EPTThey don't think of one white race bashing another race as anti-white racism is I think the take away.
Ask and answer stupid questions here! - Page 253
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
They don't think of one white race bashing another race as anti-white racism is I think the take away. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24264 Posts
On May 14 2015 12:40 Thieving Magpie wrote: They don't think of one white race bashing another race as anti-white racism is I think the take away. OK as many of your posts do, you've lost me. ELI5 Is it hard for most, some, very few, people to understand black on black racism or woman on woman sexism? Or are the people in the politics thread who seem to think black people can't be or or act racist (on behalf of another) against other black people or women sexist against women unique on TL? | ||
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On May 14 2015 13:54 GreenHorizons wrote: OK as many of your posts do, you've lost me. ELI5 Is it hard for most, some, very few, people to understand black on black racism or woman on woman sexism? Or are the people in the politics thread who seem to think black people can't be or or act racist (on behalf of another) against other black people or women sexist against women unique on TL? How is it hard to understand? Most people I've known, seen on TV, read in books, and met randomly will most commonly counteract any suggestions or accusations of racism with something akin to "I know a person who is ______ so I'm not racist/misogynist/etc..." I'm sure you've heard phrases such as: "My cousin is ____" "My son is ____" "My best friend is ____" etc... Being followed by the phrase "so of course I'm not ______" or "so how can I hate _____?" Over and over, this phrase is used as proof of the purity of one's intentions. But that makes no sense at all unless you believe people of a certain group are not racist/misogynist/etc to their own groups. How would having a black friend prove you aren't racist against blacks unless you believe there is no way to be part of black culture and hate it at the same time. Because no matter how close you are to your ____ friend, you will never be as close to that group as being actually part of that group. So here's the problem with that line of logic. If people can be racist/misogynist/etc to a person of their own race/gender/creed/orientation/etc... then how can knowing someone of a group show your innocence? I've known gay men who hated lesbians Black men who distrusted other black men Women who attack other women And so on and so forth This means that the only reason people use this line of reasoning is because they don't believe black people can be racist towards black people. They don't believe that women can be misogynist to women. And hence they believe that a group (say black people) can't be racist towards (black people) then by showing you aren't racist to one (say black person), then that must mean you aren't racist towards all people of that group. Most people don't believe groups can hate themselves. You can tell because they use their friends as proof that they can't hate people who are like their friends. But its actually racist to use their friend as a token representative of an entire group of people. They say this because they believe if you are engaged in a part of that culture, that you can't hate that culture. And who is more part of that culture than the people in that culture. But if you really believe that people of a certain group can hate others in that same group. Then you'd never believe the argument that being friends with someone of a group makes you innocent of racism. Which means most people don't believe groups can hate themselves. If you were 5 years old this is what I would say: You don't represent all five year olds. You being five years old does not mean you like other five year olds. And just because I'm friendly to you, a five year old, doesn't mean I'll be friendly to all five year olds. Now replace five year old with any race. You don't represent everyone in your race. You being of a certain race, doesn't mean you like other people of your race. And just because I'm friendly to you, a person of a specific race, doesn't mean I'll be friendly to everyone of your race. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24264 Posts
On May 14 2015 14:35 Thieving Magpie wrote: How is it hard to understand? Most people I've known, seen on TV, read in books, and met randomly will most commonly counteract any suggestions or accusations of racism with something akin to "I know a person who is ______ so I'm not racist/misogynist/etc..." I'm sure you've heard phrases such as: "My cousin is ____" "My son is ____" "My best friend is ____" etc... Being followed by the phrase "so of course I'm not ______" or "so how can I hate _____?" Over and over, this phrase is used as proof of the purity of one's intentions. But that makes no sense at all unless you believe people of a certain group are not racist/misogynist/etc to their own groups. How would having a black friend prove you aren't racist against blacks unless you believe there is no way to be part of black culture and hate it at the same time. Because no matter how close you are to your ____ friend, you will never be as close to that group as being actually part of that group. So here's the problem with that line of logic. If people can be racist/misogynist/etc to a person of their own race/gender/creed/orientation/etc... then how can knowing someone of a group show your innocence? I've known gay men who hated lesbians Black men who distrusted other black men Women who attack other women And so on and so forth This means that the only reason people use this line of reasoning is because they don't believe black people can be racist towards black people. They don't believe that women can be misogynist to women. And hence they believe that a group (say black people) can't be racist towards (black people) then by showing you aren't racist to one (say black person), then that must mean you aren't racist towards all people of that group. Most people don't believe groups can hate themselves. You can tell because they use their friends as proof that they can't hate people who are like their friends. But its actually racist to use their friend as a token representative of an entire group of people. They say this because they believe if you are engaged in a part of that culture, that you can't hate that culture. And who is more part of that culture than the people in that culture. But if you really believe that people of a certain group can hate others in that same group. Then you'd never believe the argument that being friends with someone of a group makes you innocent of racism. Which means most people don't believe groups can hate themselves. If you were 5 years old this is what I would say: You don't represent all five year olds. You being five years old does not mean you like other five year olds. And just because I'm friendly to you, a five year old, doesn't mean I'll be friendly to all five year olds. Now replace five year old with any race. You don't represent everyone in your race. You being of a certain race, doesn't mean you like other people of your race. And just because I'm friendly to you, a person of a specific race, doesn't mean I'll be friendly to everyone of your race. EDIT: Seriously thanks man the other answers weren't very helpful but yours was very enlightening and it was kind of an important question to me. Totally get that. I've even done it myself. When Jonny accused me of not liking white people. I found myself saying it. I don't think like you describe so I realized how silly it sounded later outside the heat of the moment. Can't believe I hadn't noticed that, I guess because I was exposed to black on black racism at a very early age it wasn't hard at all for me to assimilate it. What do you estimate the percentages are of people either here on TL or in the US generally that process racism like that? It feels freakishly frequent to me but that might just be me? | ||
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
| ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On May 15 2015 04:35 Fecalfeast wrote: Why do modern humans still insist on grouping people together based on melanin content, country of origin, chromosome composition, or sexual preference? Because social differentiation is the very basis upon which societies are built, in order to create a hierarchy and divide tasks. The two most basic (and common to all societies) types of differentiation are generational differentiation and man/woman differentiation. Then come more advanced concepts such as job, physical attributes, countries and cultures, etc. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11952 Posts
You meet way too many people to be able to reasonable deal with any of them without grouping them together. Of course this leads to misjudgements, and some of the obvious groups aren't really useful. Still a thing your brain does pretty much automatically, and to overcome the instinctual grouping takes quite a lot of effort. So if you have only superficial contact to someone, the most obvious characteristic will stick to that person and make your brain put them into a box. So someone is the black guy, the lesbian girl, giant moustache man, the dude with the annoying laughter, the hipster or whatever. Then they get put into a box with other people with similar characteristics and judged as a group. If you do interact with them more, you attach more data to them and they become an actual individual in your mind. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9330 Posts
On May 15 2015 04:35 Fecalfeast wrote: Why do modern humans still insist on grouping people together based on melanin content, country of origin, chromosome composition, or sexual preference? why not, it's useful | ||
|
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
Saying 'Hey, do you remember John from the party? He was the only black guy.' is trying to identify someone based on appearance. Saying 'Did you hear about all the black people rioting in baltimore?' or 'Black lives matter' or 'I got white girl wasted' is using a group of people as a modifier in your sentence to evoke a certain response. All three of those phrases can have the group of people mentioned removed and mean essentially the same thing. 'Did you hear about all the people rioting in baltimore?' 'Lives matter' 'I got wasted' | ||
|
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
Treating people differently based on factors beyond their control doesn't sound useful to me. | ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
On May 15 2015 05:22 Fecalfeast wrote: Treating people differently based on factors beyond their control doesn't sound useful to me. Maybe not, but it isn't like this happens in a vacuum. | ||
|
.Aar
2177 Posts
| ||
|
Sent.
Poland9330 Posts
On May 15 2015 05:22 Fecalfeast wrote: Treating people differently based on factors beyond their control doesn't sound useful to me. Do you think positive discrimination is a bad thing? | ||
|
Najda
United States3765 Posts
On May 15 2015 05:51 .Aar wrote: why the fuck y'all arguing about racism and shit in a stupid questions for dota thread I thought this was a LoL thread. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9330 Posts
No it's a sc2 thread, stop trolling guys | ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
*backgammon thread | ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6642 Posts
BW thread! | ||
|
Dark_Chill
Canada3353 Posts
Thread Thread | ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
Well we reached the logical conclusion I think. | ||
| ||
