Am I Becoming Racist? (rant)

[Joel]

/thread.

 

[Joey D]

Keef, I understand race in that I know what it is, but I do not understand why it is the way it is. Even after studying it, the labels make zero sense. Is white a race? Is African American? What about my buddy Joby who's from South Africa and white? See this is what I don't understand, where did we come up with these labels?

 

[Keef]

Well, when you compare a Briton to some brochacho from Zimbabwe the white/black thing is fairly obvious. White people usually came from Europe, black people from Africa, Asians from Asia, it all seems pretty cut-and-dry to me. Blame white people in South Africa on the Dutch, just as you can blame white people anywhere in Africa, Australia, North or South America on Europeans. Native Americans aren't white, literally, but you can also compare their facial bone structure to the average white person and it's very different. People native of eastern Russia have some obvious Asian cues, whereas their countrymen from back west look white, but still different than a German.

/thread.

"Well of course you don't, you're black! But I bet you tell Pollock jokes, right?" Lmao!

 

[Nero9]

Uhh, yeah. Might want to read this.

https://www.gtplanet.net/aup/

+over 9000

JSkeezi, post anymore comments like that and you will get banned.

 

[Joey D]

Keef trust me, I know that humans have adapted differently in different parts of the world, which is why we look different. I just don't understand the concept of race, or rather why it is the way it is. Skin colour is a bad indicator of "race". You see what I'm getting at now? I know the how and why, I just want to know more of the why.

 

[Keef]

Keef trust me, I know that humans have adapted differently in different parts of the world, which is why we look different. I just don't understand the concept of race, or rather why it is the way it is. Skin colour is a bad indicator of "race". You see what I'm getting at now? I know the how and why, I just want to know more of the why.

All I can suggest is that maybe a bunch of Spaniards on a boat looked towards the African coast, not knowing it was Africa of course, and said "Wha...are those...people? But they're BLACK!"

No, that's not a joke. That was pretty much my reaction in high school when we got a foreign exchange student from Africa. Dude looked like coal with legs. If a reasonable person in modern times, already knowing about different peoples of the world, can still come to that conclusion then it's pretty reasonable that they could back when they didn't know other kinds of people existed. Black stuck because they're black, it makes perfect sense. Gotta call them something, and since they didn't understand the bone structure/gene thing and probably didn't have a word for "race", all they had to go on was color. Before they all started intermixing, color was a pretty darn reliable indicator.

Though skin color may be not always be a reliable indicator of race - by no means a bad one - it's still the first thing you see when you land on the beach.

 

[Joey D]

That might have worked 200 years ago but today it's categorising people unfairly. If you're from Haiti and you have dark skin, does that make you African American? No it doesn't. Many Native Americans look like they are from east Asia (and I guess they kinda are), bit they are Asain. Labling people based on skin colour alone is not a good system in my opinion. I may have some more thoughts on this tonight when I'm not on my phone

 

[Jump_Ace]

I have never heard anyone sound so WEAK in my life(Danoff). Damn the black man.......he takes over EVERYTHING.......Basketball.....Football.......Golf......Tennis(sorry those are black women)......Music...... White women(LOL) and now the Presidency! WaaWaaWaa.....we only had a 500yr headstart and theyre still right along side of us and in most cases passing us.....WaaaWaaaaaWaaaaa......I hate those darkies with their 10in. @#$%^......Let me ask you this Danoff.....how would you feel if your ancestors did 500 yrs. of FREE LABOR....that you are the beneficiary of? With that type of head start you still have the nerve to complain.....you sound VERY WEAK! Why not start up your own company......why do you have to go to another man an ask for a job......not very qualified/certified yourself huh? As a God fearing individual....I don'y have any problems with any race of Gods people....white.......black........brown.......yellow etc etc. but I hate weak whiny people who want to blame their lack of success on someone else success, and to answer your question.......NO your not becoming racist.....your becoming a weak little girly man and it shows!!

Be honest Danoff......a black guy stole your girlfriend did'nt he?LOLOLOLOL

Welcome to the boards Skeezi. Please re-read up on the AUP here. We don't allow attacking of any individual/group of people. Also don't double post, if no one has posted since your last response, add an update clause, something like this:

EDIT: New Information.

Please edit this post and fixing grammar mistakes is a must as well. Thanks.

Jerome

 

[WVUscion]

Keef trust me, I know that humans have adapted differently in different parts of the world, which is why we look different. I just don't understand the concept of race, or rather why it is the way it is. Skin colour is a bad indicator of "race". You see what I'm getting at now? I know the how and why, I just want to know more of the why.

I think that you are getting "race" and "ethnicity" confused. Race is something purely physical, and often unfair. For example, you can have black guys and white guys all living together in the UK who sound exactly alike and act exactly alike. However their race would still be different because the physical characteristics of their body are slightly different. The black guy and the white guy in the UK would have the same ethnicity though. Assuming they were both raised in the same town, and other cultural factors, they would both belong to the same ethnic group.

However ethnicities can just confuse the idea further, because where does such categorization stop? I am originally from Massachusetts, and then in grade school I moved to Virginia, and once I went to college I moved to West Virginia. The behaviors and attitudes of the people just from those three states are shockingly different! Do they carry different ethnicities? Or is it something else? If you look at affirmative action forms from schools across the Ohio Valley, including WVU you'll see that "Appalachian" is listed as an ethnicity. This applies to the ridiculously destitute people who hail from the heart of West Virginia and the surrounding Appalachian mountains. How are they different from myself, or people from Northern WV? They act the same as many in Morgantown, talk the same, and have generally the same values and beliefs.To many extents the only discernable quality is that they make less money then people from other regions. Are economic factors alone a fair indicator of ethnicity?

 

[Keef]

That might have worked 200 years ago but today it's categorising people unfairly. If you're from Haiti and you have dark skin, does that make you African American? No it doesn't. Many Native Americans look like they are from east Asia (and I guess they kinda are), bit they are Asain. Labling people based on skin colour alone is not a good system in my opinion. I may have some more thoughts on this tonight when I'm not on my phone

Cool, come back with more later. But for now I'd just like to note that I don't actually know any African Americans. Not a single one. Most of them have never even been to Africa. As a matter of fact I asked a black girl I used to work with and she literally said "Hell no, I'm black!" I can't say all black people dislike the term African American, but the ones that I've asked have told me they prefer to be called black. Therefore, I never use the term because I find it a fallacy unless you're an African native with US citizenship.

I think that you are getting "race" and "ethnicity" confused. Race is something purely physical, and often unfair. For example, you can have black guys and white guys all living together in the UK who sound exactly alike and act exactly alike. However their race would still be different because the physical characteristics of their body are slightly different. The black guy and the white guy in the UK would have the same ethnicity though. Assuming they were both raised in the same town, and other cultural factors, they would both belong to the same ethnic group.

However ethnicities can just confuse the idea further, because where does such categorization stop? I am originally from Massachusetts, and then in grade school I moved to Virginia, and once I went to college I moved to West Virginia. The behaviors and attitudes of the people just from those three states are shockingly different! Do they carry different ethnicities? Or is it something else? If you look at affirmative action forms from schools across the Ohio Valley, including WVU you'll see that "Appalachian" is listed as an ethnicity. This applies to the ridiculously destitute people who hail from the heart of West Virginia and the surrounding Appalachian mountains. How are they different from myself, or people from Northern WV? They act the same as many in Morgantown, talk the same, and have generally the same values and beliefs.To many extents the only discernable quality is that they make less money then people from other regions. Are economic factors alone a fair indicator of ethnicity?

There's a word I always forget, thanks for that.

Without any outside influence I coined the term "Appalachian American" for myself as a joke. I like visiting the mountains of Tennessee and North Carolina, and I've been through some pretty serious hills in West Virginia also. The lifestyle and behavior of people actually from that area are drastically different than where I'm from, and even very different than Kentucky or western Tennessee. Ethnicity is the right word for it I think.

I'm not sure exactly where it would stop, because if you go in Raleigh and ask somebody who appears to be a mountain person, "Are you a mountain person?", they'd pull out their shotgun and run you off. That confirms it for me, but for them it was an insult. Like, I'm sorry dude, but you just whipped a 12-guage from your back pocket, you're missing teeth, and you just bit the head off that snake. I don't care if you were born in Malibu, you're a damn mountain person.

 

[jinxtigr]

I'm not sure what good it will do, but I've got a book by Malcolm Gladwell where people actually studied the after-effects of flat-out affirmative action in law schools- a situation where they literally took black law students who were not as good, measurably not as good on the entrance exams as white students, and they jumped them over the white students when there was loads of competition for the school

The point of the study was looking to see how much worse those students were AFTER school, in real life, just like this assumption that you're taking worse people and giving them breaks.

Once they were done with school there was NO difference. It was a surprising result because there was an obvious difference up front. The theory was, to make use of school (even Ivy League law school!) you have to be smart ENOUGH. They didn't put in any idiots, it was still competitive among black students, it's just that in the new student pool the black students were obviously worse than the white ones overall.

Does it change the picture for anyone if we're talking about students (this is a real world study, actually happened) who would have had extra obstacles just from looking different, who came out of a background where on average they just didn't have as good a preparation, yet when given the same law school education, they ended up being NO different or worse after all?

It's like contriving to give less qualified people a given opportunity on the assumption that it's the opportunity that is transformative, not the racial inferiority of the people. Because apparently it is the opportunity that takes people who actually are not as good (for whatever reason- bad schools, more toxic society?) and transforms them into people who ARE as good, full stop.

If your argument is that no opportunity should be given unless on the merits of existing performance, this result sucks. If your argument is that societal racism needs to go away and everybody should get a Star Trek colorblind future, this result is kinda awesome...

 

[FoolKiller]

Labling people based on skin colour alone is not a good system in my opinion.

It is a matter of simplicity. On forms when it asks your race or ethnicity there are only five or six options to choose from. Reality would call for a separate page or someone to write it in, leaving it open to all kinds of crazy descriptions that fail to be an identifier. It's not feasible.

Similarly, in cases involving police whether you are describing a suspect or a missing victim they need to look for they are far better looking for someone that generically falls under one of a few descriptors than some ethnicity heritage descriptor.


For instance, if you were trying to meet me somewhere and asked what I looked like and I said I was an Irish, Scot, German American you would have no freaking clue. That sounds like I should be strawberry blond with blue or green eyes, with pasty skin, and possibly even wearing a kilt. Instead I have dark hair, brown eyes, and tan easily. If I told you I was a white guy with dark brown hair it is simplified and you don't have to guess which of my genetic traits might be dominant.


As for how this leads to racism: Putting aside older people from a time when equal rights weren't granted or people raised to think a certain way, if someone does something to anger you or disappoint you many people will look for something to blame. We never just say that the person is responsible for their actions in today' society. And we grab on to the thing that is most obviously different from us. Skin color is pretty obvious. And we assign that generic descriptor to them and use it as the problem. Same thing happens if they are a different sex, age, or even have a different accent.

Racism, along with all other isms, is just a simplified and unjustified excuse for us to direct our hate or anger. Using your example, If a guy in a blue Corvette hit my car I might hate blue Corvettes from that point on. It is irrational, but it is possible. I know mid-90s dark green Honda Accords became my most hated car after a girlfriend that drove one cheated on me. Until I got over that hurt I made every dark green Honda Accord of a similar make a hated symbol of her. Along with that stupid Savage Garden song she listened to non-stop.

 

[TheCracker]

I think that you are getting "race" and "ethnicity" confused. Race is something purely physical, and often unfair. For example, you can have black guys and white guys all living together in the UK who sound exactly alike and act exactly alike. However their race would still be different because the physical characteristics of their body are slightly different. The black guy and the white guy in the UK would have the same ethnicity though. Assuming they were both raised in the same town, and other cultural factors, they would both belong to the same ethnic group.

Not really. Ethnicity also takes into account ancestry. A white British-born guy and a black British-born guy have different ancestry. The black British-born guy is most likely to be 3rd or 4th generation Afro-Caribbean by descent.

 

[JSkeezi]

In my opinion, African Americans and Latino Americans in this country have their reasons for being racist(which are way too many to name in this blog). White racist just don't like other races because their not white! I understand whites wanting to preserve their white race, being that the black male gene is the most dominant on the planet, and the white male gene is the weakest. That is not an insult, just a fact! Example: if you breed a black male with any other race, the black male gene will be the dominate gene in the offspring, its completely the opposite for whites. If you breed a white male with a African American woman, the black gene is STILL the dominant gene. So I completely understand whites wanting to preserve their white race, if they did'nt it would only be a matter of time before there were no more whites on the planet. But when you listen to the rants a raves of the skinheads and kkk, it just makes the white race look bad......literally! I saw a video of a Grand Wizard of the kkk on youtube, and the guy did'nt even have any teeth in his mouth! I mean is this the best they can do? A crackhead grand wizard from the trailor park? LOLOLOL

 

[Danoff]

In my opinion, African Americans and Latino Americans in this country have their reasons for being racist(which are way too many to name in this blog). White racist just don't like other races because their not white!

Neither of these statements is correct. The first is incorrect because racism is not a justifiable position. The second is incorrect because there are more reasons to form racist thoughts than simply because you do not like other races - for example, the reason this thread was started.

Thank you for improving your writing quality (note: paragraphs are your friend, as is "they're"), I'd still suggest you to read a bit more of the thread though.

 

[FoolKiller]

In my opinion, African Americans and Latino Americans in this country have their reasons for being racist(which are way too many to name in this blog).

There is no excuse or reason to be racist. It lumps all of a group into one prejudiced belief. No matter what kind of reasoning you use you cannot justify disliking, or even hating, all of a certain group because you have issues with a few individuals that fit that group.

White racist just don't like other races because their not white! I understand whites wanting to preserve their white race, being that the black male gene is the most dominant on the planet, and the white male gene is the weakest. That is not an insult, just a fact! Example: if you breed a black male with any other race, the black male gene will be the dominate gene in the offspring, its completely the opposite for whites. If you breed a white male with a African American woman, the black gene is STILL the dominant gene. So I completely understand whites wanting to preserve their white race, if they did'nt it would only be a matter of time before there were no more whites on the planet.

Yes, genetic dominance is precisely what "a crackhead grand wizard from the trailer park" thinks about when they act in racist ways. You ever think they might just be stupid bigots?

Of course, I consider all hateful racists to be stupid bigots, including those of a minority ethnicity.

But when you listen to the rants a raves of the skinheads and kkk, it just makes the white race look bad......literally!

The handful of skinheads and KKK in this country make all white people look bad? That would be like me judging all black people based on Kanye West.

 

[KSaiyu]

I get those thoughts too, and I'm half black and asian. I think we need a better definition of "racism" otherwise people who bring valid points regarding race, ethnicity whatever will continue to be conveniently branded racists and the whole issue carry on being swept under the carpet.

 

[Keef]

I get those thoughts too, and I'm half black and asian. I think we need a better definition of "racism" otherwise people who bring valid points regarding race, ethnicity whatever will continue to be conveniently branded racists and the whole issue carry on being swept under the carpet.

On a serious note, it's not a good idea to come into a thread about generalizations and proceed to generalize, and actually be serious about it. Suggesting a new definition of racism so it doesn't include you this time around is probably the worst argument against racism that I've ever heard.

 

[Anes]

I still feel the same way I did when I posted before in this thread. I hate the "thug/gangsta" look. I automatically tend to dislike people that fall into that category. Is it my fault that about 90% of all black people I've seen fall into the category?

I agree with this guy.


If i was a boss, and a white guy came looking for a job dressed like an inner city wannabe rapper I wouldn't hire him either. Also the poor english language skills irritate me...

 

[JeronimoM]

I tend to make my first impression based on the person's demeanor and tone of voice. However, I'm not going to say that I'm colorblind, because that simply isn't true. I think everyone has moments where skin color or ethnicity immediately jump to mind when something stereotypical annoys them.

 

[McLaren]

The handful of skinheads and KKK in this country make all white people look bad? That would be like me judging all black people based on JSkeezi.

Fixed.

 

[KSaiyu]

On a serious note, it's not a good idea to come into a thread about generalizations and proceed to generalize, and actually be serious about it. Suggesting a new definition of racism so it doesn't include you this time around is probably the worst argument against racism that I've ever heard.

No, you misunderstand. I couldn't give a **** if people call me racist.

It seems if you make any, and I mean any generalisation about race you are branded a racist - which leads to my point about all the negative connotations that definition entails. I believe it's human nature and vital to a more productive and equal world if we embrace these differences.

For instance there's the argument that black children are doing poorly in our school system not because of institutional racism, but laziness on the part of students. That was said by a black educational campaigner. This is a view I have not only witnessed, but can relate to. Now can you imagine if a white person made such a statement, and how the media would run with it?

"White guy says black kids are lazy"

OK, it's an exaggeration, but hopefully it shows the point I was trying to make a little clearer.

 

[Keef]

No, you misunderstand. I couldn't give a **** if people call me racist.

It seems if you make any, and I mean any generalisation about race you are branded a racist - which leads to my point about all the negative connotations that definition entails.

That's not the definition. The definition is hatred; racial superiority; the right to rule others. The definition is not "any generalization", that's a mistake made by society at large through misinformation, propaganda, and a serious lack of thought. People are a bunch of dummies and they're wrong, frankly. There's a difference between making a hilarious Black & Tan joke like I did and saying "You're black and asian, so not only do you act like a monkey but you look like one too. Put you on a leash."

See the difference?

For instance there's the argument that black children are doing poorly in our school system not because of institutional racism, but laziness on the part of students. That was said by a black educational campaigner. This is a view I have not only witnessed, but can relate to. Now can you imagine if a white person made such a statement, and how the media would run with it?

Institutionalized racism in part causes laziness and a lack of caring, for the simple fact that these kids can't improve their situation because the government is effectively holding them down. This has been going on in Chicago forever, done by our own President's buddies, and the truth of it never makes the news. People bat an eye and say "awww, that's so sad."

 

[KSaiyu]

So, by that definition, would you call the original post racist? I'm not sure if we're agreeing here....

 

[Keef]

So, by that definition, would you call the original post racist? I'm not sure if we're agreeing here....

Some of the original concerns posted by Danoff were racist, yes. That's the whole point of him starting this thread. A logical, sensible man has found himself prone to emotional responses, only realizing he's wrong when he has time to sit and think about it. His first reactions may have been racist but I don't think he's a racist person, because he's got the initiative to think about and understand why he was thinking that way and what causes it. Smarter than the average bear, sure, but he's still a bear and prone to doing bearish things occasionally.

Then you've got the people who don't understand what racism actually is. They spout and preach and whine about it all day long but they don't even know what it is that they're mad about. Good intentions for the wrong reasons.

Then you've got the people who don't bat an eye and think their racist way is the right way. Not only do they not understand racism, but they don't see a problem in the first place. They hate, and that's just what they do. They're bigots.

Most people seem to fall in the middle. They know racism is wrong but they don't know why and therefore can't address the problem effectively. Some of us are smart enough to think through it. Some of us simply don't care. I think the thinking brains out there aren't actually capable of being racist, though I wish I could find a better word for it. They understand racism and why it's bad, so it doesn't make any sense to do it at all. Human instinct is one thing, but basing your life principles on it is another.

 

[Dotini]

I found this archeological discovery interesting, as it refers to a lost Bronze Age civilization of swastika worshiping Aryans out in the wastelands of Siberia as the originators of all those modern languages known as Indo-European.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-rewrite-history/story-e6frg6so-1225933563131

Respectfully submitted,
Dotini

 

[KSaiyu]

I think the thinking brains out there aren't actually capable of being racist, though I wish I could find a better word for it.

This is where I got to. So perhaps I shouldn't have said definition, but some word covering the middle ground would be nice.

 

[MatskiMonk]

If groups of people regularly and consistantly conform to racial stereotypes, is it wrong to "pre-decide" how to treat them?

I deal with the public, If I may be blunt, I will change my sales tactic based on "percieved" ethnic origin, because in 16 years of experience the majority of people conform to certain stereotypes.




I also decide my sales tactic based on clothing, shoes, accesories, car of arrival..


So am I racist, or a shoe-snob? is there a difference?

 

[Keef]

So am I racist, or a shoe-snob? is there a difference?

I see no difference between stereotyping race or clothes. You're not enslaving, overpowering, or hating them. You are discriminating, but you're not being racist. Discrimination and racism get confused all the time by everyone who thinks they know what they're talking about, but it's a really simple concept.

 

[hambone8611]

I was recently asked by a repeat client how I felt about working for a certain minority group and without a second thought I responded that I bid their work with the attitude that I don’t want to do their work. Having worked for this group many times I add four or five hundred dollars a day to their bid and call it a pain in the axx charge, although I don’t line item it. I have always taken a strong position against racism and have been in favor of legislation that prevents business from discriminating based on race, sexual orientation, and so on.
So am I a huge hypocrite? , should I stop the up charge? Am I a bit of a racist? Or is it a reasonable up charge considering I assume they will be difficult?