Racism Part two

[Thug]

3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

That’s a completely ridiculous comparison. 

Is it?

You literally said if someone tells you something, it must be true.

no exaggeration.  
 

Literally that is what you said.

My whole point is that we’re just following what we are told without thinking for ourselves.

And you’re telling exactly this.

Edited June 18, 2023 by Thug

[Thug]

3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

And I’m saying that those white people won’t have just made up that something is racist. 
 

Just because he doesn’t think it’s racist doesn’t mean that other minorities also don’t. And someone telling you something is racist PROBABLY comes from the right place, ie someone does find it offensive

I won’t argue about that at all.

Absolutely right, and I thank you all for it.

But I don’t find what Monchi did offensive.  But you’re right, maybe others do.  
 

But like I said, there’s a difference between what IS racist, and what could be deemed to be racist.

He probably will never do it again because he doesn’t want to offend anyone, but when he did do it, I’m convinced he wasn’t trying to offend anyone.

 

We’re all just getting offended too easily these days.

[bobzy]

10 minutes ago, Thug said:

But you see, the dictionary definition (you may argue that it is outdated - but that’s a separate debate) would say that for something to be racist, you need to have the belief that one race is inferior due to that point.

so back to your question. The context is key.

Two girls discussing boyfriends, and one saying to the other that she loves black men because:

’They have massive cocks’ - absolutely not racist.  Stereotyping yes, racist no.  There is no intent to degrade the race based on presumptions.

It's prejudicial.  "All" racism is, is prejudice based on race.  Sexism likewise based on sex.  Ageism on age and so on and so forth.

Where it would be considered to be offensive is where it's tapping into hate or naivety - racial profiling based on a positive is unlikely to be viewed this way; but then it can be contextually.  "He's black so he has a massive cock" suddenly becomes a very differently received phrase if the person is actually incredibly insecure about having a small cock.  And what's it based on?  Literally him being black and that's it.  So yes, it's racist.  It's just not a type that is going to cause widespread offence.

7 minutes ago, Thug said:

If I was to say I love Latin women because they have big asses… is that racist?

...and this sort of falls into the last bit.  Again, it's prejudicial.

[Thug]

1 minute ago, bobzy said:

It's prejudicial.  "All" racism is, is prejudice based on race.  Sexism likewise based on sex.  Ageism on age and so on and so forth.

Where it would be considered to be offensive is where it's tapping into hate or naivety - racial profiling based on a positive is unlikely to be viewed this way; but then it can be contextually.  "He's black so he has a massive cock" suddenly becomes a very differently received phrase if the person is actually incredibly insecure about having a small cock.  And what's it based on?  Literally him being black and that's it.  So yes, it's racist.  It's just not a type that is going to cause widespread offence.

...and this sort of falls into the last bit.  Again, it's prejudicial.

Exactly right.

We need to understand there is a difference between racism and racial profiling.

Prejudice has its own connotations, and I don’t think you’ve got the context right.

’Latin women have massive asses’ - statement of opinion. Not racist. 
‘I love Latin women because I love a girl with a big ass’ - racial profiling, stereotyping, not racist, positive discrimination.

’I can’t stand Latin women with their big asses’ - Racial profiling, stereotyping, and racist.  The sentence is racist at the end of the first phrase.  The justification is irrelevant.  I have expressed a prejudicd based on race. 

[bobzy]

6 minutes ago, Thug said:

Exactly right.

We need to understand there is a difference between racism and racial profiling.

Prejudice has its own connotations, and I don’t think you’ve got the context right.

’Latin women have massive asses’ - statement of opinion. Not racist. 
‘I love Latin women because I love a girl with a big ass’ - racial profiling, stereotyping, not racist, positive discrimination.

’I can’t stand Latin women with their big asses’ - Racial profiling, stereotyping, and racist.  The sentence is racist at the end of the first phrase.  The justification is irrelevant.  I have expressed a prejudicd based on race. 

Racial profiling is racism. Anything that is making a judged statement based on nothing other than race, is racism.

The harm that occurs is when it becomes a discriminative action or offensive in nature. 

[Thug]

2 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Racial profiling is racism. Anything that is making a judged statement based on nothing other than race, is racism.

The harm that occurs is when it becomes a discriminative action or offensive in nature. 

I think where we disagree is that I believe that there has to be a negative impact associated with the distinction made on race.  Where that be actual, or intended, it would still be racism.

I think you would define any distinction made based on race is racism.

Would that be a correct assumption?

 

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, Thug said:

Is it?

You literally said if someone tells you something, it must be true.

no exaggeration.  
 

Literally that is what you said.

My whole point is that we’re just following what we are told without thinking for ourselves.

And you’re telling exactly this.

No I didn’t say that. I said if someone is telling you something is offensive then it’s PROBABLY because someone has been offended by it. It’s unlikely that someone has just made up that something is offensive, and if that was the case I’d agree with you. 
 

And twice I’ve asked for examples of it if it is happening and so far you haven’t given anything. 
 

Im not saying people shouldn’t think for themselves, but if you think for yourself and decide something isn’t racist, but somebody is telling you that it actually is, then it’s PROBABLY because someone does find it offensive even if you don’t. 

[maqroll]

On 17/06/2023 at 13:58, CVByrne said:

But why are we focussing on the differences between people and not the fact that as a west society we share an incredible amount on common. Identity politics is a way of gaining support for your side by creating an internal enemy.

I feel division was crystallised with Brexit and the election of Trump. Who was a moron but what did he actually do as President legislatively other than a tax cut? Absolutely nothing other than grand stand. His danger was undermining the democratic system by refusing to accept defeat. The fact he won an election legitimately 4 years prior wasn't a crime. 

We need to just end the idea that people who agree with 99.9% of our outlook on life and ways of government are the enemy because we disagree on the 0.1% of things. Disagreement afforded by the society our parents and their parents have built.

The problem now is the big media players in the US and probably the UK as well reap big profits on driving the Left v Right "cold war". "Controversies" are pulled out of thin air (almost always by conservative outlets) whenever there's a lull in the action. Just the other day, Trump said to his crowd about Transgender matters, "You didn't even know about it four years ago". A glimpse of truth from Trump there. It's a manufactured outrage, just like the Critical Race Theory thing. And we see how quickly public policy is shaped in reaction to these made up issues. DeSantis literally said he doesn't think white students should be "made to feel bad" about slavery, lynchings, and what was essentially American Apartheid for one hundred years following Emancipation.

I'm afraid the gulf between the sides is too massive to bridge as long as right wing media lies to it's audience for money, and the audience demands to be lied to. 

[Thug]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

No I didn’t say that. I said if someone is telling you something is offensive then it’s PROBABLY because someone has been offended by it. It’s unlikely that someone has just made up that something is offensive, and if that was the case I’d agree with you. 
 

And twice I’ve asked for examples of it if it is happening and so far you haven’t given anything. 
 

Im not saying people shouldn’t think for themselves, but if you think for yourself and decide something isn’t racist, but somebody is telling you that it actually is, then it’s PROBABLY because someone does find it offensive even if you don’t. 

Ok I get your point.

So let me give you an example.

Say you are passing by, and my friend and I (strangers to you) are meeting and he’s a Chinese chap.  He greets me with a racial slur, and I return the greeting with a racial slur.  We hug, with a laugh, and proceed with a conversation.

Would YOU (I’m assuming as a white man) believe either one of us to be racist?

Now put aside for a second your thoughts on the appropriateness of such greetings.  The question is that in that moment, would you believe either one of us to be racist?

 

[Stevo985]

8 hours ago, Thug said:

Ok I get your point.

So let me give you an example.

Say you are passing by, and my friend and I (strangers to you) are meeting and he’s a Chinese chap.  He greets me with a racial slur, and I return the greeting with a racial slur.  We hug, with a laugh, and proceed with a conversation.

Would YOU (I’m assuming as a white man) believe either one of us to be racist?

Now put aside for a second your thoughts on the appropriateness of such greetings.  The question is that in that moment, would you believe either one of us to be racist?

 

No I wouldn't. But that's a hypothetical situation which isn't the same as your original point.
I have chinese friends, black friends, asian friends and we all say inappropriate things to each other because we're comfortable enough with the group to know that we'd all take it as a joke and that's the kind of humour we use.

But that's totally different to your original point. 

You've admitted yourself that your greetings in that hypothetical situation ARE racist. It's just that your comfortable enough with your imaginary friend to use them without causing offence.

 

So if somebody told you "what you said there was racist" seemingly you wouldn't disagree. You just might explain to them that it hasn't caused offence because you know each other.

 

But like I said I don't think your hypothetical example addresses your original point.

Edited June 19, 2023 by Stevo985

[mjmooney]

9 hours ago, maqroll said:

DeSantis literally said he doesn't think white students should be "made to feel bad" about slavery, lynchings, and what was essentially American Apartheid for one hundred years following Emancipation.

I almost agree with him. I would rephrase it to say that they shouldn't feel guilty about it. Because they are not. No individual today carries responsibility for what was done by people before they were born, simply because those people had a similar ethnicity to them. 

However, I would expect them to feel bad, simply as fellow human beings. And it's a worrying state of affairs if they don't do so quite automatically,  and have to be 'made' to. 

[maqroll]

5 hours ago, mjmooney said:

I almost agree with him. I would rephrase it to say that they shouldn't feel guilty about it. Because they are not. No individual today carries responsibility for what was done by people before they were born, simply because those people had a similar ethnicity to them. 

However, I would expect them to feel bad, simply as fellow human beings. And it's a worrying state of affairs if they don't do so quite automatically,  and have to be 'made' to. 

The thing with this anti-woke movement in schools is that they are attempting to craft a fantasy past in which slavery wasn't that bad and heroic white people saved the day, Indians weren't slaughtered and driven off land en masse, and historical housing/lending/job discrimination isn't even considered. *Because they don't want white students to feel bad*. It's insane, and antithetical to learning. The past informs the present, but again, the right wing also lives in a contemporary fantasy land where racism doesn't exist, Trump won the 2020 election, and drag queens are eating children.

[maqroll]

16 hours ago, Thug said:

Racial profiling is racism.

Wouldn't it depend on the context? For example, a white man with ginger hair was seen mugging an old lady yesterday, and police are asking the public for help in identifying him.

The mugger has just been racially profiled. Is it racism?

A bank has a hiring quota based on racial demographics. They are seeking to identify credentialed Black candidates. Racism? (I suppose one could argue that the hiring quota is racist in and of itself, but that's a more complex argument))

[bobzy]

17 hours ago, Thug said:

I think where we disagree is that I believe that there has to be a negative impact associated with the distinction made on race.  Where that be actual, or intended, it would still be racism.

I think you would define any distinction made based on race is racism.

Would that be a correct assumption?

Any prejudice (not distinction) based solely on race is racism.

[Thug]

On 18/06/2023 at 21:07, Thug said:

I am sick and tired of being told what is racist. What is racist is what comes from the heart.

 

Above was meant in reference to prejudice.

On 18/06/2023 at 21:28, bobzy said:

I don't think the bit in bold is remotely true.  It might be in terms of hate, but not racism.

 

On 18/06/2023 at 22:05, Thug said:

for something to be racist, you need to have the belief that one race is inferior due to that point.

 

On 18/06/2023 at 22:00, bobzy said:

It doesn't come from a place of hate or anything - in fact, having a massive cock is deemed to be a positive, but it's absolutely racism

Now you’ve got me confused.

I’ve advocated all along that if there is no prejudice, then it is not racism, and I have been thinking all along that you were saying ‘no, the intention doesn’t matter..’

But your last post (which Is difficult to quote from a different page on my phone) says that if there is no prejudice then it’s not racism? - which was my original point?

So are we in agreement that intention matters?

@bobzy

Edited June 19, 2023 by Thug

[bobzy]

8 hours ago, Thug said:

Above was meant in reference to prejudice.

 

Now you’ve got me confused.

I’ve advocated all along that if there is no prejudice, then it is not racism, and I have been thinking all along that you were saying ‘no, the intention doesn’t matter..’

But your last post (which Is difficult to quote from a different page on my phone) says that if there is no prejudice then it’s not racism? - which was my original point?

So are we in agreement that intention matters?

@bobzy

I think you're saying that prejudice is an inherently negative thing - but this isn't the case.  It's "simply" a belief.

We all have unconscious bias which shapes how we act in the World and, naturally, this gives life to prejudice.  I may see a gang of lads on the same side of the street as me and cross the road.  Or think that a woman isn't as good a driver as a man.  Or believe that my neighbour must be a good person because they live in the same area as me.  Or think that the guy in the police uniform is definitely a police officer.  Whatever it is, we shape an initial thought (often) on some sort of prejudice - whether an unlearned/learned belief or via an experience.

"All" that happens with racism is that this prejudice is based solely on race rather than other factors - and this in turn becomes a problem when we act upon those prejudices.

So you don't necessarily need to have "racism in your heart" to naively do/make an action based on prejudice - and that in itself could be offensive or inoffensive.  There will be many, many instances of someone doing something racist, people calling them out and then them saying "woah, how is this racist?!  I never meant to..." etc.  It may well be that there was no intent to offend.

However, where intention comes in is when you'd be actively seeking to hurt someone by saying/doing something racist (in this example); those people have it in their heart as you initially said.

Personally, I'd say intention absolutely matters but it doesn't mean that unintended offence shouldn't be pointed out as well.  Judging things based on race is pretty pathetic, after all.

[CVByrne]

On 18/06/2023 at 21:27, Stevo985 said:

At the same time you don’t have the right to decide what does and doesn’t offend people. 
 

Just because you don’t find something offensive doesn’t mean you should keep on doing it if it is offending other people. 
 

If something you don’t consider racist is deemed to be racist and offensive by those it targets, then you should absolutely welcome being “told” it’s racist

Here is the issue, being offensive and being racist are two completely different things. 

For example I think the religious people who really believe abortion is murder are deeply offended and feel passionately about the belief they are on the side of morals and saving lives. So those people are offended. Does that mean we ban abortion and people should stop having abortions because these people disagree with them so strongly? 

No, of course not. People are offended by countless things that are all legal in western society. We need to just accept we live in a diverse society where we just accept people are different and agree to disagree on things. There are going to be plenty of assholes and dickheads everyone has to deal with in life. Like someone refusing to give the priority seat on the bus to an elderly person or pregnant woman is not a crime. 

Racist abuse is a hate crime. Someone being offended is not a crime.

 

 

[bickster]

3 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Like someone refusing to give the priority seat on the bus to an elderly person or pregnant woman is not a crime. 

Actually, it is, as is putting your feet on the seats. Breaking local byelaws is a criminal act

But anyways, thats going to take this way off topic, so just an FYI

[CVByrne]

6 minutes ago, bickster said:

Actually, it is, as is putting your feet on the seats. Breaking local byelaws is a criminal act

But anyways, thats going to take this way off topic, so just an FYI

Thanks, I googled it to check before I posted and wikipedia told me

Quote

In most cases, there is no regulation to restrict the use of priority seats, but people are expected to offer their seats to those in need.

Priority seat - Wikipedia

Which probably means the US more than UK.

Anyway the point I was making was that there is a difference between offensive things and criminal things, in relation to peoples words and actions. Every individual is the arbiter of what is offensive to them while the legal system is the arbiter of what is criminal. 

Edited June 20, 2023 by CVByrne

[Stevo985]

12 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Here is the issue, being offensive and being racist are two completely different things. 

For example I think the religious people who really believe abortion is murder are deeply offended and feel passionately about the belief they are on the side of morals and saving lives. So those people are offended. Does that mean we ban abortion and people should stop having abortions because these people disagree with them so strongly? 

No, of course not. People are offended by countless things that are all legal in western society. We need to just accept we live in a diverse society where we just accept people are different and agree to disagree on things. There are going to be plenty of assholes and dickheads everyone has to deal with in life. Like someone refusing to give the priority seat on the bus to an elderly person or pregnant woman is not a crime. 

Racist abuse is a hate crime. Someone being offended is not a crime.

 

 

I wasn't talking about crime. I was talking about being a decent person.

Being offended isn't a crime, but generally if someone tells you something is offensive, you have to be a bit of a dick to react by saying "No it's not, don't tell me what to do" etc rather than "Oh sorry, I didn't realise. I won't do that again"

I don't think abortion is an appropriate example