Black in America

On many occasions white people will cordially refer to me as "brother". "Hey bro", "thanks brother" or somthing like that. Its not offensive but a little comical that is thought of as the way to address a black guy. Then I started to think to myself that maybe I call white guys "dude". I dont think I do.

Or maybe you're reading too much into it. I've noticed a certain percentage of primarily caucasian males, predominantly middle-class mainstream types derogatorially known as "jocks" or "frat boys", tend to address any other male, regardless of ethnicity, as "bro" or "brother, particularly the former. I notice this, because I get addressed like this a lot by this group, and it annoys the crap out of me (dunno why, I guess I'm a bit on the uptight and formal side). And aside from a barely-noticible Jewish/Eastern European (Ukranian, to be specific) hint to my features, I'm pretty much straight Northern European (British Isles and German).
 
Can't we all agree on the blindingly obvious--that "race", "black", and "white" are real concepts despite being, to a degree, socially constructed? That's hardly remarkable; it's true for virtually ALL our concepts, e.g., "chair", "food", "intelligence", and so on. That hardly means food or intelligence or chairs do not exist or are totally subjective.

What matters is not whether "race" exists, but whether it's an important concept that should determine our behavior towards others. A racist isn't a racist for saying racists exists, but for mistreating those of a different race, just like a chauvinist isn't a chauvinist because he thinks women are different than men, but because how he treats women.
 
Can't we all agree on the blindingly obvious--that "race", "black", and "white" are real concepts despite being, to a degree, socially constructed? That's hardly remarkable; it's true for virtually ALL our concepts, e.g., "chair", "food", "intelligence", and so on. That hardly means food or intelligence or chairs do not exist or are totally subjective.

What matters is not whether "race" exists, but whether it's an important concept that should determine our behavior towards others. A racist isn't a racist for saying racists** exists, but for mistreating those of a different race, just like a chauvinist isn't a chauvinist because he thinks women are different than men, but because how he treats women.

Remarkable.

Must be my month for agreeing with people.

** I'm guessing you mean "race", not "racists".

Well put.
 
Just as a sort of tangent to the main theme of the thread's discussion, I'd like to throw out a couple scenarios out here.


1) It's commonly claimed by various individuals (almost always caucasian) that Black people get worse service in restaurants. I

have been involved in several debates like this in several service-industry oriented fora. There have been cases where Blacks have

sued for "racism" because of what they perceived as a lesser quality of service. This situation is not really debated by service

industry workers and watchers. They admit that Black people do tend to get a somewhat lesser quality of service; although not as

often or as bad as is generally claimed. This is generally considered evidence of a pervading, perhaps unconscious, racism

inherent in American culture.

However, studies have demonstrated that Back people

tip less in restaurants and for other services than Whites
. There are also differences in Asian and Hispanic tipping

patterns, but not as dramatic or consistent. My experiences with the service industry, and that of many of the people I have

conversed with, is that Black customers also have a tendency to be more demanding and problematic, though this seems to vary by

region. (Incidentally, I have heard the latter complaint at least as much from Black servicepeople as I have from other

ethnicities.)

2) Nightclubs and music venues with a predominantly Black clientele (eg. hip-hop clubs) get a disproportionate amount of police,

and in areas with state-controlled liquor sales, LCB attention. This happens regardless of the particular location of the

nightclubs, even those in a predominantly white or mixed area receive a considerably larger amount of police and LCB attention.

This also has been asserted to be an example of unacknowledged institutional racism.

The fact is, however, that violent crime is considerably higher in and surrounding these establishments. Noise complaints are more

frequent, even when they're located in predominantly black neighborhoods. Violations of liquor control laws are more common (over

-pouring, over-serving, insufficient screening of underage patrons, etc). Open illicit drug use is more common. For about a year there was one located in a district with a large GLBT population, and there was constant harassment of openly gay/trans individuals in the immediate vicinity of the nightclub. Most local residents took to crossing the street rather than "running the gauntlet" outside the club.

How much of the "unconscious racism" or "cultural racism" that supposedly pervades middle-class America truly exists, and how much is a smokescreen to cover the undeniable fact that the black communities and organizations patronized predominantly by blacks have some serious problems which they are not willing to address.
 
Just as a sort of tangent to the main theme of the thread's discussion, I'd like to throw out a couple scenarios out here.

The first situation, if true, could be a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the waiter is going to anticipate a bad tip, he might give lousy service, thereby earning a bad tip.
 
You are not seriously suggesting that I should treat claims from skeptics any different than claims from woos?
Of course you should. Your tactic of hammering woos with endless questions is ok for handling know-nothing woos. But when you want to discuss with people with a brain, a question is not generally not considered an answer.
Of course it is. I am just questioning the criteria called "race".
Excellent! You have agreed that it is possible to divide all humans into categories based on some criteria. Would you also agree that it is possible to divide all humans into categories based on the whiteness of their face? I.e., how much light is reflected from their face?
 
Of course you should. Your tactic of hammering woos with endless questions is ok for handling know-nothing woos. But when you want to discuss with people with a brain, a question is not generally not considered an answer.

I ask the questions to get to the bottom of things, without having to weed out weasel words, excuses, irrelevant explanations, etc.

"Evidence?" is very effective, and should work for both woos and skeptics.

Excellent! You have agreed that it is possible to divide all humans into categories based on some criteria. Would you also agree that it is possible to divide all humans into categories based on the whiteness of their face? I.e., how much light is reflected from their face?

Sure. Although I fail to see how that will solve anything. An aboriginee can reflect as much light as a Congolese. Does that mean they are the same "race"?

I have no idea where you are going with this, but in the event of you wasting your time - and mine - going down a road I'm not travelling on, let me restate my concern about "race":

As long as we don't have a commonly agreed upon definition of "race", all discussions about "race" are futile.
 
As long as we don't have a commonly agreed upon definition of "race", all discussions about "race" are futile.

And as long as pedants are stuck on that point, they will abandon the issue and nothing will be done to combat racism.

Race may not be a real thing, but racism surely is.

Getting mired in theoreticals means abandoning the problem of the practical.

I'm doubtful of the efficacy of shouting "race is a purely socially-constructed concept!" out the window to people burning a cross on your lawn. I mean, they're not going to say "Oh! I never thought of that!" and leave, extinguishing as they go.
 
And as long as pedants are stuck on that point, they will abandon the issue and nothing will be done to combat racism.

Race may not be a real thing, but racism surely is.

Getting mired in theoreticals means abandoning the problem of the practical.

I'm doubtful of the efficacy of shouting "race is a purely socially-constructed concept!" out the window to people burning a cross on your lawn. I mean, they're not going to say "Oh! I never thought of that!" and leave, extinguishing as they go.

Where did I say that racism isn't real? Racism is very real, but that's a whole different issue as to whether race can be defined or not.

Also, nowhere have I indicated that racism shouldn't be combated. Discrimination of any kind is unacceptable, regardless of the reasons why people do it.
 
Where did I say that racism isn't real? Racism is very real, but that's a whole different issue as to whether race can be defined or not.

Rich, Claus. If racism is real, then how the hell do you reconcile that acknowledgement with a steadfast denial that race is real? You can't maintain that race isn't real, but racism is without looking like a complete dumbass.

Congratulations.

AS
 
Rich, Claus. If racism is real, then how the hell do you reconcile that acknowledgement with a steadfast denial that race is real? You can't maintain that race isn't real, but racism is without looking like a complete dumbass.

Congratulations.

AS

Here's an analogy: I acknowledge that belief in psi is real, but that psi isn't well defined.

Racism is when people segregate and discriminate based on what they think are racial differences. Whether those differences can be accurately defined is another issue.

You try and ask any racist to clearly define what the racial differences are. See what answer you get.
 
You can't speak for Slingblade, but she has.



If that's not a sign to back off someone, I don't know what else is. I didn't make it up, I'm just providing evidence for what happened. You are making things up.


Just an aside, I've had PM communication with sling...lady's hurtin', folks, let her be, please. Just asking.
 
The first situation, if true, could be a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the waiter is going to anticipate a bad tip, he might give lousy service, thereby earning a bad tip.

Nope. Read the study. Tipping was consistently low regardless of the level of service actually received, or whether the server was white or black. There is some indication that Black Americans may perceive a lesser quality of service, despite receiving equivalent service; and are more likely to pull the race card when service doesn't meet their expectations, regardless of how realistic those expectations are.
 
You try and ask any racist to clearly define what the racial differences are. See what answer you get.

Do you honestly think that will make the slightest bit of difference to a racist? If so, maybe you should join the rest of us in this world, and actually talk to one.

The technicalities of race are completely, totally, thoroughly, and in all other ways irrelevant to the issue. All that is important is perception. It doesn't matter what you call the difference -- race, ethnicity, genetic markers, etc. -- all that matters is the perception of difference, and the judgement of "difference == bad". The beligerent pedantry you get off on is simply teaching a pig to sing. Bigots won't accept that there is no significant difference, because they can see and hear the difference. Whether they can exhaustively describe said differences in a matter acceptable to you doesn't make any difference at all in the real world, and claiming it does is ignorance and hubris.

Humans are not rational animals, they are rationlizing animals. The only thing that is going to change the subject is not nit-picking technical debates on the nature and validity of the perception of difference, it is changing the "difference == bad" judgement. Accepting difference is what is important.
 
Being black in America involves living amongst bigoted dolts such as Glenn Beck, host of CNN program of the same name.
Glenn Beck said:
I don't have a lot of African American friends. And I think part of it is because I'm afraid I would be in an open conversation and I would say something that somebody would take wrong and then it would be a nightmare.

youtube
 
Sure. Although I fail to see how that will solve anything. An aboriginee can reflect as much light as a Congolese. Does that mean they are the same "race"?
No. But at least we are now getting somewhere.
I have no idea where you are going with this, but in the event of you wasting your time - and mine - going down a road I'm not travelling on, let me restate my concern about "race":

As long as we don't have a commonly agreed upon definition of "race", all discussions about "race" are futile.
Cool.

Third question: Would you agree that it is possible to divide humanity into categories based on the width of their nose?
 
Being black in America involves living amongst bigoted dolts such as Glenn Beck, host of CNN program of the same name.


youtube

Okaaaay. He's afraid of accidentally offending black people through ignorance, so he's going to fix that by avoiding them and thus learning nothing?

I think I'd rather be offended occasionally than avoided out of consideration for my delicate feelings.
 
Im a light skinned mixy. Ive found that my "race" changes depending on which part of the country Im in.

Also, in some parts of america (like the northeast) many white people still have strong ties to their ancestoral home countries. They only time they consider themselves "white" is when being compared to non whites. Otherwised if you ask the question "what are you?" you'll get answers like Itailion, Russian, Irish, ect... Even though their families have been in the states for generations.
 

Back
Top Bottom