racism in reverse

[suchislife]

Yes, I'm talking about reverse racism. Where a black, Lebanese, Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Muslim, Jewish or Aboriginal (basically anyone that isn't white Anglo-Saxon) can make a resist remark towards a white person like "your just white trash".."white pig" and so on and so forth, but do it in reverse and your a resist! OR and this doesn't always happen, but a white person decides to go after their person that stole their car, broke into their home, raped them, beat them, killed their dad/mum/sister/girlfriend/ boyfriend, and that person happens to be another race...their instantly dubbed racist because they are going after that person, or the person pulls the race card, do it in reverce, the white person must have done it because they are racist! This just gets me.

I spose I'll just tack this on here, I know it's not a rase thing, but it's almost the same as when a man rapes/goes out with an underage girl everyone is screaming for his blood and wants him put away for life. However, put it in reverse, and it's a woman doing the same thing, OMG slap on the wrist and a "naughty girl don't do it again!" :confused: what are your thoughts?

By the way, I don't claim for any of this to be fact, its mostly people in the minority that do these things, I have met MANY people of multiple races who have all been WONDERFULLY kind people who you just love instantly. But it does get on my nerves when I hear something on the news in regards to these things because I think every one should be punished for the crime they committed no matter what sex/race you are "you do the crime, you pay the time!". Don't make a bad name for the rest of those people all doing the right thing and doing their best to get along with anyone and everyone!

[Lace Neil Singer]

Well, I've had a black girl barge into me and call me a "white bitch" before; no-one blinked an eyelid. I'm betting that if I had bumped her and called her a "black bitch" everyone would have squawked in horror.

[Isios]

Where I live you can see this all the time. It's annoying, because if I say anything to anyone then I am racist. All I can say is racism breeds racism. You want me to respect you as a human being then you damn well better act like one. I don't demand respect persay but I do like to be treated in kind.

This brings me back to a while ago while I was about 7 months pregnant and standing in line at the automotive department at Wally world. The girl at the desk had somehow erased all the car entries for the day. So me and the others in line had been there for a bit but were patiently waiting in line. Firstly this woman hit me with her cart trying to get through. Secondly she walked right up to the desk like she didn't see all 6 of us standing in line. Thirdly, I was pregnant and now pissed off. Can I also just say it is true when they say a pregnant woman can be a completely different person than she is normally.

I like to avoid confertation. Well this time I spoke up and said, "Ma'am we have all been waiting." Pointing to the line behind me. She goes off on the racial crusade on how I am just trying to get her to the back of the line because she is black. I just rolled my eyes and left for Lowe's to go get my key made.

On the note of the older man and younger girl thing. Here in Georgia we just had this big case where a female teacher ended up ion jail becuase she got pregnant and married a 14 or 15 year old boy. So I have seen that door swing both ways.

[protege]

Somewhat along those lines... why is it OK for black people to call themselves the N-word...but if a white person does it, it's racist? I don't use that word, but I can't figure that one out.

[Rapscallion]

Well, it's spelled 'Nigga', which is fine, what with it demonstrating illiteracy, which is so desirable, y'know?

Actually, does that mean that only whites can refer to each other as 'honky'?

Rapscallion

[MadMike]

On a similar note, when did "Equal treatment" become "preferential treatment." For example, can you imagine the outcry if someone tried to start a "White Entertainment Network" or a "United Caucasian College Fund?" Yes, it would be wrong to have the money only available to white people, but isn't it just as wrong to have it only available to black people? There are plenty of people out there who need help with college, and the color of one's skin should not be part of the criteria.

The "quotas" that some jobs have are another thing that pisses me off. Again, the color of one's skin should not have anything to do with the hiring. My current job got mixed up in that once. They hired a black woman with no experience into a non-entry level position, one that most people have to work years to attain. I had to help her out once, and while she was quite nice, she didn't have the slightest idea what she was doing.

[protege]

Awhile back, my boss tried to hire people of different ethnicities, since the office was, and still is, all-white. However, once he started having people come in for interviews, they wouldn't come to work for us. Apparently, because of the "whiteness" in the office, they just assumed that we were all racists...and that they'd be treated badly. That was *never* the case--it was simply a timing thing. When the jobs opened up, nearly all the applicants were white. No racism involved.

Quotas piss me off too. Companies should be allowed to hire the best qualified person for the job, regardless of skin color. However, that gets swept under the rug in order to make "amends" for past events. Who gets hurt in the long run? We all do.

Reverse discrimination will *not* make the problem go away. All it's going to do is make people even more resentful, and prejudiced. The same thing could be said about reparations for descendants of slaves. Sure, they'll be happy in the short run, but it'll lead to even more problems. For example, why should today's generation be held responsible for events that happened hundreds of years ago? All of the people who *did* those things are dead now.

[rahmota]

affirmative action is not a good thing in my opinion either. that was one thign when i was in training to be a police officer I didnt like. In that just because a department didnt have its quota of minorities a person who was not qualified to do the job might be placed into a situation where lives depend on them.

Like a firefighter. they HAVE to be able to carry so much equipment, deal with high temps, high stress , be required to carry my fat butt out of a place, etc... This means they have to meet certian physical standards. But thanks to affirmative action there could be a person in the position who cannot meet the physical requirements of the job.

Personally there should be blind requirements set for a job and if a person can do the job then great and if they cant sorry but thats the way it goes.

[Rubystars]

I notice when I'm working as a cashier I have to make sure I do certain things differently with black customers.

1. If I'm monitoring self checkouts and both a white and black person need help at the same time, I have to go help the black person first, or they'll think I helped the white person first because I'm racist.

2. If I'm using bags that have been torn off the carousel or pulled out of the recycle bin, I have to make sure I don't give any to black people, or at least make it seem like I'm not, because they'll think I'm giving them a wrinkled bag 'because they're black'.

3. I have to try to be more discreet when checking their bills for counterfeit, because they think the only reason I check their money is because they're black.

4. If I ask for ID for someone who looks young, they often think it's because they're black.

5. I had an injured finger one time and I was trying not to let it brush against anything so I was careful in how I was handing money back to people, and this black woman got upset because she thought I didn't want to touch her because she was black. I showed her the sore on my finger but she just got this look like she didn't believe me and said "mmmm hmmm" in that ebonics accent. So from then on, I always made sure when I handed black people their money that my hand brushed against theirs.

Honestly I really, really get tired of this BS. I'm not racist and if I didn't have to follow the stupid rules as outlined above then I would be happy to completely ignore people's color. It's because they make it such a big issue that I have to keep these things in mind!

[blas87]

Thank you thank you thank you! I am so glad I am not the only person disturbed by all of these inequalities.

Did you know MTV is coming out with a 3rd channel, just for Spanish speaking folks?

Can you imagine the horror and the outrage, if there were ever to be a "White History Month"? Yes, we celebrate dead (white) presidents, but can you imagine a month dedicated to important people in "White" history?

All I can say to people is it is not a crime to be proud of your race. I am proud of who I am, where I came from, and who I am growing up to be. Just because I am proud to be white does NOT make me a Neo Nazi or a Hitler fanatic or a racist. If it's ok to be proud to be black, I can be proud to be white without being criticized and labeled.

[Rapscallion]

I think there's something in the argument that non-whites don't see many role models of their own colour, so I can see some justification for pointing to great achievements by non-whites. There's also the point that it is generally white history year - what colour are the people on the coins you spend, and what colour are the figures depicted in statues? What colour does everyone draw Jesus? I don't regard race-specific history months as reverse racism - I think they're a necessary evil that needs to be removed once they've achieved their purpose.

We're agreed, it seems, that reverse racism is just as bad as the standard sort, but what do we do about it?

Rapscallion

[Rubystars]

Jesus is supposed to be Jewish, not white or black. It doesn't really matter what His race is though, because black people have painted him as black and so forth, I think it's just to identify with Him.

I grew up in the 80s and 90s and I was never part of apartheid or slavery or anything stupid like that. I never oppressed anyone and I don't feel ashamed about things that had nothing to do with me. Yet I'm being affected by affirmative action, etc.

I don't understand why I don't get the equal opportunity for scholarships or for hiring or for promotions because I don't help "diversity" but lessen it.

There are many achievements that can be attributed mostly or solely to white people just as there are those discoveries/achievements, etc. that can be attributed to black people or Asian people or whoever. Furthermore, white people suffered as serfs and slaves too, does anyone remember reading about that?

Maybe we need white history month for that reason anyway.

[rahmota]

Maybe if we stopped emphasizing the "diversity" seperation in this regards like ethnic history month and go with an overall inclusionist human history month or somethign it might help. Recognize the inventions/discoveries or great deeds of various humans throughout history as well as remembering like you said the bad things that humans did to each other regardless of skin tone. Its not just dark skin that has felt the lash of the whip or the weight of chains.

I mean there is one "race" and that's human. Everything else is just a matter of skin pigment and fat deposits. So having a seperate month for each little differention of skin tone is rather self defeating in the long run.

And i've already stated how I feel affirmative action is a bad thing. Diversity is a good thing but if by becoming more diverse the ability to get the job done or take care of things is lesened then what good have you actually achieved in the end?

[Rubystars]

Its not just dark skin that has felt the lash of the whip or the weight of chains.


Exactly! And white people most certainly were not the only ones who enslaved anyone else! There was, of course, slavery in Africa (one could argue there still is), but there were black slave owners even in the USA!


I mean there is one "race" and that's human. Everything else is just a matter of skin pigment and fat deposits. So having a seperate month for each little differention of skin tone is rather self defeating in the long run.


I think it would be wonderful if we could just forget all about what color other people are, but as I mentioned in the 'reverse racism' thread, it's impossible for me to ignore people's color because I always have to guard against innocent actions which could be seen as racist. Ironic, huh?



Diversity is a good thing but if by becoming more diverse the ability to get the job done or take care of things is lesened then what good have you actually achieved in the end?

I think that diversity should be encouraged not for its own sake, but to keep someone from being discriminated against because of their race. Instead of the concept of "diversity" being used to keep people from being ruled out due to color, it's doing the opposite, favoring certain races. I should be contributing to a 'diverse' work force as much as a black or hispanic employee is, but that's now how it works out in reality. They're 'diverse' and I'm not. It's really irritating!

[squall]

Jesus is supposed to be Jewish, not white or black. It doesn't really matter what His race is though, because black people have painted him as black and so forth, I think it's just to identify with Him.


Jewish is not a race, it is a religion, just like Christianity is a religion. Christians have the biggest majority of races I can think of. The majority of jews consider themselves of either caucasian or middle-eastern descent. And of course Muslims are usually of middle eastern, or Asian descent.

I have never seen a survey or job application that gives "Jewish" as a race in the race selection. Usually, but not always, they fall under caucasian or middle-eastern, the majority of jews today are descended from both; such as Hispanics are descended from Spanish caucasians and American Indians(usaully a mayan or aztec ethnic subdivision).

So Jesus is of the Jewish religion, but is probably a mixture of caucasian and middle eastern, or either one.....or could just be descended from God, whic begs the question what race is God, not one I intend to analyze.

[Rubystars]

Here's my perspective on it, it was originally a group of Middle Eastern people, descended from the same ancestry and sharing a common religion.

If not exactly a race to some degree it is an ethnicity, although converts who were Gentile-descended are accepted as officially Jewish afterward.

[Rapscallion]

Hmm - I could be wrong, but a Gentile can only become a Reform Jew, not an Orthodox Jew. I think, and I repeat that I could be wrong, that Orthodox Judaism teaches that only those born from the twelve tribes, traced through their mothers, can be Jews.

Anyone got more information on this?

Rapscallion

[Ryu]

thats true, at least it was, not sure if it still is
it was for a long time you could only be jewish if you were born jewish except there were exceptions in the Old Testament so i dont know if it was established later or had ended by then or they were exceptions

[Rubystars]

Ruth in the Old Testament converted to Judaism and she was a Moabitess.

This page seems to indicate that the Orthodox do accept Gentile converts: http://www.beingjewish.com/conversion/becomingjewish.html

[Ryu]

thats why i said there were exceptions in the old testament, i was mainly thinking of her
i know at some point, i dont know when or for how long, it was the common view that you could only be jewish by blood which is what my message said adding that i didnt know if it was different today

[Rubystars]

I've asked some of them about it before and they said that even though they don't seek converts and discourage conversion that they do accept converts today from all peoples.

[squall]

According to the Bible, it says a Christian's duty is to actively seek converts. Does not mean it's any less annoying when they bug you at your place of employment.

[Rubystars]

It's a Christian's duty to actively seek converts, but Jewish people don't seek converts. Quite the opposite in fact. They're supposed to discourage people from converting, although they do accept converts if someone is persistent and willing enough.

[Barefootgirl]

Can you imagine the horror and the outrage, if there were ever to be a "White History Month"? Yes, we celebrate dead (white) presidents, but can you imagine a month dedicated to important people in "White" history?

Obviously i can't speak for the way these things are taught in the USA, but in the UK, conventional history as its taught in school IS "white history", simply because there were not that many prominent black people in the UK before the middle of the 20th century. It's also "men's history" - aside from the odd Queen or three, the canon simply doesn't mention that many famous women. Again, I don't know about the US, but in the UK we do have "Women's History" events, emphasising the contribution women made to our society. It doesn't denigrate the canon in any way, shape or form, it enhances it. White people's history IS the canon, its what everybody learns, its generic history, so there is little need for a specific event celebrating it.

Being proud of your race, whatever it is, always seems a bit odd to me. Its not like its an achievement, is it?

[DisgruntledBadger]

We're agreed, it seems, that reverse racism is just as bad as the standard sort, but what do we do about it?

Rapscallion

It seems to me that that's the crux of the problem where any sort of racism is concerned. A lot of the "affirmative action" and quota policies were put into place to try to combat racism, and they quite obviously have not worked. There's got to be a way to get rid of discrimination against one group without causing discrimination against another, right?

[powerboy]

All I can say to people is it is not a crime to be proud of your race. I am proud of who I am, where I came from, and who I am growing up to be. Just because I am proud to be white does NOT make me a Neo Nazi or a Hitler fanatic or a racist. If it's ok to be proud to be black, I can be proud to be white without being criticized and labeled.


I think the same way about it. I am proud to be white, and I am not a racist



I grew up in the 80s and 90s and I was never part of apartheid or slavery or anything stupid like that. I never oppressed anyone and I don't feel ashamed about things that had nothing to do with me. Yet I'm being affected by affirmative action, etc.

I don't understand why I don't get the equal opportunity for scholarships or for hiring or for promotions because I don't help "diversity" but lessen it.

There are many achievements that can be attributed mostly or solely to white people just as there are those discoveries/achievements, etc. that can be attributed to black people or Asian people or whoever. Furthermore, white people suffered as serfs and slaves too, does anyone remember reading about that?

Maybe we need white history month for that reason anyway.


I feel the same way as you on that.

[TennesseeWhiskey]

I grew up in the 80s and 90s and I was never part of apartheid or slavery or anything stupid like that. I never oppressed anyone and I don't feel ashamed about things that had nothing to do with me. Yet I'm being affected by affirmative action, etc.



Oh honey, you're preaching to the choir on this one. Try growing up in the 70's and '80's, a Tennessean with a strong accent, and, inevitably something goes wrong for a customer who is just DETERMINED to get over, not pay, get something for nothing, not be charged a service bill for something THEY tore up, and, the first thing that gets brought up is, "You just beez doing me like dat 'cause I be black."

Nope, sorry to bust your bubble, honey, I couldn't care less if you were pink with purple polka dots, you break it, you pay to fix it, right there in your agreement, just like the clause about professional behaviour, siccing your dogs on my guy when he knocks on the door to find out why you haven't paid isn't quite what your average reasonable man/woman on the street considers normal behaviour. Nor is threatening to "beat up that m-f-ing cracka if dey calls me up on my m-f-ing job again" after having tried to contact you for two or three weeks, every other way than calling your job.


Now, I'm NOT trying to say that only black people show off when you call bull excrement on them for bad behaviour, but, they will sure enough holler discrimination when there ain't any. Fortunately, we're not in a huge area, and, I've more than one time seen another customer, black, by the way, laugh at the dingleberry hollering "discrimination", and tell them, "Aw, hush, if you were doing what you were supposed to be, they wouldn't have to call you. They're good people, and you're acting a fool."

Don't even get me going about the mess about slavery. Sorry, dude, it ended in the USA in 1865. Neither of us was alive then, yeah, it was bad, nope, it don't affect us, and my give-a-damn's busted.

[AFPheonix]

OK. I've kept out of this thread until now, but I'm sorry, slavery in the US may have officially ended in 1865, but institutionalized racism and Jim Crow continued unchecked into the 1960's. You can't tell me that this has had no effect on black peoples' ability to move up in society at the rate that white people can. The very fact that blacks make up a huge segment of the lower classes is very telling in that regard.

As for white guys whining that they can't say Nigger but black guys can. Oh please. You as a white male are in a demographic that holds the most power in this world.

Is it right when minorities strike out at the majority? No, of course not, but what do you think has been the larger injustice overall? Minorities striking out, or the majority holding down up until this most recent generation? My vote will be on the latter. As a white female, I will suck it up and deal, as I understand we're still in a period of transition and most likely will be for several generations.

As for being proud of your skin color, well, I just don't really understand that. Why are you proud of something that you really had no hand in doing? I don't care one way or another what color I am, but I will reserve my pride for things that I actually affected in a positive manner.

[Boozy]

Thanks AFP, for articulating my thoughts on the subject. I would have responded myself, except that every time I started, I felt I came across too...vehemently, to put it nicely. :D

So I stayed away from this one up until now.

I did like Barefootgirl's point about being "proud" of your race. It is an accident of birth and nothing you've achieved. Like nationalism, this kind of attitude is at best silly and at worst, dangerous.

[TennesseeWhiskey]

OK. I've kept out of this thread until now, but I'm sorry, slavery in the US may have officially ended in 1865, but institutionalized racism and Jim Crow continued unchecked into the 1960's. You can't tell me that this has had no effect on black peoples' ability to move up in society at the rate that white people can. The very fact that blacks make up a huge segment of the lower classes is very telling in that regard.



Will I say Jim Crow had no effect? Nope. I won't say that at all. Jim Crow's been outlawed for many years now. All of us here, my age (mid-late 30's and younger) went to non-segregated schools, teachers taught, and continue to teach, white and black kids from the same books on the same subjects, in the same classrooms!


There comes a time when you need to quit blaming everybody else and look to your own to see the problems. Am I saying white folks are perfect? Naw, we have our own problems, but, do we try and collectively blame other races and this, that and the other? Nope, not for the most part, sure, there's a few out there who will holler about the (insert ethnicity here) taking over, etc, so on and so forth, but, that ain't the majority.

I'm speaking as a white Southern female. Why is it bad to be proud of your roots and where you come from? Quite often, it can inspire you.

As for white guys whining that they can't say Nigger but black guys can. Oh please. You as a white male are in a demographic that holds the most power in this world.


Frankly, I don't really give an aviating copulation about the usage of that word one way or another. What burns my biscuits is that if a white person says "nigger" in whatever context, it's about as bad as being accused of witchcraft back in Salem Mass in 1692 or so, however, it's okay to call a white person everything but a child of God because of discrimination, etcetera, ad infinitum. The way I look at that, it ought to go both ways. Fine, don't call any black person a nigger, but, don't call white people cracker, white trash, buckra, trailer trash, etc.

[TheRoo]

Jim Crow laws may have been outlawed, but their effects still live on. There is this myth that there is social mobility in this country, and while that is true for a select few, the fact remains that both poverty and wealth get passed down through the generations. Do you think George W Bush or Ted Kennedy would be rich had they not come from rich families? When parents have money, kids get more oppurtunity, which translates into money for the kids and oppurtunities for their children.

[TennesseeWhiskey]

Jim Crow laws may have been outlawed, but their effects still live on. There is this myth that there is social mobility in this country, and while that is true for a select few, the fact remains that both poverty and wealth get passed down through the generations. Do you think George W Bush or Ted Kennedy would be rich had they not come from rich families? When parents have money, kids get more oppurtunity, which translates into money for the kids and oppurtunities for their children.


Yeah, kids with rich parents start off with more money, but, just because you're not born with a proverbial silver spoon doesn't mean you're damned from the git-go. Speaking for myself, I finished high school, started in my industry at 19, entry level, and manage a store, and, though I ain't hauling wheelbarrows of cash to the bank, I ain't wondering where my next meal is coming from either. I'm not from a rich family, we're solid middle-working class, the last three generations including myself, and before that, just typical Upper East Tennessee farm people. Nobody figured the world owed them anything, nor did they think that they couldn't get out here, work and better themselves, and have just as good a chance as anyone. That's what is lacking now. Too many people talk themselves out of trying before they get going good!

[AFPheonix]

I'm glad you have experienced success in your life, Tennessee Whiskey. However, statistically you still have a leg up, simply for being white.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1663841,00.html

The affects of institutionalized racism are still with us. Even though it is no longer kosher to be outwardly racist, the reality is there's still the aftermath of when it was ok. Statistically, Blacks are poorer and have worse schools than we do as whites. We are still very segregated along class and racial lines. I will also submit that in this current time, while outward racism against blacks is considered bad, blatant racism against Latinos is absolutely rampant in this country, and they are also affected by the racial and class lines that affect blacks.

We cannot put on blinders to this. If we do, we will only let the problem fester and it will blow up again like it did in the 60's. Yes, people are ultimately responsible for their fate, but it is our responsibility as the majority and the power holders to do our best to level the playing fields for all.
Actually, this leads right back into my favorite rant about school reform, but I've already taken over several threads on that tack.

[NightAngel]

I guess I'm weird. I don't see "in color" except when I'm forced to- such as someone pulling the race card on me. There have actully been times when someone has pulled the race card and left me surprised because I hadn't even noticed the person's skin color until then.

Of course, at that point I am forced to see "in color" and it really kind of pisses me off. I don't WANT to see you differently- please don't make me.

[Seshat]

I used to be like that, NightAngel. However, I've since had several things pointed out to me. Now, I'm Australian, so the majority of our racism is towards Aboriginals, or towards immigrants (yes, I see the irony). Let's compare the life stories of a random white person (me, for instance) with Frank Fullblood aboriginal. If this interests people, I can also do Helen Halfblood, and Immanuel Immigrant.

I was born in the dominant culture of my country, raised in that culture, and can reasonably reliably predict what an employer expects of me, what resources are available to me, and so forth. I perceive teachers, social workers, and police as providing a service, and as basically my equals.

Frank was born in the outback, among a bunch of aboriginals who live and work on a station (a ranch, to USA folk). He was raised in his culture, with some schooling in the dominant culture from the School of the Air. His family had an agreement with the station holder that they could go walkabout when they needed to, so long as they were back when he needed them. However, a long drought caused the station holder to sell up, the farm was bought by an agribusiness, and Frank's people ended up moving to the fringe of one of the cities - let's say Alice Springs.

Frank and his family meet up with a cop, who tells them they can't stay in the camp they've set up - it's private land. The cop, intending to do the right thing, talks to the social workers, who find Frank and his family housing. But they split them up, along lines that make sense to the whites, but not to Frank. For Frank, his family is all twenty-five of them! Not just the four the whites put in this three-bedroom house.

Frank and his family don't understand how to maintain the house, so it gets run-down. They've never lived by clock-time before - on the station, you watched the cattle and the weather and did jobs when they needed doing, and the rest of your time was your own. So they have trouble holding down jobs that require them to turn up at 9am and stay at the workplace until 5pm. They definitely don't understand the concept of 'looking busy' - either you are busy, or you aren't!

The welfare system is confusing, and they have no idea what they're entitled to. Cops and social workers are people who randomly show up, tell you that you can't do something, split your family up, and vanish. These whites also don't seem to understand communal property - if our sister (who the whites call a distant cousin) shows up, of course she can stay with us! So can her children (some of whom the whites may consider to be nieces, nephews, or simply unrelated).



. . . this is why Frank and his family end up being stereotyped as lazy thieves who don't want to work, can't take care of anything, and crowd lots of people into a small house. When what's happening is that we're expecting a massive cultural shift in only two or three generations. That can't be done.

So I'm prepared to cut Aboriginals a bit more slack than I'd cut someone of my own cultural background.


* In case it has to be said:
There are Aboriginal groups and individuals who are learning how to live in the world as it now is. Both those Aboriginals and people of other races are helping people like Frank adapt. I give Frank and his like a bit of slack because there are still many, many Aboriginals who are the first generation of their family adapting to the modern world.

There are also Aboriginal tribes who, with assistance from someone who knows the modern world, pool their welfare payments and use it as capital to develop a communal enterprise. Tourism is a common one, but Aboriginal crafts and arts are also common. Most of these groups come off welfare entirely this way, and should be very, very proud of themselves. If you're interested in visiting Australia, I can strongly recommend checking with our tourist bureaus for a visit to one of these tribes.

[Misanthropical]

I'm so sick of the race card. I am white, but guess what? I grew up in a poor family! My mother wasn't really educated and couldn't help me with my homework. My father wasn't around, since they divorced when I was three and he had a second family and didn't want to bother with his first. I have lost track of how many times my mother has been married.

I had to deal with a lot growing up, things that no child should ever have to deal with, I still have nightmares about the things that went on, but I don't blame my problems on my childhood.

No one offered to help me with anything, I did it on my own! I didn't wallow around in misery and try to blame everyone else for my failings.

I took responsibilty for my life and the choices I make. I didn't look to anyone to be my role model. I knew what I wanted out of life and tried to make it happen.

I'm not going to feel sorry for anyone that revels in victimhood and tries to blame others for their own failings.

If someone is a victim and is trying to over come that, then I'm more than happy to help, but wearing victimhood like a badge of honor will not get sympathy from me.

Pulling the race card on me will only insure that I think you are uneducated and can't get through life without screaming racism to get your way.

Besides, I hate everyone equally.

[protege]

No one offered to help me with anything, I did it on my own! I didn't wallow around in misery and try to blame everyone else for my failings.

Exactly, Mis. My parents struggled for years...up until recently. Dad's ad agency had failed, throwing him out of work. My mother, even though she was working full-time, still couldn't make ends meet. Not one government agency lifted a finger to help us--we were *barely* above the minimum income level, and were ignored. Since that was impossible, at one point, my father was working 3 part-time jobs. He was tired as hell...but I don't *ever* remember him complaining about it. In fact, it drove him harder...and eventually, he went back to school and became a teacher.

In fact, when all that was going on, he literally inspired me *not* to repeat his mistakes. I put myself through college, landed a good job, etc. I'm not rich by any means...but I was poor once, and I told myself that I was *not* going to allow things to end up like that.

With all that said, I guess I'm just tired of people using race as an excuse for their circumstances. To me, it seems easier and more convenient than working hard.

[Difdi]

One of my pet-peeves is getting called anti-semitic because I personally favor Palestinians over Israelis in a lot of things. I tend to favor the underdog in such matters, and have no tolerance for abuse or injustice. But it annoys me that some people don't know what the word semitic refers to.

I take a political side, and get accused of racism. I can handle that. But what bugs me is that Palestinians are a semitic people as much as Hebrews are. And more so than a Caucasian whose grandparents converted to Judaism and moved to Israel. So how the heck am I being anti-semitic if I favor a semitic person over a Caucasian, for purely political reasons?!? :rolleyes:

[BlackIronCrown]

Somewhat along those lines... why is it OK for black people to call themselves the N-word...but if a white person does it, it's racist? I don't use that word, but I can't figure that one out.

Actually, I have an answer for this.
The current definition of "racism" in academia and in racial relations studies and practice is "Prejudice + Power = Racism".

What this means is that you are only racist if you are a member of a race that holds majority power in a society. Since the USA is (and I quote) "a white-power patriarchical society" any use of the N-word by a Caucasian is racist. However, those of African-American persuasion are able to embrace the N-word and use it as a self-referential weapon against overbearing white autocracy.

Similarly, should an African-American persist in calling a Caucasian a "cracker" or "honky", that is NOT a racist act. Since the African-American is a minority race, they are out of power and so therefore cannot possibly be racist by definition. They are using words of power to fight the white hierarchy.

I encountered this prevailing definition of racism in the LJ debunkingwhite community, which is populated almost entirely by those of Caucasian bent. In the same thread, it was also shown that whie people are inherently racist from birth, as we benefit from white privilege whether we wish to or not and so must admit to being racist by default, even if we take no overt acts.

[Sylvia727]

Wouldn't reverse racism be nice prejudices? "Hey, you're Jewish, you must be great with numbers!", or "You're gay? Can you give me fashion advice?"

What this means is that you are only racist if you are a member of a race that holds majority power in a society.

That may be the academic definition of their jargon, but that doesn't have any bearing to daily realities. Dictionary.com says that racism is "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races," and this is the meaning in the vernacular.

Since the USA is (and I quote) "a white-power patriarchical society" any use of the N-word by a Caucasian is racist. However, those of African-American persuasion are able to embrace the N-word and use it as a self-referential weapon against overbearing white autocracy.

Sure, why not. I call my sister a bitch because I love her. Doesn't mean that anyone else is allowed to do it. But if a black person knows that his white friend means it as an insult, it's not racist. I doubt you'll find many blacks who allow this usage, because of the hateful implications, but it is hypothetically possible.

Similarly, should an African-American persist in calling a Caucasian a "cracker" or "honky", that is NOT a racist act. Since the African-American is a minority race, they are out of power and so therefore cannot possibly be racist by definition. They are using words of power to fight the white hierarchy.

"Cracker" and "honky," on the individual level, are just as racist as "nigger" and "spic". On the general level, words from majorities against minorities may be more racist because of historical and relative power implications, but to two people bumping into each other at the neighborhood grocery store, racism is racism. "Words of power"? Is it empowering to hate people for no legitimate reason? I don't want to live in your society.

If my white employee calls someone a spic, I will fire his racist ass. If my Asian employee calls someone a nigger, I will fire his racist ass. And if my black employee calls someone a cracker, I will fire his racist ass. Hatred is not suddenly acceptable based on one's skin tone.

In the same thread, it was also shown that whie people are inherently racist from birth, as we benefit from white privilege whether we wish to or not and so must admit to being racist by default, even if we take no overt acts.

You're really going to have to elaborate on this one. I refuse to believe that someone's skin tone makes him a bad person, anymore than I believe that someone's skin tone makes him morally inferior.

[Boozy]

You're really going to have to elaborate on this one. I refuse to believe that someone's skin tone makes him a bad person, anymore than I believe that someone's skin tone makes him morally inferior.

He was not saying that anyone is a "bad person"; he said that whites are racist from birth. I understand how that sounds, but if you'll re-read his post, you'll find that the definition of racism that he is using is not as morally charged as the one used colloquially.

Regarding white privilege, Seshat made a wonderful post describing what is meant by this. I can't for the life of me find it, but I'll post the link here when I do.

What BIC has said is not going to be popular, but personally I agree with him.

[Rapscallion]

He didn't even say it was his definition, just that of academia.

Rapscallion

[Sylvia727]

Which is why I asked BIC to elaborate. If all whites are inherently racist, and the definition of racism is power + prejudice, then doesn't that mean that all whites are prejudiced? I find that both wrong and incredibly arrogant.

If the definition of racism depends on the balance of power, doesn't that mean that my white friend Lilith, one of only three whites in a school with 500 black students, could use the word "nigger" as a word of power to fight the black hierarchy? And before anyone says that it's not the same, she lived in a city of some 20k people, almost all black. She went to the same schools, ate in the same restaurants, and shopped in the same grocery stores. She had less job prospects than her black classmates because prospective employers wanted someone who could "relate to the community". And she saw another white person maybe once or twice a day. She is the minority in that city.

[Rapscallion]

I think what you're up against here is a number of people who are guilt-stricken at what their ancestors may have done and are doing their best at guilting others into acting a certain way to assuage their own guilt. (Did that make sense?)

Person A reads about slavery, realises it was a very nasty time in history, works out that their ancestors may have been involved. Guilt rises, but in order to assuage that they try to make person B feel guilty.

I'm not saying that the guilty shouldn't feel embarrassed over evils they committed, but I'll be buggered sideways if I'm going to hang my head in shame over acts committed by someone else. So what if they were white as well? Doesn't mean to say I desire to own slaves as well. Doesn't mean to say I did or do own slaves.

True, we can't really get to the people who did own the slaves, what with old age having killed them off years since, but why should I feel guilty for that? I'm got no problem with policies of equality - that's pure natural justice. A sentiment of 'all people of race X should be guilt-stricken over what others of their race did' is yet more racism.

The pendulum needs to be in the middle - not swinging from side to side every so often.

Rapscallion

[Seshat]

Regarding white privilege, Seshat made a wonderful post describing what is meant by this. I can't for the life of me find it, but I'll post the link here when I do.

Thank you.

If you meant my 'Frank Fullblood' post, it's post 35 (http://www.fratching.com/showpost.php?p=2746&postcount=35) in this thread.

Another possibility is post 9 of the Sexism (Of Both Types) (http://www.fratching.com/showpost.php?p=3413&postcount=9) thread.

[MMATM]

I agree as well with BIC's description of "racism" as used in academia.
Unfortunately, the true definition of racism is not likely what was intended by the original topic. The vernacular use of "racism" is, as Sylvia stated, in reference to intolerance.

I am still wondering how "power + prejudice = racism" can be said to apply to specific whites, as opposed to whites as a whole (an ironically "racist" statement).

However, I will indicate that everyone, whether black, white, or any other color, is inherently predisposed towards racism at birth. We have to essentially "grow out" of our racism. This isn't a reflection on the parents, either. As human beings, we like people who look, think, and act like us. That's one of the biggest reasons for so many high-end positions being filled by white males, the traditionally "in-power" group. It is more natural for a white male CEO to select a white male as his successor than it is for him to select a black/Asian/Hispanic male, or a woman of any race. Hence the "glass ceiling" for women, and the need for "affirmative action".

In today's society, we love to claim racism in almost every aspect of our lives at one time or another. This ranges from entitlement whores demanding service after hours at grocery stores and playing the race card to government officials being called racist for daring to say that they don't support Barack Obama (without giving a "good enough" specific reason as to why not).

To side-track a little in response to Rapscallion's post:
In the history of racism, the primary oppressors of other nations have been upper-class English males. Not "white" males. Some of the first slaves sent to America, for example, were in fact Irish (and about as white as they come). Only later, when it became obvious that black slaves were easier to identify as being slaves (for obvious reasons) and less likely to attract the sympathy or even the affection of their masters and the masters' families, that blacks by color became the "inferior" race.

What does this mean? Hell if I know. All I know is that a lot of people nowadays are too afraid of being branded "racist", and so will go to great lengths to prove they're not. Sometimes to the effect of becoming "racist in reverse". Basically, until humans as a species have interbred long enough to eliminate all recognizable race characteristics, there will be racists on every side of the issue, as well as those who try to avoid being called such by reversing their racism.

[ebonyknight]

On a similar note, when did "Equal treatment" become "preferential treatment." For example, can you imagine the outcry if someone tried to start a "White Entertainment Network" or a "United Caucasian College Fund?" Yes, it would be wrong to have the money only available to white people, but isn't it just as wrong to have it only available to black people? There are plenty of people out there who need help with college, and the color of one's skin should not be part of the criteria.

Oh, how could I have missed this section? This should be interesting.

Lets start here.

http://unitedwhitecollegefund.net/

Where's the "outcry"?????

[Norton]

According to that page, minorities are eligible for scholarships from the UWCF as well, so "United White College Fund" is only a name, and not what they practice. It doesn't appear to actually be a whites-only scholarship.

We are hopeful that the brightest student with the greatest potential will have the opportunity to take advantage of the UWCF regardless of race, color, creed, sex, or financial status.

What's to cry out against?

If it's outcry against a whites-only scholarship you're looking for, there's the WHAM thread: http://www.fratching.com/showthread.php?t=432

[Zyanya]

Basically, until humans as a species have interbred long enough to eliminate all recognizable race characteristics, there will be racists on every side of the issue, as well as those who try to avoid being called such by reversing their racism.

I am part Spic, Kyke, Mic, Polock, Kraut, Wop, Ruski, Redskin, Honky, Cracker, and Chink. Go back a few more generations, I am also a Gook, Nigger, Bohunk, Wetback, Guinea, Limey, Towelhead. I'm also a Yank, Americunt, and I'm sure I've forgotten quite a few.

My point should be obvious, but I'm sure some will deliberately fail to see it.

[miffed]

Here's an interesting articles regarding Honky VS Nigger.

http://www.racismagainstindians.org/WhitePrivilege/HonkyWannaCracker.htm

So whereas "nigger" was and is a term used by whites to dehumanize blacks, to imply their inferiority, to "put them in their place" if you will, the same cannot be said of honky -- after all, you can't put white people in their place when they own the damned place to begin with.


On a slightly different note:
I think often the attempts to promote equality only further segregate people and promote the wrong ideas. Affirmative action being one, but another is "Black is beautiful" used to boost confidence in blacks so they would stop trying to change themselves according to a white person's idea of beauty. Rather than saying "we are beautiful individuals" they only further reinforced what segregated them, the definition "black".

The idea of race needs to be dispelled, definitions only allow for things to be categorized and separated.

[Zyanya]

So whereas "nigger" was and is a term used by whites to dehumanize blacks, to imply their inferiority, to "put them in their place" if you will, the same cannot be said of honky -- after all, you can't put white people in their place when they own the damned place to begin with.


Now that is a racist remark.

[miffed]

Stating that white people are the majority is racist? What the quote means is that racial slurs are used to put minorities down and enforce the idea that they are inferior. And how can a minority put a majority in their "place"?

If a black person calls me a "cracker", it's not going to bother me. I'll laugh at them. Afterall, who are they to insult me? It's not because they are black, but because I'm not going to let someone else define who I am and try to put me down. On the other hand, if I were to insult a black person with "nigger", typically they will get extremely offended. Alot (not all) of black people seem to be quite sensitive to what white people think of them, and why? victim complex of some sort? It's almost as if they place too much power in what a white person thinks of them. By being offended they are giving into the insult and idea that they are somehow inferior. If a random person calls me an idiot I'll shrug it off, they don't know me so who are they to insult me. So if a black person is called a nigger by a total stranger, who the heck is that stranger to try and put them down?

[anriana]

Somewhat along those lines... why is it OK for black people to call themselves the N-word...but if a white person does it, it's racist? I don't use that word, but I can't figure that one out.

(harsh language) There are many words that have been used by one set of people as a slur and another as an term of familiarity- fag is the second biggest example I can think of, but there's also queer, oreo, slut, bitch, dyke, and many more. I have no issues with my friends using those words towards me in certain contexts, but I would take offense if a stranger used them. I've always seen the debate over the N word the same way - two black people can use it as a greeting or a term of endearment and automatically know that there is no racism intended based on appearance, whereas coming from someone of a different skin color that certainty isn't there. My high school was very racially diverse and there were no issues with the many non-black students who used the n word within their own social spheres.


On a similar note, when did "Equal treatment" become "preferential treatment." For example, can you imagine the outcry if someone tried to start a "White Entertainment Network" or a "United Caucasian College Fund?" Yes, it would be wrong to have the money only available to white people, but isn't it just as wrong to have it only available to black people? There are plenty of people out there who need help with college, and the color of one's skin should not be part of the criteria.


Can you imagine the horror and the outrage, if there were ever to be a "White History Month"? Yes, we celebrate dead (white) presidents, but can you imagine a month dedicated to important people in "White" history?

White is not a specific cultural identity the way African American is. White can mean a second-generation German or a tenth-generation French-Canadian or a hundreth-generation Bosnian. Furthermore, there are already plenty of TV channels primarily populated by white people and world history (at least in the States) would more properly be called the history of rich white european men. White culture and history is already dominant and celebrated 12 months out of the year; it doesn't need a super special month or channel.

All I can say to people is it is not a crime to be proud of your race. I am proud of who I am, where I came from, and who I am growing up to be. Just because I am proud to be white does NOT make me a Neo Nazi or a Hitler fanatic or a racist. If it's ok to be proud to be black, I can be proud to be white without being criticized and labeled.

I'm curious, what exactly does being white mean to you? What is the cultural identity you are proud of? I am not criticizing you, I just can't think of any specific history of my own that I would call "white."


I think this whole argument would be easier if "white" and "black" weren't used. It's much easier, to me anyways, to think of this while using the phrase "African American" because it takes it beyond the difference in skin color and highlights the differences in cultural history and heritage. Unfortunately there is no real equivalent for whites because German-/Irish-/whatever- American just get melted down to "white."


Did you know MTV is coming out with a 3rd channel, just for Spanish speaking folks?

I don't understand why this is a bad or surprising thing. Telemundo and Univision have been around for years and years. In parts of California with very large immigrant communities there are also channels just for people who speak Armenian, Mandarin, and Tagalog. I'm sure there are other examples too, those are just the ones I know.

[Norton]

I think this whole argument would be easier if "white" and "black" weren't used. It's much easier, to me anyways, to think of this while using the phrase "African American" because it takes it beyond the difference in skin color and highlights the differences in cultural history and heritage.

I've never cared for the phrase African American. An African American to me would be someone born in Africa, who later became a US citizen. Even if their parents or grandparents were born in Africa and immigrated, I could see using the term African American. However, I believe the majority of black people in the country were born here, and have had ancestors here long enough so that they should simply be called American - leave the African part out of it.

What of black people in Britain? Can't rightly call them African American. What of Jamaican immigrants? Black Americans, but not African.

My grandparents on my mother's side were immigrants, but I don't refer to myself as Italian American, or German American, because I am simply American. I've never been to Italy or Germany. I doubt many black people born in the US have actually been to Africa, either, so why the distinction in labels when it comes to our status as US citizens?

I have no problem being called white (though I'm actually a peach-ish color with some yellow undertones) in comparison to someone of darker skin color, so I fail to see the big deal in calling someone black in comparison to those of lighter skin tone.

[anriana]

I've never cared for the phrase African American. An African American to me would be someone born in Africa, who later became a US citizen. Even if their parents or grandparents were born in Africa and immigrated, I could see using the term African American. However, I believe the majority of black people in the country were born here, and have had ancestors here long enough so that they should simply be called American - leave the African part out of it.

What of black people in Britain? Can't rightly call them African American. What of Jamaican immigrants? Black Americans, but not African.

My grandparents on my mother's side were immigrants, but I don't refer to myself as Italian American, or German American, because I am simply American. I've never been to Italy or Germany. I doubt many black people born in the US have actually been to Africa, either, so why the distinction in labels when it comes to our status as US citizens?

I have no problem being called white (though I'm actually a peach-ish color with some yellow undertones) in comparison to someone of darker skin color, so I fail to see the big deal in calling someone black in comparison to those of lighter skin tone.


I'm not saying that we should go back to African American or German-American, etc, in permanent use, I was saying that for the purpose of this debate, I find it easier to think less in terms of skin color and more in terms of culture, ie the american history that I've been taught always focused on people of European descent, hence the need for a month for all of the people of African (and Latino and Asian and Native American) descent's history that gets overlooked. Semantics, yes, but it helped me to frame it.


And obviously AA was never intended to refer to people who were not African American, such as the examples of people you gave of people in countries other than America and from continents other than Africa.


I've always found it interesting that we use black/white yet yellow and red are still somewhat offensive terms for Asian and Native Americans.

[Boozy]

I've always found it interesting that we use black/white yet yellow and red are still somewhat offensive terms for Asian and Native Americans.

That's the first I've ever really thought about that.

You're right - its somewhat curious.

[BlaqueKatt]

I find it easier to think less in terms of skin color and more in terms of culture

just to stir the pot a bit.....

so exactly what would you classify one of my co-workers as-he is from africa, and an american citizen. So if we "label" him by(your ules of) culture, he would be african american-right?

He is the most racist person I have ever met-did I mention he is melanin deficient?
Under your rules(labels by "culture") he is african american, but not dark skinned, and he hates anyone that is.

should he be labeled "african american", should we make a totally new label for him-and if so why*?


*wouldn't doing so be racist as the only reason you would be doing so be due to his skin color, and not due to his culture which is what you "claim" to be labeling by.

[Zyanya]

Stating that white people are the majority is racist? What the quote means is that racial slurs are used to put minorities down and enforce the idea that they are inferior. And how can a minority put a majority in their "place"?

Last four companies I worked for were NOT owned/managed by those that are considered 'white'.

The statement is just another example of 'hey, the whites deserve the abuse, they are all slave-owning racists'.

I'm curious, what exactly does being white mean to you? What is the cultural identity you are proud of? I am not criticizing you, I just can't think of any specific history of my own that I would call "white."

I am damn proud to be a Spic, Kyke, Mic, Polock, Krout, Wop, Limey, Ruski, and Guinea. Europe and Asia are great countries with rich and occasionally glorious histories. I am proud to be a descendant of immigrants who came to a new world to pick themselves up by their bootstraps and make a life for themselves.

I'm also damn proud to be the descendant of redskins who fought to the last (and are still fighting) to save their cultures.

I am proud to be Irish
I am proud to be Welsh
I am proud to be Russian
I am proud to be Italian
I am proud to be French
I am proud to be Ukrainian
I am proud to be Swedish
I am proud to be German
I am proud to be Spanish
I am proud to be Jewish
I am proud to be Vietnamese
I am proud to be Cherokee
I am proud to be Apache
I am proud to be Moroccan
I am proud to be Egyptian
I am proud to be the descendant of folks who looked beyond skin color and ethnicity when making friends and finding lovers.

[miffed]

Last four companies I worked for were NOT owned/managed by those that are considered 'white'.

Your point? You've worked for 4 companies out of how many in America run by white people?

The statement is just another example of 'hey, the whites deserve the abuse, they are all slave-owning racists'.

You're missing the point of the article and my post. Pointing out whites as the majority is not saying it's ok to pick on them, it's just explaining why there is such a contrast in the reactions regarding "nigger" and "cracker".

[Zyanya]

Your point? You've worked for 4 companies out of how many in America run by white people?

Point 1 - Not all companies are owned by white people and the vast majority of white people are employees, not owners.
Point 2 - It is an insult to minorities to assume all businesses are owned by white people, minorities are fully capable of running successful businesses.

You're missing the point of the article and my post. Pointing out whites as the majority is not saying it's ok to pick on them, it's just explaining why there is such a contrast in the reactions regarding "nigger" and "cracker".

No, I got the point fully. Yes, your statement is implying that it is okay to pick on them by justifying use of a racial slur against whites at the same time you condemn a racial slur against blacks.

Which leads to point 3 -

A racial insult is a racial insult no matter who it is directed against. Stereotyping is wrong-headed at best and leads to making improper judgments and assumptions. It is wrong to call an Asian man a squint, a black man a nigger, or a white man a cracker, and all of these are EQUALLY wrong. To consider one more acceptable than another IS racist.

[Difdi]

If my white employee calls someone a spic, I will fire his racist ass. If my Asian employee calls someone a nigger, I will fire his racist ass. And if my black employee calls someone a cracker, I will fire his racist ass. Hatred is not suddenly acceptable based on one's skin tone.


The only time I'll use a racial insult is in response to one. The black person (for example) who calls me a honky had better not mind getting called a nigger (for example), because that's what they'll get called. But only in that specific case. I have no tolerance for people who are racist, but hide behind their minority to excuse it. If it's wrong for me to call them that, it's wrong for them to call me that; I return the respect I'm shown, and that applies to degree and type of insults as much as anything else.

[miffed]

Point 1 - Not all companies are owned by white people and the vast majority of white people are employees, not owners.
Point 2 - It is an insult to minorities to assume all businesses are owned by white people, minorities are fully capable of running successful businesses.



No, I got the point fully. Yes, your statement is implying that it is okay to pick on them by justifying use of a racial slur against whites at the same time you condemn a racial slur against blacks.

Which leads to point 3 -

A racial insult is a racial insult no matter who it is directed against. Stereotyping is wrong-headed at best and leads to making improper judgments and assumptions. It is wrong to call an Asian man a squint, a black man a nigger, or a white man a cracker, and all of these are EQUALLY wrong. To consider one more acceptable than another IS racist.

I wasn't implying anything. My point in posting that article was because someone was wondering why there is such a contrast in the view of black on white racism versus white on black racism. I wasn't trying to justify anything with that. The article explains why "nigger" is more frowned upon than "cracker". It explains why a school suspended only the white student who called a black person a "nigger" after being called a "cracker" by said black person. neither word is right but society looks at them differently.

And by saying whites are the majority, I didn't mean that they run every single company in America, I just meant that whites control the majority of them, y'know, what with being a majority and all. You're taking "majority" to mean "all/the only". Also I wasn't meaning that white people only run businesses, yes they work for them too, I never stated anything to the contrary did I?

I agree with point #3. racial slurs are bad no matter who uses them. I was never at any point implying that they were alright to use in any manner.


You seem to be looking for something that isn't there in my posts.

[the_std]

If it's wrong for me to call them that, it's wrong for them to call me that; I return the respect I'm shown, and that applies to degree and type of insults as much as anything else.

This mentality, while not the spawn of racism that bigotry is, allows racism to continue.

Instead of calling a black man who called you a honky something in turn (spade, nigger), why not call him what he is, a bigoted racist, instead of becoming a racist yourself?

That argument makes no sense.

[Zyanya]

I wasn't implying anything. My point in posting that article was because someone was wondering why there is such a contrast in the view of black on white racism versus white on black racism. I wasn't trying to justify anything with that. The article explains why "nigger" is more frowned upon than "cracker". It explains why a school suspended only the white student who called a black person a "nigger" after being called a "cracker" by said black person. neither word is right but society looks at them differently.

And that is a racist way to look at it. Both students should have been treated equally. Trying to justify or 'explain' it is simply justifying racism.

And by saying whites are the majority, I didn't mean that they run every single company in America, I just meant that whites control the majority of them, y'know, what with being a majority and all. You're taking "majority" to mean "all/the only". Also I wasn't meaning that white people only run businesses, yes they work for them too, I never stated anything to the contrary did I?

No, you were just trying to justify or explain why it's better to call someone a cracker than a nigger.

I agree with point #3. racial slurs are bad no matter who uses them. I was never at any point implying that they were alright to use in any manner.

Except for the whole 'well, whites own the place so it's more acceptable to call them a cracker' argument.

You seem to be looking for something that isn't there in my posts.

No, I seem to have picked up on something that you don't like to think about.


There is no such thing as reversed racism. Racism is racism, period.

[miffed]

No, you were just trying to justify or explain why it's better to call someone a cracker than a nigger.

I, too, think that the school should have treated/punished the students equally, they both used racial slurs and are equally at fault. But the school didn't? Why not? Thats what I was trying to bring up, the faulty mindset society has seemed to adopt (That it's no big deal if a black person uses racial slurs. Which I do not agree with), but somehow by explaining why society reacts differently to racism in different contexts, I am actually condoning it? :confused:

Why do you keep making me out to be a racist? Racism is bad no matter what color it comes from or goes to, but you keep making me out to be somehow condoning it. I am white, so why the heck would I say its ok to pick on me? I did explain that I wouldn't be bothered by racial slurs but that was in no way saying its ok to pick on me just because I won't get offended.


I agree with you about racism for the most part, no one should get away with it.

[thetinman]

you guys are totally missing what miffed is trying to say.

what he's saying is that racism is wrong. he's made that abundantly clear. trying to call him a racist isn't getting anywhere. where he loses you guys is when he talks about how black people calling white people racial slurs isn't as bad as white people calling black people racial slurs. this is how society views it. it's not right. everyone, i think, can agree on that. but people feel since whites have treated black people so poorly in the past (slavery, prejudice, segregation) that blacks have this "racial wiggle room". let me explain what i mean by that. when i say "racial wiggle room", i mean that black people can somehow be racist to white people because they were treated poorly by whites. don't get me wrong, all racism is wrong. but has a blck comedian ever been on the news for calling a white man a cracker?

[miffed]

Careful there, tinman. It's just Zyanya that's arguing with me. I don't think anyone else has missed my point. You can get in some hot water with wording like that.

[anriana]

just to stir the pot a bit.....

so exactly what would you classify one of my co-workers as-he is from africa, and an american citizen. So if we "label" him by(your ules of) culture, he would be african american-right?

No, he would be (whatever country he's from)-American or white.

wouldn't doing so be racist as the only reason you would be doing so be due to his skin color, and not due to his culture which is what you "claim" to be labeling by.

The American government classifies black/AA as "A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa." Is that racist?
First, it seems to me that a white person from Africa would have a far different culture than a black person from the States.
Second, nowhere did I "claim" to be labeling by culture and not by skin color - my definition of black has always been race based. I merely stated that I found it easier in the " why do we have black history month/BET?" debate to look at as "a people who has had their presence minimized in history and popular culture in favor of the dominant culture and race have areas and times to focus on that culture" instead of "people with dark skin get a special month and channel but us people with light skin don't?" Apparently I didn't expand on my "labels" enough.



I am damn proud to be a Spic, Kyke, Mic, Polock, Krout, Wop, Limey, Ruski, and Guinea. Europe and Asia are great countries with rich and occasionally glorious histories. I am proud to be a descendant of immigrants who came to a new world to pick themselves up by their bootstraps and make a life for themselves.

I'm also damn proud to be the descendant of redskins who fought to the last (and are still fighting) to save their cultures.

I am proud to be Irish
I am proud to be Welsh
I am proud to be Russian
I am proud to be Italian
I am proud to be French
I am proud to be Ukrainian
I am proud to be Swedish
I am proud to be German
I am proud to be Spanish
I am proud to be Jewish
I am proud to be Vietnamese
I am proud to be Cherokee
I am proud to be Apache
I am proud to be Moroccan
I am proud to be Egyptian
I am proud to be the descendant of folks who looked beyond skin color and ethnicity when making friends and finding lovers.


I don't see the relevance to my question.

[Zyanya]

where he loses you guys is when he talks about how black people calling white people racial slurs isn't as bad as white people calling black people racial slurs.

Except it is just as bad, and that was my point. I even broke the point into three parts to explain why the initial comment was racist, even how it was racist against all the sides.

Society can be wrong, and when it is, effort should not be put into justifying WHY it's wrong. Effort should be put into making it right.

I don't see the relevance to my question

You asked why I would be proud to be 'white'. I answered you. You wanted to know what 'cultural identity' whites had. I answered you.

[miffed]

Effort should be put into making it right.

So racism is just plain bad and should never ever be talked about except in terms of how to solve it? But you have to know what the problem actually is before you can attempt to solve it. That's what I was getting at. Here's the fault now how do we fix it?

[protege]

let me explain what i mean by that. when i say "racial wiggle room", i mean that black people can somehow be racist to white people because they were treated poorly by whites.

That's *exactly* why society thinks that way. Until all this color bullshit stops, people are going to keep thinking that way, and nobody is *ever* going to feel "equal." We're all the same underneath, yet too many people see only in black and white. Pretty sad, actually.

but has a blck comedian ever been on the news for calling a white man a cracker?

I have a feeling that the media took that story and ran with it...simply because it was *celebrity* who said it. If it was Joe Schmo on the street, I don't think they would have cared, or if they did, it probably wouldn't have gone for so long.

[miffed]

We're all the same underneath, yet too many people see only in black and white. Pretty sad, actually.


My thoughts exactly. Pretty much the only way to dispel racism is to dispel the concept of "race" and get everyone to realize we are all the same, human. People need to see the bigger picture.

[thetinman]

Except it is just as bad, and that was my point. I even broke the point into three parts to explain why the initial comment was racist, even how it was racist against all the sides.

Society can be wrong, and when it is, effort should not be put into justifying WHY it's wrong. Effort should be put into making it right.

no one is saying that society is right! but since society views it like that, minorities can get away with racism because of former oppression.

[AFPheonix]

no one is saying that society is right! but since society views it like that, minorities can get away with racism because of former oppression.

And yet, if we want to move towards a true meritocracy, they shouldn't be able to get away with it. We want society to change? Then we as the individuals get to start changing it.

Now, even as I say this, I do think we need to do more as a society for impoverished minorities, as they are in that position because of the oppression they felt even in the latter part of last century and beyond. This also goes for bad decisions we've made as a country in regards to Native Americans too.
We also need to change how we look at hispanics. It almost seems to me that racism against them is condoned even at the highest levels of government.

[Zyanya]

So racism is just plain bad and should never ever be talked about except in terms of how to solve it? But you have to know what the problem actually is before you can attempt to solve it. That's what I was getting at. Here's the fault now how do we fix it?

Simple.

We stop trotting out that same old tired justification everytime it happens and say 'look, this is wrong, period, knock it off'.

[miffed]

Simple.

We stop trotting out that same old tired justification everytime it happens and say 'look, this is wrong, period, knock it off'.

If that worked then there would be world peace and we wouldn't be having this discussion about racism. You can't just tell a criminal theft is wrong and expect them to listen to you and straighten out. They have to be rehabilitated. And that's almost what has to be done with society, its views have to be changed and reconstructed, and that's not a simple easy task.

[Zyanya]

If that worked then there would be world peace and we wouldn't be having this discussion about racism. You can't just tell a criminal theft is wrong and expect them to listen to you and straighten out. They have to be rehabilitated. And that's almost what has to be done with society, its views have to be changed and reconstructed, and that's not a simple easy task.

You can however, stop making excuses for the criminal like 'oh, you had such a hard childhood, here is a lollipop and please don't do that anymore'.

[miffed]

You can however, stop making excuses for the criminal like 'oh, you had such a hard childhood, here is a lollipop and please don't do that anymore'.

Are you even reading my whole posts? I am not making excuses or justifying anything. Like I have previously said, you have to know the problem before you can solve it. You have to know why a problem occurs so you can stop it from happening again. I explained why society behaves a certain way, and now that we know why that behavior occurs, we can work towards a solution to change that behavior. My posts are more like "oh, you did that because you had such a hard childhood, but that's not right and here's why."

Minorities can get away with racism because the majority isn't affected by slurs in the same way. Some people tend to think that the majority almost deserves it because of past occurances. That's the mindset of society, now how do we rectify that? Getting rid of the concept of race seems like a good start. Show everyone we are all the same, create a sense of community between cultures.

[aniwahya]

I think that there is no such thing as reverse racism, it is just racism plain and simple.

I have had several experiences where I have been accused of racism by another employee trying to retaliate against me because they got in trouble for something I was vaguely involved in. In one case I was 16 working as a sales associate and had a dark skinned manager who referred to herself as our store's "spot of color". Since people were hired on merit that I could see. I and the last associate hired are classified Caucasian, but I was hired because a long time employee knew me well and the other girl was hired because she lived 1/4 of a block from the store. So I thought of the manager referring to herself as "a spot of color" was just a cute phrase. Lo and behold I repeated it once, meant absolutely nothing by it and had at any point it been explained to me that it would offend her I would have avoided using it on the grounds I didn't want to offend anyone. Just two days before the main manager had caught her doing some things when she was manning the store by herself that were very much against policy, and since I was the associate who was working with her that day I was blamed for her getting in trouble.

What bothers me about this experience is how devastating an experience it was, to have my job threatened and to be accused of being something I consider to be vile. I realize that denial is a powerful thing, yet I truly make an effort to treat everyone equally. Experience has led me to believe that treating people equally is the problem. Racists don't want to be treated equally, they have expectations for interactions with other people that are unreasonable, especially interactions with people perceived as being lower in status than them.

My mom married an immigrant of an Asian country who was one of the most racist people I have ever met, except for his close family members. At one point his uncle started telling me how he thought Native Americans were a dirty, worthless, savagely barbaric people:eek:. I have never had so much joy in telling someone that he was talking to one (though I have no official connection to a tribe thanks to a deadbeat biological father, I am genetically 1/4 cherokee). It warmed my heart cockles to see his face go completely white and to see the sheer terror wash across his face (he was well aware that despite being only a girl I could life his bodyweight and crush him with no problems).:D

It was also an experience to go gatherings of people who had zero respect for American culture. I was told repeatedly that Americans are a "bastard" people with no culture. They had similar views of any nationality other than their own. It was appalling, to put it mildly.

I hate when people use "reverse racism" since in my experience people respond to it with an eye roll and seem to think of it as a lesser form of racism.
People accuse "white people" or "crackers" of being racist and then being incapable of experiencing racism against them selves.

Why do people focus on African slavery and then exclude other cultures, like the Japanese who were forced into concentration camps here in America during WWII. Citizens of this country were taken against there will and locked in camps watched and patrolled by armed guards for no reason other than they were of Japanese descent. Many people lost everything they had because of it. No one cares that Native Americans have been largely ignored and neglected as a people. Or what about the Chinese who helped build the railroads that first spanned the country? The Irish who were the working backbone of old New York, that were considered second and third class citizens? Russians, Germans, everyone has experienced racism. Hell, there is still slavery going on today. An astonishing number of young girls are abducted and sold into sexual slavery in every country including the United States. The majority of them are "white". Yet because I am classified as "white" I am automatically racist? Grr.

Oh, does anyone else get annoyed when all Caucasians are lumped into the same group? As though "white" is one big country we all are a part of, and that there is no difference between someone who is say Irish from someone who is German, English or French?

Sorry for the length, this subject just burns me up. People are people, what the hell difference does it make what shade their skin is, or whether they have an accent? ><

I think there's something in the argument that non-whites don't see many role models of their own colour, so I can see some justification for pointing to great achievements by non-whites. There's also the point that it is generally white history year - what colour are the people on the coins you spend, and what colour are the figures depicted in statues? What colour does everyone draw Jesus? I don't regard race-specific history months as reverse racism - I think they're a necessary evil that needs to be removed once they've achieved their purpose.

Rapscallion

I think your post definitely has a valid point, and I don't want to go running down bunny trails and derail the thread but there is one thing id like to point out. If you replaced minorities with "women" or "people of non mainstream christian faiths" it would read the same, and still be just as valid.
Kind of weird to think about since we have a whole slew of PC phrases for what is essentially the same thing.

I'm glad you have experienced success in your life, Tennessee Whiskey. However, statistically you still have a leg up, simply for being white.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1663841,00.html

.


I needed to comment on this. My great grandparents on my mom's side immigrated to America. They literally had nothing but the clothes on their backs. They didn't even speak English well. My grandfather worked hard growing up and started his own business. . My ancestors on my fathers side were literally forcibly dragged across the country by the US gov't in what is known as the Trail of Tears.
What advantage does that give me for being white?
Two years ago I became very ill, lost the ability to walk for almost a year, and because of a pain disorder I have been in constant excruiciating pain that is just now getting better due to treatment. Despite having worked since I was 15 years old, and have more than met the qualifications for state aid , I was literally told that they in order to get aid I needed to either be pregnant or not speak English.

So to paraphrase, it's hard all over. The grass is always greener on the other side. There may be a great many rich white men, but they've never done a damned think to help me. All I want is to be judged on my merits as a person, not the color of my skin.

*Note to mods if possible could you merge my posts? I wasn't sure how to edit a post w/ a quote.*

[AFPheonix]

I needed to comment on this. My great grandparents on my mom's side immigrated to America. They literally had nothing but the clothes on their backs. They didn't even speak English well. My grandfather worked hard growing up and started his own business. . My ancestors on my fathers side were literally forcibly dragged across the country by the US gov't in what is known as the Trail of Tears.


The operative word there was statistically. Some people are somewhere out of the bell curve on stats.
I myself am a second gen immigrant. My parents had to be on food stamps when the job Dad thought he had coming down from Canada disappeared.

[aniwahya]

The statistics are skewed in the sense that Caucasian Americans are seen as a solidified majority, when in fact it is a large body of people with the same skin color who come from multiple and varied countries and regions before coming to America. Also large populations immigrating from the same area can skew geographic statistics. For instance a huge number of German and Swedish immigrants formed the city that I am now living in. Their descendants now hold the majority of the wealth in my city, solely because they're families have been here for generations. If you compare them statistically with the large group of first generation Mexican immigrants who now reside here, of course those of Caucasian descent come out "advantaged", and while it can be argued that having seniority gives advantage, if the situation were reversed would those who are of Mexican descent (using my example) be considered "advantaged" and as racially privileged as Caucasians are now?

Does it bother anyone else that a lot of people seem to confuse acts of hate, that are based on their sex or age, for being acts of hate based on their race? It is a huge pet peeve of mine, and just wondering if anyone else feels the same about this specifically.