Racism is contextual

[sadhatter]

And how do you address someone's racial biased actions without putting them on the defensive?

Hell you can not even talk about Trumps overt racism without people getting offended. It seems ignoring it is the only thing that people do find acceptable.

I bet you could explain to me how to talk about high crime areas with high black populations without putting poc on the defensive.

Try the same thing but with a different race.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

It doesn't matter if you're using the term "racism" in some new approved "Woke" way when 95% of the population is still using it to mean "Intentional and harmful conscious bias based on skin tone."

That's a pretty good definition there in bold. Nice and short, and it doesn't (I think) leave anything out.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Really because from here it looks like when people act like ******** other people tend not to want to listen to them.

Funny how being a hyperbolic acidic dramatic movement has that effect.

Look racism doesn't hurt anyone. See Ron Tompkins for that. So if it is so meaningless why would we even need to talk about it? Clearly racism can not kill any black people because that would be hurting them and so therefore it never happens.

It is like Mel Brooks said, Comedy is when you fall into a manhole and die, tragedy is when I get a papercut. This is the political view of that. Important issues are the ones that make white people uncomfortable, the trivial ones are the ones that kill blacks. Hence why keeping white people comfortable is far more important than a few worthless blacks.

This is why no one really like Martin Luther King in his own life time. He was a criminal troublemaker with the shutting down highways with his march on selma. People should just have driven right through them on that bridge.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I bet you could explain to me how to talk about high crime areas with high black populations without putting poc on the defensive.

Try the same thing but with a different race.

Of course this means we can never address any individual persons actions and how their racial biases might influence them.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Of course this means we can never address any individual persons actions and how their racial biases might influence them.

No it just means you can't argue with the made up version of them saying whatever you want them to say in your head because it makes arguing against them easier.

But you do you.

 

[ponderingturtle]

That's a pretty good definition there in bold. Nice and short, and it doesn't (I think) leave anything out.

Yep and it means panicking and killing a black man for being black is not racist at all. Nothing wrong with that. Why would anyone think killing someone for being black is racist?

 

[ponderingturtle]

No it just means you can't argue with the made up version of them saying whatever you want them to say in your head because it makes arguing against them easier.

But you do you.

So how do you address that? We have already proved that panicking at the sight of a black man and killing them is not racist, what are we moving on to next?

 

[Lithrael]

To solve racism we have to be able to talk about racism. I think it would help to talk about it honestly, openly and without judgement. The problem is that you can’t talk about it without someone being at risk of being called a racist and stigmatized. Of course people are going to resist that, who wouldn’t?

It works in reverse too. People of colour often feel like they can’t talk about their own experiences with racism, at least not with white people, because they fear being stigmatized as the overly sensitive snowflake who either can’t fit in or is just waiting for the opportunity to sue somebody. It’s perfectly reasonable to fear that kind of stigmatization as being a career killer.

Yeah, this is pretty much how I feel.

And how do you address someone's racial biased actions without putting them on the defensive?

And of course admitting any racial bias makes one a racist so one must always appear to be above reproach and we can not even talk about the polices actions because #bluelivesmatter.

So how do you talk about race and the death of say Tamir Rice while preserving white feelings? You say you have a better way of talking about these things, well put it out there.

And this I how I feel too.

telling someone that because they hadn't necessarily thought of something, that they are scum and p.s. they should do what you say due to inherent guilt and not even dream of debating it...

And this is a bunch of straw, though at least I can see where you got it from. I have seen angry people say things similar to this when they are at the end of their rope. For example, they don't say "don't dream of debating it" but rather they say "I am not going to debate this with you."

I can absolutely not understand the way people constantly bring 'you want us to be guilty' into this stuff. I don't get it at all. I have never once, while looking at the problems of society's structural imbalances and the history of how various groups have been advantaged or disadvantaged in this country, felt guilty or felt like anyone wanted me to feel guilty for what a good position I am in or for what a poor position anyone else is in.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

But how can racism exist if it never hurts anyone?

Nothing in the previous post of yours I replied to, said anything about "racism not hurting anyone". You merely stated that there is no inherent advantage to being black, white, latino, etc. That part is correct.

Of course racism hurts people. Duh. I am not arguing against that.

 

[JoeMorgue]

So how do you address that? We have already proved that panicking at the sight of a black man and killing them is not racist, what are we moving on to next?

No that's the "proof" you are making up because you incapable of arguing against anything that isn't a pile of straw that you aren't even forming into a man.

Nobody has said that. Nobody has said anything like that. I wonder if the voices in your head even said anything like that.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Yep and it means panicking and killing a black man for being black is not racist at all.

???

No, it doesn't.

 

[Lithrael]

So how do you address that? We have already proved that panicking at the sight of a black man and killing them is not racist, what are we moving on to next?

No that's the "proof" you are making up because you incapable of arguing against anything that isn't a pile of straw that you aren't even forming into a man.

Nobody has said that. Nobody has said anything like that. I wonder if the voices in your head even said anything like that.

You don't see where he got it from? Half the folks here agree that unintentional bias is not racism; that to be racist is to be intentionally hateful and/or convinced of racial inferiority, in a conscious and considered kind of way. So if you have an officer whose subconscious danger buttons react to black men with more panic than white men, and that's enough to send them over the edge of having to choose to fire a deadly shot at some black guy because of how much of a threat his subconscious perceives, where, in the same circumstances but with a white guy they'd be less on edge and end up not firing.... Then that is not racist, because it's not intentional.

Or are you saying that the scenario itself is implausible and never happens? That if you whisked race away out of every police interaction, then none of these 'snap judgement' shootings would have turned out differently?

 

[Mycroft]

This is a bit unfair. There are tests for unconscious racism that are very suggestive. I was shocked to see that I scored poorly, to be honest.

I think it's fair to say that one can have racist biases without being aware of these biases. That doesn't make them bad people, but victims of their environments.

Bingo!!!

I certainly try not to allow racial stereotypes to influence me, but I believe they do.

If they do, being open-minded about the possibility and being willing to consider it is absolutely vital in being able to out-grow them.

 

[Mycroft]

If you are saying that white people can deal, you realize that you are saying that poc can't right?

I am absolutely not saying that.

People of colour have been "dealing" in that way since forever. The point is casting and storytelling should be more inclusive so they don't have to "deal" all the time.

Go watch a lot of film from any country, the majority is represented well and minorities, not so much. If I had a dime for every "white american" character in a Korean film who was clearly 75% asain I'd be rich. But when you don't bother to actually look at other cultures, you are right, it appears to be a white person thing.

Are there a lot of white American actors in Korea who can't find work because those roles are taken by Asians?

If I were to visit (South) Korea, would it be difficult for me to find and view American made television and movies?

If the answeres to those quesitons are "no" and "no", then I think you miss the point.

 

[Mumbles]

Does anyone really think that "I am not saying you are racist, I am saying you acted in a racially biased manner" is really going to be much better?

It really does seem like white sensibilities are more important than black lives.

Jay Smooth once advised people to make that distinction. Here, he described the two usual reactions he got:



In short, as you say, it usually goes badly.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

This is a bit unfair. There are tests for unconscious racism that are very suggestive. I was shocked to see that I scored poorly, to be honest.

I think it's fair to say that one can have racist biases without being aware of these biases. That doesn't make them bad people, but victims of their environments.

I certainly try not to allow racial stereotypes to influence me, but I believe they do.

I don't really like the phrase "unconscious racism" because to me the word racism suggests intention. Other may disagree, but then we're just arguing about the definitions of words, not about states of affairs.

In fact, we have all sorts of biases, based not only on race but all sort of aspects of a persons appearance and demeanor. And a lot of the time, but not always. we're right to have those particular biases. Our lizard brains are pretty well evolved, you know.

I've seen the racial bias test results, and there are even cases where people have a negative bias against member of their own race. This is discussed in a Sam Harris podcast featuring my favorite podcaster, Glenn Loury of the Glenn Show. “There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.” -- Jesse Jackson

I think other factors play a much more prominent role than race in many situations. For example, if someone has a face tattoo and permascowl I think it matters less what racial group they belong to.

 

[Butter!]

You don't see where he got it from? Half the folks here agree that unintentional bias is not racism; that to be racist is to be intentionally hateful and/or convinced of racial inferiority, in a conscious and considered kind of way. So if you have an officer whose subconscious danger buttons react to black men with more panic than white men, and that's enough to send them over the edge of having to choose to fire a deadly shot at some black guy because of how much of a threat his subconscious perceives, where, in the same circumstances but with a white guy they'd be less on edge and end up not firing.... Then that is not racist, because it's not intentional.

Or are you saying that the scenario itself is implausible and never happens? That if you whisked race away out of every police interaction, then none of these 'snap judgement' shootings would have turned out differently?

I know you weren't asking me, but in my opinion - those aren't subconscious biases in the cases of those cops. I would be willing to bet most cops who panic and react like that have much more overt racist ideas in their heads. Maybe that's uncharitable, but I think it anyway.

 

[Mycroft]

And that means that they are going to be invested in not changing their totally not racist behavior and continue the established biased acts they do.

Everybody is vested in maintaining their own point of view. In general it is not easy to convince someone else that they are wrong and you are right.

So how do we adress real problems while preserving the delicate sensibilities?

I’m not saying that preserving delicate sensibilities is the priority. I’m saying that offending delicate sensibilities is counter-productive to the goal of reducing/ending racism. Recognize that it’s the goal that’s important and you will become more open minded about the methods of achieving it.

But with no stigma what is the impediment to give up the racist lifestyle?

I assume most people are motivated, at least a little, by a desire to be a good person who at least tries to do the right things.

Think of it this way; how often does fat shaming lead to weight loss? I’m going to say pretty close to never, therefore fat shaming is counter-productive.

So how do you talk about the racism that people perpetuate without calling them personally racist? Will they ever not hear that they are racist for their perpetuating of racism?

I’m trying to do it in this thread. I’m exchanging ideas with lots of people who have radically different ideas than I do about what racism is, and I haven’t yet called anyone a racist. Instead I’m focusing on what they’re actually saying, and trying to communicate my own ideas in ways they will best be understood.

So start by getting rid of the stigma of violating equal rights acts and equal housing acts? What would destigmatizing racism so that someone can say "I am a racist" with out there being a stigma mean?

Start with your own assertion that racism is not a binary state but a place along a spectrum. Add further that everybody is somewhere along that spectrum with very few truly enlightened beings at the far “zero racist” end of the spectrum. Then look at moving toward that end of the spectrum as an act of growth that most people will want but that many people will need help with.

All you are doing is criticising, you are not putting forward how this hypothetical method of talking about race would even work.

Aren’t I?

Take privilege it is the basic idea that due to racial bias in all levels of society it is more difficult for a black person to achieve the same things as a white person. It is the simple outcome the bias so how can someone argue that there is such a bias against some groups and that as a member of a different group with fewer biases against it they have a competitive advantage? Why is that whole thing wrong? Where does the logical progression go wrong?

People are not born understanding trigonometry either, and you can’t just point to a diagram and a formula and say, |See? If you don’t understand that you’re a bad person. Bad. Shame!”

There is a reason why “woke” is called “woke”. The reason is before you’re woke you legitimately don’t get it. Becoming woke is an educational process that requires the cooperation of the person being educated. You don’t get that cooperation with hostility.

 

[Mycroft]

So if you have an officer whose subconscious danger buttons react to black men with more panic than white men, and that's enough to send them over the edge of having to choose to fire a deadly shot at some black guy because of how much of a threat his subconscious perceives, where, in the same circumstances but with a white guy they'd be less on edge and end up not firing.... Then that is not racist, because it's not intentional.

This perception that black people are more dangerous is also why juries exonerate these police officers. It's not a conscious bias but it is a real bias that kills people.

 

[Lithrael]

This perception that black people are more dangerous is also why juries exonerate these police officers. It's not a conscious bias but it is a real bias that kills people.

And yet Joe and Sir both act like PT has grown another head when he says IF mere unconscious bias is not racism THEN shooting a black man where you would not have shot a white man (because of this bias) is not racist.