Modern Racism
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerI think there might be a quick equation of "different = inferior" on your part. The principal of natural selection implies that a species will adapt according to its surroundings. Since humans inhabited all sorts of different surroundings, it should not surprise that there are differences. Any perception of "different = inferior" comes from you (not Weaselman-you, but generic-you), meaning the problem doesn't lie with any differences.
Well said.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerStatements like this always confused me. There are differences, to think there's not is ... ignorant.
It wasn't a statement. Note the question mark in the end :)
I wanted to see what differences he was talking about. What's "ignorant" about it?
Quote:I think there might be a quick equation of "different = inferior" on your part.
No, to the contrary. You and I are different. Every person is different from every other. But what does it have to do with race or racism? For that to be relevant, the "differences" we are talking about need to be somehow specific to the race. What I am saying is that the race is a set of exterior details that do not define who you are, and therefore do not provide any justification for you being treated differently.
That goes both ways, BTW. For example, while I don't deny that the individuals of white race used to oppress and exploit the people of black race in the past, I, as an individual, do not feel any guilt for that, and don't consider that it would be justified for me (or any other person) to be deprived of certain benefits I would otherwise enjoy to make it up to the other race for that past oppression.
Quote: weaselmanNo, to the contrary. You and I are different. Every person is different from every other. But what does it have to do with race or racism? For that to be relevant, the "differences" we are talking about need to be somehow specific to the race. What I am saying is that the race is a set of exterior details that do not define who you are, and therefore do not provide any justification for you being treated differently.
That goes both ways, BTW. For example, while I don't deny that the individuals of white race used to oppress and exploit the people of black race in the past, I, as an individual, do not feel any guilt for that, and don't consider that it would be justified for me (or any other person) to be deprived of certain benefits I would otherwise enjoy to make it up to the other race for that past oppression.
I agree with the blue highlighted part. I disagree with the yellow highlighted part.
The differences are deeper than exterior details. There are genetic differences, bone structures, even ways-of-thinking (in the "wiring" sense), etc. I would not classify the differences between men and women as "exterior details." I would similarly not classify the difference between an African man and a South American man and an Eskimo and an Asian and an Aborigine and a Western Eurpoean as "exterior details."
Those differences do, in a genetic sense, define you. I would say that the genetic code that gives women a vagina, breasts, and a womb is fairly defining of who they are in the genetic sense. But they don't, in a psychological sense, define you. So there's a hair to be split there, but in the genetic sense, yeah, it defines you.
But so what? There's differences! I'm say, enjoy and celebrate those differences. I think your blue part is exactly right. "Different" does NOT = "something less/more than human."
Quote: ItsCalledSoccer
The differences are deeper than exterior details.
I got it, that that's what you think. That's why I was asking those questions, trying to understand what particular differences you have in mind, that are specific to race, and are less superficial than others.
Quote:There are genetic differences
There are genetic differences between you and me as well. They define, in particular the skin color, and other traits we have already mentioned. To say simply "genetic differences" is, therefore meaningless, you need to name a particular feature or trait that is different.
Quote:bone structures,
That's "exterior" in the sense that it, again, does not define who you are as opposed to how you look. Fits my earlier vague definition of "skin color".
Quote:even ways-of-thinking (in the "wiring" sense), etc.
This is the part I disagree with.
Do you care to provide any evidence that supports this point?
Quote:I would not classify the differences between men and women as "exterior details."
I would not either.
Quote:I would similarly not classify the difference between an African man and a South American man and an Eskimo and an Asian and an Aborigine and a Western Eurpoean as "exterior details."
This depends on what exactly you mean by 'African man'. If it is a man, living in Africa (or having recently moved from there), I'll agree, that there are more things that differentiate him from Americans than the exterior (I called them "cultural differences" before, another term is "mentality" ... these are akin to the differences between an American and a German or a Russian, and have nothing to do with the race).
But if it is a black person, born and raised in USA, then I'll say, aside from how he looks, there is nothing significantly different about him from any other American (in the sense, in which there is nothing different, between, say, you and me, with understanding that no to persons are identical).
Quote: weaselman
This depends on what exactly you mean by 'African man'. If it is a man, living in Africa (or having recently moved from there), I'll agree, that there are more things that differentiate him from Americans than the exterior (I called them "cultural differences" before, another term is "mentality" ... these are akin to the differences between an American and a German or a Russian, and have nothing to do with the race).
But if it is a black person, born and raised in USA, then I'll say, aside from how he looks, there is nothing significantly different about him from any other American (in the sense, in which there is nothing different, between, say, you and me, with understanding that no to persons are identical).
This is where your opinion diverges from evolution. If you just don't believe in evolution, then fine. But to try to say a population lives in an environment long enough and different enough to bring about unique physical attributes but behaviors, talents, etc. remain identical to all other homo sapiens is naive.
An example would be that employees that work on very tall cell phone towers in my area are dominated by people with a racial background of a specific indian tribe. They have little to no fear of heights and have no problem working 800 ft in the air with little to no safety equipment. I don't care what environment I was raised in or what I was told, I could not do this. This unique attribute of this group of people could be due to some sort of niche their ancestors exploited and survived because of it, or it could be due to an abnormally high frequency of a lack of fear at altitudes in the original stock.
Quote: weaselmanThere are genetic differences between you and me as well. They define, in particular the skin color, and other traits we have already mentioned. To say simply "genetic differences" is, therefore meaningless, you need to name a particular feature or trait that is different.
My skull/scapula/humerus/wrist/rib/spine/pelvis/femur/ankle/200 or so other bones are shaped differently than yours. Hopefully, 200 is enough. I would make the same statement for any other man on earth.
Quote: weaselmanThis is the part I disagree with.
Do you care to provide any evidence that supports this point?
Men think differently than women. While I don't have the neurological proof handy, it is not only pretty self-evident but supported by studies (don't have one handy; studies that conclude men and women think differently are so obvious as to be uesless). Note again that "different" does NOT = "inferior" or "something other than human." In my personal experience, I absolutely depend on this particular difference and am a better person (and she is too, I think) because of it.
Quote: weaselmanThis depends on what exactly you mean by 'African man'. If it is a man, living in Africa (or having recently moved from there), I'll agree, that there are more things that differentiate him from Americans than the exterior. But if it is a black person, born and raised in USA, then I'll say, aside from how he looks, there is nothing significantly different about him from any other American (in the sense, in which there is nothing different, between, say, you and me, with understanding that no to persons are identical).
It's hard to believe this is anything other than an intentional obfuscation, but I'll try to sepcify what I mean.
Back in the millenia before worldwide travel could be accomplished in a matter of a day or so, people used to stay fairly put in the regions of their ancestors. The process of natural selection occurred, as it does with all living beings, and for whatever reason, characteristics arose among varieties of the human species that encouraged their survival in the regions they inhabit.
So, by "Asian man," I don't mean someone who recently moved to Asia. I mean someone who, through millenia of genetic heritage as "learned" in the process of natural selection, has a deep connection to the region we today call "Asia." All other families of humans, for convenience purposes related to this discussion, are similarly regional-ized.
As for me, I have such a connection to Western Europe, so even though I was born and raised in North America, I am, in this sense, a "Western Eurpoean." Some of my friends are also "Western European." But one of my best friends is, in a similar sense, an "Asian Man." Another is "African," still another is "North American." We do not look alike. We have different bone structures. We have different skin colors. We hav differnt blood types (I'm guessing). We look at problems differently. We think differently. We laugh at different things. We have different talents. We like different types of women. But I do look a lot more like my Western Eurpoean friends than, say, my Asian friends. Why? Because my genetic heritage is also Western Eurpoean. It is, in part, defining of me.
So what?
Quote: ItsCalledSoccer
My skull/scapula/humerus/wrist/rib/spine/pelvis/femur/ankle/200 or so other bones are shaped differently than yours. Hopefully, 200 is enough. I would make the same statement for any other man on earth.
Yes, so what? I did not get which point you were objecting to with this statement.
Quote:
Men think differently than women.
Yes, so what? Didn't I already agree with you that there is more than looks differing men from women?
Quote:Back in the millenia before worldwide travel could be accomplished in a matter of a day or so, people used to stay fairly put in the regions of their ancestors. The process of natural selection occurred, as it does with all living beings, and for whatever reason, characteristics arose among varieties of the human species that encouraged their survival in the regions they inhabit.
Indeed. But which of those characteristics you find to be specific to race, and why?
Jewish people and Vikings used to live as far apart if not farther from each other than Blacks and Spanish, certainly farther than Indians and Chinese. Yet the former are the same race while the latter pairs are different races. Why?
What is it, besides skin color, that makes an African man more different from a Spanish berber, than a Jewish guy is different from a Swed?
Quote:As for me, I have such a connection to Western Europe, so even though I was born and raised in North America, I am, in this sense, a "Western Eurpoean."
So, if I tell you that my roots are not in "Western Europe", does it make me belong to a race different than yours in your view?
Quote: clarkacalThis is where your opinion diverges from evolution. If you just don't believe in evolution, then fine. But to try to say a population lives in an environment long enough and different enough to bring about unique physical attributes but behaviors, talents, etc. remain identical to all other homo sapiens is naive.
I do believe in evolution. I also know what it means. Evolution is a process of developing new species.
If you insist that black people is a different species altogether, like, say, Homo Neanderthalensis (this used to be quite a popular view about a century ago), then your point might have some validity.
But as long as you are talking about Homo Sapience, evolution has nothing to do with it. Variations within the same species are called mutations, and they don't depend on color. A number of mutations is what makes you different from me as well as from that black guy or that Swed. It doesn't matter what race you are, as long as you are not looking at your identical twin, your genome is going to be different from his. Some of the differences are attributable to the environment your ancestors used to live in (like your skin being paler than Jesus'), some are due to the specific traits in the particular gene pool (like, say Tay Sachs disease among Jewish people, or lactose intolerance among some blacks), some are direct inheritance from your parents (like your blood type, some genetic diseases or eye color), and others are just random mutations (like your fingerprints or Beethoven's genius).
Quote:An example would be that employees that work on very tall cell phone towers in my area are dominated by people with a racial background of a specific indian tribe. They have little to no fear of heights and have no problem working 800 ft in the air with little to no safety equipment.
Or, perhaps, they just don't know how to become lawyers? :)
Quote: weaselman
Or, perhaps, they just don't know how to become lawyers? :)
They get paid quite well. I'm with itscalledsoccer, I think you are just being argumentative and obfuscatory.
PART I
Quote: weaselmanThere are genetic differences between you and me as well. They define, in particular the skin color, and other traits we have already mentioned. To say simply "genetic differences" is, therefore meaningless, you need to name a particular feature or trait that is different.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerMy skull/scapula/humerus/wrist/rib/spine/pelvis/femur/ankle/200 or so other bones are shaped differently than yours.
Quote: weaselmanYes, so what? I did not get which point you were objecting to with this statement.
???????
I was accommodating your request to name specifics, not objecting to anything. I'm not even sure where "objecting" to anything enters into this point
PART II
Quote: ItsCalledSoccereven ways-of-thinking (in the "wiring" sense), etc.
Quote: weaselmanThis is the part I disagree with. Do you care to provide any evidence that supports this point?
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerMen think differently than women.
Quote: weaselmanYes, so what? Didn't I already agree with you that there is more than looks differing men from women?
I'm pretty slow to assign bad faith to someone, but I'm starting to with you. It's starting to feel like you're more interested in disagreeing for disagreeing's sake than for the opinions you hold.
No, you didn't agree. You said you disagree. If I can't take your words at face value, we're probably done here.
PART III
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerBack in the millenia before worldwide travel could be accomplished in a matter of a day or so, people used to stay fairly put in the regions of their ancestors. The process of natural selection occurred, as it does with all living beings, and for whatever reason, characteristics arose among varieties of the human species that encouraged their survival in the regions they inhabit.
Quote: weaselmanIndeed. But which of those characteristics you find to be specific to race, and why?
Jewish people and Vikings used to live as far apart if not farther from each other than Blacks and Spanish, certainly farther than Indians and Chinese. Yet the former are the same race while the latter pairs are different races. Why?
What is it, besides skin color, that makes an African man more different from a Spanish berber, than a Jewish guy is different from a Swed?
Given what I now believe to be your disposition in this discussion, I don't think a specific delineation of characteristics would be wise for me to go into. It feels like you're trying to bait me into saying something which you would use to smear me and derail the (so far) somewhat decent discussion. So, I think I'm going to leave my answer as it was before:
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerSo, by "Asian man," I don't mean someone who recently moved to Asia. I mean someone who, through millenia of genetic heritage as "learned" in the process of natural selection, has a deep connection to the region we today call "Asia." All other families of humans, for convenience purposes related to this discussion, are similarly regional-ized.
If you are assigning any specifics to that, that's your thinking, not mine. You say that some are different races. I've told you what I think. What do YOU think? What, in YOUR mind, delineates races?
PART IV
Quote: weaselmanSo, if I tell you that my roots are not in "Western Europe", does it make me belong to a race different than yours in your view?
Apparently, you hold a different way of defining what is a race than I do ...
Quote: weaselmanJewish people and Vikings used to live as far apart if not farther from each other than Blacks and Spanish, certainly farther than Indians and Chinese. Yet the former are the same race while the latter pairs are different races. Why?
Quote: weaselmanWhat is it, besides skin color, that makes an African man more different from a Spanish berber, than a Jewish guy is different from a Swed?
You're bringing these questions up, so it's only fair that you tell us what YOU think the answers are.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerGeez, it's like chatting with mkl .... But okay, one last time, here goes ...
You haven't ever "chatted" with anyone here, and as far as we know, you haven't "chatted" with anyone in your life. You have certainly talked AT quite a few people here, but those talking-ats have only marginally resembled dialogue/conversation.
The most telling symptom of that is that in this your latest post, it's damned hard to figure out just what your position actually IS--you spend much more time trying to oppose and blunt weaselman's points. Now, he isn't exactly the shining example of fair and logically sound debate himself, but you're not being fair to him. Or, ultimately, to yourself.
It's been very thoroughly proved and explicated by science that "race" is a fiction. Therefore, "racial characteristics" is also a term that is a fiction.
End of discussion (I wish).
Quote: mkl654321
It's been very thoroughly proved and explicated by science that "race" is a fiction. Therefore, "racial characteristics" is also a term that is a fiction.
The linkage of physical attributes with other intangible or non superficial attributes as a result of isolated populations is not fiction and is what we are discussing, whether you want to call it race or something else.
Quote: clarkacalThe linkage of physical attributes with other intangible or non superficial attributes as a result of isolated populations is not fiction and is what we are discussing, whether you want to call it race or something else.
It comes down to an issue of terminology. But the popular concept of "race", as the man on the street (or the bloviating politician) would think of it, is indeed fictional.
On the micro level, mutations, whether in response to environmental stimuli or not, happen over every generation. The only question is, do those mutations become genetically encoded or not? That would depend on whether those mutations are beneficial for survival. But those mutations, even if successful, take a long time to propagate. It is highly unlikely that any significant such characteristic would be shared by a majority of a given population ("race").
Quote: mkl654321You haven't ever "chatted" with anyone here, and as far as we know, you haven't "chatted" with anyone in your life. You have certainly talked AT quite a few people here, but those talking-ats have only marginally resembled dialogue/conversation.
There's an old proverb which goes something like, "Everything is pure to those whose hearts are pure. But nothing is pure to those who are corrupt, because their minds and consciences are corrupted."
In other words, what motives/actions you assign to someone else are generally those you possess.
We'll let the forum membership decide that question for themselves, but I don't suspect you would be open to any answer other than, "ALL the fault lies with ICS and mkl is absolutely the model of forum board participation. Why Wizard hasn't banned ICS for life is a question nobody can answer."
Of course, the fact is, one of us has been suspended for violations, and the other hasn't. That makes you a lot closer to being JerryLogan than me.
Quote: mkl654321The most telling symptom of that is that in this your latest post, it's damned hard to figure out just what your position actually IS--you spend much more time trying to oppose and blunt weaselman's points. Now, he isn't exactly the shining example of fair and logically sound debate himself, but you're not being fair to him. Or, ultimately, to yourself.
Maybe the LATEST post obscures my position, but conversations evolve, and I stated it in previous posts, which are still available for your reading pleasure. If you would lend your insight into your thinking as to why you think you can gain the gist of an entire conversation by overhearing the last few sentences, I'd be very interested in learning that about you.
Quote: mkl654321It's been very thoroughly proved and explicated by science that "race" is a fiction. Therefore, "racial characteristics" is also a term that is a fiction.
Generalities are fun! But they're not helpful to a meaningful discussion and they are helpful to the giver in that it allows him to hide behind some self-assigned vestige of "intelligence."
I think there's little doubt that "races" exist, unless you're willing to condemn everyone who thinks so as ignoramuses.
But okay ... I'll bite ... what do you mean by "race" that, scientifically, is a fiction? Are you saying that people didn't occupy various regions of the world, and that natural selection doesn't exist?
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerI was accommodating your request to name specifics, not objecting to anything.
I requested that you name specifics of differences between races, and in response you listed differences between you and me. Did I misunderstood, are you of a different race?
If so, I apologize for not understanding. But the differences in skeletal features have been discussed earlier anyhow. I don't find anything meaningfully different about them compared to skin color. They alter your appearance, perhaps, they affect some minor physiological processes. But for a civilized man in a civilized society, I just don't see how it can possibly matter for anything.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccer
Quote: weaselmanThis is the part I disagree with. Do you care to provide any evidence that supports this point?
Quote: weaselmanYes, so what? Didn't I already agree with you that there is more than looks differing men from women?
I'm pretty slow to assign bad faith to someone, but I'm starting to with you. It's starting to feel like you're more interested in disagreeing for disagreeing's sake than for the opinions you hold.
Well ... about bad faith, it's pretty hard not to start with it myself at this point ... Let me respond with some quotes you chose to omit for some reason (let's hope, in completely good faith :))
Quote: ItsCalledSoccer
I would not classify the differences between men and women as "exterior details."
Quote: weaselI would not either.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerNo you didn't agree.
????
Let me end with a quote from you as well:
what motives/actions you assign to someone else are generally those you possess.
Well said, indeed. I have nothing to add :)
Quote:You said you disagree. If I can't take your words at face value, we're probably done here.
I said I disagreed with the statement that people of different races have "different ways of thinking", and requested that you offer some evidence in support of that point. You responded by repeating a statement that men and women think differently, that was never in dispute.
Quote:If you are assigning any specifics to that, that's your thinking, not mine. You say that some are different races. I've told you what I think. What do YOU think? What, in YOUR mind, delineates races?
I think, I already stated my position clearly enough. I don't think there are any differences arising from your racial origins, beyond the superficial exterior features like skin color, nothing that would play any part in defining you differently as a human being.
Quote:
Apparently, you hold a different way of defining what is a race than I do ...
Perahps ... What is yours then?
Quote: weaselmanI think, I already stated my position clearly enough. I don't think there are any differences arising from your racial origins, beyond the superficial exterior features like skin color, nothing that would play any part in defining you differently as a human being.
State it again, then. You know, just for shits and giggles. Go back and get the quotes if you want, that works for me.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccer
Quote: weaselmanI think, I already stated my position clearly enough. I don't think there are any differences arising from your racial origins, beyond the superficial exterior features like skin color, nothing that would play any part in defining you differently as a human being.
State it again, then. You know, just for shits and giggles. Go back and get the quotes if you want, that works for me.
I just did. Sometimes, it helps to read beyond the first sentence :)
Quote: mkl654321On the micro level, mutations, whether in response to environmental stimuli or not, happen over every generation. The only question is, do those mutations become genetically encoded or not? That would depend on whether those mutations are beneficial for survival. But those mutations, even if successful, take a long time to propagate. It is highly unlikely that any significant such characteristic would be shared by a majority of a given population ("race").
Speaking of mutations, has anyone seen the show "Stan Lee's Superhumans" on the History channel? Well done show with some incredible stuff!
Quote: mkl654321Bob, you can't write, you can't spell, and you say a LOT of really, really stupid things.
Gosh, I'm sorry if I offended your obviously delicate 190 IQ sensibilities. I do the best I can with what I was born with, we can't all be Brainiac's like you. This thread has 118 replies, it seems to have sparked a modicum of interest. I'll try harder to win your approval in the future. Please accept my sincere apologies for failing you yet again......
Quote: pacomartinI imagine that the majority of Domino's customers are minorities..
Not according to MKL. In an earlier post he indicated that mostly White people eat pizza, thats why the ad has only minorities, they want to target a new audience. I guess the Blacks and Latinos have never noticed the Dominos and Pizza Huts and Papa Johns and Little Ceasars that have been in their neighborhoods for decades now.
Quote: EvenBobNot according to MKL. In an earlier post he indicated that mostly White people eat pizza, thats why the ad has only minorities, they want to target a new audience. I guess the Blacks and Latinos have never noticed the Dominos and Pizza Huts and Papa Johns and Little Ceasars that have been in their neighborhoods for decades now.
Gee--the majority of Domino's, etc. customers are nonwhite?
Quote: rxwineI assume if one wanted to find significant racial differences that might matter, one would primarily look at the brain. If you can't find them there across a relatively non-migrating population group, you'd have to question whether there is anything worth considering.
If you're talking about the brain's hardware, and not its software, there is are no discernable differences across "racial" lines. There are some tiny software differences from culture to culture, but since it's basically impossible to study a human brain before it is exposed to social contacts and influences, there's no reason to presume that those differences are inherent.
Obviously there are adaptive body types, such as the short, barrel-chested high-altitude-living Peruvian and Ecuadoran peoples. But such differences are only variations in appearance, not in fundamental thinking, attitudes, behavior, etc.
Quote: mkl654321But such differences are only variations in appearance, not in fundamental thinking, attitudes, behavior, etc.
Yes, in MKL's Brainiac Lib world, there is are no differences between the races or the sexes. Everybody is a homogeneous conglomeration of placid sameness. The only reason every country in the world didn't invent computers and TV and light bulbs at exactly the same time is because they were held back somehow. Spread the wealth of the world equally and everyone on the planet will produce equally. Yadda yadda yadda..
I used to know a guy who was head of security at a big store chain. He said the employees he watched the most for stealing were the ones who thought they saw shoplifters everywhere. They were often thieves themselves.
Quote: EvenBobDid you see the Pepsi commercial on the Super Bowl, where the Black girl throws a Pepsi can and hits a White girl in the head? I saw nothing wrong or racist about it, but a Black congresswoman is going bonkers over the overt racism of portraying Blacks as aggressive. I thought we were beyond all that, according to people here. We're all the same, there is no racism anymore. I also saw a Dominos ad that had all Black and Latino customers at the counter and all White's cooking in the kitchen, at least 5 of them. Just a coincidence, I guess.
I heard about the black congresswoman getting upset. Wonder if it is the same one who was upset the Capitol Police stopped here when she wasn't wearing her congressional pin and wanted to walk past security?
When I hear some minority in congress complaining about racism on the news I usually flip to a commercial on another channel. The race card was overplayed 20 years ago.
Quote: AZDuffmanWonder if it is the same one who was upset the Capitol Police stopped here when she wasn't wearing her congressional pin and wanted to walk past security?
That was Cynthia McKinney, she got voted out in 2008. Too bad, she had a lot of entertainment value.
Quote: EvenBobThat was Cynthia McKinney, she got voted out in 2008. Too bad, she had a lot of entertainment value.
Congress has plenty of other jokers all too eager to succeed her. Will you take off your shirt and pose for Craigslist?
Quote: EvenBobI also saw a Dominos ad that had all Black and Latino customers at the counter and all White's cooking in the kitchen, at least 5 of them. Just a coincidence, I guess.
So, it was showing white people making an honest days wage, and minorities buying pizza with their welfare checks and drug money?
I think that you guys are making a big deal about these targeted commercials. Companies realize that people need to envision themselves using their products. They simply make ads depicting all kinds of people in their ads. It can hardly be called racism.
Quote: pacomartinI think that you guys are making a big deal about these targeted commercials. Companies realize that people need to envision themselves using their products. They simply make ads depicting all kinds of people in their ads. It can hardly be called racism.
I don't think you're getting that we're calling Bob out for his assertion that a targeted commercial is racist.
Quote: mkl654321I don't think you're getting that we're calling Bob out for his assertion that a targeted commercial is racist.
It would be considered racist by many though, if it was the other way around - exclusively black people staffing the kitchen, and whites driving up the window to get their pizzas - wouldn't it?
At the time it happened, it was a shock. In the seconds following, I stared at the screen thinking "Wow! Did that really just happen?!" In the days afterwards, the network was fined a half million dollars for obscenity, but Janet Jackson got the lion's share of blame and Justin Timberlake got off scot free. What I saw on my TV was a white man on national TV ripping the top off a black woman, the highest-ranking female of the Jackson clan no less, while singing "I'll have you naked by the end of this song", but no one in the media focused on him at all. He wasn't charged with any crime like assault, he wasn't interviewed in the news for his very questionable behavior, wasn't fined, while Jackson had to do the talk-show circuit defending herself. I saw her as the victim in the incident, and Timberlake as the aggressor. In the aftermath, Jackson's career suffered terribly while Timberlake's really took off, earning him two Grammy awards after the incident.
If the races were reversed, like Busta Rhymes exposing LeAnn Rimes boob, I wonder how it might've played out.
Quote: weaselmanIt would be considered racist by many though, if it was the other way around - exclusively black people staffing the kitchen, and whites driving up the window to get their pizzas - wouldn't it?
Not these days, not by any reasonable person. The whole point that we are trying collectively to make is that people shouldn't view everything in terms of race. We see a Domino's commercial, and some people are making the pizza, some people are buying the pizza. NOT, "some black people" or "some white people".
In other words, you could only view such a commercial in that way (with the roles the way you said, or switched around) if you were somewhat racist yourself--after all, "racism" doesn't mean "discrimination" or "bigotry", but rather, "considering a person or person primarily in terms of his or her race". That's what you would be doing here, if you narrowly focused on the skin colors of the actors in the commercial.
Quote: weaselmanIt would be considered racist by many though, if it was the other way around - exclusively black people staffing the kitchen, and whites driving up the window to get their pizzas - wouldn't it?
I think it's a pretty vague accusation, but the defense (if it is needed) is the totality of commericials by Dominoes corp. "You only show [this depiction]is countered by "no we don't" see whatever other examples.
You're right, that people make all kinds of accusations about lots of things. I'm not sure what that proves though.
Quote: mkl654321Not these days, not by any reasonable person.
Well, I agree with this statement. But if you really believe that, you have to also believe that most of the modern mainstream media is really-really unreasonable. That's the point.
Here are a few examples of what I am talking about (and no, it does not take very long to find them at all).
KFC "stereotype that black people like fried chicken"
This is an Australian commercial, but "the majority of the complaints came from the US" (of course!)
Metro PCS "Indians are disproportionately employed as tech-help jockeys or in tech-help call centers"
Old navy
This one is "racist and stereotypical", because the black "supermonequin" name is Michelle (if I got the author's point right).
some German toothpaste A black man climbs a light pole to get am escaped balloon for the little white girl. I am not sure what exactly this one is "stereotyping", the comment does not say, but it does say that it is racist.
"25 most racist advertisements"
I did not read the whole page, but at least #6, #10, #12, #15, #21, #25 were right on point, I think.
Quote: weaselman
KFC "stereotype that black people like fried chicken"
This is an Australian commercial, but "the majority of the complaints came from the US" (of course!)
I think there's a big difference between racism and stereotyping. Stereotyping is many people observing something over and over for decades, or centuries, until it becomes cliché. These clichés don't just happen by themselves; they're based in fact. Black people do like fried chicken. So what? That's not racist. Everybody likes fried chicken, but the common knowledge is NOT that Swedish people like chicken, is it? If KFC was targeting Swedes in an ad, we'd all be scratching our heads, but if KFC dares to focus on blacks, well, that rubs some people the wrong way.
And is it racism if the cliché is positive rather than negative? Black people are generally better at pro sports than whites. That's not being racist, but an announcer calling the players "nappy-headed hos" IS racist. Any black people on here feel free to comment. Black men have big cocks...is that racism? Asians are smarter than whites. Would any Asian be angry at that statement? There is no cliché that states blacks are pedophiles because that's not been observed in the past. College students eat a lot of pizza....is that bigoted, or just an observation?
It doesn't surprise me that the KFC commercial above went unnoticed in Australia. People in America get so uppity over such ridiculous things, sue people over nothing, support a cause just to make a noise and be heard. And speaking of suing people, there are many clichés about lawyers, jokes based in truth.
And let me say out loud how much I hate the term "african american". Black people are just American, unless they actually emigrated here from Africa. Not their great-great-grandparents, but them. I'm white, he's black. If you're uncomfortable saying it, then you might be a racist. If you feel you're being oh-so politically correct calling Deshaun "African American" when in fact he's never been outside of Detroit, then you need to call me "European American" also. Don't call me WHITE by god! Call me "European American" regardless whether I've ever even been to Europe of not, my ancestors came from there. Black is only one syllable, african american is seven, so if you have to go that far out of your way to show us all you're not racist, then you are a racist.
Quote: zippyboy
I think there's a big difference between racism and stereotyping.
Yes, me too. I also don't think that ad was racist. I am just referring to it to support my earlier point about how quick many people in the state are nowadays to call anything they see "racist" as long as ... well ... I don't even know as long as what. Pretty much anything will go. If a black person eats a chicken, it's racist because black people like chicken, and stereotyping (of black people) is racist, if a black person isn't eating chicken, that's racist, because black people like chicken, and if it wasn't shown, it must be because we did not want to show a black person ... Etc.
But then, when anyone tries to bring up an opposite issue, he gets shushed at all of a sudden, because everyone is suddenly color-blind, and we should not be focusing on the color of the people playing in that ad. I wish we could not focus on it ...
Quote:Black is only one syllable, african american is six, so if you have to go that far out of your way to show us all you're not racist, then you are a racist.
Not necessarily a racist. More likely you just don't want any trouble. I'll call them whatever name they want me to call them, because it's not hard enough for me to do to justify going to prison or getting beaten, or even just frowned at if I don't. I am not a racist, but I am not a hero either. I won't get into trouble over words. It's not worth it.
Quote: weaselmanI'll call them whatever name they want me to call them, because it's not hard enough for me to do to justify going to prison or getting beaten, or even just frowned at if I don't. I am not a racist, but I am not a hero either. I won't get into trouble over words. It's not worth it.
Funny story here. Just last night as I was making a snack in my kitchen, I heard an argument going on outside my apartment. I hit mute on the TV and listened at the door for a bit. Two black girls were fighting loudly, about what exactly I had no idea, but I kept hearing phrases like "I'll mess you up, nigga", "f- you bitch" "ho" etc. like we were on a movie set from some 1990 blaxploitation flick. After it had calmed down a bit, I peeked my head out to see who it was since I didn't recognize the voices, but it wasn't over yet. Girl number 1 saw me and shrieked "WhaCHOO lookin' at, white boy? You better get on back in there!" I couldn't help grinning as I closed the door. "White boy" ha! She called me white boy! Is that supposed to be an insult? If two white girls were fighting, they'd never call each other "whitey" the way these two were calling each other "nigga". I laughed for five minutes after that. White boy! Hilarious.
So is that what I'm supposed to call them?...since that's what they call each other?
Arguably the worst word in the English language, it's a tough word to say, even alone in the room with the lights off. But I can think of only two situations where it's okay for a white person to say it in mixed company.
1. If 2 white and 2 black college kids are riding in a car, singing along to the rap station, let's say Dr. Dré song, it'd be awful awkward for the white guys to suddenly NOT speak a line of verse out of fear of upsetting their black friends. Then, they simply MUST say it or risk being thought a pussy.
2. It's always okay for a white woman to scream "nigga, f*ck me harder, harder, nigga!" I doubt he'd mind much.
That was all. Hence "African American" or "First Nations" or "Inuit" over "Black", "Indian" or "Eskimo" (or whatever more insulting term you want to use).
PC has since become a by word for all sorts of crazy language thought crimes that aren't anything to do with PC and much more to do with bleeding hearts and people who feel the need to complain on behalf of others.
As an aside, don't call British Black people "African American".
Quote: thecesspitAs an aside, don't call British Black people "African American".
I've heard it on the news every now and then, also in reference to Haitians and others.
What do you call a white person born in Africa who emigrates to America? For instance Charlize Theron.
Quote: Nareed
What do you call a white person born in Africa who emigrates to America? For instance Charlize Theron.
Well, that's the thing ... there is no law protecting white people. So, you can call him whatever you damn please.
I can't recall, but for some reason I think someone once put her up for a African American award...
Personally, I call Charlize Theron hot and talented.
Quote: thecesspitHer...
Lol. See, I can even call here a him! :)
Quote: weaselmanIt would be considered racist by many though, if it was the other way around - exclusively black people staffing the kitchen, and whites driving up the window to get their pizzas - wouldn't it?
EXACTLY! If it was all Whites at the counter, and 5 young Black kids making pizza in the kitchen, the ACLU would be screaming. Good grief, that Black congresswoman is still yelling over the Pepsi commercial where the Black girl hits a White girl in the head with a Pepsi can, and that was a week ago, not in the 80's. Racism is alive and well.
Quote: thecesspitI can't recall, but for some reason I think someone once put her up for a African American award...
When she hosted Saturday Night Live, one of the black actors in the cast joined her in the monologue and pointed out she's African American. I forget what happened then.
Quote: EvenBobEXACTLY! If it was all Whites at the counter, and 5 young Black kids making pizza in the kitchen, the ACLU would be screaming. Good grief, that Black congresswoman is still yelling over the Pepsi commercial where the Black girl hits a White girl in the head with a Pepsi can, and that was a week ago, not in the 80's. Racism is alive and well.
If you're noticing "modern racism" you must also have a list of all white peopled commericials that jumped out at you. A commerical that ONLY has white people in it must be racist, right?
I couldn't tell you the racial make-up of the last 10 commericials I've seen. (hell, I can't tell you the last ten I've watched, heh)
Quote: rxwineA commerical that ONLY has white people in it must be racist, right?
Here is the difference the way I see it. If a commercial has all white people in it, it is really unlikely (I think) because the producers actively did not want to film blacks. More probably, it is because there were more white actors immediately available to them, or, perhaps, because they just picked some actors they worked with before, or some other innocent reason like that. It is not because they were thinking about race, but exactly the opposite - because they were not.
But when it is all blacks shopping at Old Navy or eating at Dominoes, that is exactly because someone up there in the ad agency thought "I gotta film some minorities or I'll get in trouble", or "I gotta film some minorities because I am such a liberal, open minded person", or something else like this. They did it purposefully, choosing actors of a particular race because of their race. And that is racism.
