Support NeoGAF

[FODEA]

You are giving people too much credit. How many people do you think actually read the whole study. You know, all 5 pages of it

Spoiler

4 if you don't count the references

.

I didn't read the study. I'm really not that invested in this type of thing. It's just sad to see how journalists, media deal with studies.

"New cancer test works at 90% effectiveness!!!!!"
"White Americans believe they experience more racism than Black Americans!!!!"

They just butcher studies to get views. And it worked, they caught me hook line and sinker with this article. They do every time. It's just so frustrating to see it happen. Particularly with cancer treatments and tests - it's false hope (90% effectiveness is really not that good for those reading and not getting the first example).

 

[Angelus Errare]

I didn't even make it halfway through the video. Strawman arguments, ignoring historical context (that ain't even 30 goddamn years old), ignoring common sense, and make shit up (WHEN has it ever been frowned upon for a white to marry a white? That's never been a fucking thing. Yes, I'm sure you could find me a group of 50 people who say this. Doesn't matter, it's not a cultural taboo and 99.999999999999999999999999999% chance that it never will be) abound.

You totally forgot there was a time when white people weren't even allowed to marry black people.

 

[adamsappel]

Where are my reparations?

 

[Devolution]

You totally forgot there was a time when white people weren't even allowed to marry black people.

But seriously the HBO Doc about that was pretty enlightening.

http://www.hbo.com/documentaries/the-loving-story

 

[FODEA]

Where are my reparations?

I'd vote for that if it ever came up. I do believe it's one of the reasons why African Americans haven't succeeded or 'pulled themselves up'.

Whites even if they were poor and had shitty lives were able to scrounge and save, Blacks weren't.

 

[Tangeroo]

I don't understand.

The post from Angelus Errare that you responded to regarding slavery was a joke post (partially referencing a Louis C.K. bit that was posted earlier in the thread). What I am suggesting is that he has already tricked so many posters already (ie - "fishing") that he has surpassed the fishing limit for the day.

 

[Aylinato]

^ on the internet that response would more likely be sincere then sarcasm. It's safer to assume the poster is being serious than trolling.

You totally forgot there was a time when white people weren't even allowed to marry black people.

that was because the Irish(who most white people didn't consider whites) were marrying black people in large amounts and the people in charge feared revolts.

 

[Trey]

Why should you, I, or anyone need to feel guilty about anything from the past when we had no part in it? Changing the status quo is good, but doing it out of personal guilt is wrong and no one should feel personally responsible unless they themselves are racist.

Why would I feel guilty? I didn't do anything wrong and don't approve of the behavior of society and the way they treat minorities.

If you can agree that working for a better society is a good thing and are on board with doing your part, it matters to me little what act or force is driving you.

But your culpability is implicit. You may not have to feel guilty but you bear responsibility - just like any man or woman in our society - all the same, especially since you (I'm assuming white folk) inherently benefit from the arrangement.

 

[thefit]

Where are my reparations?

They got a new season of Arrested Development, they brought back Family Guy and Futurama how much more do they want?!

 

[MikeHaggar]

I'd vote for that if it ever came up. I do believe it's one of the reasons why African Americans haven't succeeded or 'pulled themselves up'.

Whites even if they were poor and had shitty lives were able to scrounge and save, Blacks weren't.

seriously? what were the circumstances that allowed poor whites with shitty lives to scrounge and save, but kept african-americans from doing so?

 

[CrimsonCrescendo]

.

 

[CadetMahoney]

"Black ppl cant fuck with time machines"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY

seriously? what were the circumstances that allowed poor whites with shitty lives to scrounge and save, but kept african-americans from doing so?

Thats what I want to know.

 

[Five]

i'd argue that there needs to be the implication that said race is "inferior" or "superior" to another in order for it to actually be racism. otherwise, it's just stereotyping. that gif doesn't imply white people are inferior or superior to any other race as a result of being "f***ed up"

If you don't mind, could you elaborate on the difference between inferior and "f***ed up" as it applies to this case? They seem synonymous from my perspective.

 

[MikeHaggar]

If you don't mind, could you elaborate on the difference between inferior and "f***ed up" as it applies to this case? They seem synonymous from my perspective.

from my perspective, darryl is saying he doesn't like and/or understand the way white people act when saying "white people are f***ed up." there's no implication that his intent is to convey that white people are inferior.

 

[obijkenobi]

"Black ppl cant fuck with time machines"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY



Thats what I want to know.

seriously? what were the circumstances that allowed poor whites with shitty lives to scrounge and save, but kept african-americans from doing so?

Discriminatory practices in the housing industry was/is a huge deal. Owning a home/wealth and being able to pass that down to your children for many in this country is a given. For many generations in America, not so much for minorities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

A quote from the wiki article on Redlining. Bold is my emphasis of course:

For example, in Atlanta in the 1980s, a Pulitzer Prize-winning series of articles by investigative-reporter Bill Dedman showed that banks would often lend to lower-income whites but not to middle- or upper-income blacks

 

[MikeHaggar]

Discriminatory practices in the housing industry was/is a huge deal. Owning a home/wealth and being able to pass that down to your children for many in this country is a given. For many generations in America, not so much for minorities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

poor whites with shitty lives isn't the group that comes to mind when discussing home ownership and wealth...

 

[PogiJones]

Nah, b. Racism is racism. Oppression is oppression. Affirmative action isn't racism. It's a response to racism. It discriminates in order to apply pressure on the status quo, the latter of which was built squarely atop racism and oppression.

Tautology is tautology.

Yes, it is a response to racism, by practicing (justified) racism. I was claiming it was justified racism, and you're saying it's not racism because it's justified. This is the exact kind of attitude and confusion that's creating the friction. "It's not fire, because we're fighting fire with it. It's a response to fire. So this burning sagebrush is not actually fire." Yes, it is fire, and as long as it's justified for the greater good (such as stopping the even larger fire) and controlled properly, it's perfectly fine. We really need to ditch the notion that there is no such thing as justified racism, particularly if we want to implement affirmative action, which is racism. The conceptual dissonance created is really obfuscating the issue.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Discriminatory practices in the housing industry was/is a huge deal. Owning a home/wealth and being able to pass that down to your children for many in this country is a given. For many generations in America, not so much for minorities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

Beat me to it, shit even getting a bank account as a black person was damn near impossible.

 

[rvy]

This is how white men react when their women have figured out that blacks are the superior males.

THIS IS HOW THEY ARE FIGHTING BACK AND TAKING BACK THEIR WOMEN!

But it's too late. They're gone already.

 

[Trey]

Tautology is tautology.

Yes, it is a response to racism, by practicing (justified) racism. I was claiming it was justified racism, and you're saying it's not racism because it's justified. This is the exact kind of attitude and confusion that's creating the friction. "It's not fire, because we're fighting fire with it. It's a response to fire. So this burning sagebrush is not actually fire." Yes, it is fire, and as long as it's justified for the greater good (such as stopping the even larger fire) and controlled properly, it's perfectly fine. We really need to ditch the notion that there is no such thing as justified racism, particularly if we want to implement affirmative action, which is racism. The conceptual dissonance created is really obfuscating the issue.

You're conflating the response to racism with racism itself. They are distinct entities, and have different contextual applications.

Affirmative action doesn't exist to hurt whites. It's not fighting fire with fire. It's taking some of the wood out of the original kindling. Or at least attempting to. It's an inelegant solution.

 

[obijkenobi]

poor whites with shitty lives isn't the group that comes to mind when discussing home ownership and wealth...

Addressed this point in my edit. It's impossible to underestimate how much of an affect policies like this had on creating wealth that could be passed down to the next generation of minorities.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

If you can agree that working for a better society is a good thing and are on board with doing your part, it matters to me little what act or force is driving you.

But your culpability is implicit. You may not have to feel guilty but you bear responsibility - just like any man or woman in our society - all the same, especially since you (I'm assuming white folk) inherently benefit from the arrangement.

But I have no control over any of that. I don't see why I should feel guilty about things that I had no involvement with creating and have no ability to change on a significant basis.

I don't like that society is the way it is and would like it to change drastically, but I don't feel any personal guilt towards it because what's happening would have happened regardless of if I was even born or not.

It's like saying that someone who was reluctantly drafted into a war and refuses to fight should feel personal guilt for war crimes committed by his country. He has no choice over his involvement, is a consciousness objector and he doesn't have the power to stop people with more power from what they're doing.

 

[leadbelly]

I think applying Caucasian only to white people is racist! I'm definitely caucasian, but I am more olive skinned.

What about brown people?

What about olive skinned people!

 

[Monocle]

Haha, wow. I feel like a public awareness campaign is in order here. People need to be informed about the reality of racism and racial inequality for there to be any hope of change. While it's probably true that you can't really understand the everyday hardship nonwhite people experience without actually living those experiences, I think the average person would be able to empathize if they could see and hear what it's like to be constantly shamed and profiled and denied a fair shot. These stories need to be brought to people on a countrywide scale so that no one can claim with a straight face that their white person problems are remotely comparable.

 

[rvy]

What about olive skinned people!

Which olives? What a broad statement to make.

 

[MikeHaggar]

Addressed this point in my edit. It's impossible to underestimate how much of an affect policies like this had on creating wealth that could be passed down to the next generation of minorities.

alright, we're making two different points. i was simply trying to point out that there was nothing keeping african-americans from saving money (as was originally stated). you're pointing out a different set of econmic challenges they faced (which i understand and don't dispute) that in no way affects their ability to save whatever money they have.

i probably should have let the original "saving money" comment go and not bothered questioning it. it just seemed like a ridiculous statement at the time.

 

[Cyan]

Tautology is tautology.

Yes, it is a response to racism, by practicing (justified) racism. I was claiming it was justified racism, and you're saying it's not racism because it's justified. This is the exact kind of attitude and confusion that's creating the friction. "It's not fire, because we're fighting fire with it. It's a response to fire. So this burning sagebrush is not actually fire." Yes, it is fire, and as long as it's justified for the greater good (such as stopping the even larger fire) and controlled properly, it's perfectly fine. We really need to ditch the notion that there is no such thing as justified racism, particularly if we want to implement affirmative action, which is racism. The conceptual dissonance created is really obfuscating the issue.

Right. A better way of explaining it might be that "racism" has several negative connotations tied to it. So if someone says "affirmative action is racism," typically they aren't actually making any kind of interesting point--sure, by definition it's racism, so what?--but rather trying to bring in the negative connotations without actually having to argue for them. Which is why saying that affirmative action is racism generally gets pushback.

This is sort of a losing battle because it's really difficult to get people to ignore the connotations and argue what they're actually trying to argue, but yes, it would be nice if we could have discussions where we use phrases like "sure this is racism, but it's the good and consequentially useful kind of racism!" Unfortunately that one is pretty difficult to say without sounding weird or possibly insane.

 

[leadbelly]

Which olives? What a broad statement to make.

I would say yellow skinned, but someone might call me racist...

 

[PogiJones]

You're conflating the response to racism with racism itself. They are distinct entities, and have different contextual applications.

Affirmative action doesn't exist to hurt whites. It's not fighting fire with fire. It's taking some of the wood out of the original kindling.

No, removing wood was what the civil rights movement was about. But that wasn't enough, so we've been adopting affirmative action. So now, if there are two applicants to an affirmative action university who have identical credentials, but one is black and one is white, the black applicant will be preferred over the white. Same with latino vs. white, and likely other races vs. white. In the situation where the candidates have equal credentials, white person gets chopped solely because they're white. That is discrimination based on race, which is, by definition, racism. I don't know how you can keep saying it's not.

Your resistance to acknowledging it's racism is precisely the problem with discussions surrounding the issue. The sagebrush is complaining it's getting burned, and instead of saying, "Yeah, I know it burns a bit, but we've got to do this to stop the even bigger fire," you're saying, "You're not on fire, sagebrush, because we're using this intense heat to fight a fire. So since you're not on fire, stop complaining." That's just not productive. If you want people who feel burned to understand your side, you need to tell them WHY you're burning them, not pretend that they're not actually burning.

 

[richiek]

I experience racism when I go to Chinese/Korean restaurants. I order something spicy and it comes out tasting like they only added black pepper.

And yes, some white people DO like jellyfish salads.

A textbook example of first world problems.

 

[Trey]

But I have no control over any of that. I don't see why I should feel guilty about things that I had no involvement with creating and have no ability to change on a significant basis.

I don't like that society is the way it is and would like it to change drastically, but I don't feel any personal guilt towards it because what's happening would have happened regardless of if I was even born or not.

It's like saying that someone who was reluctantly drafted into a war and refuses to fight should feel personal guilt for war crimes committed by his country. He has no choice over his involvement, is a consciousness objector and he doesn't have the power to stop people with more power from what they're doing.

You still bear the responsibility. Just because you don't have the "stop racism" button under your finger does not absolve you of living in, and profiting from, a society that passively and actively works in the interest of white people.

Whether you feel guilty or not by this arrangement is your business.

 

[Aylinato]

No, removing wood was what the civil rights movement was about. But that wasn't enough, so we've been adopting affirmative action. So now, if there are two applicants to an affirmative action university who have identical credentials, but one is black and one is white, the black applicant will be preferred over the white. Same with latino vs. white, and likely other races vs. white. In the situation where the candidates have equal credentials, white person gets chopped solely because they're white. That is discrimination based on race, which is, by definition, racism. I don't know how you can keep saying it's not.

Your resistance to acknowledging it's racism is precisely the problem with discussions surrounding the issue. The sagebrush is complaining it's getting burned, and instead of saying, "Yeah, I know it burns a bit, but we've got to do this to stop the even bigger fire," you're saying, "You're not on fire, sagebrush, because we're using this intense heat to fight a fire. So since you're not on fire, stop complaining." That's just not productive. If you want people who feel burned to understand your side, you need to tell them WHY you're burning them, not pretend that they're not actually burning.

Out of all the stupid preferences of getting admitted first into universities you picked AA as the unfair one? Lol, give me a break.

 

[akira28]

media push and 3rd party social engineering.

 

[Devolution]

Out of all the stupid preferences of getting admitted first into universities you picked AA as the unfair one? Lol, give me a break.

 

[obijkenobi]

alright, we're making two different points. i was simply trying to point out that there was nothing keeping african-americans from saving money (as was originally stated). you're pointing out a different set of econmic challenges they faced (which i understand and don't dispute) that in no way affects their ability to save whatever money they have.

i probably should have let the original "saving money" comment go and not bothered questioning it. it just seemed like a ridiculous statement at the time.

Well, I mean, if you are trying to buy a house and have to pay and extra 3% in interest per year over 30 years to do so....makes it harder to save money. That seems like an important thing to keep in mind.

 

[Brawndo Addict]

I'm on mobile so I can't copy it over: but here's a link to a Tim Wise essay on the Affirmative Action is racist argument: http://www.timwise.org/2010/10/affirmative-action-for-dummies-explaining-the-difference-between-oppression-and-opportunity/

 

[Shaanyboi]

L
O
FUCKING
L

 

[Switch Back 9]

I've experienced some pretty hardcore racism in the past.
Some Black and Spanish girls in my class were talking about Reggaeton, and I explained to them how it's awful, terrible music. One girl replied "Well it's better than that screamo shit you listen to."
Implying that because I'm white I OBVIOUSLY listen to Metal music.

Of course, I do listen to Metal, but that's not the point! It was a brutal and vicious racist attack I'm sure many of my white brothers and sisters can empathize with.
I went home in tears because of how it made me feel.

 

[MikeHaggar]

Well, I mean, if you are trying to buy a house and have to pay and extra 3% in interest per year over 30 years to do so....makes it harder to save money. That seems like an important thing to keep in mind.

i was under the impression we were discussing poor people (both white and african-american) who would be lucky to even get to the point of buying a house. so, what was keeping poor african-americans, who couldn't afford a mortgage nor get approved for any type of loan, from saving whatever money it is that they had?

 

[leadbelly]

I've experienced some pretty hardcore racism in the past.
Some Black and Spanish girls in my class were talking about Reggaeton, and I explained to them how it's awful, terrible music. One girl replied "Well it's better than that screamo shit you listen to."
Implying that because I'm white I OBVIOUSLY listen to Metal music.

Of course, I do listen to Metal, but that's not the point! It was a brutal and vicious racist attack I'm sure many of my white brothers and sisters can empathize with.
I went home in tears because of how it made me feel.

lol

 

[Trey]

No, removing wood was what the civil rights movement was about. But that wasn't enough, so we've been adopting affirmative action. So now, if there are two applicants to an affirmative action university who have identical credentials, but one is black and one is white, the black applicant will be preferred over the white. Same with latino vs. white, and likely other races vs. white. In the situation where the candidates have equal credentials, white person gets chopped solely because they're white. That is discrimination based on race, which is, by definition, racism. I don't know how you can keep saying it's not.

Your resistance to acknowledging it's racism is precisely the problem with discussions surrounding the issue. The sagebrush is complaining it's getting burned, and instead of saying, "Yeah, I know it burns a bit, but we've got to do this to stop the even bigger fire," you're saying, "You're not on fire, sagebrush, because we're using this intense heat to fight a fire. So since you're not on fire, stop complaining." That's just not productive. If you want people who feel burned to understand your side, you need to tell them WHY you're burning them, not pretend that they're not actually burning.

Racism is the belief that one race is inherently superior to another, not merely the recognition of separate races. I will acknowledge that AA promotes this belief in favor of minorities the moment it does so, which does not occur when a college is funded for minority kids so that their school demographic at least can approach society's ratios. So that the races that are overwhelmingly disadvantaged can have more of a shot.

I'm not the problem. I'm not telling the bush that its problems aren't real. I'm telling a leaf on that bush that you got burned while the rest of the bush is sitting atop everything else, and has its roots penetrating society in an attempt to maintain the status quo.

 

[Complex Shadow]

Get a load of this GAF: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zMzeKBEvaQ

I remember this. Still as infuriating as ever.

 

[God Dayumm]

While the notion is absolutely false, it's terrible that more white people feel alienated or discriminated, that can set things back and slow down social progress

 

[xbhaskarx]

Obama's America

 

[Switch Back 9]

I remember this. Still as infuriating as ever.

They certainly could have picked prettier idiots to get their point across.

 

[SolarPowered]

I think one of my lungs is going to collapse.

I

I've experienced some pretty hardcore racism in the past.
Some Black and Spanish girls in my class were talking about Reggaeton, and I explained to them how it's awful, terrible music. One girl replied "Well it's better than that screamo shit you listen to."
Implying that because I'm white I OBVIOUSLY listen to Metal music.

Of course, I do listen to Metal, but that's not the point! It was a brutal and vicious racist attack I'm sure many of my white brothers and sisters can empathize with.
I went home in tears because of how it made me feel.

BRB going to the hospital

ahaha

 

[Spinluck]

Obama's America

Obama only won because of black people!

 

[Zen_Arcade]

You still bear the responsibility. Just because you don't have the "stop racism" button under your finger does not absolve you of living in, and profiting from, a society that passively and actively works in the interest of white people.

Whether you feel guilty or not by this arrangement is your business.

That doesn't make any sense. You don't bear responsibility for everything you benefit or profit from.

 

[The Adder]

Why would I feel guilty? I didn't do anything wrong and don't approve of the behavior of society and the way they treat minorities.

You directly benefit from the perpetuation of said wrong doing.

Would you not feel guilty if someone else stole some money and gave you a cut?

 

[Cyan]

Your resistance to acknowledging it's racism is precisely the problem with discussions surrounding the issue.

No, that's really not the problem. The problem is that people insist on arguing using these loaded terms and then saying "but by definition!" which is not productive or useful. Unpack the words and argue that. Affirmative action involves racial discrimination. Is that good or bad? Well, you have to look at reasons and consequences. There's really no point in insisting that other people use particular words just because of definitions. They don't want to use those words because they bring along needless baggage. Unless you're just really interested in semantics, it's probably more useful to find another angle of discussion.