| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, easy, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member, please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| On racism... | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jan 14 2010, 03:23 AM (127 Views) | |
| Post #1 Jan 14 2010, 03:23 AM | Joe E. Holman |
|
Keep checking the blog. My latest inflammatory entry... http://joeholmansblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/racism-what-it-is-what-it-isnt-and-why.html |
 
|
 
|
 |
| Post #2 Jan 14 2010, 06:39 PM | magicshoemonkey |
|
The only actual criticism I have of the structure of your argument is that you only use one direct example that I can see, and it's a bad one. I think almost everyone can agree that the guy saying that "black hole" is racist (unless he's referring to some other meaning) is being ridiculous. Granted, some people will think it's brilliant, but those people usually also think that Pat Robertson and Jesse Jackson are working for the people. Overall, I agree with some of what you say and disagree with other parts. I don't remember Punch Out well enough to talk about it. I think that there are common racist joke that are acceptable and common racist jokes that are not acceptable. There is a difference between saying, "He's like a drunken Russian," and saying, when you meet a Russian man who isn't drunk, "Oh, I though all Russians were drunk all the time and beating up their wives." I mean, you could say that as a joke if you knew the guy would take it well, but you wouldn't likely do so because there are certain social rules that we follow. Which is really the issue: there are certain times when a comment that would otherwise be offensive isn't because the context makes it acceptable. For example, if people know you don't mean it negatively. I know a guy who comes from Vietnam who, when he came to the US, immediately became friends with a group of black guys. He says the "n" word in that group with no issues, but if he were to go into a bar and call a black guy that, even with good intentions, the guy might be offended. And that would be understandable. I think you know this stuff, though; I'm not trying to be condescending, just add my POV. With the stuff about cars being more likely to be stolen, last I heard, this was years ago, the most likely car to be stolen was the Ford Taurus. The reason isn't because it's so not a black car, but because it's ubiquitous, easy to get into, and doesn't particularly stand out. People steal a certain car because it's there and easy, not because it's owned by white people (that may happen sometimes, but I don't think that black or Hispanic car thieves are generally stealing as a reaction to racial oppression). The reason cars are more likely stolen in some areas is more to do with economics than race. Now, it is a fact that the history of America has led to black Americans being generally poorer than white Americans. That actually does have to do with race, but it's not inherent in anyone's race: the centuries of whites oppressing blacks has created a serious cultural problem there. So it's a social issue more than a race issue (even though race is a causal factor). But, obviously, not every poor person steals, and some rich people do. The stuff about Prisons is also a complex situation. Which is really my point: a lot of the things that people generalize and apply to race are essentially more complex than just a "race" issue. And it never has to do with inherent genetics or any such thing. So, the point, to me, of modern anti-racism is to separate the socially constructed stereotypes out and reveal their falsehood. Sometimes people carry it too far, though, and that's worth pointing out. There are also some cases where double standards are applied. For example, Dave Chappelle got away with saying very racist things on his show simply because he's black, and people assume he doesn't mean it. Plus, comedians get away with that kind of stuff more than normal people or politicians (a white example is Lisa Lampanelli). This is mostly because politicians have to appeal to a large population than comedians to be successful, and are therefore held to a different standard. Anyway, I think I had more in mind, but that's probably enough for now. |
 
|
|
|
|
| Post #3 Jan 15 2010, 12:20 AM | Bonzolee |
|
I'd like to point out that video games are much more popular now than they were back in the 80s. So, they're much more under the microscope now. Unfortunately, I can't comment on modern gaming as I don't own any of the systems (though I'd like a Wii and either a PS3 or X-Box 360) but a game like "Punch Out" coming out today wouldn't surprise me in the least. Hell, "South Park" has plenty of jokes that would be considered to be more offensive. "Family Guy" gets away with a ton of stuff, too, and that airs on network television. Sarah Silverman gets away with a helluva lot, both in her stand-up and on her show. Bill Maher, too– but as Monkey pointed out, it's all about context. Comedy relying on stereotypes is HUGE in this day and age. If I were more up on these things, I'm confident I could find a modern game MUCH more offensive than "Punch Out" ever was. And "Punch Out" just used stereotypes for comedic effect, so I think anyone calling the game "racist" is sorely mistaken. And I do think you're terribly simplifying Liberals in this piece to the point of... a stereotype!
I agree there. And the things I disagree with in that piece I do so because I feel it to be way too oversimplified. I like to study a lot of sociology and psychology. Something like the Robbers Cave experiment is extremely informative in this particular area. Edited by Bonzolee, Jan 15 2010, 12:22 AM.
|
|
|
"Brain disorders, like madness, are themselves contagious. The frequency of madness among doctors who are specialists for the mad is notorious." – Gustave Le Bon "The fact that audiences would rather go to Wonderland than face Iraq speaks volumes." – Random Youtube Poster | |
|
|
|
| Post #4 Jan 15 2010, 07:57 AM | Joe E. Holman |
Actually, it's not that farfetched. I can give you plenty of others to go with it that are nearly as bad. These examples are far and near, and they range from controversial to absurd. A Muslim woman somewhere in the north doesn't eat pork. Her co-workers put a piggy bank on their desks (not to provoke her). She gets offended, goes to liberal management, and they back up her request to ban all pig jokes and piggy banks because that offends those who don't eat (or like) pork. That made the news a year or two ago. Have you noticed that black kids and Asian kids all the more now are being thrown into posters? It's because if the producers don't, they'll be seen as non-diverse, and hence, racist unless they have one child of each race represented. They have to have "the token minority" somewhere no matter what. At work recently, it's nearly mandatory to take diversity training classes. One of the little snotty "Little Man's Syndrome"-afflicted bosses wrote up a co-worker because she and another employee (both Mexicans) were making "inside jokes" about "beaners." It was amongst themselves, not in front of others. The boss just barely heard it. He's a perfect example of the modern liberal. This stuff happens everywhere, and it's a sign of how people think. And so no, the example is not that extreme. Tons of liberal academics are moving in that direction.
But that's your reason talking. You are reasonable. Yes, context matters, as does tone. But the examples in Punch Out I highlighted were examples of things that should never be taken to task on, and yet today, they certainly would be. You may not remember the game, but those of my generation do, and we're in awe at how times have changed. You're too young to see it, and that's ok, but to us, it's a stupefying wonder. It used to be that if a kid fatally allergic to peanuts registered at a school, the teacher had to learn how to inject the shot to save the child's life in the event of a reaction. But today, they don't stop there. They BAN peanuts and peanut products from the school! It's about emotional catering, and it's sickening, just like with Obama and the attitude changes--no emphasis on hard work from this president. He talks about getting something to make things easier. It's a change in thinking. That's the problem. Instead of acknowledging that people CHOOSE to be offended, people create inadvertently the mindset to be a victim in a vicious cycle of future offenses. We have to please everyone. No one can be denied or refused anything. Everyone must be psychologically pampered at all costs. That's why it made the news three years ago when a school soccer team that won a game had the scoreboards reset at the end. Why? To not offend the other team by calling them the "losers." The principle backed it and said doing otherwise would hurt kid's self-esteem. It's fucking insanity, and an entire generation is nearly blind to it.
It doesn't matter. At Great Wolf, twice recently, a Cadillac Escalade and a Lincoln Navigator - both ghetto-ed out vehicles - got broken into and the rims stolen. Drive around and look like some fool who wears a sideways hat with pants dragging like a loaded diaper and you'll get ripped off. I have been in security 4 years, and even before that, I have seen this trend. We're not talking which vehicles are statistically stolen more. We're talking about a thing the low-lives go for (the rims, just like the stereos).
Why mention that? I'll tell you why...because you are a product of this generation, and whites have been guilt-tripped into at least passively mentioning things like that. It's like the "I have black friends" comments some make, or the "I don't want to seem racist, but..." comments. It's low-level guilt, I think. Yes, of course not all steal. Goes without saying. I myself have known rich who steal.
No, it's simple. You get protection from your own. Trust me, I have studied this. It's all about race and street ways there.
We agree. |
|
|
|
|
| Post #5 Jan 15 2010, 08:01 AM | Joe E. Holman |
Nope. I'm making a point about the way people think. My reply to MSM gives other examples of how it goes to one's thinking. It's a state of mind, a readiness to be offended, a victimized mentality of...pussiness (for lack of a better term). It's a weakening of thought, and I believe, a dangerous mentality. |
|
|
|
|
| Post #6 Jan 15 2010, 10:28 AM | Huxley |
|
Can I just point out that it should always be argued that "Black Hole " is never considered racist? All light cannot escape and therefore appears as a hole within the blackness of space. I mean honestly, is a Red Dwarf taking the piss out of a short Native American? How about Super massive Black Holes? Is that a remark aimed at Whoopie Goldberg? It is poverty and/or jealousy that steals cars, not skin colour. |
|
  | |
|
|
|
| Post #7 Jan 15 2010, 07:50 PM | Joe E. Holman |
Now why say that, Hux? No one said skin color steals cars. This is what I mean...people are feeling obligated to not make generalizations lest they forget to remind everyone about the exceptions. I have discussed this with "people of color" and you know what I have found? They hate it when whites get into this routine of reminding everyone of how fair they are. It is possible (and should not be shunned) to make generalizations, so long as guilt is not bestowed. That's what I said in the article. On the south side of San Antonio (Zarzamora street and General McMullen), the police have the biggest task enforcing the curfew. WHy? Because that's where the trash live, teen gangsters with only mothers and no fathers, who graffiti fences and walls and steal. Wanna guess what race they are predominately? I don't think you do. You'd feel too guilty. Discussing this (in gest) with my Mexican manager at the time, he turned to me and said: "These Mexicans have fucked it up for the good kids." We both laughed. Should me and my supervisor have been written up by the head boss? Were we racist? Nope, no guilt bestowed. Just a general truth stated. It's not absolute, nor definite, but I feel no guilt to have to remind everyone of that in every conversation. What I'm saying is, "Light up!" Edited by Joe E. Holman, Jan 15 2010, 07:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
| Post #8 Jan 15 2010, 08:43 PM | magicshoemonkey |
Well, I actually think that this example is less ridiculous than the "black hole" guy, even though I don't agree with the woman's offense. The difference is that this is a case of real cultural clash. It is true that there is a serious problem where some more conservative Muslims are offended by things in our culture that we think nothing of (and this is true of some other cultures, too). I don't mean fundamentalist crazy Muslims (granted, I think all Muslims are wrong, but most are at least as normal as conservative Christians who don't protest abortion clinics). Anyway, to you and me, it seems insane to be offended by a piggy bank because in our culture it is completely meaningless. I don't even own one, and I can only think of one person I know who does. I certainly think the woman is a little off to be so offended that she complains, but I can understand why the company would be in such a situation where they would say, "Well, I guess we'll just ban piggy banks, odd as that is." Not because they're super-crazy "libs," but because it's the best action to diplomatically solve the situation. I mean, honestly, who even needs a piggy bank at work (if you need to put coins in something, get a jar or even a coin bank not shaped like a pig). Again, I'm not siding with the woman, she should have just told them she was offended, the workers should then have apologized, and everything been fine. If the woman insisted piggy banks be banned, what can they do?
This is becoming more prevalent, but at its best it's a move to add some diversity to films. At its worse it's cases where they use black characters at times when they make no sense (like Medieval Germany or something). But in the past, they've done the opposite (blackface and whatnot). South Park does make fun of the "token" black character thing with the character Token. Anyway, I agree that there are cases where people go too far with racial sensitivity, but I just thought that example you gave was not the best. I mean, it certainly shows the extreme, but it shows an extreme that I don't think most of the worst violations reach.
I agree about the peanut and the soccer thing. I didn't mean to imply that you are wrong that these kinds of things don't go too far at times, but I feel like it's important to note that we come from a past where the extreme opposite has held sway. It's understandable that there would be a hope to move in the other direction, and I think it's even understandable that some of it would go too far. I would also point out that "Harrison Bergeron," Vonnegut's brilliant short story about this topic in relation to athletic ability and intellect, was published in 1961, so this kind of thing does have roots in earlier times.
I agree that flashy and expensive things are likely to get stolen when flaunted. I thought perhaps you were referring to statistics in your article, so I may have confused the issue.
I said this in response to your claim about workers in an office stealing lunches, that the most likely thief would be the poorest. I could easily point to kids I knew in school who were some of the more privileged but were stealing from the poor kids because they could. I'm saying that while economics has some effect on the likelyhood of stealing, it's not the main contributing factor and therefore one shouldn't assume that the poor person is more likely to steal. I could be wrong, I suppose, but I don't think that's the case.
I also agree with you on this. I wasn't saying we should go around constantly making concessions about everything we say, just that we should be aware of the more complex nature of some situations. When you're going around about your day and talking to people you always find ways of paraphrasing using stereotypes and such. Regardless of the topic. Edited by magicshoemonkey, Jan 15 2010, 08:47 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
| Post #9 Jan 16 2010, 12:06 AM | Bonzolee |
Still sounds like a stereotype to me.
Here's the psychology behind that: Why do people like others? One of the several reasons is familiarity. If we are familiar with something, we will probably like it. However, looking at school integration in the United States, or the study I mentioned in my last post, paints a different picture. It was thought that by sending children of various races to school together, you would effectively lower intergroup hostility and encourage a mixing of the children, which would lead to decreased prejudice. But it's not that simple. Actually, one could argue that what we've seen is increased prejudice. And when you look at the psychology behind it, it makes sense. Familiarity, as mentioned above, can get someone to like another person or thing– but only if their past experience was positive. Most schools operate using what's called "competitive learning" in the classrooms. This fosters hostility and promotes an environment boiling with tension, and students, for the most part, stay within their safe, racial groups. They meet the other groups in the classroom, a tense environment, and it completely kills any further communication. This changes, however, when schools implement what's called "cooperative learning", a method that has shown a lot of promise. Do you see the similarity between this and the Robbers Cave experiment? Cooperative learning has been shown to produce positive feelings and thus fulfills the familiarity hypothesis. There was actually a study performed, called the "Jigsaw Classroom experiment", in Austin, Texas. More info, like the Robbers Cave experiment, can be found quite easily on google. Now, apply the above to the workplace. A tense workplace environment where people are afraid that one misstep could cost them severely leads to negative familiarity. It's a bad environment that winds up being counterproductive. Of course, if someone does something way out of line, then it should be dealt with– but we mustn't go way overboard. The example you provided is an example of management that doesn't understand psychology. They've created one of the worst climates for learning about others– one where someone is afraid that another could call a "diversity hot line" and end their career. This is something that needs to be understood. And, for this reason, if there is a white cop who grew up in a blue collar family, who was brought up in a predominantly white area, and spends most of his time patrolling poor areas, and said areas lead to many confrontations with black criminals, then, if that is his main exposure to blacks, it is completely normal (and easily predictable) for him to develop a negative prejudice toward them. It's normal, however unfortunate it may be. If the guy doesn't develop a negative prejudice, then he has performed exceptionally. Few people are exceptional. |
|
|
"Brain disorders, like madness, are themselves contagious. The frequency of madness among doctors who are specialists for the mad is notorious." – Gustave Le Bon "The fact that audiences would rather go to Wonderland than face Iraq speaks volumes." – Random Youtube Poster | |
|
|
|
| Post #10 Jan 16 2010, 06:24 AM | Huxley |
|
I still stand by my comment that it is poverty that creates theft. I have no problem pointing out there's more blacks in prison or that Mexican kids are stealing cars. But rich mexican kids (is there such a thing?) dont steal cars or generally join gangs. Its not a generalisation but its easy to fall into that area. If your a christian you are more prone to commit a crime. Is that true? Well there are more christians in US prisons than anyone else, so it must be right. Except we know it is not because most people convert to get early parole. It is not racist to point out the data, where such data exists, that shows more Mexican kids stole cars than anyone else. its a bald fact. If more pimps are black than white, it is not racist to point that out - but it all stems from the need for bucks. Now Im going to shut up because I fear I may be talking shit. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics, News, and other informative stuff · Next Topic » |
4:37 PM Jul 31
