Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Women, basketball, hos and radio hosts

12728293032

Posts

  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Jinnigan wrote: »
    image that points out irony of my intelligence comment

    Sorry Jinn... but my response was also to everyone else who can't seem to tell the difference for whatever reason.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • VoodooVVoodooV Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    If that's what you got from the South Park episode then you need to watch it again.

    Every group has the right to refer to itself in its own way... without having the outside groups dictate what they say or how they say it. There is no reason black people should have to stop using that word. People who can't see the difference have a whole subset of issues.

    I wasn't referring to the Nagger episode, just Trey Parker and Matt Stone's policy of either its always OK to make a joke, or its never OK to make a joke. You can't have it both ways.

    And your comment is EXACTLY why racism exists. If we continue to be so obsessed about our what our ethnicity of origin is and so obsessed with grouping ourselves off into our own little isolated "clubs" which is exactly what you're describing. If you can't see past these idiotic little groups and your issues of self-labeling who has the "right" to label us and who doesn't. Then we are never going to get past this shit and never have any sort of unity. You don't have to forget that slavery existed but my god, we really need to let this shit go as it only serves to continually divide us.

    At some point, you've got to stop thinking of yourself as an African-American or an Irish-American or a German-American or an Asian-American and start thinking of ourselves as Americans. and beyond that, citizens of the fucking planet. If you continue to insist that we all have to have these separate little communities. Then newsflash motherfucker, they're going to eventually compete, and competition inevitably leads to some asshole saying that their community is better than the other, and maybe even come up with a colorful little slang term for the other community...SHOCK!

    I fucking refuse to be browbeaten and walk on eggshells and feel guilt over something that happened hundreds of years ago. I'm not going to go out and start spouting the N-word every chance I get. But if a black man can say "what's up my N****?! in an endearing fashion, then so should I (not that I am cuz that's just simply not my style of expressing friendship) Anything else is promoting the idea that different races need to be treated differently, AKA racism.

  • HooraydiationHooraydiation Registered User
    edited April 2007
    You can be part of a group without being isolated.

    Home-1.jpg
  • The Green Eyed MonsterThe Green Eyed Monster i blame hip hop Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    This is a comedian writing, but like most good comedy, it still holds a little truth:
    Nick Adams wrote:
    Using the word doesn't give you any special insight into our culture or our struggle. It certainly doesn't endear you to us. Just be content with being a cool white person. You took our music, you took our clothes, you took our slang, and you're importing players from Europe and China just to keep us from totally dominating the NBA. Can't we have anything to ourselves? Damn! Black people don't get to be president, and white people don't get to use the word n*****. Can we just call it even now?

    He has a lot of other funny shit to say about it, but I mean that's pretty straight-forward. He goes on to critique the idea of how ridiculous it is for white people to critique the usage of it:
    Nick Adams wrote:
    I once had a white friend tell me, "I just think it's such a vile, disgusting word. I don't understand why anyone would want to use it. Even black people." I can't imagine anything more arrogant and presumptuous. There are plenty of things that white people do that we don't understand. We don't understand why you keep buying Kelly Clarkson's records, but no one is stopping you from going into Tower Records. We never watched J.A.G. or Walker, Texas Ranger, but faithful white viewers kept those shows on the air for years without complaint from black America. We're not stopping you from eating fruitcake. You don't have to understand why we want to use the word. It doesn't belong to you anymore. It's ours. We earned it. But I forgot that good, liberal, white people always know what is best for black folks. Or at least they always think they do.

    (The editing in the book I'm pulling this from is horrible, so just add one big [sic] to all that up there. Nick is aware, I've seen him apologize on another forum.)

    wisdom wrote:
    if knowledge is power and power corrupts, be smart, be evil
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2007
    black people miss out on fruitcake? That's terrible :(


    *this facetious comment brought to you by the letter 'holy christ this discussion has been circling in on itself for days' and the number 'take a sociology class, bitches'.

    tmsig.jpg
  • The Green Eyed MonsterThe Green Eyed Monster i blame hip hop Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    black people miss out on fruitcake? That's terrible :(


    *this facetious comment brought to you by the letter 'holy christ this discussion has been circling in on itself for days' and the number 'take a sociology class, bitches'.
    ^^ cruel-hearted liberal trying to pass off her culture's legacy of suffering and inequity onto powerless minorities ^^


    Cat -- I wouldn't wish fruitcake on the Nazis.

    wisdom wrote:
    if knowledge is power and power corrupts, be smart, be evil
  • mrflippymrflippy Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    What's wrong with fruitcake?

  • HozHoz Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Bill O'Reilly was calling for Imus to be fired like the day after he said it, because other people were fired for similar reasoning (savage and those two pricks). Now that he got fired he's saying it was a wrong move and he should have just been suspended. Billo is a fucking ho.

  • TheDrizzitTheDrizzit Registered User
    edited April 2007
    i've been lurking for a while, and i noted, as perhaps some of you have, that cat will on occasion bring gender issues into the discussion. that being said, i'm surprised more hasn't been said about how imus called a group of female athletes "hos," both here and in general. it certainly merits at least some discussion.

  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2007
    I think that's kind of where the rap thing got dragged in, as in 'he was an old white guy trying that hip new lingo, and didn't realise that nelly is actually a shithead' kind of thing.

    tmsig.jpg
  • GlyphGlyph Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Hoz wrote: »
    Bill O'Reilly was calling for Imus to be fired like the day after he said it, because other people were fired for similar reasoning (savage and those two pricks). Now that he got fired he's saying it was a wrong move and he should have just been suspended. Billo is a fucking ho.

    A chappy headed ho.

    MyBannerII-a.jpg
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheDrizzit wrote: »
    i've been lurking for a while, and i noted, as perhaps some of you have, that cat will on occasion bring gender issues into the discussion. that being said, i'm surprised more hasn't been said about how imus called a group of female athletes "hos," both here and in general. it certainly merits at least some discussion.

    Yeah, even if you ignore the racist bit, there's still that sexist bit. Moreover, the Imus apologists have jack all to say about that part. Maybe it's because they can't pull the same bullshit they've been doggedly harping on since the beginning of this discussion. Using the excuse "they say it, so why can't we" doesn't work for women and the word "ho", neither does relentlessly attacking the character of the leading opposition voices, nor does blaming women for the sexism. I'd love to hear one of his defenders take on this side of the issue instead of running this discussion around in circles with the same stupid shit.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • Manning'sEquationManning'sEquation Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    <img class=" title=":cry:" class="bbcode_smiley" />
    Elkamil wrote: »
    Elkamil wrote: »
    Oh I see the link. It's called black people. That's all people need to bring this shit up.

    Oh the white man needs the blacks to be irresponsible to use the word. Wouldn't use it other wise. Never did.


    With the latest mischaracterization of my stance by Elkamil I will log off.


    Yep, whiny bullshit is not his stance. This is Manning's reaction to a dude calling a bunch of girls nappy-headed hoes.

    Next time Chris Rock makes Whitey jokes I'll be sure to call the rainbow coalition since they do not want racism for anybody under any circumstance. They will protest for me. Am i rite?




    Elkamil by mischaracterizing my stance, by using personal insults, and by refusing to enter into a meaningful discussion on the word N***a and its use you are perpetuating racism in America. I did not want to bring my race into the picture. However, you continue to suggest that I am a white man and therefore, based on my skin color I should have no experience or opinion on the use of the N***a. For the record I am half white half Cheyenne (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheyenne ).


    I am tired of discussing a symptom (the word n***a and its use). I want to talk about the roots of the problem, and why what you are doing to me over the internet is wrong. I will attempt to identify the problem and in doing so I will use some of the ideas expressed by Nickel and Jinn.



    Method:


    I love the movie Crash because it shows how racism is fucked up and how it ripples through society. Let me use that model to explain the world as I see it.


    Theory:


    Suppose a young man is reading an internet chat forum and comes across a topic he is interested in discussing. He trys to be productive and add to the discourse. Along the way he proposes to talk about a subject that he may not feel comfortable discussing in real life, hoping to get some new insight. Instead of receiving meaningful debate he is marginalized, insulted, and indirectly called a racist.


    He decides to quit the forum and continues on with his life as normal. By normal I mean he only hangs out with other people who look like him, joke like him, and think like him. The reason he does this is because he feels comfortable when he is around people like him. He can just be himself instead of guarding his words from the fear of being called a racist. He does not feel bad about what he is doing because he says to himself, "Whenever I try to have a dialogue about race, and my opinion differs from a black man's opinion then I am a racist. Why should I even try?"


    Fast forward 10 years. This same man is now a manager at a firm. His company has narrowed down the applicants to two men. Equal in all measurable regards (same GPA, same school, same IQ test score, same amount of job experience) expect that one applicant is black and the other is white. The manager hires the white man.


    The reason why he does this is because the white manager will feel more comfortable around the white employee. The manager says to himself, “what if two of my employees make a proposal? One of them is a black employee the other is a white employee. Suppose the board of managers looks over both proposals and decides to go with the white employee’s proposal. Will the black employee think it was racism? Will the employee become less productive over the perceived racism? Or what if I hire the black man to be my employee? What if he is not good at his job? If I tell him to work harder or ask him to stay the weekend will he think I am racist? What if I fire him because he is not keeping up with the tasked assigned to him will he sue my company for racism? I mean even if I win the lawsuit, it will still cost my company a ton of money in lawyer fees just to fight the case. Not to mention the bad publicity, I might even have to talk to that asshole Al Sharpton. I might even have to kiss Al Sharpton's ass just so my company does not lose millions of dollars when Jesse Jackson calls for a boycott." The manager may think to himself, "The black applicant must be measurably better than the white applicant to offset these risks; since the two applicants are equals I might as well hire the white man. It will be less of a risk."


    The black man might suspect that he did not get the job purely based on his skin color. He might ask the manager why he didn't get the job. The manager will tell the black applicant that they were glad to receive his application but he just would not "a good match for their corporate culture." So the black applicant is forced to take a lesser job, which offers less pay and less chance for advancement. That night he gets on the internet and attacks what he perceives to be a white man talking about something a white man should talk about. He sees the man as racist for even bringing it up. He insults the man and marginalizes his position, and he feels happy when the man quits posting on that topic. Then, he goes to bed feeling victorious.


    So the cycle continues <img class=" title=":cry:" class="bbcode_smiley" />.


    Commentary:

    In some companies or at some level in the company the same story can be played out but instead of a black applicant it is a woman, an atheist, or even at times a political party (republican or democrat).


    People are people and they like to feel comfortable. People feel comfortable when they are around people who are like act as they act. When things like Imus's firing happen it further scares the managers (which might be the intention). However, the effect of scaring the mangers does not have a positive influence on racism in America. The managers will not see people belonging to a specific group as people anymore; he will see them as part of a group. A group which must be feared (because of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Women's Liberation, ACLU's actions) because of this fear the manager will perceive certain risks, and will weight them in considering which applicant to hire.


    People who are victims of racism are like people who are victims of sexual predators. They may with time cope with it and live a normal (yet scarred) life. A lot of people though once they have been the victim of racism (or perceived racism) will begin to be racist vs. other groups. Racists like sexual predators do not offend once, they do it again and again over their life time, and so the cycle continues.


    To Elkamil: Suppose you racially piss off 10 people in one year over the internet, and one of the ten do not shrug it off. The one person gives up and racial dialog like the above example. Let’s say you are 20 and you live to be eighty. That is sixty people that you have caused to disengage and entrench. Suppose on average those sixty people are in the business world for twenty years and each have a chance to hire 5+ people. They will have the opportunity to fill 300+ positions. If you continue on the path you are currently on Elkamil you will indirectly cause 300+ positions to have a bias toward hiring a white applicant.


    To Everyone: Please help me refine this model, and since I have a science back ground let us discuss ways of improving the model. Only by attacking the root can we begin to work toward progress. I will be offline to finish tests and project until friday night. Please leave let us have some civil discourse on this subject. It is to important to ingore and marginalize.

  • FencingsaxFencingsax Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Guys, Guys, we have to take this seriously. He's got a science back ground.

    It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Actually, I was coming in here this morning to state that I felt that what Imus said was more offensive to women then it was to black people. Though, I can't recall any of the media or celebrities (Sharpton and Jackson) really giving that more than a cursory mention. Racism is ratings grabber.

    Here's my question for today: Are we fighting for equality or against racism? The two are not as intertwined as one would assume. One of these things is an end, to which great (greater than some would admit) strides have been made, and the other is an idea, which will never be defeated as long as idiots are born everyday. (Guess what, they are, and it's not only white people who still harbor racist feelings). The point: Just because racism still exists, it doesn't mean that the entire world still operates on racist ideals. You look at Imus' comments as evidence that racism is still prevalent. I look at the fact that he was fired, and that what he said was widely considered wrong, as evidence to just the opposite.

    If you want to talk about equality, (and I'm not saying that this is relevant to the Imus situation, I'm just using it as an example) the day that a black person can be poked fun at for their racial characteristics in the same way that a white person can be made fun of for theirs...that day we will have equality. I'm all for saying that it was safe to assume that Imus was being racist, because he had a history of racism. But I don't think it should be acceptable to say that white people should be assumed racist, because white people have a history of racism. Saying that white people can't do something simply because of the color of their skin, is a form of discrimination. I'll admit it's a weak form in the face of what minorities have experienced, but discrimination will never be defeated by more discrimination. Who will be the first to skew this into an "OLOL white people should be able to say the n-word" argument? I've made it clear before that I feel no one should say that word, due to it's history. Regardless of reappropriation, or whatever.

    One day, (again, I'm not saying this applies here) maybe a white comedian could make a joke about racial stereotypes without people immediately jumping to racism. Like Dave Chappelle, only white. (I just had to bring him into this) I guess what I mean to say is that as long as we continue to look so hard for racism, we'll never fail to find it. The first person to understand that that wasn't a literal statement gets a cookie. Are we going to really let the minority of people who ARE racist keep us from coming together? Really?

    EDIT: Just to clarify what I was saying, before the vultures come out to pick out what they want and skew it: I'm not saying "Black people should forgive white people and let them make jokes and everything will be OK". I'm not nearly stupid enough to think that anything is that simple in life, and we still have quite a ways to go. All I'm saying is that we are fighting the fight in the wrong way, going after the cosmetic aspects of discrimination, but not actually addressing the issue at the heart.

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle wrote: »
    Actually, I was coming in here this morning to state that I felt that what Imus said was more offensive to women then it was to black people.

    You are neither black nor a woman. Exactly what kind of position are you in to judge which is more offensive?
    Nickle wrote:
    Here's my question for today: Are we fighting for equality or against racism? The two are not as intertwined as one would assume. One of these things is an end, to which great (greater than some would admit) strides have been made, and the other is an idea, which will never be defeated as long as idiots are born everyday. (Guess what, they are, and it's not only white people who still harbor racist feelings). The point: Just because racism still exists, it doesn't mean that the entire world still operates on racist ideals. You look at Imus' comments as evidence that racism is still prevalent. I look at the fact that he was fired, and that what he said was widely considered wrong, as evidence to just the opposite.

    No... I look at all you assholes rushing to defend his statements as evidence racism is still present.
    Nickle wrote:
    If you want to talk about equality, (and I'm not saying that this is relevant to the Imus situation, I'm just using it as an example) the day that a black person can be poked fun at for their racial characteristics in the same way that a white person can be made fun of for theirs...that day we will have equality. I'm all for saying that it was safe to assume that Imus was being racist, because he had a history of racism. But I don't think it should be acceptable to say that white people should be assumed racist, because white people have a history of racism. Saying that white people can't do something simply because of the color of their skin, is a form of discrimination. I'll admit it's a weak form in the face of what minorities have experienced, but discrimination will never be defeated by more discrimination. Who will be the first to skew this into an "OLOL white people should be able to say the n-word" argument? I've made it clear before that I feel no one should say that word, due to it's history. Regardless of reappropriation, or whatever.

    Imus did not poke fun at a race of people for anything. He made derogatory comments about a specific group of young women. I can't imagine anyone being able to do that and get away with it without public outrage. If you called the an all white team at USC a bunch of clan-attending crackers, the same result would have occured.
    Nickle wrote:
    One day, (again, I'm not saying this applies here) maybe a white comedian could make a joke about racial stereotypes
    White people makes jokes about racial stereotypes all the time. All the fucking time. What you want is white people being able to make fun of people because of their race, not poke fun of stereotypes associated with them.

    For more information on comedians who deal in racial stereotypes AS PART OF THEIR FREAKING ACT please see:
    Nick Depala
    Colin Quinn
    that white guy Carlos Mencia stole his jokes from

    Hell, watch Mad TV sometime...

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Seriously guy, you've got the reading part down pat. Now just work on your comprehension.

    Also, please stop assuming I mean nationally famous comedians when I talk about jokes. Being famous and rich affords more freedom than being an average Joe, and Hollywood doesn't work by the same rules as the rest of the world. No matter how much reality TV there is, popular culture should never dictate everyday life.

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle wrote: »
    Seriously guy, you've got the reading part down pat. Now just work on your comprehension.

    Yeah, I think I got the jist of your "point" pretty well. Any mistakes are likely more the result of your inability to form an articulate argument. But if there's something specific you want to refute, by all means.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Manning, there's one huge flaw in your post.

    Crash was a piece of shit movie.

  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Seriously guy, you've got the reading part down pat. Now just work on your comprehension.

    Yeah, I think I got the jist of your "point" pretty well. Any mistakes are likely more the result of your inability to form an articulate argument. But if there's something specific you want to refute, by all means.

    If you want to flame me, take it to a PM, but it's impossible for me to argue against someone who is only arguing against their skewed perception of what I said. If you continue to alter what I say to suit your needs, there is no point in my fighting back, you've already decided that you've won. Intelligent conversation can never be had if everyone already 'knows' that their view is the only correct view.

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • JinniganJinnigan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Seriously guy, you've got the reading part down pat. Now just work on your comprehension.

    Yeah, I think I got the jist of your "point" pretty well. Any mistakes are likely more the result of your inability to form an articulate argument. But if there's something specific you want to refute, by all means.

    If you want to flame me, take it to a PM, but it's impossible for me to argue against someone who is only arguing against their skewed perception of what I said. If you continue to alter what I say to suit your needs, there is no point in my fighting back, you've already decided that you've won. Intelligent conversation can never be had if everyone already 'knows' that their view is the only correct view.

    I don't know, you yourself certainly have a solid history of repeatedly ignoring any attempts to explain what white privilege is, and doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, IF WE WOULD JUST LIVE TOGETHER IN HARMONY THEN THERE WOULD BE NO RACISM"

    whatifihadnofriendsshortenedsiggy2.jpg
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I'd also draw your attention to Lisa Lampanelli, who has made a career out of walking and even crossing the line of propriety in her comedy. Her jokes are almost completely racial and not for the easily offended. Hell, she even says the N word, and while it's a little uncomfortable, she at least seems to understand the implications of white people saying the word. You'll never hear her go "but they say it, why can't I?"

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Jinnigan wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Seriously guy, you've got the reading part down pat. Now just work on your comprehension.

    Yeah, I think I got the jist of your "point" pretty well. Any mistakes are likely more the result of your inability to form an articulate argument. But if there's something specific you want to refute, by all means.

    If you want to flame me, take it to a PM, but it's impossible for me to argue against someone who is only arguing against their skewed perception of what I said. If you continue to alter what I say to suit your needs, there is no point in my fighting back, you've already decided that you've won. Intelligent conversation can never be had if everyone already 'knows' that their view is the only correct view.

    I don't know, you yourself certainly have a solid history of repeatedly ignoring any attempts to explain what white privilege is, and doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, IF WE WOULD JUST LIVE TOGETHER IN HARMONY THEN THERE WOULD BE NO RACISM"

    If that's the way you've taken it, that's your perogative. If you don't want to believe that I've taken the time to read about white privilege, soley because I didn't come away from reading up on it with the same exact opinion that you did, by all means, assume my ignorance. That's the rule right? If they don't think like you, they must be ignorant?

    EDIT: I must draw your attention to money, and celebrity. They afford you many freedoms that 'normal' people will never have, and do not neccessarily reflect everyday life. No matter how many seasons of the Surreal Life are aired. If you're really paying attention to what I write, you'd understand that I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that discrimination doesn't exist. My argument is that we, as a people (blacks, whites, purples, whoever) are fighting and rallying against the wrong facet of discrimination. You can ban any word you want from the english language, but it will never change the fact that there will always be idiots who can't see past the color of a person's skin, and that this is not a characteristic that applies exclusively to white people.

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • JinniganJinnigan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle wrote: »
    Jinnigan wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Seriously guy, you've got the reading part down pat. Now just work on your comprehension.

    Yeah, I think I got the jist of your "point" pretty well. Any mistakes are likely more the result of your inability to form an articulate argument. But if there's something specific you want to refute, by all means.

    If you want to flame me, take it to a PM, but it's impossible for me to argue against someone who is only arguing against their skewed perception of what I said. If you continue to alter what I say to suit your needs, there is no point in my fighting back, you've already decided that you've won. Intelligent conversation can never be had if everyone already 'knows' that their view is the only correct view.

    I don't know, you yourself certainly have a solid history of repeatedly ignoring any attempts to explain what white privilege is, and doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, IF WE WOULD JUST LIVE TOGETHER IN HARMONY THEN THERE WOULD BE NO RACISM"

    If that's the way you've taken it, that's your perogative. If you don't want to believe that I've taken the time to read about white privilege, soley because I didn't come away from reading up on it with the same exact opinion that you did, by all means, assume my ignorance. That's the rule right? If they don't think like you, they must be ignorant?

    EDIT: I must draw your attention to money, and celebrity. They afford you many freedoms that 'normal' people will never have, and do not neccessarily reflect everyday life. No matter how many seasons of the Surreal Life are aired.

    You didn't simply come away with a different opinion, you completely missed what white privilege is about. You (and VoodooV, and Manning'sEquation) assume that racism is a conscious thing that happens in the mind, that it's something made by choice.

    But that's not what racism is anymore. It's all in the unconscious now, it's in the reflexive thoughts before your conscious is able to kick in and say "oops, that's racist!"

    Let me be honest - I fly between Philadelphia, my college town, and home in Boston, reasonably often, at least once every couple of months. And I'll say this - when I looked into the cockpit once, and saw that the two pilots were black, I didn't say, "oh, how nice to see African-Americans moving up in the world!" No, my first, reflexive, unguarded thought was, "Oh, fuck, are we sure these guys can fly a plane!?" Now, given the history of blacks in the white-collar work force, these guys were probably better pilots that most whites - but that's something I had to remind myself after my racism reflex.

    I want to emphasize that I do think we've made huge progress against racism - affirmative action programs, reponsibility in the media, etc - but to ignore that we've still got a long way to go, to ignore that there are still racist problems (albeit subtle and subliminal now, instead of blatant like the previous decades), doesn't help anyone.

    whatifihadnofriendsshortenedsiggy2.jpg
  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Jinnigan wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Jinnigan wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Seriously guy, you've got the reading part down pat. Now just work on your comprehension.

    Yeah, I think I got the jist of your "point" pretty well. Any mistakes are likely more the result of your inability to form an articulate argument. But if there's something specific you want to refute, by all means.

    If you want to flame me, take it to a PM, but it's impossible for me to argue against someone who is only arguing against their skewed perception of what I said. If you continue to alter what I say to suit your needs, there is no point in my fighting back, you've already decided that you've won. Intelligent conversation can never be had if everyone already 'knows' that their view is the only correct view.

    I don't know, you yourself certainly have a solid history of repeatedly ignoring any attempts to explain what white privilege is, and doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, IF WE WOULD JUST LIVE TOGETHER IN HARMONY THEN THERE WOULD BE NO RACISM"

    If that's the way you've taken it, that's your perogative. If you don't want to believe that I've taken the time to read about white privilege, soley because I didn't come away from reading up on it with the same exact opinion that you did, by all means, assume my ignorance. That's the rule right? If they don't think like you, they must be ignorant?

    EDIT: I must draw your attention to money, and celebrity. They afford you many freedoms that 'normal' people will never have, and do not neccessarily reflect everyday life. No matter how many seasons of the Surreal Life are aired.

    You didn't simply come away with a different opinion, you completely missed what white privilege is about. You (and VoodooV, and Manning'sEquation) assume that racism is a conscious thing that happens in the mind, that it's something made by choice.

    But that's not what racism is anymore. It's all in the unconscious now, it's in the reflexive thoughts before your conscious is able to kick in and say "oops, that's racist!"

    Let me be honest - I fly between Philadelphia, my college town, and home in Boston, reasonably often, at least once every couple of months. And I'll say this - when I looked into the cockpit once, and saw that the two pilots were black, I didn't say, "oh, how nice to see African-Americans moving up in the world!" No, my first, reflexive, unguarded thought was, "Oh, fuck, are we sure these guys can fly a plane!?" Now, given the history of blacks in the white-collar work force, these guys were probably better pilots that most whites - but that's something I had to remind myself after my racism reflex.

    I want to emphasize that I do think we've made huge progress against racism - affirmative action programs, reponsibility in the media, etc - but to ignore that we've still got a long way to go, to ignore that there are still racist problems (albeit subtle and subliminal now, instead of blatant like the previous decades), doesn't help anyone.

    If you read my edit, I don't think that our arguments are so different. I can acknowledge that we still have quite a few hurdles to jump over, and what you're saying about 'subliminal racism' is what I've been saying regarding racial relations vs real racism. What I'm arguing is that some of the people who are leading the fight are still fighting against the 'old' idea of racism, while in the meantime they're only perpetuating this 'new subliminal racism' and harming racial relations. Also, and this is where we differ, I would say that the idea of 'white privilege' is a form of 'new subliminal racism'. I will say that alot of the points made in the argument for white privilege are valid, but a good deal of them are antiquated or not really as impactful as you might think. See my argument that an impoverished white person doesn't really glean any benefits over an impoverished black person, simply because they see more white people on TV. It's only one aspect of white privilege, yes, but it is one that is both not impactful, and not neccessarily true in todays media.

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle wrote: »

    If that's the way you've taken it, that's your perogative. If you don't want to believe that I've taken the time to read about white privilege, soley because I didn't come away from reading up on it with the same exact opinion that you did, by all means, assume my ignorance. That's the rule right? If they don't think like you, they must be ignorant?

    See Jinn's response. It's better then anything I could say and he's exactly right. If you've read up on white privilege then you've been completely mischaracterizing it this entire debate.
    Nickle wrote:
    EDIT: I must draw your attention to money, and celebrity. They afford you many freedoms that 'normal' people will never have, and do not neccessarily reflect everyday life. No matter how many seasons of the Surreal Life are aired. If you're really paying attention to what I write, you'd understand that I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that discrimination doesn't exist. My argument is that we, as a people (blacks, whites, purples, whoever) are fighting and rallying against the wrong facet of discrimination. You can ban any word you want from the english language, but it will never change the fact that there will always be idiots who can't see past the color of a person's skin, and that this is not a characteristic that applies exclusively to white people.

    Is there any reason why we can't fight multiple facets of discrimination at one time? Are you saying that people should have just ignored Imus's NATIONALLY BROADCAST comments and focused on fighting the Klan? You don't seem to understand that the racism in our society is built on these comments. People aren't born racist, they evolve that way do to societal and family influence. Imus's comments just reinforce those beliefs.

    It seems to me your argument keeps changing, but perhaps I'm just not getting what you are talking about.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • JinniganJinnigan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    VoodooV wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    If that's what you got from the South Park episode then you need to watch it again.

    Every group has the right to refer to itself in its own way... without having the outside groups dictate what they say or how they say it. There is no reason black people should have to stop using that word. People who can't see the difference have a whole subset of issues.

    I wasn't referring to the Nagger episode, just Trey Parker and Matt Stone's policy of either its always OK to make a joke, or its never OK to make a joke. You can't have it both ways.

    And your comment is EXACTLY why racism exists. If we continue to be so obsessed about our what our ethnicity of origin is and so obsessed with grouping ourselves off into our own little isolated "clubs" which is exactly what you're describing. If you can't see past these idiotic little groups and your issues of self-labeling who has the "right" to label us and who doesn't. Then we are never going to get past this shit and never have any sort of unity. You don't have to forget that slavery existed but my god, we really need to let this shit go as it only serves to continually divide us.

    At some point, you've got to stop thinking of yourself as an African-American or an Irish-American or a German-American or an Asian-American and start thinking of ourselves as Americans. and beyond that, citizens of the fucking planet. If you continue to insist that we all have to have these separate little communities. Then newsflash motherfucker, they're going to eventually compete, and competition inevitably leads to some asshole saying that their community is better than the other, and maybe even come up with a colorful little slang term for the other community...SHOCK!

    I fucking refuse to be browbeaten and walk on eggshells and feel guilt over something that happened hundreds of years ago. I'm not going to go out and start spouting the N-word every chance I get. But if a black man can say "what's up my N****?! in an endearing fashion, then so should I (not that I am cuz that's just simply not my style of expressing friendship) Anything else is promoting the idea that different races need to be treated differently, AKA racism.

    How do you feel about Reagon's policies of "Benign Neglect?" How do you explain the hugely popular and well-received The Bell Curve, a work that pushed "scientific" racism? Remember, this book was published in 1994. How do you explain the fact that, given equal credentials and equal work experience, women and minorities will earn 20-30% less than a white male for the same job?

    whatifihadnofriendsshortenedsiggy2.jpg
  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »

    If that's the way you've taken it, that's your perogative. If you don't want to believe that I've taken the time to read about white privilege, soley because I didn't come away from reading up on it with the same exact opinion that you did, by all means, assume my ignorance. That's the rule right? If they don't think like you, they must be ignorant?

    See Jinn's response. It's better then anything I could say and he's exactly right. If you've read up on white privilege then you've been completely mischaracterizing it this entire debate.
    Nickle wrote:
    EDIT: I must draw your attention to money, and celebrity. They afford you many freedoms that 'normal' people will never have, and do not neccessarily reflect everyday life. No matter how many seasons of the Surreal Life are aired. If you're really paying attention to what I write, you'd understand that I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that discrimination doesn't exist. My argument is that we, as a people (blacks, whites, purples, whoever) are fighting and rallying against the wrong facet of discrimination. You can ban any word you want from the english language, but it will never change the fact that there will always be idiots who can't see past the color of a person's skin, and that this is not a characteristic that applies exclusively to white people.

    Is there any reason why we can't fight multiple facets of discrimination at one time? Are you saying that people should have just ignored Imus's NATIONALLY BROADCAST comments and focused on fighting the Klan? You don't seem to understand that the racism in our society is built on these comments. People aren't born racist, they evolve that way do to societal and family influence. Imus's comments just reinforce those beliefs.

    It seems to me your argument keeps changing, but perhaps I'm just not getting what you are talking about.

    You're not quite getting what I'm going at, but I can see where you are coming from as well. I'm not saying ignoring the problem is going to make it go away, and I'm not defending Imus' actions. But as our world gets more integrated, and communications are burgeoning, people aren't going to be subjected to just one view of the world. Do you think that a white guy saying a racist thing on the radio is going to convince white people that racism is OK? It's not like it was back when the Klan had actual power, in that the people who listened to the Klan really had no other opinion to hear, we didn't have the internet, and mass sharing of ideas. I would like to think that as opinions are spread around the globe, intelligent people will make the more open-minded choice, and that people who propogate ignorant views will be marginalized. Ignorance will never go away completely, but I don't think that this ignorance has as much power as it once did, and that racial relations or Jinn's 'subliminal racism' are more important to address.

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • JinniganJinnigan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle wrote: »
    If you read my edit, I don't think that our arguments are so different. I can acknowledge that we still have quite a few hurdles to jump over, and what you're saying about 'subliminal racism' is what I've been saying regarding racial relations vs real racism. What I'm arguing is that some of the people who are leading the fight are still fighting against the 'old' idea of racism, while in the meantime they're only perpetuating this 'new subliminal racism' and harming racial relations. Also, and this is where we differ, I would say that the idea of 'white privilege' is a form of 'new subliminal racism'. I will say that alot of the points made in the argument for white privilege are valid, but a good deal of them are antiquated or not really as impactful as you might think. See my argument that an impoverished white person doesn't really glean any benefits over an impoverished black person, simply because they see more white people on TV. It's only one aspect of white privilege, yes, but it is one that is both not impactful, and not neccessarily true in todays media.

    Anyways, we're repeatedly said that we all here think Sharpton and Jackson are douchebags.

    I think it's pretty harmful when the vast majority of black role models you see on TV are killers and thugs, people who push being hard over being educated. And where are my Asian representatives? Jet Li, Jackie Chan, Chow-Yun Fat?

    whatifihadnofriendsshortenedsiggy2.jpg
  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Jinnigan wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    If you read my edit, I don't think that our arguments are so different. I can acknowledge that we still have quite a few hurdles to jump over, and what you're saying about 'subliminal racism' is what I've been saying regarding racial relations vs real racism. What I'm arguing is that some of the people who are leading the fight are still fighting against the 'old' idea of racism, while in the meantime they're only perpetuating this 'new subliminal racism' and harming racial relations. Also, and this is where we differ, I would say that the idea of 'white privilege' is a form of 'new subliminal racism'. I will say that alot of the points made in the argument for white privilege are valid, but a good deal of them are antiquated or not really as impactful as you might think. See my argument that an impoverished white person doesn't really glean any benefits over an impoverished black person, simply because they see more white people on TV. It's only one aspect of white privilege, yes, but it is one that is both not impactful, and not neccessarily true in todays media.

    Anyways, we're repeatedly said that we all here think Sharpton and Jackson are douchebags.

    I think it's pretty harmful when the vast majority of black role models you see on TV are killers and thugs, people who push being hard over being educated. And where are my Asian representatives? Jet Li, Jackie Chan, Chow-Yun Fat?

    Don't think for a second that white people aren't ashamed of their representation in the media as well. Do you think I share the views of every white person on TV? And yes, it's widely accepted in this forum that Sharpton and Jackson are douchebags, but does that change the fact that they may be influencing people that don't share our sentiment?

    EDIT: I really gotta get some work done, but I'll be back later. Suffice it to say though, that a few sticking points aside, it's worth noting that we agree more than we disagree.

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »

    If that's the way you've taken it, that's your perogative. If you don't want to believe that I've taken the time to read about white privilege, soley because I didn't come away from reading up on it with the same exact opinion that you did, by all means, assume my ignorance. That's the rule right? If they don't think like you, they must be ignorant?

    See Jinn's response. It's better then anything I could say and he's exactly right. If you've read up on white privilege then you've been completely mischaracterizing it this entire debate.
    Nickle wrote:
    EDIT: I must draw your attention to money, and celebrity. They afford you many freedoms that 'normal' people will never have, and do not neccessarily reflect everyday life. No matter how many seasons of the Surreal Life are aired. If you're really paying attention to what I write, you'd understand that I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that discrimination doesn't exist. My argument is that we, as a people (blacks, whites, purples, whoever) are fighting and rallying against the wrong facet of discrimination. You can ban any word you want from the english language, but it will never change the fact that there will always be idiots who can't see past the color of a person's skin, and that this is not a characteristic that applies exclusively to white people.

    Is there any reason why we can't fight multiple facets of discrimination at one time? Are you saying that people should have just ignored Imus's NATIONALLY BROADCAST comments and focused on fighting the Klan? You don't seem to understand that the racism in our society is built on these comments. People aren't born racist, they evolve that way do to societal and family influence. Imus's comments just reinforce those beliefs.

    It seems to me your argument keeps changing, but perhaps I'm just not getting what you are talking about.

    You're not quite getting what I'm going at, but I can see where you are coming from as well. I'm not saying ignoring the problem is going to make it go away, and I'm not defending Imus' actions. But as our world gets more integrated, and communications are burgeoning, people aren't going to be subjected to just one view of the world. Do you think that a white guy saying a racist thing on the radio is going to convince white people that racism is OK? It's not like it was back when the Klan had actual power, in that the people who listened to the Klan really had no other opinion to hear, we didn't have the internet, and mass sharing of ideas. I would like to think that as opinions are spread around the globe, intelligent people will make the more open-minded choice, and that people who propogate ignorant views will be marginalized. Ignorance will never go away completely, but I don't think that this ignorance has as much power as it once did, and that racial relations or Jinn's 'subliminal racism' are more important to address.

    Ahh... okay, I think I get it now. Interesting.

    So, I guess it comes down to open debate and free speech vs. the need/desire to fight hate speech. Is that right?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Nickle wrote: »

    If that's the way you've taken it, that's your perogative. If you don't want to believe that I've taken the time to read about white privilege, soley because I didn't come away from reading up on it with the same exact opinion that you did, by all means, assume my ignorance. That's the rule right? If they don't think like you, they must be ignorant?

    See Jinn's response. It's better then anything I could say and he's exactly right. If you've read up on white privilege then you've been completely mischaracterizing it this entire debate.
    Nickle wrote:
    EDIT: I must draw your attention to money, and celebrity. They afford you many freedoms that 'normal' people will never have, and do not neccessarily reflect everyday life. No matter how many seasons of the Surreal Life are aired. If you're really paying attention to what I write, you'd understand that I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that discrimination doesn't exist. My argument is that we, as a people (blacks, whites, purples, whoever) are fighting and rallying against the wrong facet of discrimination. You can ban any word you want from the english language, but it will never change the fact that there will always be idiots who can't see past the color of a person's skin, and that this is not a characteristic that applies exclusively to white people.

    Is there any reason why we can't fight multiple facets of discrimination at one time? Are you saying that people should have just ignored Imus's NATIONALLY BROADCAST comments and focused on fighting the Klan? You don't seem to understand that the racism in our society is built on these comments. People aren't born racist, they evolve that way do to societal and family influence. Imus's comments just reinforce those beliefs.

    It seems to me your argument keeps changing, but perhaps I'm just not getting what you are talking about.

    You're not quite getting what I'm going at, but I can see where you are coming from as well. I'm not saying ignoring the problem is going to make it go away, and I'm not defending Imus' actions. But as our world gets more integrated, and communications are burgeoning, people aren't going to be subjected to just one view of the world. Do you think that a white guy saying a racist thing on the radio is going to convince white people that racism is OK? It's not like it was back when the Klan had actual power, in that the people who listened to the Klan really had no other opinion to hear, we didn't have the internet, and mass sharing of ideas. I would like to think that as opinions are spread around the globe, intelligent people will make the more open-minded choice, and that people who propogate ignorant views will be marginalized. Ignorance will never go away completely, but I don't think that this ignorance has as much power as it once did, and that racial relations or Jinn's 'subliminal racism' are more important to address.

    Ahh... okay, I think I get it now. Interesting.

    So, I guess it comes down to open debate and free speech vs. the need/desire to fight hate speech. Is that right?

    In a way, yes. If we are going to support the people's right to free speech, we have to expect that idiots are going to abuse this right. All I'm trying to say is that when society can move to a point where we can maginalize these types of people, and move forward towards actually improving racial relations, we'll be in a good place. When you give so much power to the words of an ignorant racist, even if it's to call out how wrong it is, you're still helping to propagate their message. I think it's safe to say that a majority of people do agree that what Imus did was wrong and insulting in one way or the other, race, gender, or just plain insluting a hard working group of girls. If we could just say, as a nation "OK, people like Imus are idiots, and are not representative of the way that a majority of people think", then we could move on to actually tackling the real issues.

    EDIT: One last thing, and then I really have to get to work. Here's the core of my argument. Yes, I can acknowledge that 'white privilege' does exist, and yes, I can acknowlege that there are still racist people in positions of power and it is affecting our daily lives. But is it wrong to be optimistic about our future, to think that as the world moves to a more 'open' state, that people who propogate ignorant ideas will naturally be marginalized? Wouldn't we be better served towards fighting this 'subliminal racism' than fighting against something that, by definition, will never be completely defeated? Through education and the open sharing of ideas, greater steps will be taken than firing an old racist guy. Sure, this kind of stuff does bring the issue onto the front page, but what issue is it really bringing up?

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle I agree. I think situtations like this one are so common because people want to stop racism but don't know how. it's so easy to singe out one racist guy and get him fired. it let's people feel like they've done something significant to solve a problem and they really don't have to do much more than be mad for a couple days. Then everyone feels good about righting a wrong, dusts off thier hands and forgets about the issue till next time. What's more frighenting is that the civil rights leaders these days seem to embrace this approach and forget the big picture.

    Really tackling racism is a societial issue. it's not about Imus or any individual racists. It's about removing the instituitonal roadblocks that propogate inequality. Msot of us don't want to spend our time dealing with things this big. Probably because it will take years or even lifetimes to really get anywhere. But sooner or later I think it has to be acknowledged that our current approach isn't very effective.

  • mrflippymrflippy Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    Imus did not poke fun at a race of people for anything. He made derogatory comments about a specific group of young women. I can't imagine anyone being able to do that and get away with it without public outrage. If you called the an all white team at USC a bunch of clan-attending crackers, the same result would have occured.

    See, now, I wasn't aware that nappy had the same connotations as clan-attending. I would have thought the first part of his comments were similar to someone calling me a long-haired hippy or something.

    What us ignorant white folks really need is some sort of reference table that matches up words with their meanings and relative connotations and impact. Then, we could look up nappy and realize, "Oh! That's really quite a serious racial slur!"

  • ÆthelredÆthelred Registered User
    edited April 2007
    Nickle I agree. I think situtations like this one are so common because people want to stop racism but don't know how. it's so easy to singe out one racist guy and get him fired. it let's people feel like they've done something significant to solve a problem and they really don't have to do much more than be mad for a couple days. Then everyone feels good about righting a wrong, dusts off thier hands and forgets about the issue till next time. What's more frighenting is that the civil rights leaders these days seem to embrace this approach and forget the big picture.

    Really tackling racism is a societial issue. it's not about Imus or any individual racists. It's about removing the instituitonal roadblocks that propogate inequality. Msot of us don't want to spend our time dealing with things this big. Probably because it will take years or even lifetimes to really get anywhere. But sooner or later I think it has to be acknowledged that our current approach isn't very effective.

    Where does this idea keep coming to you that the only work on race relations being done is attacking white people for saying racist things? There's vast amounts of work going on elsewhere; it's just low-level stuff that you won't hear about in the media because it's boring.

    pokes: 1505 8032 8399
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I like the guy on Oprah who said, "We're holding Imus to a higher standard than we hold ourselves."

  • NickleNickle Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Æthelred wrote: »
    Nickle I agree. I think situtations like this one are so common because people want to stop racism but don't know how. it's so easy to singe out one racist guy and get him fired. it let's people feel like they've done something significant to solve a problem and they really don't have to do much more than be mad for a couple days. Then everyone feels good about righting a wrong, dusts off thier hands and forgets about the issue till next time. What's more frighenting is that the civil rights leaders these days seem to embrace this approach and forget the big picture.

    Really tackling racism is a societial issue. it's not about Imus or any individual racists. It's about removing the instituitonal roadblocks that propogate inequality. Msot of us don't want to spend our time dealing with things this big. Probably because it will take years or even lifetimes to really get anywhere. But sooner or later I think it has to be acknowledged that our current approach isn't very effective.

    Where does this idea keep coming to you that the only work on race relations being done is attacking white people for saying racist things? There's vast amounts of work going on elsewhere; it's just low-level stuff that you won't hear about in the media because it's boring.

    I'm not saying that progress isn't being made towards resolving the other aspects of racism. But I do think that situations like this do more harm to that work that is actually making a difference. You see, some people in here that are trying to defend themselves have been construed as trying to defend Imus. The reaction to this situation by certain sensationalists has (and please don't try to put an 'Oh, poor white people' slant on this) put an onus on all white people to defend themselves. We feel forced into a position of defending the fact that we, as a whole, do not share Imus' beliefs, when I feel that given our current social climate this fact should be evident. When this happens, it hurts our ability to have an open discussion regarding the real problems. I know alot of white people who are fighting for the rights of minorities, but these people get overshadowed by the attention grabbing headlines of one idiot being a racist. I'm most definately not saying that this is a view that is shared by all minorities, and my black friends never once looked at me to answer for Imus, but this is the view that the media is presenting.

    People are still hung up on fighting this antiquated idea of racism, an idea that was valid when a majority of people did harbor racist beliefs. But I would say that the majority of people no longer harbor true racist beliefs, and that once we can accept that those who are ignorant and spread hate are in the minority, the quicker we'll be able to have an educated discourse towards solving the problems that are actually relevant. The persistance that this kind of ignorance is still wide-spread is creating yet another roadblock on the path to true equality.

    NickleDL.png
    Xbox/PSN/Steam: NickleDL | 3DS: 0731-4750-6906
  • JinniganJinnigan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Nickle wrote: »
    Nickle I agree. I think situtations like this one are so common because people want to stop racism but don't know how. it's so easy to singe out one racist guy and get him fired. it let's people feel like they've done something significant to solve a problem and they really don't have to do much more than be mad for a couple days. Then everyone feels good about righting a wrong, dusts off thier hands and forgets about the issue till next time. What's more frighenting is that the civil rights leaders these days seem to embrace this approach and forget the big picture.

    Really tackling racism is a societial issue. it's not about Imus or any individual racists. It's about removing the instituitonal roadblocks that propogate inequality. Msot of us don't want to spend our time dealing with things this big. Probably because it will take years or even lifetimes to really get anywhere. But sooner or later I think it has to be acknowledged that our current approach isn't very effective.

    Where does this idea keep coming to you that the only work on race relations being done is attacking white people for saying racist things? There's vast amounts of work going on elsewhere; it's just low-level stuff that you won't hear about in the media because it's boring.

    I'm not saying that progress isn't being made towards resolving the other aspects of racism. But I do think that situations like this do more harm to that work that is actually making a difference. You see, some people in here that are trying to defend themselves have been construed as trying to defend Imus. The reaction to this situation by certain sensationalists has (and please don't try to put an 'Oh, poor white people' slant on this) put an onus on all white people to defend themselves. We feel forced into a position of defending the fact that we, as a whole, do not share Imus' beliefs, when I feel that given our current social climate this fact should be evident. When this happens, it hurts our ability to have an open discussion regarding the real problems. I know alot of white people who are fighting for the rights of minorities, but these people get overshadowed by the attention grabbing headlines of one idiot being a racist. I'm most definately not saying that this is a view that is shared by all minorities, and my black friends never once looked at me to answer for Imus, but this is the view that the media is presenting.

    People are still hung up on fighting this antiquated idea of racism, an idea that was valid when a majority of people did harbor racist beliefs. But I would say that the majority of people no longer harbor true racist beliefs, and that once we can accept that those who are ignorant and spread hate are in the minority, the quicker we'll be able to have an educated discourse towards solving the problems that are actually relevant. The persistance that this kind of ignorance is still wide-spread is creating yet another roadblock on the path to true equality.

    Did you watch Borat?

    whatifihadnofriendsshortenedsiggy2.jpg
  • ElkiElki hegemon globalSuper Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited April 2007
    Suppose you racially piss off 10 people in one year over the internet, and one of the ten do not shrug it off.

    Who did I piss off? Some College Republican? Another white person in denial? Should I tone it down? You wanted my words, didn't you?

    Step forward, and tell me why my rant pissed you off, if did. Why do you want me to put up with the fucking jackasses bringing n****r into every discussion about race?

  • ElkiElki hegemon globalSuper Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited April 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    I like the guy on Oprah who said, "We're holding Imus to a higher standard than we hold ourselves."

    Common? I wanted to watch that, but I missed it.

Sign In or Register to comment.