boiled goose
good with gravy
DP
Black people can't be racist?
- Thread starter Blasty
- Start date
- Status
I don't think anyone is saying that this is the only form of racism. But it is one of them. Of course are some forms more harmful than others but I don't think anyone would disagree with that.
It's not about how much harm it does to the victim but on what the aggressors motivation is. When that motivation is "He isn't the same race as me" than his motivation is racist.
Shamrock7r
Member
Well the thread started out specifically about this point and not the broader picture of racism, so that's a little unfair. As this thread has shown, the consensus of what is or isn't racist and who or can't be racist has not been agreed upon by everyone, so it is important to extent to define that point. Lastly, I would say it is a little ignorant on your part to pick what "racism that actually matters". I would think that the white classmate I saw get books thrown at him in middle school for being the "white kid" would like to see his experience with racism fixed, as well as others.
Okay, since white people get to re-define "racism" to align with their unwarranted sense of being oppressed by minorities, what word do you propose minorities use to describe the sort of systemic racism they endure each day, and how do you propose this near-voiceless minority goes about convincing white people to accept this new word? Perhaps we should use "institutional racism," a word whose value, meaning, and existence are routinely laughed off by the white majority? Minorities already have so little to fight racial oppression with. In repurposing "racism" for whites, you're taking that away from them too.
boiled goose
good with gravy
I don't think you have justified why my comment is 'ignorant' , but perhaps I will agree it is a bit misguided.
I am definitely not in a position to say what matters and what doesn't.
My main point was perhaps that we can definitely quantify the effects of racism towards one group vs another in aggregate. When a big picture issue gets brought up, the knee-jerk reaction x group is racist too, or everyone experiences racism, distracts from the solution.
If someone brings up institutional racism and you bring up an example of a white kid being thrown a book in that thread it is probably going to be counterproductive. The same exact thing happens in GAF all the time when topics about sexism are brought up...
Of course I agree we should all work towards improving society to minimize prejudice...
Perhaps a depressing thought, it is likely that groups that have experienced racism and discrimination instead of learning from societies mistakes would instead reverse the tables if the situation changed.... The eye color studies, the cycle of abusee to abuser, and perhaps even the Israeli Palestinian conflict are perhaps depressing reminders of how faulty human nature can be....
Since when is using the definition of a word re-purposing it? The term racism encompasses a lot of things. I'm not sure what's the problem with that.
Shamrock7r
Member
Perhaps ignorant was too strong of a word, but I think you understood my point. The act of an individual, racist slight towards a white person of course doesn't come close to equaling the effect that institutional racism has had, in terms of the bigger picture. If we are going to have productive discussions of racism on here though, I do not like the idea of (and not saying it was you) people being told they can or cannot contribute to the discussion based on their experiences, or having their experienced outright dismissed. To me that is counter-productive. I am sure there are people on here of all racial types that are rational, and although they might not have the negative first hand experience of racism, they can still have a rational, thoughtful debate on the subject. Bringing it back to the original topic, if we can't even agree on what is or isn't racism, or if certain races can or can't be racist, we are already at a huge divide from the get go.
And yea, it's all very depressing, but I have long term optimism, at least in the U.S. and a few other developed countries that over time, as we go through multiple generations of humans, it will keep getting better, as it has, in my opinion.
TUROK
Member
Nobody is redefining anything.
When someone calls me a wetback or a spic, when they use my race in order to belittle me as a person, I consider that racism. When black people are called niggers by someone from a different race, I think they'd consider that racism as well.
Now, either I'm mistaken and this isn't racism, or we're not upholding the same actions from different racial groups up to the same standard.
lazorexplosion
Member
This is absolutely a definition many radical race activists try to uphold. For example,
Excerpts from University of Delaware Office of Residence Life Diversity Facilitation Training
It is, of course, patently absurd and ironically racist, but it exists.
Excerpts from University of Delaware Office of Residence Life Diversity Facilitation Training
It is, of course, patently absurd and ironically racist, but it exists.
I'm not white (nor black) but every time I read one of those "LOL white people" joke, I couldn't help but cringe. I get it, as minorities we've been hard done by some white people. And we still are being discriminated against in every aspect of our lives.
Having said that, I don't see the need to go down the bitter and vengeful path. Sure, it makes me sad when I get discriminated against but I don't see how mocking others (in this case white people) actually help our causes.
Having said that, I don't see the need to go down the bitter and vengeful path. Sure, it makes me sad when I get discriminated against but I don't see how mocking others (in this case white people) actually help our causes.
Yep, that is absolutely moronic.
Racism is another unfortunate human trait that needs enough science/social engineering to be minimized. .
Stormhammer
Member
Are you sure about this?
On topic though, I don't think "nerdy white boy" is racist. Though I guess if you were to say "nerdy white boy", "nerdy black boy", "nerdy mexican boy" etc. it could be with a certain tone behind your words when mentioned their race?
You're taking a word whose definition in the U.S. has been established for decades and changing it.
The definition of racism has practically no impact on the lives of whites because they hardly ever experience racial discrimination. If that is understood, why should whites be in charge of deciding what the word means over the people who actually experience it?
I'm looking forward to revisiting this post - and the thread in general - later on.
cheststrongwell
my cake, fuck off
I don't care about people's definitions of racist. If you treat an individual like shit because of their race or discriminate against them because of their race, you're a scumbag asshole.
Uno Venova
Banned
nerdy is right there
but these are the descriptors you jump to instead
Angelus Errare
Banned
It's telling when the first thing they jump to when they think of descriptors for blacks is stupid and thuggish.
TUROK
Member
Let's not be purposely obtuse here. White people are stereotypically seen as meek and dorky (especially when attempting to dance), so the "nerdy" descriptor is more apt for whites than black.
BearFlexington
Member
Hmmm. I see your point and actually want to agree (sort of) but can't. Equality must apply universally, even to measures of equality. What I mean to say is; if blacks begin claiming right to the measure of what is deemed racist and what what is not based on historic abuses of privilege, are they not claiming undo privilege? Is that not how racism, tyranny, and oppression come to be.
Its kind of like saying: "I was the victim of a crime, so I get to say who the criminals are."
A slippery slope argument? Really? C'mon, man.
Do you honestly believe whites, having little to no experience dealing with discrimination, are in a better position than minorities to say what racism is?
Probably the most ironic perm ban I've ever handed out.
I have this conversation a lot with friends, and I've started to develop a kind of strategy for discussing it -- both so I avoid offending anyone's sensibilities, and so I can make the point known without too much argument.
I basically separate the discussion of racism into two categories: one is Racism with a capital "R", and the other is racism, well, without a capital "R."
Lowercase racism, I describe (and believe to be) the kind of racism that any culture, or group of people, can engage in: it's skin-deep stuff. It's all about skin-culture, and just being an asshole about those skin-deep references. It's offensive, and it's usually offensive regardless of whether you're white or not, because more often than not it just takes the place of a personal attack. It's white dudes getting called "cracker."
Uppercase Racism, is the systemic, deep-seated racism that has been cultivated from the history that exists between the oppressed and the oppressors. It exists in the deep, dark crevices of society; it's a disease that segregates, and ruins our ability to truly recognize each other as equals, even when documents officiate such things. It's cops profiling blacks, it's more blacks being in prison than whites, and for lesser crimes -- it's intangible, and disgusting. It's the Racism we have to fight, but first the Racism we need to understand exists -- and WHY it exists. It is not possible for blacks to be capital "R" racist to whites in this way, because it's literally outside of their power to do so.
So, yeah, that's how I discuss it with people, and it's worked quite well -- distinguishing between these things, but also making them known under the umbrella of racism in general. It's difficult to explain, and this method helps.
edit: I'm really dumb. I left out the thesis here lol. The reason for separating these two things is because, you know, in normal speech we can't tell the difference between these two categories, and so often times I feel like we're literally not talking about the same "racism" when arguments spring up like the one in OP. So, this is why I often delineate exactly what I mean this way with people: so we don't spend a bunch of time arguing over something where we actually agree on the points anyway.
I basically separate the discussion of racism into two categories: one is Racism with a capital "R", and the other is racism, well, without a capital "R."
Lowercase racism, I describe (and believe to be) the kind of racism that any culture, or group of people, can engage in: it's skin-deep stuff. It's all about skin-culture, and just being an asshole about those skin-deep references. It's offensive, and it's usually offensive regardless of whether you're white or not, because more often than not it just takes the place of a personal attack. It's white dudes getting called "cracker."
Uppercase Racism, is the systemic, deep-seated racism that has been cultivated from the history that exists between the oppressed and the oppressors. It exists in the deep, dark crevices of society; it's a disease that segregates, and ruins our ability to truly recognize each other as equals, even when documents officiate such things. It's cops profiling blacks, it's more blacks being in prison than whites, and for lesser crimes -- it's intangible, and disgusting. It's the Racism we have to fight, but first the Racism we need to understand exists -- and WHY it exists. It is not possible for blacks to be capital "R" racist to whites in this way, because it's literally outside of their power to do so.
So, yeah, that's how I discuss it with people, and it's worked quite well -- distinguishing between these things, but also making them known under the umbrella of racism in general. It's difficult to explain, and this method helps.
edit: I'm really dumb. I left out the thesis here lol. The reason for separating these two things is because, you know, in normal speech we can't tell the difference between these two categories, and so often times I feel like we're literally not talking about the same "racism" when arguments spring up like the one in OP. So, this is why I often delineate exactly what I mean this way with people: so we don't spend a bunch of time arguing over something where we actually agree on the points anyway.
Shamrock7r
Member
Society determines how words are defined over time. Words have and do change in meaning, both in minor and sometimes major ways.
Lord Thrappleper The 49th
Member
Anyone can be racist.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
It's a given. I think something that is always outlined on forums and internet is the negative slant on white people. I think it's fair to say that from most of my upbringing, hispanics and blacks caught a lot of heat but I never personally witnessed as much as fellow hispanics or blacks against white type of comments. I say that as a hispanic myself. That doesn't grant me some kind of immunity but growing up in the SoCal vicinity near Compton and LA county surely has given me thicker skin.
Wait, is it commonly thought that racial theory was actually grounded in biological science? White people pre-Darwin and pre-genetics somehow accurately mapped out the genesis of all human populations? (How fortuitous that their own race happened to be the best one! And no wonder they were so anxious to find reasons why certain people weren't actually white.) Of course it's a social construct!
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
How oblivious is that friend of yours to say something so stupid?
boiled goose
good with gravy
I agree with you that the term white privilege can been used to dismiss people's points of views instead of correcting them. When someone calls you out with it, try to understand why it might be perceived that way instead of reacting emotionally and defensively.
In this thread, I have had to concede multiple times when I make a mistake or overstate a case. That is important for having a productive discussion instead of our natural tendency to become defensive and entrench ourselves in our previously stated position. It is actually very difficult to do, but is important.
The important underlying thought is this: Variations between individuals are large enough that stereotyping is mostly useless, it doesn't matter what the 'group average number' is.
This is a very very very important point. Not just for race, but for all groups including gender, sexual orientation, etc.
When we attribute behavior or perceived characteristics of an individual to the perceived characteristics whatever group they belong in, we are likely being unfair to the individual.
This is VERY IMPORTANT.
Byakuya769
Member
Ha. And you became an Orc only by chance.
Your posts in this thread sound conspiratorial.
You don't get stop the application of a word because it doesn't happen as often in your geographical location. You are the one that wants to repurpose a word, not 'the whites wanting to align the word with their unwarranted sense of being oppressed by minorities' which again, sounds like some conspiracy shit. Like some shadowy cabal of salty whites control the words
And this post is fucking terrible. You don't have the authority to argue your views on racial issues because you make terrible posts. I don't think i need to explain why 'shut up white people' is a terrible post.
jordan0386
Member
Black Americans dont have any power to hold any other group down.
Why would a black attempt to be racist anyway? I could understand being mad at white people, in general, because of the obvious.
But Racism? Attempting to limit others? Nah, not really.
Why would a black attempt to be racist anyway? I could understand being mad at white people, in general, because of the obvious.
But Racism? Attempting to limit others? Nah, not really.
Skellig Gra
Member
Racism isn't just between blacks and whites. In America blacks are certainly not the lowest rung on the racism food chain. I'd put them above Hispanics, Indians, etc.
Being mad is one thing, generalizations and hatred is another.
Institutional racism and individual racism are two different topics. Sometimes people conflate the issue, like you are right now.
My thought was more like this: Who came up with the commonly known theory by which we divide humanity into races? Why did they develop this theory, how did they apply it, and what knowledge did they actually have to back up this theory? After answering those questions, would any person expect a scientific study of human genetics to support that theory? I really hope not.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Races were just divided based on general geography and external appearance. Of course there are some geographically visible external difference in traits... the question is how useful these classifications are at making predictions about individuals.. turns out not too useful.
Devolution
Member
To make this discussion simple black people can be racist but their ability to discriminate is pretty damn low.
And that's probably because the classifications we commonly use today are adapted from earlier ones that were made for sinister purposes (putting it lightly) and the people who developed them were ignorant (again, putting it lightly) of some of the most important mechanisms that make humans tick.
MagnaderAlpha
Member
I have more problems with her calling the white guy "nerdy" than referring to him as a "white guy". Whether or not it was meant to be racist would be determined by where she puts more stress on, the "nerdy" part of the phrase or the "white guy" part of the phrase. She the ridicule statement was to point out how nerdy that white guy was, she was probably more interested in commenting on how awkward he was. If it's purporse was to point out how stupid that guy was BECAUSE he was white(and just happened to be nerdy), that would be racist. I somehow think it might be the former, though.
And I believe, if we truly are equal(maybe not socially, but in spirit), anybody can be racist, just like anybody can be sexist(not just men).
RockTurtle
Member
hey let me tell you about haitian and black american relations in MIAMI...
EDIT: on 2nd thought, i better not.
The lack of focus given to institutional racism and its effects in American secondary education is really disappointing.
All Black people deal with it, but white people have so little experience with institutional prejudice that they have little reason to believe it even exists.
All Black people deal with it, but white people have so little experience with institutional prejudice that they have little reason to believe it even exists.
Its astonishing that you legitimately believe your arguing to redefine and repurpose the common American usage of the word racism is actually the norm, and those who use it as its used are the ones who are redefining it.
This is on some 1984 doubleplusgood shit.
Here's some fun food for thought: was George Zimmerman racist or bigoted? Was his profiling of Trayvon Martin as a criminal because he was a young black kid in a hoodie based on his feelings of racial superiority over all black people, or because he had a hate/fear/distrust of young black kids based on some bigoted stereotyping?
Spoiler: it doesn't matter, both instances are racist as all get out.
Hence why people are trying to refocus the discussion of racism to this and why so many people on these boards are so against it.
The equivalence of some idiot calling a guy n***** on the street to the systemic issues of race relations in US is what people want to avoid. Go read some of Ta Nehisi Coates. Or read about mortgage discrimination in US.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked