejudice-on-the-whiteasian-stereotype-video-video/)
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on June 06, 2013, 07:01:50 PM
Not sure if this has been posted here before.
What kind of Asian are you? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWynJkN5HbQ&feature=player_embedded)
Followed up by the two actors reading racist ass comments left on the video.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/06/americans-unleash-their-inner-prejudice-on-the-whiteasian-stereotype-video-video/ (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/06/americans-unleash-their-inner-prejudice-on-the-whiteasian-stereotype-video-video/)
That was AWESOME. :lulz:
Also, I'm not Asian but I'm racially difficult to pigeonhole, and I've had almost that exact conversation about fifty million times.
"No, before that" :lulz:
I've definitely been on the dumb side of that conversation before, and I WISH someone called me out on it like that. I would have learned so much better than finding out a few years later how much of a dick I was being.
Quote from: Waffles, Viking Princess of Northern Belgium on June 06, 2013, 06:49:47 PM
Vas Blackwood would make a great Doctor.
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg) (http://s151.photobucket.com/user/Slesk/media/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg.html)
Holy shit yes. Or if they HAVE to go with an old white guy again: Brick top
(http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Brick-Top.jpg)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OCvm7CTo_0
Quote from: Faust on June 06, 2013, 11:39:13 PM
Quote from: Waffles, Viking Princess of Northern Belgium on June 06, 2013, 06:49:47 PM
Vas Blackwood would make a great Doctor.
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg) (http://s151.photobucket.com/user/Slesk/media/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg.html)
Holy shit yes. Or if they HAVE to go with an old white guy again: Brick top
(http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Brick-Top.jpg)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OCvm7CTo_0
YES YES YES.
I would watch the show again.
Brick Top as the Doctor?
I may have just shit myself.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on June 06, 2013, 08:08:29 PM
I've definitely been on the dumb side of that conversation before, and I WISH someone called me out on it like that. I would have learned so much better than finding out a few years later how much of a dick I was being.
I'm here to serve! :thanks: (By pre-emptively drawing attention to things like that, thus hopefully avoiding future embarrassment for someone).
I have a weakness for pasty white girls with red hair, and freckles. I also like fat women regardless of background. I'm a terrible human being.
/inb4 being called a racist, and a thin shamer.
Also lawl @ Rogers story about the comedian!
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 07, 2013, 02:00:12 AM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on June 06, 2013, 08:08:29 PM
I've definitely been on the dumb side of that conversation before, and I WISH someone called me out on it like that. I would have learned so much better than finding out a few years later how much of a dick I was being.
I'm here to serve! :thanks: (By pre-emptively drawing attention to things like that, thus hopefully avoiding future embarrassment for someone).
Yep. The acid test.
If Nigel doesn't poke it full of holes, it's good.
I bet Lebron James' ancestors were amazing hunters/gatherers. Revolutionary, probably.
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg)
I would just like to return to this image again for a minute. Does anyone else think that this is one hellaciously beautiful man?
I'd describe him as "reasonably good-looking."
...His personality could take it up into smoking hot or down to 'oh hell no'.
I've not seen him act, you see, and for me it's brains over looks.
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 09, 2013, 02:48:18 AM
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg)
I would just like to return to this image again for a minute. Does anyone else think that this is one hellaciously beautiful man?
All I've seen him in is Lock, stock, he didn't come across a beautiful in that but Id seen him in something else first I might have a different opinion.
Yeah, he was kinda a shitbag in that.
If we're talking amazing black UK actors, however, then Idris Elba definitely deserves some consideration.
That said, in UK terms, it was probably a greater statement for diversity that Chris Eccleston was chosen as the Doctor than having a black or female Doctor would be.
In the UK, classism is at least as pernicious as racism and, given the choice, the BBC has shown in the past it is more than willing to put a middle class ethnic minority or woman in the place of someone with a "common" sounding accent and background.
And even more importantly, Doctor Who is a terrible show anyway, and people should feel bad for liking it or putting it in a position of social relevance.
Quote from: Cain on June 09, 2013, 11:25:51 AM
Yeah, he was kinda a shitbag in that.
If we're talking amazing black UK actors, however, then Idris Elba definitely deserves some consideration.
Hottie hottie hot hot.
Quote from: Cain on June 09, 2013, 11:37:36 AM
And even more importantly, Doctor Who is a terrible show anyway, and people should feel bad for liking it or putting it in a position of social relevance.
It's like 2000AD, it has a plethora of writers. Mostly bad, with some marvellous exceptions. But when its excellent it really is fantastic. The show has been running for fifty years and has about 300 episodes at this point, you could watch all the good episodes in about eight hours.
Idris Elba is WAY too cool to be The Doctor.
I mean, we're talking about goddamn Stringer Bell, FFS.
He's also to handsome and competent sounding. The last doctor looked like an Easter Island head and this is someone with a time machine that has never gone where he wants it to go.
Interesting article on why the Doctor shouldn't be a woman...
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/so-some-feminists-are-calling-for-a-female-dr-who--but-isnt-that-missing-the-point-entirely-8649972.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/so-some-feminists-are-calling-for-a-female-dr-who--but-isnt-that-missing-the-point-entirely-8649972.html)
Quote from: Faust on June 09, 2013, 09:10:43 AM
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 09, 2013, 02:48:18 AM
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg)
I would just like to return to this image again for a minute. Does anyone else think that this is one hellaciously beautiful man?
All I've seen him in is Lock, stock, he didn't come across a beautiful in that but Id seen him in something else first I might have a different opinion.
I saw it but don't remember his performance. I just think he's HOT and PRETTY, aesthetically speaking.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on June 10, 2013, 03:45:29 PM
Interesting article on why the Doctor shouldn't be a woman...
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/so-some-feminists-are-calling-for-a-female-dr-who--but-isnt-that-missing-the-point-entirely-8649972.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/so-some-feminists-are-calling-for-a-female-dr-who--but-isnt-that-missing-the-point-entirely-8649972.html)
I expected to disagree, but I don't. She makes an incredibly valid point. We need MORE male characters on TV who are brainy and pacifistic, not fewer.
the fuck, dude
nsfw, and beyond that
what the fuck, dude
come on
EDIT: this post refers to a post that was, rightly, deleted after the fact
Quote from: Cainad on June 11, 2013, 11:56:42 PM
the fuck, dude
nsfw, and beyond that
what the fuck, dude
come on
Why are people so uptight about the human body? It's just a head, we all have them.
Quote from: DECI4 on June 12, 2013, 12:05:35 AM
Quote from: Cainad on June 11, 2013, 11:56:42 PM
the fuck, dude
nsfw, and beyond that
what the fuck, dude
come on
Why are people so uptight about the human body? It's just a head, we all have them.
A skinned head, some chopped off limbs and a severed dick. And the joke or argument or whatever the fuck it was supposed to be doesn't work.
Who pissed in your Post Toasties?
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 11, 2013, 11:09:54 PM
Quote from: Faust on June 09, 2013, 09:10:43 AM
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 09, 2013, 02:48:18 AM
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg)
I would just like to return to this image again for a minute. Does anyone else think that this is one hellaciously beautiful man?
All I've seen him in is Lock, stock, he didn't come across a beautiful in that but Id seen him in something else first I might have a different opinion.
I saw it but don't remember his performance. I just think he's HOT and PRETTY, aesthetically speaking.
Funny how in this post one of your members is sexually objectifying a black man and nobody gets offended but when confronted with a severed penis with no sexual connotation, simply a piece of human anatomy, their liberal world comes crashing down.
Quote from: DECI4 on June 12, 2013, 12:05:35 AM
Quote from: Cainad on June 11, 2013, 11:56:42 PM
the fuck, dude
nsfw, and beyond that
what the fuck, dude
come on
Why are people so uptight about the human body? It's just a head, we all have them.
I'm uptight about a botched joke delivery
gore I don't give half a fuck about; I'm American and I eat glorified violence for breakfast
but that shit just came out of nowhere
There's some of us can't tolerate gore and violence. Really glad I have this retard on ignore right now, sounds like.
Quote from: Cainad on June 12, 2013, 12:11:17 AM
Quote from: DECI4 on June 12, 2013, 12:05:35 AM
Quote from: Cainad on June 11, 2013, 11:56:42 PM
the fuck, dude
nsfw, and beyond that
what the fuck, dude
come on
Why are people so uptight about the human body? It's just a head, we all have them.
I'm uptight about a botched joke delivery
gore I don't give half a fuck about; I'm American and I eat glorified violence for breakfast
but that shit just came out of nowhere
Joke?
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 12, 2013, 12:13:16 AM
There's some of us can't tolerate gore and violence. Really glad I have this retard on ignore right now, sounds like.
Too bad there is no ignore button in real life. Enjoy surfing the web in safety while sipping your 5 dollar non-fat venti latte. Once the economic collapse comes around and roving gangs of cannibals prey on the elderly, weak and infirm, nobody is going to care what you can and can't tolerate.
Quote from: DECI4 on June 12, 2013, 12:09:36 AM
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 11, 2013, 11:09:54 PM
Quote from: Faust on June 09, 2013, 09:10:43 AM
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 09, 2013, 02:48:18 AM
(http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s131/Slesk/DoctorWho12_zps17e93c8e.jpg)
I would just like to return to this image again for a minute. Does anyone else think that this is one hellaciously beautiful man?
All I've seen him in is Lock, stock, he didn't come across a beautiful in that but Id seen him in something else first I might have a different opinion.
I saw it but don't remember his performance. I just think he's HOT and PRETTY, aesthetically speaking.
Funny how in this post one of your members is sexually objectifying a black man and nobody gets offended but when confronted with a severed penis with no sexual connotation, simply a piece of human anatomy, their liberal world comes crashing down.
Oh FFS. What is your fucking problem?
Quote from: DECI4 on June 12, 2013, 12:18:25 AM
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 12, 2013, 12:13:16 AM
There's some of us can't tolerate gore and violence. Really glad I have this retard on ignore right now, sounds like.
Too bad there is no ignore button in real life. Enjoy surfing the web in safety while sipping your 5 dollar non-fat venti latte. Once the economic collapse comes around and roving gangs of cannibals prey on the elderly, weak and infirm, nobody is going to care what you can and can't tolerate.
Butthurt because the Black guy is infinitely more fuckable than you?
Quote from: Faust on June 06, 2013, 04:07:00 PM
Are afro's a black thing in general or are they American?
LMFAOROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
you're better than this dude
I may be drunk but even I know that
what the fuck are you doing right now
Shameless attention whoring.
I guess I'll go feed the dogs. Fuck this noise.
Quote from: stelz on June 12, 2013, 12:20:51 AM
Butthurt because the Black guy is infinitely more fuckable than you?
See you would have been better off just editing that little quip into your previous post. Instead it looks like you were too slow to come up with a "witty" retort off the bat and just to get another word in.
Quote from: Cainad on June 12, 2013, 12:22:03 AM
you're better than this dude
I may be drunk but even I know that
what the fuck are you doing right now
Reading this thread and contributing. You seem to be missing the point I'm making.
Quote from: DECI4 on June 12, 2013, 12:05:35 AM
Quote from: Cainad on June 11, 2013, 11:56:42 PM
the fuck, dude
nsfw, and beyond that
what the fuck, dude
come on
Why are people so uptight about the human body? It's just a head, we all have them.
Banned.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 12, 2013, 12:32:02 AM
Quote from: DECI4 on June 12, 2013, 12:05:35 AM
Quote from: Cainad on June 11, 2013, 11:56:42 PM
the fuck, dude
nsfw, and beyond that
what the fuck, dude
come on
Why are people so uptight about the human body? It's just a head, we all have them.
Banned.
Thanks.
Where the fuck did THAT come from? The guys been around for awhile...
seriously
out of nowhere, dude completely loses his shit and starts posting like a redditor
He's a troll from Zoklet or Totse2 or whatever.
Squiddy: Called it in 2011 http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,30911.msg1122448.html#msg1122448
Quote from: stelz on June 12, 2013, 04:22:35 AM
Squiddy: Called it in 2011 http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,30911.msg1122448.html#msg1122448
That's not Squiddy, that's Demo Squid. :/ SQUIDDY IS AWESOME FLORIDIAN. DEMO SQUID IS AWESOME DUDE IN LONDON.
Quote from: Freeky Queen of DERP on June 12, 2013, 04:27:20 AM
Quote from: stelz on June 12, 2013, 04:22:35 AM
Squiddy: Called it in 2011 http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,30911.msg1122448.html#msg1122448
That's not Squiddy, that's Demo Squid. :/ SQUIDDY IS AWESOME FLORIDIAN. DEMO SQUID IS AWESOME DUDE IN LONDON.
My bad. But it's cool having a DUAL SQUID BOARD.
I read a very interesting book over the weekend called "Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking". It covers some very interesting examples of how snap judgments can be very beneficial, at the same time covering examples of how things like unconscious racism/sexism can be very problematic. The author makes a very interesting argument that, even in cases of apparent racism/sexism, it may be completely unconscious on the part of the individual. In cases where cops have responded violently, in cases where women weren't selected for jobs in an orchestra and even in cases where African Americans get harsher sentences in the US court system... he argues that it may often be due to an unconscious decision rather than a conscious act of racism.
Much of his argument dovetails nicely with the BiP concept. For societies that have negative stereotypes, the people in those societies have a very difficult time of being without some level of unconscious prejudice, around those stereotypes. On the upside, the author also covered some experiments that indicate that these unconscious behaviors can be reprogrammed. In one set of tests that measured unconscious racism, the performance of the testers improved after reading articles on positive role models from that particular race.
In another experiment, they found that minority students performed worse on tests where they were asked their race at the beginning of the test.
All in all, a very interesting book.
Gladwell is a fucking hack. He's also a shill for the tobacco industry.
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 12, 2013, 02:09:15 AM
He's a troll from Zoklet or Totse2 or whatever.
We knew that, because that was his screen name on Totse2.
I just realized that I was more surprised than I ought have been by his behavior, because my drunkbrain mixed him up with someone else who has a letters-numbers forum name.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on June 12, 2013, 12:18:01 PM
I read a very interesting book over the weekend called "Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking". It covers some very interesting examples of how snap judgments can be very beneficial, at the same time covering examples of how things like unconscious racism/sexism can be very problematic. The author makes a very interesting argument that, even in cases of apparent racism/sexism, it may be completely unconscious on the part of the individual. In cases where cops have responded violently, in cases where women weren't selected for jobs in an orchestra and even in cases where African Americans get harsher sentences in the US court system... he argues that it may often be due to an unconscious decision rather than a conscious act of racism.
Much of his argument dovetails nicely with the BiP concept. For societies that have negative stereotypes, the people in those societies have a very difficult time of being without some level of unconscious prejudice, around those stereotypes. On the upside, the author also covered some experiments that indicate that these unconscious behaviors can be reprogrammed. In one set of tests that measured unconscious racism, the performance of the testers improved after reading articles on positive role models from that particular race.
In another experiment, they found that minority students performed worse on tests where they were asked their race at the beginning of the test.
All in all, a very interesting book.
Yeah, he's talking about the Harvard implicit association tests I linked to in another thread; very worth checking out, if only for some self-insight.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/
I've never seen anyone take one and not be mad afterwards.
I'm biased against white people and prefer light-skinned brown people over dark-skinned brown people, FWIW. Almost all of us carry prejudices we aren't conscious of, it's what we do with them when we know about them that's important.
I took the one for associations of weapons with black people vs white people earlier today.
I automatically want to fault the way the test works, since it "trains" you in the first round to use the same key for "weapons" as for "black american", and then it switches it in a later round. But maybe I'm just offended by myself.
If you'd asked me to self-assess, I would have told you that I associate weapons with white people, mainly because I associate guns with white hillbillies, and melee weapons with white SCA nerds and LARPers. I would have assumed that I'd be biased against associating black people with weapons, because I'd assume (not based on any kind of actual knowledge) that more black people avoid carrying weapons for fear of being in the wrong place at the wrong time when cops roll around.
I've taken one of those race association tests before and come up with being most comfortable with other Black people and least comfortable with White people which is to be expected considering both the things my father has told me about his life as a Black American, my own experiences with racism by mostly white people, and all of those history classes where white people generally did crappy things.
In terms of the race thing though I have found that I kind of understand some of the obsession with the masked man without a secret identity, two prominent examples being V (from V for Vendetta) and The Joker. Their face is just what they have chosen and not what they are born with creating an unease in those who face them because they can't be easily classified. They are unpredictable because they don't mesh with preconceived notions preprogrammed by society. This gives them more control over their image and other people a bit less. Due to this quality it becomes understandable to see why they inspire such obsession. Sometimes I feel like I would like it if I didn't look easily identifiable.
On another tangent to this tangent could this be apart of the reason the western world finds such a problem with Burqas? They get rid of the form we are used to and programmed to see and instead leave us with something we are unsure about. An unsolvable mystery, a shroud and a mind, but nothing physical like body qualities and body language to tie it down to. It creates an uneasiness in our minds and makes us want to destroy Burqas by doing things like passing no Burqa laws like France has done. The president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, said that burqas are "not welcome" in France, commenting that "In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity". Something to think about.
I actually did OK on the light and dark skinned one.
Going to take some more tomorrow so I can get mad. Sometimes getting mad is a good thing.
Quote from: Cainad on June 13, 2013, 04:47:53 AM
I took the one for associations of weapons with black people vs white people earlier today.
I automatically want to fault the way the test works, since it "trains" you in the first round to use the same key for "weapons" as for "black american", and then it switches it in a later round. But maybe I'm just offended by myself.
If you'd asked me to self-assess, I would have told you that I associate weapons with white people, mainly because I associate guns with white hillbillies, and melee weapons with white SCA nerds and LARPers. I would have assumed that I'd be biased against associating black people with weapons, because I'd assume (not based on any kind of actual knowledge) that more black people avoid carrying weapons for fear of being in the wrong place at the wrong time when cops roll around.
Yes, that is a frequent criticism of the design and I often wonder if the results might be very different if it was done the other way around.
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 13, 2013, 01:48:08 AM
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on June 12, 2013, 12:18:01 PM
I read a very interesting book over the weekend called "Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking". It covers some very interesting examples of how snap judgments can be very beneficial, at the same time covering examples of how things like unconscious racism/sexism can be very problematic. The author makes a very interesting argument that, even in cases of apparent racism/sexism, it may be completely unconscious on the part of the individual. In cases where cops have responded violently, in cases where women weren't selected for jobs in an orchestra and even in cases where African Americans get harsher sentences in the US court system... he argues that it may often be due to an unconscious decision rather than a conscious act of racism.
Much of his argument dovetails nicely with the BiP concept. For societies that have negative stereotypes, the people in those societies have a very difficult time of being without some level of unconscious prejudice, around those stereotypes. On the upside, the author also covered some experiments that indicate that these unconscious behaviors can be reprogrammed. In one set of tests that measured unconscious racism, the performance of the testers improved after reading articles on positive role models from that particular race.
In another experiment, they found that minority students performed worse on tests where they were asked their race at the beginning of the test.
All in all, a very interesting book.
Yeah, he's talking about the Harvard implicit association tests I linked to in another thread; very worth checking out, if only for some self-insight.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/
I've never seen anyone take one and not be mad afterwards.
I'm biased against white people and prefer light-skinned brown people over dark-skinned brown people, FWIW. Almost all of us carry prejudices we aren't conscious of, it's what we do with them when we know about them that's important.
Yeah I saw your post after I wrote this. Very interesting.
In one of the examples he discussed the events surrounding the death of Amadou Diallo. On one side, people claim it was "in the heat of the moment", on the other side, people claim it was overt racism. The author argued that it may well have been unconscious racisim, which due to the close quarters and how quickly everything happened basically put the cops on an auto-pilot with their unconscious managing the whole mess (they couldn't see out of their BiP). He pointed out that once the heart beat of a human reaches a certain point, their conscious thinking shuts off and they're acting entirely automatically. He believed this was important, because its a result (perhaps) not of the racism of the cops, but rather their lack of proper training of the unconscious response. He He provided some examples of private security firms that actually train their employees in such a way that their heart rate doesn't accelerate so much during an intense situation, allowing them to remain cool and function at a conscious level, as well as training of the unconscious response so that if things escalate too much they won't make the wrong "Blink" decision.
This could mean that the behavior of cops toward minority groups could be a problem of training, more than a problem of racism. His point was that we may be able to 'fix' the former, while the latter would be far more difficult to fix.
He gave an example of orchestras which were almost all male up through the early 80's (especially the horns), because of the prejudice that women simply didn't have the lung capacity to perform. The people selecting new performers generally "heard" what they expected to hear. However, once blind performances were instituted, where the performer plays behind a screen, the numbers began to quickly change and now its about a 50/50 split in the horn sections. The judges admitted that what they 'heard' was different once they no longer had the visual cue that it was a man or woman (or that they hold the instrument in a weird way, or have poor posture etc).
Rather than waiting for "prejudiced" judges to retire and be replaced by less "prejudiced" judges, they found a real solution that could be implemented now. He then asked what would happen if defendants weren't physically visible to a judge and jury, if their race, sex and physical appearance weren't included in the data available to those judging them... would we see a change in the obviously absurd numbers around minority sentences?
I felt some of his arguments were pretty weak, but a few like this one, seemed to me, to take a very interesting direction...
Implicit prejudice training is very functional in a lot of situations. One of the detectives in Hillsboro is trying to get it implemented in the Hillsboro police force, and it sounds like the chief is interested, so that will be interesting to observe, if it pans out.
Quote from: Cainad on June 13, 2013, 04:47:53 AM
I took the one for associations of weapons with black people vs white people earlier today.
I automatically want to fault the way the test works, since it "trains" you in the first round to use the same key for "weapons" as for "black american", and then it switches it in a later round. But maybe I'm just offended by myself.
This, and to an extent I wanted to fault repetition/brain laziness (i.e, Left 5x, then RIGHT, except I just kept left). But again, that could just be excuses, excuses.
I don't I've ever acted consciously racist, or at least I certainly try not to. There's a fair amount of it, though not horribly rampant, in this general area, more-so against Latinos than African Americans. And while I don't think that I act consciously racist, since I've been on this board, I know I've made more conscious efforts not to act unconsciously racist (body language, etc.), as it probably hadn't much occurred to me before that I may be doing that.
America(TM) has a million ways of sneaking it in, grinding it into your head. You have to look for it and root it out, more often than not. :x :x :x
Fucked up thought comes up, pay attention and counter the shit. Happens to all of us sometimes.
I raged on the name, and family one.
There's only one race worth hating - humans. Any attempt to narrow it down just leaves me feeling unsatisfied. Like only eating the lettuce on my favorite cheeseburger.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on June 13, 2013, 07:55:35 PM
There's only one race worth hating - humans. Any attempt to narrow it down just leaves me feeling unsatisfied. Like only eating the lettuce on my favorite cheeseburger.
:lulz: Sometimes you annoy me, but usually you tickle me.
Quote from: The End on January 16, 2012, 07:41:20 PM
Man will always have a penchant for labelling, compartmentalizing, and stuffing away into dark little corners the undesirables. Whether it be done with labels of race, sexual orientation, land or origin, political ideology, physical disability, mental disability, etc., etc.,
Rog has it right. It's all about making that tucking away of undesirables, well, undesirable. It's tough though and has its ups and downs, as exhibited by the Islamaphobia that has been all the rage since 2001.
SORRY WHAT I MEANT TO SAY WAS FUCKING KILL THOSE MONSTERS AND DON'T YOU DARE PUBLISH ANYTHING WHICH SUGGESTS THEY DON'T ALL HAVE BEARDS AND TURBANS.
Quote from: Pæs on August 12, 2013, 02:26:36 AM
SORRY WHAT I MEANT TO SAY WAS FUCKING KILL THOSE MONSTERS AND DON'T YOU DARE PUBLISH ANYTHING WHICH SUGGESTS THEY DON'T ALL HAVE BEARDS AND TURBANS.
Finally, a well formed thought. I was really starting to get worried about this shithole.
*TUMBLEWEEDS*
I know this is probably fucked in the head, but Delcon is starting to grow on me. I think he might be my favorite troll. :lol:
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on June 13, 2013, 01:48:08 AMYeah, he's talking about the Harvard implicit association tests I linked to in another thread; very worth checking out, if only for some self-insight.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/
I've never seen anyone take one and not be mad afterwards.
I'm biased against white people and prefer light-skinned brown people over dark-skinned brown people, FWIW. Almost all of us carry prejudices we aren't conscious of, it's what we do with them when we know about them that's important.
Wow, very cool test! I took the dark/light skinned test, since that's what this thread is about.
Apparently it suggests I have "a slight automatic preference for Light Skin compared to Dark Skin".
It's weird because initially/intuitively I felt like the order of the images influenced the outcome, but in fact the more I think back about what really happened, the more I realize it did indeed feel easier to correctly classify the words/faces when positive words were under the same key as light-skinned faces. The only other factor I can think of was maybe that the second time around I was also a bit more practiced in doing the task, and I never feel comfortable doing these kinds of timed tests. But then, at the end they said something about correcting for such biases.
I'm fairly sure that short drops in my focus/attention caused the most actual errors (got ADD, after all). But, if I understand correctly it's not so much about the errors you make, but also about the timing, and I'm pretty sure it felt like I could do the second test much faster.
So yeah I guess it really is easier for me to classify positive words if they're under the same key as light skinned people, than vice versa.
Though the test said it was only "slight". I'm not really sure what to make of this outcome, I'll have to give it some time and see what my brain makes of it :) I guess I'll end up trying to slightly adjust for this bias or something (but only "slight" since that's what the test said :P). And only in the positive direction of course. I usually don't have to make many snap judgements this quickly, though.
Very cool test, anyway. I might make a few of the others as well, when I get the time.
Quote from: Triple Zero on August 12, 2013, 05:49:29 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on June 13, 2013, 01:48:08 AMYeah, he's talking about the Harvard implicit association tests I linked to in another thread; very worth checking out, if only for some self-insight.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/
I've never seen anyone take one and not be mad afterwards.
I'm biased against white people and prefer light-skinned brown people over dark-skinned brown people, FWIW. Almost all of us carry prejudices we aren't conscious of, it's what we do with them when we know about them that's important.
Wow, very cool test! I took the dark/light skinned test, since that's what this thread is about.
Apparently it suggests I have "a slight automatic preference for Light Skin compared to Dark Skin".
It's weird because initially/intuitively I felt like the order of the images influenced the outcome, but in fact the more I think back about what really happened, the more I realize it did indeed feel easier to correctly classify the words/faces when positive words were under the same key as light-skinned faces. The only other factor I can think of was maybe that the second time around I was also a bit more practiced in doing the task, and I never feel comfortable doing these kinds of timed tests. But then, at the end they said something about correcting for such biases.
I'm fairly sure that short drops in my focus/attention caused the most actual errors (got ADD, after all). But, if I understand correctly it's not so much about the errors you make, but also about the timing, and I'm pretty sure it felt like I could do the second test much faster.
So yeah I guess it really is easier for me to classify positive words if they're under the same key as light skinned people, than vice versa.
Though the test said it was only "slight". I'm not really sure what to make of this outcome, I'll have to give it some time and see what my brain makes of it :) I guess I'll end up trying to slightly adjust for this bias or something (but only "slight" since that's what the test said :P). And only in the positive direction of course. I usually don't have to make many snap judgements this quickly, though.
Very cool test, anyway. I might make a few of the others as well, when I get the time.
I definitely recommend taking several others, I found the results really interesting.
I took the religion one today. Everything was near neutral, Buddhism slightly positive and (to my dismay) Islam slightly negative, with Christianity and Judaism square in the middle.
Quote from: Triple Zero on August 12, 2013, 05:49:29 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on June 13, 2013, 01:48:08 AMYeah, he's talking about the Harvard implicit association tests I linked to in another thread; very worth checking out, if only for some self-insight.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/
I've never seen anyone take one and not be mad afterwards.
I'm biased against white people and prefer light-skinned brown people over dark-skinned brown people, FWIW. Almost all of us carry prejudices we aren't conscious of, it's what we do with them when we know about them that's important.
Wow, very cool test! I took the dark/light skinned test, since that's what this thread is about.
Apparently it suggests I have "a slight automatic preference for Light Skin compared to Dark Skin".
It's weird because initially/intuitively I felt like the order of the images influenced the outcome, but in fact the more I think back about what really happened, the more I realize it did indeed feel easier to correctly classify the words/faces when positive words were under the same key as light-skinned faces. The only other factor I can think of was maybe that the second time around I was also a bit more practiced in doing the task, and I never feel comfortable doing these kinds of timed tests. But then, at the end they said something about correcting for such biases.
I'm fairly sure that short drops in my focus/attention caused the most actual errors (got ADD, after all). But, if I understand correctly it's not so much about the errors you make, but also about the timing, and I'm pretty sure it felt like I could do the second test much faster.
So yeah I guess it really is easier for me to classify positive words if they're under the same key as light skinned people, than vice versa.
Though the test said it was only "slight". I'm not really sure what to make of this outcome, I'll have to give it some time and see what my brain makes of it :) I guess I'll end up trying to slightly adjust for this bias or something (but only "slight" since that's what the test said :P). And only in the positive direction of course. I usually don't have to make many snap judgements this quickly, though.
Very cool test, anyway. I might make a few of the others as well, when I get the time.
I just saw this. Took the fat/thin test and the gay/straight test. So far the results match my previous inclinations. Strongly prefer fat to thin and slightly prefer gay to straight. Hasn't pissed me off yet but I haven't done the skin color one yet. Gotta stop because headache/puke from screen staring.
My data suggest little to no automatic preference between African American children and European American children.
That test tried to trick me.