|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Racism: Let's Talk.
|
Mili
Shipmate
# 3254
|
Posted
That's still racism Twilight. Have you ever been treated badly by white people? I'm pretty sure you have and I'm sure your husband and son have had bad and rude white customers before too. The difference is they blame individual white customers for their behaviour, but a few bad black customers and suddenly they start seeing all black people as bad.
I volunteer on multicultural housing estates here and generally have a great time. Occasionally I do get verbal abuse from teenagers or adults, and yes have very occasionally been accused unfairly of racism. However the last time that happened was at Christmas when a few of the Mums thought we (the multicultural group of volunteers providing free toys) were favouring a Somali Mum and child. A Sudanese Mum angrily accused us of racism. I have to say I laughingly denied this because it was so ridiculous - thankfully that didn't inflame matters as the Mum knew she was being ridiculous and was just trying to get extra toys for her child. Then a white Mum came up and smilingly asked if I had let the Somali Mum swap the toy her child chose. When I said yes, we had let her as the toy the child chose was not age appropriate, she turned horribly angry and accused me of ruining Christmas for her children. She ranted and raved and really killed the Christmas spirit temporarily.
On other occasions I have had to explain to angry white parents that our rides, food and activities are for everyone as they assume we are just there for the migrant families and have a chip on their shoulder because they think migrants get more than them.
Overall however not being racist is so enriching that I don't understand why people won't give it a go. I had such a great night tonight at tutoring with kids and tutors from numerous European, African and Asian backgrounds (and a few from other parts of the world too). Most of us Australians, others people here to study who still are happy to give their time to help Australians while they live here. Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus all teaching, learning and sharing a meal together.
Then I had a great chat about politics, education, poverty and charity, and technology with a Singaporean tutor and a teenager who was born in Vietnam. So cool to learn from so many perspectives and to see people being loving to each other and treating each other as wonderful human beings.
You can't force other people to change, but I recommend doing all you can to make your community a loving and caring place. You might be surprised how many great people you get to meet and know and maybe even become friends with.
Posts: 1015 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
I think your experience is interesting, Twilight. I do however think the issue of unconscious racism is a problem.
It's a two-edged sword though, which is a sad thing. I'd say that 5 or 10 years ago, I was much more 'colourblind' in that I didn't even notice someone's skin colour any more than I'd notice their hair or eye colour. It was just an incidental.
Learning about unconscious racism, which is a huge issue, has made me more aware of race than before. It means I'm more self-reflective. I have to think whether I'm prejudging someone based on their race or not. I'm more sensitive to it, which is both good and bad. There's a loss of naivety.
Of course, in an ideal world, we'd all be colour-blind. But we don't live in an ideal world, so I do think it's important to be aware.
I wholly agree on the notion of self-separation being a bad thing. I think that Clarke Carlisle, the chairman of the PFA (Professional Footballers' Association) was exactly right when he said that the idea of a separate black PFA could be divisive. I get the motivation of wanting more of a voice by setting up black-only (or women-only, or whatever-only) organisations, but I think in the long-run it is counter-productive in the quest for equality. It extends the us-them mentality, and it gives the message that non-blacks / men / whatever 'majority' it is reacting against don't have an important role in fighting for equality themselves.
I'm not gay, black or female, but that doesn't mean I don't strongly believe in gay rights, racial equality or gender equality. Self-separation says that, unless I'm a minority, I don't really have much of a role in fighting for equality.
(a couple of X-posts)
[ 14. August 2013, 14:16: Message edited by: goperryrevs ]
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
I wholly agree on the notion of self-separation being a bad thing. I think that Clarke Carlisle, the chairman of the PFA (Professional Footballers' Association) was exactly right when he said that the idea of a separate black PFA could be divisive. I get the motivation of wanting more of a voice by setting up black-only (or women-only, or whatever-only) organisations, but I think in the long-run it is counter-productive in the quest for equality.
I can't comment on what's being proposed in this instance, but in general, such groups often arise because there's no great 'quest for equality' in the parent body. There might be sweet words or general indifference, but no 'quest'. In other words, sometimes waiting for other people to act on your behalf, especially when they don't see your concerns as a priority, might be a waste of time. Your quiescence might just be read as a sign that everything's okay. The fear of divisiveness is a fear of something that already exists; it's just easier to turn a blind eye if the dissenters are contained and controlled.....
[ 14. August 2013, 14:36: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
"Race" is, in practice, phenotype - it's a set of physical characteristics that are typical of people with a particular ancestral background.
Well, no. Two organisms with the same genotype can exhibit different phenotype.
Well, yes. I know. The thing we call "race" is emphatically not genotype. My phrasing was both careful and exact.
There are a set of physical characteristics which are typical of sub-Saharan African ancestry - the skin, the hair, the nose and so on - that form the "race" that we call black, or black African. Somebody who exhibits these features will be called "black", whereas the pale, blonde-haired tot with more African genetics will not.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
I wholly agree on the notion of self-separation being a bad thing. I think that Clarke Carlisle, the chairman of the PFA (Professional Footballers' Association) was exactly right when he said that the idea of a separate black PFA could be divisive. I get the motivation of wanting more of a voice by setting up black-only (or women-only, or whatever-only) organisations, but I think in the long-run it is counter-productive in the quest for equality.
I can't comment on what's being proposed in this instance, but in general, such groups often arise because there's no great 'quest for equality' in the parent body. There might be sweet words or general indifference, but no 'quest'. In other words, sometimes waiting for other people to act on your behalf, especially when they don't see your concerns as a priority, might be a waste of time. Your quiescence might just be read as a sign that everything's okay. The fear of divisiveness is a fear of something that already exists; it's just easier to turn a blind eye if the dissenters are contained and controlled.....
Yeah, I get that. Like I said, I understand the motivation.
However, I think what would be more fruitful, in that case, is to either:
a) Set up a new body whose express purpose is to lobby for equality. I.e., rather than Black PFA, a "racial equality in professional football" organisation, that anyone can join, which can promote and campaign for equality.
b) If one does have to set up a Black PFA (or whatever), then as part of the founding principles state that it is a temporary organisation, and that its ultimate goal is to merge with the pre-existing organisation, once it has raised sufficient awareness and played its part in promoting equality.
My opinion is that this kind of approach is more productive in terms of true equality than separating ourselves from each other, and highlighting our differences.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
I have some sympathy for the colorblind way of thinking myself. I was also colorblind as a child due to the unusual places I was raised. It was great. Unfortunately, eventually we moved and I ended up in a much less diverse and somewhat more racist community. I had to learn to see race, because otherwise I found I was accidentally part of the problem. Still, I think not seeing race is definitely better. It's just that we can't mostly afford to do that until we can get rid of the problems in the institution.
[ 14. August 2013, 14:53: Message edited by: Gwai ]
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
How do we address racism towards "whites"?
Reduce the oppression* of non-whites and I think we see a decrease in this.
*Yeah, oppression is a might strong in some cases, but not certain the proper word for a lesser form.
Ok ... at what point in the reduction does racism towards "whites" stop?
Perhaps when the statistically social, educational and economic disparities between whites and others have flattened out rather more than they have?
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Perhaps when the statistically social, educational and economic disparities between whites and others have flattened out rather more than they have?
Is this a modern variant of the idea of the "noble savage"? Are you claiming that racism against white people is all a reaction to the oppression of other racial groups? Because I can assure you that people from all racial backgrounds are just as capable of being bigoted, insular and mean-spirited.
The only thing that sets white Europeans apart is the traditional power disparity, arising from the fact that most of the world was conquered and dominated by white Europeans.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Why do I feel like this thread is a trap for some of us to voice opinions that will quickly be disissed as irrelevant utterances coming from white privilege?
It is not intended so, but truly from the desire to increase understanding in all directions. I did not expect it to be smooth, however. Nor do I expect it will end contention on the ship. But I hope the balance at the end is positive.
quote:
I was raised in unusual circumstances that brought me to my teens completely colorblind.
As was I. Though I would not say "colour blind", but rather skin colour mattered no more than hair colour, height or anything else. They were descriptors, not values.
When first judged by the colour of my skin, it was rather shocking.
quote:
That's why I laugh when I hear about my background of white privilege.
White privilege is a group condition from which individuals might benefit, but are not guaranteed to.
To put this another way; a white person from West Virginia could lose their accent, work their way to a high-powered position and be treated no different than any other white person. The same cannot be said for people of colour.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Leorning Cniht
Nobility isn't the issue at all. My point was simply that the world has in recent centuries favoured the white West. It's therefore fairly unsurprising that some people who don't belong to that favoured category, especially those from formerly colonised groups, feel resentful about its success. The resentment may be mixed with all kinds of other feelings, some contradictory. Whether the resentment is justified or not in individual cases or circumstances is another matter.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
The "white west" is far too much generalization. Western Canada has been much more interested in the discrimination from the rich (Ontario) east historically against the white (but swarthy) eastern European immigrants who populated the west, so much so, that they forced them to live in isolated homesteads instead of allowing them to live clustered together in villages or they might form political parties. Which they did, first the CCF/NDP (kind of like Labour in the UK but started with farmers), and then the various reactionary populist conservative parties later. The Regina Riot and the On to Ottawa train are part of the story.
This was predated with the two Riel Rebellions where the French Metís Nation (mix of Cree, French and Scottish) formed over 300 years or so were put down by British troops in the 19th century.
Thus, our experience is that those with power and money use whatever they can to maintain control, that the race aspect may be part of it, but has been secondary to culture/ethic derivation and the wish to keep the local economies in service to the established eastern oligopy.
Thus, my additional questions have to do with economic exploitation in, I suppose, the Marxist sense. Except that it is identifiable people who are exploited, race being secondary to the avarice and power motives.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mili:
That's still racism Twilight. Have you ever been treated badly by white people? I'm pretty sure you have and I'm sure your husband and son have had bad and rude white customers before too. The difference is they blame individual white customers for their behaviour, but a few bad black customers and suddenly they start seeing all black people as bad.
<snip>
You can't force other people to change, but I recommend doing all you can to make your community a loving and caring place. You might be surprised how many great people you get to meet and know and maybe even become friends with.
What did I say that gave you the idea that my husband and son are racists or that either of them needed to be lectured by you on "making the community a better place?" My husband volunteers 30 to 40 hours per week to feeding and clothing people of all races. When he and the black woman he works with get called racist over the phone they just laugh. I'm the one who is irritated on their behalf.
Of course my son knows there are rude white people. He's been doing this job for years, but he has come to fear waiting on black people because of people like you. The white people who come in the store and are rude and dishonest don't have the power to damage his reputation in the town the way a black person can by standing halfway across the room and yelling "He's a racist!" at the top of their lungs. The other people in the store don't know that he only told them it was store policy to show a receipt for returns, the other people are like you and think he must actually be a racist and that he needs a little lecture about it. Your eagerness to think you are less racist than everyone else and that you are superior to them because of it is part of the problem.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Of course my son knows there are rude white people. He's been doing this job for years, but he has come to fear waiting on black people because of people like you.
![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
I think you've crossed a serious line here.
Let's everyone take a step back.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
no prophet
I think your main point is that white people can be racist against other white people? That's certainly true. I've read about English and American attitudes towards the Irish in the past. And the Nazis built on the pseudo-science of a previous generation when they divided up different white ethnic groups into categories based on notions of superiority.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
I am not a Host and I am not making a jr. hosting statement here. I am entering a plea for the sake of the intent of this thread that we might better understand each other.
Please let us moderate our responses and accusations. If there is to be a hope that this thread do an ounce of good, I think we must.
I realise I am perhaps the wrong person to ask, my on-line tone is very dry and easily mistaken for being curt.
I am not admonishing or instructing anyone and do not wish to, I am merely pleading. Perhaps I am a fool for such, but I do not wish to believe this type of discussion cannot exist.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
It is difficult to accept difference, even harder to love it.
But to "make allowances" for it is to inherently regard it as less good, and, therefore, be prejudiced against it.
I think there are some groups of people that I think I'm making allowances for. I think that probably makes me racist.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Of course my son knows there are rude white people. He's been doing this job for years, but he has come to fear waiting on black people because of people like you.
I think you've crossed a serious line here.
Let's everyone take a step back.
What line is that? I don't understand what has offended you so much or why you are vomiting.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
It's occurred to me that some people think Mili is black and that might change the tone of what I said.
Maybe Mili is black but based on her avatar and what I read as a patronizing, "Look at me I'm being nice to black people you should try it!," tone, I think she's white.
The sort of white person who would read my first post where I said my son is sometimes accused of being racist and believe that because he was called that, he was that. He is not racist. At all. In fact he sends a good part of every paycheck to Unicef with a view to helping poor black children.
His fear of waiting on black people is that if a black customer gets mad at him and calls him racist a white person like Mili, who believes that where there's smoke there's fire, will believe he is racist.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
Several thoughts haev wacked me on the head (not for the first time) me as I read this thread.
1)
1) A number of people on Ship of Fools, especially those from outside the USA, are very quick to label things "racist," "homophobic," "sexist," as those these labels had the same obvious meaning (and effect) for all.
2) A number of people on Ship of Fools, especially those from outside the USA, haven't a clue as to how complicated and dysfunctional the use of the label "racist" has become in the United States.
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
Edited to remove post.
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
Apologies for double posting. Somehow, once again, I clicked "enter" while writing and the post was actually ... posted. I don't seem to have the knack for this.
However, the point I was going to make is that the perceptions, definitions, and charges of "race" and "racism" have a long and insidious history in this country. Almost 150 years after the end of slavery in this country, and 50 years since the passage of serious civil rights legislation by Congress, the issues raised by Twilight ring true.
I write this as a former civil rights movement volunteer, white, life-long leftist, a believer in the goal of a MLK-ian "color-blindness" which has been mentioned earlier in this post. Twilight's experience -- which several posters here don't seem to "get" -- is not an uncommon one. Although my own experience has been different, I can empathize with Twilight's frustration. It's the frustration, I think, of man of us who, long ago, did not grasp how resilient the belief in "race" is in this country-- as is the willingness to use "race" in so many settings, for so many different reasons, and for so many different occasions. "Race" in the U.S. is the noxious weed that cannot be killed. It just seems to have become cleverer and more adaptive as the decades pass.
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
no prophet
I think your main point is that white people can be racist against other white people? That's certainly true. I've read about English and American attitudes towards the Irish in the past. And the Nazis built on the pseudo-science of a previous generation when they divided up different white ethnic groups into categories based on notions of superiority.
Good point of clarification. I may be mincing words, but it seems to be something else if the race as in appearance is the same. Being of radical capitalistic left-right socialist persuasion I'm wondering about the race as the secondary characteristic that is used to justify the economic exploitation.
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
As a matter of experience.
I was born a white Rhodesian. Not my fault.
In later years as a Methodist Minister I was offered a scholarship for a year at Union Theological Seminary.
The (multi-racial) Rhodesian Christian Council supported me.
I got as far as the UK on my way to the States to take up the scholarship. Then a telegram arrived from the States. " Sorry. The scholarship was for a Rhodesian national. We didnt expect a white national. Therefore we are sorry but dont bother to come"
So I booked a return passage. A victim of racism.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mili
Shipmate
# 3254
|
Posted
I'm sorry Twilight if you thought I was accusing your husband and son of racism. Perhaps I shouldn't type on here after midnight. I misunderstood your post to mean that you were learning to be racist because your husband and son had been verbally abused by black people - some black people have been mean to them and accused them of racism so now you mistrust all black people. I thought the problem you had was verbal abuse, which is also perpetrated by white people, but now I understand you are more upset that they have been accused of racism.
I dodged working in retail, but my sister worked in a department store for a while and came home with lots of stories about abusive customers who thought being abusive and reporting the sales staff to the manager would allow them to bypass the store policies and get a special deal on their purchases. It's sad that people will even use accusations of racism as one of these ploys to save money. In my sister's store they never gave into the customer however, and everybody who witnessed the abusive incidents would take the staff member's side. Sorry to hear this is not the case for your son and that people believe the abusive customers and their accusations sometimes.
As stated in my post I have occasionally had similar situations where I have been accused of racism, but again,no-one believed the accuser so although it was not a nice thing to go through it didn't impact my life.
And yeah I'm white, but have relatives and friends who aren't, and my Dad was born and grew up in Ethiopia, so that may make me a little sensitive when people say they are learning to be racist (or maybe I misunderstood and that's not what you meant in your original post) and blame black/Asian/Muslim people for it.
I wasn't trying to be superior either. I genuinely have seen the benefits of everybody getting along. When people in a diverse community respect and like each other (most of the time) it's amazing. I wish everyone in the world could live like that. There's lots of racism in Australia too so I really love it when I'm in community with people who are trusting and caring of each other despite ethnic differences.
I guess it comes easily to me though - my sins and temptations largely lie in other areas of my life eg. being a bit judgmental as I have been on this thread. I know it's really hard to fix the destruction that has occurred in the US and throughout the world from historic racism. It's really easy to have a dysfunctional community. Lots of years of work in community building and understanding can be undone by a few small incidents.
Posts: 1015 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I do not think racism is imprinted on the DNA of white people. I do think Europe spread racism around the world for its economic benefit and the negative effects of that are still felt in a very real way today. And that white Westerners have internalized much, much more of that institutionalized racism than they are willing to accept.
I don't think Europe spread racism around the world. I think it was everywhere already. I happen to know more about Japan than about other countries, but I am sure there are equally bad stories about other places. I have already mentioned how the Koreans still suffer discrimination. The story of Ainu is worse.
During World War 2 the Asian peoples whose countries were occupied were shocked to discover that the Japanese treated them much worse than the European colonial powers had done.
Teenaged Japanese soldiers would routinely slap mayors and college professors in the face. Since they were Japanese they were obviously superior to all non-Japanese.
Racism is very evil, but it is a product of human nature, not of any specific culture.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I do not think racism is imprinted on the DNA of white people. I do think Europe spread racism around the world for its economic benefit and the negative effects of that are still felt in a very real way today. And that white Westerners have internalized much, much more of that institutionalized racism than they are willing to accept.
I don't think Europe spread racism around the world. I think it was everywhere already. I happen to know more about Japan than about other countries, but I am sure there are equally bad stories about other places. I have already mentioned how the Koreans still suffer discrimination. The story of Ainu is worse.
During World War 2 the Asian peoples whose countries were occupied were shocked to discover that the Japanese treated them much worse than the European colonial powers had done.
Teenaged Japanese soldiers would routinely slap mayors and college professors in the face. Since they were Japanese they were obviously superior to all non-Japanese.
Racism is very evil, but it is a product of human nature, not of any specific culture.
Moo
Britain and the Netherlands maintained a physical presence in Japan long before WWII. The Dutch used Japan as a staging point for their colonial conquests in SE Asia. When Japan decided to open itself up in the 1800s they made a conscious decision to copy behaviour that it saw the European powers using in advancing its political and economic goals.
You're sort of proving my point...sorry!
Like I've said, racism exists in every society across the world. But European racism as part of a global economic strategy has had a great impact on the world and therefore requires a greater effort to overcome.
I don't understand why some are so loathe to accept this. Surely if China started enslaving Indians for the next 500 years, one would imagine that China in the year 2600 would have a major uphill battle in moving past that history. Why is Europe different? Too close to home?
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
As a matter of experience.
I was born a white Rhodesian. Not my fault.
In later years as a Methodist Minister I was offered a scholarship for a year at Union Theological Seminary.
The (multi-racial) Rhodesian Christian Council supported me.
I got as far as the UK on my way to the States to take up the scholarship. Then a telegram arrived from the States. " Sorry. The scholarship was for a Rhodesian national. We didnt expect a white national. Therefore we are sorry but dont bother to come"
So I booked a return passage. A victim of racism.
Not necessarily. If the scholarship were designed to help black Africans, you simply did not fit. Just as if the scholarship were for a woman, your rejection would not make them sexist.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
LilBuddha
The scholarship was designed for " Rhodesian/Zimbabwean nationals" Its intention was to prepare 'nationals' to take the future lead in theological educdation.
It was only when Union Theological realised that "nationals" included some whites that they backtracked. A bit late in the day.
That was pure discrimination on the basis of colour. i.e. racism
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Beautiful Dreamer
Shipmate
# 10880
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I'm not racist, but I'm learning.
Why do I feel like this thread is a trap for some of us to voice opinions that will quickly be disissed as irrelevant utterances coming from white privilege?
(snipped)
Then things stared to change in a way I didn't understand. Black people wanted to be called African-American instead of just American as though they wanted to remain separate from everyone else. Instead of incorporating stories of notable black people in the history books there was to be a special Black History month. My son's best friend from age five through fifteen suddenly dropped him on the first day of high-school to join a group of all black teens. My black friend from my book club never spoke to me again after we read "Beloved," and I said I didn't like it. My husband, and the black woman he works for, both get called "racist," over the phone almost daily. It's a non-profit food bank and free store. If they have to say something like, "I'm sorry the free school supplies are all gone," or, "We're closed on Sunday," the 'r" word comes out. I was banned from a TV message board for saying something vaguely negative about the black contestant on "Big Brother." My son works in retail now and the same store policies he has to abide by with every customer are loudly called racist by his black customers. He's confessed to me that he's become afraid of them.
Colorblindness and equal treatment no longer seem to be the goal, in fact it's a dangerous way to be. On the contrary, these days it's wisest to be conscious of the color of the person we're dealing with and tread very softly or else face their wrath and all who wish to be seen as their defenders. So, as I say, I'm not racist but I'm learning to be.
Sorry to jut in, but to commisserate-
I had similar experiences to your son's when I worked in a mostly-black part of Durham, NC. There are some really nice parts of the area, but others are anything but. I was in a management training program for a rent-to-own furniture store chain, so I had to work in both local stores and learn all aspects of the job. Some of the black customers didn't seem to want me to wait on them...I thought it was something I said or did wrong until two coworkers (at two different stores and of two different non-white races) flat-out told me that the customer didn't like white people. One (black) friend told me that some of them actively resented and distrusted white people because they thought (and sometimes taught their kids to think) we were all racist backstabbers...in other words, they thought the worst of us the same way they accused us of doing to them. His comparison, not mine.
I once had a customer ask me if I was Jewish (I get that a lot, I guess it's my coloring) and, when I said I wasn't, his demeanor darkened toward me considerably...I guess when he found out I wasn't also a minority, it put me on the 'wrong' side. To be perfectly honest, sometimes I considered letting people think I wasn't a white girl so they'd be nicer to me.
I know that's crappy of me, especially considering that I was getting just a tiny bit of what some of them had (evidently)experienced through their lives. It seemed really weird to me because of what my friend said above-they didn't see any conflict with doing the same thing to others what they feel had been done to them. That doesn't make any sense to me; if you (generic) don't appreciate something being done to you, why would you do it to someone else, particularly one who had nothing to do with it and showed nothing but friendliness? That seems counterproductive to me. Am I overly naive?
Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled thread.
[ 15. August 2013, 19:15: Message edited by: Beautiful Dreamer ]
--------------------
More where that came from
Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!
Posts: 6028 | From: Outside Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
Britain and the Netherlands maintained a physical presence in Japan long before WWII. The Dutch used Japan as a staging point for their colonial conquests in SE Asia. When Japan decided to open itself up in the 1800s they made a conscious decision to copy behaviour that it saw the European powers using in advancing its political and economic goals.
Here is a quote from this site. quote:
In 1899 the Japanese government passed an act labeling the Ainu as former aborigines, with the idea they would assimilate—this resulted in the land the Ainu people lived on being taken by the Japanese government, and was from then on under Japanese control. Also at this time, the Ainu were granted automatic Japanese citizenship, effectively denying them the status of an indigenous group.
Ainu bear sacrifice.
The Ainu were becoming increasingly marginalized on their own land—over a period of only 36 years, the Ainu went from being a relatively isolated group of people to having their land, language, religion and customs assimilated into those of the Japanese.
Do you believe it was the influence of the British and Dutch that made the Japanese treat the Ainu the way they did?
Also, the idea of British and Dutch influence does not explain why the Japanese treated the residents of the occupied lands much worse than the British and Dutch had done.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Not necessarily. If the scholarship were designed to help black Africans, you simply did not fit. Just as if the scholarship were for a woman, your rejection would not make them sexist.
Scholarships for black Africans, women, or other disadvantaged groups are quite explicitly examples of racial or sexual discrimination. This comes back to your initial point about is "racist in a good way" racist?
It is clear to everyone that because of the history of our society, black people and women face some disadvantages that white men don't. It is also clear that those disadvantages are getting smaller, but are not yet zero. In the face of this structural lack of parity, giving some individuals from disadvantaged groups an extra leg up can be reasonable policy.
[ 15. August 2013, 20:57: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Not necessarily. If the scholarship were designed to help black Africans, you simply did not fit. Just as if the scholarship were for a woman, your rejection would not make them sexist.
Scholarships for black Africans, women, or other disadvantaged groups are quite explicitly examples of racial or sexual discrimination. This comes back to your initial point about is "racist in a good way" racist?
It is clear to everyone that because of the history of our society, black people and women face some disadvantages that white men don't. It is also clear that those disadvantages are getting smaller, but are not yet zero. In the face of this structural lack of parity, giving some individuals from disadvantaged groups an extra leg up can be reasonable policy.
I would not call those scholarships racist, good or bad. They are not implying any characteristics, but assisting disadvantaged groups, as your second paragraph delineates.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
LilBuddha
The scholarship was designed for " Rhodesian/Zimbabwean nationals" Its intention was to prepare 'nationals' to take the future lead in theological educdation.
It was only when Union Theological realised that "nationals" included some whites that they backtracked. A bit late in the day.
That was pure discrimination on the basis of colour. i.e. racism
There are programmes designed to assist those who have been disadvantaged by racism, sexism, etc. Those programmes are not racist or sexist, inherently.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
There are programmes designed to assist those who have been disadvantaged by racism, sexism, etc. Those programmes are not racist or sexist, inherently.
A program presumably cannot be racist, sexist, what-have-you. But those advancing it may be. I would tend to suspect that, when people of a given group advance a program to advantage themselves, even if it is justified as compensation for wrongs of other times or to other people, it may well have a tinge of racism or sexism in it. At the very least, it is self-serving -- pretty much by definition. Further, insisting otherwise strikes me as a tad paternalistic.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
So then, Tom, how would you provide educational opportunities to people who have been traditionally blocked?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beautiful Dreamer:
Sorry to jut in, but to commisserate-
I had similar experiences to your son's when I worked in a mostly-black part of Durham, NC. ... Some of the black customers didn't seem to want me to wait on them...I thought it was something I said or did wrong until two coworkers (at two different stores and of two different non-white races) flat-out told me that the customer didn't like white people. One (black) friend told me that some of them actively resented and distrusted white people because they thought (and sometimes taught their kids to think) we were all racist backstabbers...in other words, they thought the worst of us the same way they accused us of doing to them. His comparison, not mine. ...
Well, let`s take a look at what is happening in North Carolina:
Black residents in North Carolina fear losing the ability to vote
So I agree that it really sucks when people automatically dislike you because of the colour of your skin. However, no one is trying to take white people`s votes away. Aren`t continued efforts to stop black people from voting fifty years after the civil rights movement kind of backstabby-racist?
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
A program presumably cannot be racist, sexist, what-have-you. But those advancing it may be. I would tend to suspect that, when people of a given group advance a program to advantage themselves, even if it is justified as compensation for wrongs of other times or to other people, it may well have a tinge of racism or sexism in it. At the very least, it is self-serving -- pretty much by definition. Further, insisting otherwise strikes me as a tad paternalistic.
--Tom Clune
You lost me, Tom. I'm not getting how folks at Union Theological Seminary (which, as far as I know, is in NYC and has a student body which is diverse in race and religion) get "tinged" with racism or paternalism by setting up a scholarship for black Rhodesian ministers. Nor do I get how the scholarship policy somehow benefits the seminary (self-serving, I think you termed it), as opposed to the intended recipient(s).
What I do get is that a U.S. institution of higher learning might possibly be attempting to respond to a US variety of racism that may (or may not) be going on in Rhodesia.
That may be cultural ineptitude on somebody's part (I wouldn't know -- mebbe things are hunky-dory in Rhodesia), but I'm not understanding your post.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
That may be cultural ineptitude on somebody's part (I wouldn't know -- mebbe things are hunky-dory in Rhodesia), but I'm not understanding your post.
Just in case anyone doesn't know, Rhodesia is now called Zimbabwe, and I think it's well-known that just about everything in Zimbabwe is far from hunky-dory.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
So I gather, but that still doesn't help me in understanding tclune's post.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
There are programmes designed to assist those who have been disadvantaged by racism, sexism, etc. Those programmes are not racist or sexist, inherently.
Well, I think they are, because these programmes don't look to see if the recipient has actually been significantly disadvantaged because of his sex or race, but treat anyone with the correct genitalia, skin tone or ethnic background as disadvantaged.
For example, it won't be all that long until the President's elder daughter, Malia, will be submitting college applications. Miss Obama will be eligible for scholarships aimed at encouraging African-Americans to attend university.
But Malia Obama isn't in any meaningful sense disadvantaged. Yes, she might experience racism, so she might find herself disadvantaged with respect to Chelsea Clinton, but any disadvantage that she experiences due to her skin is going to be far outweighed by the advantages of having the President of the United States of America for a father.
So the fact that Malia Obama is eligible for programmes aimed at disadvantaged youth, whereas a far more disadvantaged youth who happens to be white is not makes those programmes racist.
That doesn't necessarily make them a bad thing, and it may be that accepting some kind of affirmative action that favours Miss Obama over the impoverished son of a white West Virginia coalminer is a necessary consequence of having a system which is clear and simple, but it's still racist - it is based on assuming that the characteristic "disadvantaged" applies to all black people, which falls neatly into the definition that you gave.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
sigh
No. I think labeling them racist is decisive, inaccurate and misses the point of their reason for existence.
------
It is much more difficult to determine who escapes being disadvantaged. Malia Obama will escape most, if not all, disadvantage because who her father is. This is not something shared by the majority of blacks or females.
[ 16. August 2013, 05:40: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I think labeling them racist is decisive, inaccurate and misses the point of their reason for existence.
Decisive?
I'm not being a smartarse, because I make typos myself, but in this case I genuinely can't guess what this was meant to be.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
Britain and the Netherlands maintained a physical presence in Japan long before WWII. The Dutch used Japan as a staging point for their colonial conquests in SE Asia. When Japan decided to open itself up in the 1800s they made a conscious decision to copy behaviour that it saw the European powers using in advancing its political and economic goals.
Here is a quote from this site. quote:
In 1899 the Japanese government passed an act labeling the Ainu as former aborigines, with the idea they would assimilate—this resulted in the land the Ainu people lived on being taken by the Japanese government, and was from then on under Japanese control. Also at this time, the Ainu were granted automatic Japanese citizenship, effectively denying them the status of an indigenous group.
Ainu bear sacrifice.
The Ainu were becoming increasingly marginalized on their own land—over a period of only 36 years, the Ainu went from being a relatively isolated group of people to having their land, language, religion and customs assimilated into those of the Japanese.
Do you believe it was the influence of the British and Dutch that made the Japanese treat the Ainu the way they did?
Also, the idea of British and Dutch influence does not explain why the Japanese treated the residents of the occupied lands much worse than the British and Dutch had done.
Moo
It's certainly possible the Japanese treatment of aboriginals was due to foreign influence. The Dutch got to Jaoan in th 1600s if not earlier. I don't know enough about the subject to comment further.
Do you believe that European colonialism and slavery has had a lingering impact on race, both in Europe and in places that Europe conquered? Yes or no.
All racism is bad, but is not all equivalent. A society that got rich literally off the backs of the black and brown, like Britain or France or Spain, is not the same as one where tribes bicker over resources.
Institutionalized racism, that is a result of this history, is what has the greatest oppressive effect on minorities. Not some EDL moron shouting the N-word. That's why I'm focusing on it and trying to emphasize how ingrained racism is into Western society.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I think labeling them racist is decisive, inaccurate and misses the point of their reason for existence.
Decisive?
I'm not being a smartarse, because I make typos myself, but in this case I genuinely can't guess what this was meant to be.
divisive
Massive fail on my part. I'd blame the migraine, but it is just starting.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
[QUOTE]It is clear to everyone that because of the history of our society, black people and women face some disadvantages that white men don't. It is also clear that those disadvantages are getting smaller, but are not yet zero. In the face of this structural lack of parity, giving some individuals from disadvantaged groups an extra leg up can be reasonable policy.
Sadly in the UK that isn't the case. Disadvantage is increasing both on the basis of race (although certain people of Asian origin seem to be treated by some as an exception as they are seen to work hard) - and socio/economic background. It is much harder, for example, if you are a white child from the "working class" to get a university or college place at one of the "Russell Group" of universities.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It is much harder, for example, if you are a white child from the "working class" to get a university or college place at one of the "Russell Group" of universities.
While at the same time Pakistani, Bangladeshi and black applicants are much less likely to be offered places by Russell Group universities than white applicants with the same grades.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
No. I think labeling them racist is decisive, inaccurate and misses the point of their reason for existence.
Is the point of their existence to help disadvantaged youths, or to help black youths?
If the former, then it shouldn't matter what race the disadvantaged youth happens to be (or, conversely, what race an advantaged youth happens to be). If the latter, then by stating that all black youths are disadvantaged (and no white youths are) it fits easily into the definition of racism that you put forward in the OP, namely "attribution of a characteristic based upon race is racism and something can be racist irrespective of direction".
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
No. I think labeling them racist is decisive, inaccurate and misses the point of their reason for existence.
Is the point of their existence to help disadvantaged youths, or to help black youths?
If the former, then it shouldn't matter what race the disadvantaged youth happens to be (or, conversely, what race an advantaged youth happens to be). If the latter, then by stating that all black youths are disadvantaged (and no white youths are) it fits easily into the definition of racism that you put forward in the OP, namely "attribution of a characteristic based upon race is racism and something can be racist irrespective of direction".
Black youth are disadvantaged compared to white ones even when taking their socioeconomic and educational backgrounds into account.
That's why you see Oxbridge accepting nearly 2x as many white students predicted AAA than black students with the same grades. That's why you see employers rejecting black or Asian sounding name applicants who have the same qualifications as white-sounding applicants.
quote:
A damning report by the Department for Work and Pensions sheds some light on the subject. It shows that people with white names are 74 per cent more likely to get called for an interview following a job application than candidates with an ethnic minority name, despite the two candidates having exactly the same qualifications. Their report, “A test for racial discrimination in recruitment practice in British cities”, involved submitting job applications from fictional white and ethnic minority applicants with equivalent qualifications for advertised vacancies across Britain in order to determine the extent of racial discrimination in the labour market.
It revealed that “a high level of racial discrimination” existed “across the board”, with ethnic minority candidates having to submit nearly twice as many job applications as white candidates to achieve the same level of success. Discrimination persisted across gender, though it was noticeably higher for males. “High numbers of candidates were denied access to a range of jobs in a range of sectors as a result of having a name associated with an ethnic minority background,” the 2009 report concluded.
Evening Standard
A working class white person who gets into university will fare better in the job market than their classmate with a black or Asian sounding name, regardless of the black or Asian persons socioeconomic background. So I would say the latter are disadvantaged.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
Black youth are disadvantaged compared to white ones even when taking their socioeconomic and educational backgrounds into account.
From the rest of your post, I surmise that what you mean is "all other factors being equal, black youths are disadvantaged compared to white ones". And I wouldn't argue.
But I wasn't talking about instances where all other factors are equal. I was talking about a system that can define the President's daughter as disadvantaged, and the impoverished son of a white West Virginia coalminer as privileged. Those definitions can only be based on race, because by any other factor the "privileged/disadvantaged" categorisation would be the other way around.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
