|
Post by Amadan on Jan 10, 2018 17:23:43 GMT -5
I don't understand why the course is titled "White Racism" given the description of the course? I don't see anything in the links specifying what the complaints are, either. Re Opty's comment: I think the difference between being racist toward a person of color as opposed to a white person is that racism toward POC has been systemic and widespread, with real effect outside of personal offense. White people have had the upper hand economically, socially, politically, etc. Racist perceptions of POC as being inferior, uneducated, criminal, etc., have pervaded the education system, employment, the police force, etc. I think "being racist" on an individual level is essentially just being a bigoted asshole. Bigotry can come from any group toward any other group. It may always be so, because, alas, some humans seem to need enemies. But where the power is... that's from whence the legitimate harm comes. In the case of racism, white people are in control. Ignoring the extremists, I think people who fight against racism are not being racist toward white people; pointing out white privilege, for example, is not being racist toward white people, but many seem to get offended and call it racist nonetheless. I also think there has been and will continue to be some pendulum-swinging in the pursuit of balance in this regard. A lot of nuance gets bleached out by both sides. I understand the "racism = prejudice + power" formulation. I get it. I don't agree with literally redefining the word "racism" to mean that, because the nuance that gets bleached out on the one side results in the stereotypical but very common arguments on the Internet and in universities where it is confidently asserted that by definition only white people can be racist. But I do understand that an individual black person being racist towards an individual white person does not have the weight of generations of systematic oppression and all of society behind him that the reverse situation does. So I think white people crying about being insulted and abused for being white and equating it with historical racism against black people are being disingenuous. But that doesn't mean racism against white people doesn't exist or can't be hurtful. Repeat argument for men and women, Christians and Jews, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jan 10, 2018 19:51:09 GMT -5
Yeah, definitely bleeding heart territory there. If this had been someone who I had seen around the group, acting remotely human in her exchanges, I would certainly have reacted differently. But a quick look showed she was new to the group, and her only other post in the group was attacking some other hapless white male. A quick look at her feed confirmed her trollishness. I don't waste my time being rational with trolls. Actually, I was nice, in that I didn't actually call her a bigot until my second response. Yeah, and who would expect you to do more than that, seriously? I pictured you responding with "life's too short," and that's probably the healthiest perspective to take. I don't know why I at times get so obsessed with this stuff. I should probably get over it, but 46 years into this life, I'm still asking why, looking for reasons, trying to make sense of people's seeming irrationality. Seriously though, what Sarah Silverman did -- that was kind of epic. There was a real, (literally) hurting person behind the troll who randomly hurled the c-word at her.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jan 10, 2018 20:27:23 GMT -5
A lot of nuance gets bleached out by both sides. I understand the "racism = prejudice + power" formulation. I get it. I don't agree with literally redefining the word "racism" to mean that, because the nuance that gets bleached out on the one side results in the stereotypical but very common arguments on the Internet and in universities where it is confidently asserted that by definition only white people can be racist. But I do understand that an individual black person being racist towards an individual white person does not have the weight of generations of systematic oppression and all of society behind him that the reverse situation does. So I think white people crying about being insulted and abused for being white and equating it with historical racism against black people are being disingenuous. But that doesn't mean racism against white people doesn't exist or can't be hurtful. Repeat argument for men and women, Christians and Jews, etc. Good points, and I generally agree, but a couple of things: Racism isn't, even today, wholly encompassed by hurtful words, and I think some (not you) seem to put slurs or rudeness that unfortunately occur in some personal interactions on par with systemic/entrenched racism. And it seems that by doing so (out of ignorance or denial) they feel justified in saying it's all basically equal and there's no difference. Hence, "it's never okay to be racist." Well, yes, that's true, but it doesn't mean all racism is equal. So you get push back like, let me know the next time a police officer profiles you because you're white, or a bank turns you down for a loan because you're white, mkay? And... I'll grant that professor with the stacking, she was actually, apparently ignoring white people which could be more of a negative consequence in an educational setting (though I still see it, in general, as affirmative action and not "racism," and if only she'd just been mindful instead of broadcasting like she did... but, yeah.) That business with the "All Lives Matter" in response to Black Lives Matter. I can't figure out how, upon the commencement of the BLM movement, in response to the police brutality and murders/wrongful deaths, a significant subset of white people really, honestly were offended, who thought their own white lives were somehow being diminished or dismissed, who felt the need to declare that "All Lives Matter!!11!1!!. Worse, I got the sense that "All Lives Matter" was some sort of insidious (though perhaps largely subconscious) manifestation of more racism, a doubling down against the fight for justice and equality.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Jan 10, 2018 21:07:47 GMT -5
A lot of nuance gets bleached out by both sides. I understand the "racism = prejudice + power" formulation. I get it. I don't agree with literally redefining the word "racism" to mean that, because the nuance that gets bleached out on the one side results in the stereotypical but very common arguments on the Internet and in universities where it is confidently asserted that by definition only white people can be racist. But I do understand that an individual black person being racist towards an individual white person does not have the weight of generations of systematic oppression and all of society behind him that the reverse situation does. So I think white people crying about being insulted and abused for being white and equating it with historical racism against black people are being disingenuous. But that doesn't mean racism against white people doesn't exist or can't be hurtful. Repeat argument for men and women, Christians and Jews, etc. Good points, and I generally agree, but a couple of things: Racism isn't, even today, wholly encompassed by hurtful words, and I think some (not you) seem to put slurs or rudeness that unfortunately occur in some personal interactions on par with systemic/entrenched racism. And it seems that by doing so (out of ignorance or denial) they feel justified in saying it's all basically equal and there's no difference. Hence, "it's never okay to be racist." Well, yes, that's true, but it doesn't mean all racism is equal. So you get push back like, let me know the next time a police officer profiles you because you're white, or a bank turns you down for a loan because you're white, mkay? And... I'll grant that professor with the stacking, she was actually, apparently ignoring white people which could be more of a negative consequence in an educational setting (though I still see it, in general, as affirmative action and not "racism," and if only she'd just been mindful instead of broadcasting like she did... but, yeah.) That business with the "All Lives Matter" in response to Black Lives Matter. I can't figure out how, upon the commencement of the BLM movement, in response to the police brutality and murders/wrongful deaths, a significant subset of white people really, honestly were offended, who thought their own white lives were somehow being diminished or dismissed, who felt the need to declare that "All Lives Matter!!11!1!!. Worse, I got the sense that "All Lives Matter" was some sort of insidious (though perhaps largely subconscious) manifestation of more racism, a doubling down against the fight for justice and equality. Sure, not all racism is the same. A little old lady who clutches her pocketbook closer when she sees a black teen, but honestly says all people are equal isn't the same as a card carrying member of the KKK. (And they still exist.) Hurt feelings aren't the same as broken bones. But it's also not a victim marathon. If it's wrong, it's wrong. As far as the college TA is concerned, she pretty much broadcast that that was her pecking order. She reduced people to only their gender/race. From what I've heard, she openly mocked white male students. As far as Black Lives Matter's vs All lives matters? Most people, I think at least, didn't get that Black Lives Matters sprang from a hashtag #BlackLivesMatters which on Twitter, especially back then with only 138 characters, you needed to be brief. It didn't mean only black lives matter, or black lives matter more, but rather black lives matter as well (which, lets be honest, doesn't have the same ring) The idea was to remind people that society often shrugs off when they hear of a black male being shot and killed, including and maybe especially from the police. Having said that, there was a story of a professor who sent an email to her class urging them to be careful at a protest about police brutality, and ended it with All Lives Matter. Her email was clearly supportive, but because she chose those words, she was shamed. As opposed to someone saying, 'we're saying black lives matter because..." When someone feels attacked, they dig into the side they perceive that they're on. If someone hears Black Lives matters and feels like it's an attack on non black lives, sometimes (Not all times) it's better to speak about why it's not. It's like the #metoo movement. If someone comes across as blaming all men, then it takes away from what it's supposed to be about. Sometimes it's better to have a dialogue and not jump to shaming and ridicule. Of course, that's just me. What do I know?
|
|