When is white history month?
- Thread starter Slayven
- Start date
- Status
PhoenixDark
Banned
Let's take this a step further. Why aren't there WHITE markets? Or WHITE berries? Or WHITEmailing? Or WHITElisting? Do they X-men fly around in a jet called the WHITE bird? I think not. Hell the blacks even get their own type of dynamite!
Half and half
Member
Black History Month is a celebration of the progress we have made as a nation. Americans of all colors have helped advance this country past some extreme wickedness directed towards a specific group of people.
This month is for everyone. So sit back, reflect a bit, and then go about your daily routines.
This month is for everyone. So sit back, reflect a bit, and then go about your daily routines.
I celebrate White History Month like, every day. I listen to Arcade Fire, watch Portlandia on Netflix, spread the gospel that is Twin Peaks, eat from an overpriced novelty food truck and retweet @SeinfeldStories whenever I can.
C'mon, white people. You don't need a month to do all this. You should celebrate your woefully ironic culture every day, like me!
C'mon, white people. You don't need a month to do all this. You should celebrate your woefully ironic culture every day, like me!
That tumblr is frightening and hilarious
true. they also enslaved indians and anyone else that's white and not white.
As long as there's always the label of "Black History", Black history becoming overall American history will never happen. That's not to say that it's the only thing that is holding back Black history from being American history, since there's definitely much more, but race in itself is a false classification since race isn't real. So classifying certain pieces of history as Black history is in many ways using the same logic as racists who didn't want to put history facts in text books since they classified those facts as being "Black, Non-American, facts".
"Black History Month" blends itself in with the problem that society believes that there's a difference in people based on skin color. As long as things keep on being differentiated & classified based on something that isn't even real in the first place, there will continue on being separation.
"Black History Month" blends itself in with the problem that society believes that there's a difference in people based on skin color. As long as things keep on being differentiated & classified based on something that isn't even real in the first place, there will continue on being separation.
You said "AT ALL. Period." I am addressing that. It's your fault for speaking in absolutes. So no, I will not give you a break. Even just my one personal experience invalidates your claim.
I never said there hasn't been problems, of course there have. But not every teacher is a bigot.
so what you're saying is we treat everyone equally?
WeAreStarStuff
Member
More than you would care to know. I watch at least 7-10 documentaries any given week, but I must ask why do you ask? I concern myself w/ global and cosmic history, not any particular facet - so I look at it all; the sum of the parts as they say.
Bgamer90: So what happens first? Black History month goes away, and suddenly accomplishments of blacks in history will be given added focus and will be added to history curriculums around the country?
Or black accomplishments get added to general history and suddenly there's no need for a Black History month? - Have you been keeping up with all the things they're removing from the history books recently? And are you aware that it was a struggle to get black accomplishments to be included in the American historical narrative?
Black History month is the result of the differences being highlighted, not the cause. Black history was determined to be unimportant and not worth being discussed. So now they have an opening for discussion. And people still ignore it as they might, or minimize it as they may. But some people learn something that they didn't know before, and you're telling me that it's a bad thing? That it contributes to racism and separation?
Or black accomplishments get added to general history and suddenly there's no need for a Black History month? - Have you been keeping up with all the things they're removing from the history books recently? And are you aware that it was a struggle to get black accomplishments to be included in the American historical narrative?
Black History month is the result of the differences being highlighted, not the cause. Black history was determined to be unimportant and not worth being discussed. So now they have an opening for discussion. And people still ignore it as they might, or minimize it as they may. But some people learn something that they didn't know before, and you're telling me that it's a bad thing? That it contributes to racism and separation?
This isn't about teachers. Go back to the education system of america pre 1980. Things have to be allowed to change, and given time to do so.
freenudemacusers
Member
all those accomplishments... surely we deserve a month!?
ghostofsparta
Member
those twitter posts are gold
#THISISMYCOUNTRY
#THISISMYCOUNTRY
Mammoth Jones
Member
Oh shit, I'm on the semantics train. Well, I'll just apologize for the poor choice with those three words and nip that shit in the bud right now:
I apologize for phrasing it the way I did. I was on the train and was just jotting down my thoughts without vetting them properly. It wasn't my intention to insinuate that every teacher is a bigot. That thought didn't even cross my mind.
Huh?
I agree with what Morgan Freeman says in that video but we are not at that point yet unfortunately. Until the US gives more value and exposure to black American history at schools and the media Black History Month is needed to educate most Americans about black American's role in USA's history.
the 70s. It didn't happen over night. And it sure as hell wasn't automatic.
Yes I'm aware of the struggles, and acknowledge the fact that Black History Month has helped in many ways (considering the fact that I'm Black). However, as long as we classify this history as Black history, it's never going to be treated as overall history that has had an influence on people outside of just Blacks.
When did I say that it's a bad thing?
And yes it can definitely contribute to separation. Why? Because due to it's label (Black History), people are essentially encouraged to treat it as being different. The differences that the man made concept of race created has had a significant, unfair influence on the way that certain people live to the point in which it definitely shouldn't be ignored. However, as long as we keep on classifying people based on something that isn't real, the more that people will stupidly treat someone or something about someone as less significant.
That can be seen now with Black history. Due to Black History having a specific month, it's treated by many as being different. Due to that, the significance of how Blacks in history changed America for everyone living in the country are practically encouragingly seen as being important history only for people who consider themselves as Black.
This does exist, and is the opposite of blacklisting. Take that as you will
freenudemacusers
Member
why wasn't there a black robin. HUH BRUCE?
Bgamer90: When a black person is involved in a part of history or is responsible for creating or inventing something that affects everyone, I don't think that the first thought is to see that it's 'black history, so it only applies to black people' If that is someone's initial impression, I wouldn't put the responsibility for that on 'black history', I would put that on the person who decides that that label couldn't possibly have anything to do with something affecting or connected to them. Simply because it's the word black. We're affected by 'white' history. European history. Whatever you want to call it.
We need "black" history, because we don't even know how much of it we have and how much of it we've lost. It shouldn't be subsumed and integrated and generalized. Not yet. The respect for it isn't there yet. I think it deserves that identifier, for the very fact that it WAS something once ignored. Maybe some day we can do away with that title. But I don't think we're there yet.
I don't treat Hispanic Heritage or Asian-American/Pacific Islander history as something totally unrelated to me and my life. People do that, choose to do it, and they're wrong. They see it as the other, and you should blame them for that, not the name.
We need "black" history, because we don't even know how much of it we have and how much of it we've lost. It shouldn't be subsumed and integrated and generalized. Not yet. The respect for it isn't there yet. I think it deserves that identifier, for the very fact that it WAS something once ignored. Maybe some day we can do away with that title. But I don't think we're there yet.
I don't treat Hispanic Heritage or Asian-American/Pacific Islander history as something totally unrelated to me and my life. People do that, choose to do it, and they're wrong. They see it as the other, and you should blame them for that, not the name.
Trigger Warning
Member
.
la flama blanca
Banned
Because every other month is white history month, no?
Good Job Bob
Member
I can't disagree or fault with the general sentiment behind Black History Month, I do however think it's ultimately misguided and all the effort spent on this silly month would be best served elsewhere; like ensuring that African American history (and other minorities) isn't neglected in education.
SpeedingUptoStop
will totally Facebook friend you! *giggle* *LOL*
BURN THIS FUCKING THREAD
But since "White history" isn't called "White history", more people treat it with more significance and treat it as being what's important since it's just considered as normal history.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there shouldn't be responsibility on the person that views Black history as being different. However, the label "black history" doesn't help in making people like that change their views.
I have to disagree. The struggles of Black people in the past were greatly in part due to them wanting to be considered as being the same as everyone else. Therefore in some ways (at least in my opinion) it's ironic to label it in itself as Black history.
But again, like I said before, it encourages separation. And it having a designated month furthers that separation.
I sometimes wonder how things would be if the amount of info packed into "Black History Month" was scattered throughout the whole year. Wouldn't that make "black history" stay longer in the minds of people thus giving it a greater chance to be integrated into "general history"? Wouldn't that be better than giving tons of "black history" info in one month only to never deal with the topics again until the same time next year?
Also wouldn't scattering topics through out the whole year instead of just packing them all into one month give a chance for those topics to be talked about more in depth due to their being more time available in comparison to having to cram things in with other black history topics in the month of February? Maybe I'm wrong though...
So would have Genghis Khan.
Good Job Bob
Member
What is this supposed to even mean?
It means it's pretty easy to say someone would be appalled at something, but it doesn't a) make it true or b) make it relevant.
Good Job Bob
Member
I'd think arguably the biggest & most popular proponent of Black civil rights would be relevant to a discussion on the legibility of a "Black History Month" than freaking Genghis Khan. Can't disagree with you on no-one knows for sure what his opinion would really be.
I had no idea we had a month.
Parallax
best seen in the classic "Shadow of the Beast"
You need better trolling game.
So true.
Im_So_Pringles
Member
Yeah, I've been seeing a ton of similar posts on Facebook lately. Thickheaded, dumb people. No race needs or deserves a history month in my opinion.
Who's trolling?
Beerman462
Member
Amazing truth
bgamer: in my experience, black history month was just an opening to discuss things that would have normally not been discussed, because there were like maybe 12 black people in the history book, and most of them were discussed in the context of slavery or civil rights. And of course Crispus Attucks, who I hear may not be in the books that future generations read. So after them, you have the 'Up from Slavery' guy, and the dude who was an amazing inventor and chemist, a contemporary of Thomas Edison and Henry Ford, but is best remembered for peanut butter. So black history month gave people an excuse to read a book that wasn't a part of the regular curriculum because it was omitted. To do a book report that wasn't expected to be done by state education board standards. To learn something about a black inventor, or a black pioneer that the system itself didn't deem necessary to teach. Even though there was a proven lack. It gave schools and teachers latitude to fill in those gaps, for 10 minutes out of a 45 minute class, every day, for a month. And it did it because the system and the tools that the system used did not represent black Americans as being a part of their country's history.
Now, if you want to talk about rewriting the books, reorganizing the curriculum so that blacks, and all minorities are fairly represented. That all their efforts and stories and creations and inventions and successes are included and put on the same level as the Jonas Salks and the Zebulon Pikes of history, I'm right there with you. But right now, history and education are headed in the opposite direction. They're not adding more history to the books, they're taking things out. They're removing things that they don't think are important, things like Sally Hemmings and the founding father's ownership of slaves. They're removing discussions on the political philosophy of democracy, and preventing the expansion on the roles of Hispanics and other minorities in America's history. And they're doing this for political reasons, because they feel that "the left" has been in charge of how history is taught for too long, and they want to restore what the social conservatives of the Texas education board call "balance". They're cutting things out because they claim they don't have the time to teach, or the money to spend time on these "unimportant" sections of history. So they don't make them part of the curriculum. They could add more blacks and more minorities, make them more than just seasonal electives, there's nothing stopping them. But they won't do it. There could even be a pushback if they did.
So, do you want to put everything in one pot, and leave it up to them to divide it up, and decide what's fair? Frankly I don't trust them with white history, let alone black history. I think in the future, some day, maybe after people stop seriously asking why we don't have a white history month, they could think about whether we need a black history month. But that time isn't now. I think we need black history month more than ever, and I think more than ever, since so many are removed from the reasons for it, and the struggle to get it, we need to remember why we have it.
Now, if you want to talk about rewriting the books, reorganizing the curriculum so that blacks, and all minorities are fairly represented. That all their efforts and stories and creations and inventions and successes are included and put on the same level as the Jonas Salks and the Zebulon Pikes of history, I'm right there with you. But right now, history and education are headed in the opposite direction. They're not adding more history to the books, they're taking things out. They're removing things that they don't think are important, things like Sally Hemmings and the founding father's ownership of slaves. They're removing discussions on the political philosophy of democracy, and preventing the expansion on the roles of Hispanics and other minorities in America's history. And they're doing this for political reasons, because they feel that "the left" has been in charge of how history is taught for too long, and they want to restore what the social conservatives of the Texas education board call "balance". They're cutting things out because they claim they don't have the time to teach, or the money to spend time on these "unimportant" sections of history. So they don't make them part of the curriculum. They could add more blacks and more minorities, make them more than just seasonal electives, there's nothing stopping them. But they won't do it. There could even be a pushback if they did.
So, do you want to put everything in one pot, and leave it up to them to divide it up, and decide what's fair? Frankly I don't trust them with white history, let alone black history. I think in the future, some day, maybe after people stop seriously asking why we don't have a white history month, they could think about whether we need a black history month. But that time isn't now. I think we need black history month more than ever, and I think more than ever, since so many are removed from the reasons for it, and the struggle to get it, we need to remember why we have it.
victreeb3l
Member
im mad i gotta share a month with 3 other groups while french fuckin americans get their own >:'( ive never even met any!
regardless, im glad black history month exists and hope it continues until a large amount of this country's citizens get their shit together
regardless, im glad black history month exists and hope it continues until a large amount of this country's citizens get their shit together
At the time it was created, yes, a black history month was 100% needed and warranted. Now though, if we truly want to be progressive black history month needs to go away and instead black history should just become apart of american history as a whole, instead of being singled out for just one month of the year.
What Morgan said was true, as harsh as it might initially sound.
What Morgan said was true, as harsh as it might initially sound.
Blackace
if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
hahahahahaha
lol
njean777
Member
Country music and cool do not belong in the same sentence, unless Johnny Cash is in that sentence. My opinion of course.
I came in here from the Prove to me that there's a more epic theme than Back to the Future thread.
I was listening to your link with T2 Judgement day playing in the backround. Morgan Freeman laying down some real talk with T2... made me smile.
Anyway, I actually agree with the sentiment that race is something people need to stop putting so much weight into. Being human (and ultimately not even that, imo)and what we do with our lives is what should be considered, not the fact that we have a certain skin color.
- Status