psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
Q.E.D.
How do you define racism?
- Thread starter rdwight
- Start date
-
- Tags
- racism racism issues
Coming from the dude whose girls have to be white
I have heard people speaking (not in those obvious words) the equivalent - though generally when they thought others present agreed. Most did not in reality!!
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
Do they?
I thought that was what you said.
Admittedly it's hard to find what you are actually saying in between the stupid questions
Magrat
Mrs. Rincewind
Sex (or gender) and race are equivalent in that they can both be used to stereotype a people group. This isn't my opinion, it is an accept fact in sociology and anthropology. If you'd like to argue it, please provide some back up to your assertion. Otherwise, it can be ignored.
Anything can be used to stereotype a group. Gender distinctions are relevant. I asked earlier if women MMA fighters/boxers should be allowed to fight men. The answer, of course, is no. They'd be slaughtered. The physical differences between men and women are just too stark.
There is that thing, called persuasion, that more and more people seem to underestimate.
I have this idea about politics and ideologies, in which people tend to be prejudiced in all sorts of ways and take sides because the facts at stake are too complex and people don't like ambiguity. And when people take sides, I really mean they take sides, almost in a binary, echo chambers "A" and "B", way. It's politics.
You know what's persuasive? Consistency. Echo chambers are places where cognitive dissonance and double standards run rampant, but the other side is at fault because... well... they do the same, only with other premises. Of course. Like a cat fighting the other cat in the mirror. Consistency is the common ground by which some people, sometimes, can be persuaded. At the very least, it paves the way for a rational discussion. It transcends ideologies, it's the corridor between echo chambers.
By the way, I like your posts.
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2016
- Messages
- 6,416
Physiological differences are part of the same package that make an ethnic group or 'racial subgrouping' have a unique designation to begin with. Why are males more physically dominant? Because our historical gender roles made physical strength a desirable trait. Women reared children and took charge of domestic affairs, so they tend to excel more at multi-tasking, intuition, and social interaction. African Americans are represented in athletics in greater proportion than the overall population would suggest because we imposed physical labor on them for centuries, so again you see the same skew towards it as seen in men vs. women.
However, we shouldn't make the mistake of applying some broad trends (which may not be true at all in other parts of the world) to individuals we've just met (or simply observed from a distance). It is also possible that a shift in social attitudes about what traits are 'desirable' will mean a totally different paradigm in another few centuries. Most importantly, of course, is that while there might be some slight differences in tendencies towards certain kinds of tasks a given group possesses (and again, this is typically far more localized than we think), but their core identity as fellow human beings is key.
It's depressingly rare to hear a discussion about observable differences as they exist now or did exist at some point in history without someone eventually starting to introduce overtones that suggest some people are valued differently from others.
I think we'll be able to transition to a new paradigm when it comes to gender/race. Look how fast people accepted gay rights. I'm optimistic.
applecorped
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2008
- Messages
- 20,145
It's an all-purpose term used to denigrate your opponent
The history of it.
See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States
And: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation_in_the_United_States
For a little more global flavor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid
See, I would have thought it was the centuries of systematically denying people access to political and economic power on the basis of race that was causing the divide, but it turns out it was pointing out that it happened that was the problem the whole time. Who would have thunk it?
Mumbles
Philosopher
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2008
- Messages
- 8,726
Anyone who says black people can't be racist has never spent a cold winter morning at a busstop while some Black Israelites are on their rants.
(Okay, that's not literally true, but if you've every heard of them, you know exactly what I mean)
As I've said in another thread, it's an incoherent definition when you try to apply to individuals. Some woman getting scared and clutching her purse as she runs into traffic to avoid the black guy isn't real power, after all, and she's only putting herself in harm's way.
The other one is that racism is a horrible insult, when it's just a description. Trump isn't called racist because he ran for the presidency as a Republican. He's called a racist for the same reason he's called a sex predator - because he's very clearly both.
(Okay, that's not literally true, but if you've every heard of them, you know exactly what I mean)
As I've said in another thread, it's an incoherent definition when you try to apply to individuals. Some woman getting scared and clutching her purse as she runs into traffic to avoid the black guy isn't real power, after all, and she's only putting herself in harm's way.
The other one is that racism is a horrible insult, when it's just a description. Trump isn't called racist because he ran for the presidency as a Republican. He's called a racist for the same reason he's called a sex predator - because he's very clearly both.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
I have problem with superiority alone being considered racism. First I don't understand what general superiority means. You have to be specific .. superior in what ? And that can be measured ..
I believe white people are, on average, more intelligent than black people. I see no problem in stating this.
I also believe that Asian people are more intelligent than white. I believe black are more athletic, and more musically talented. Denying things like that would be stupid, cause it's untrue.
But the difference between races average is lot smaller than difference within the race.
That's where I define racism .. if you imply somebody's qualities based on the average. That's not fair .. and also stupid, cause it's untrue.
That's obviously quite simplistic view .. in US there is so many secondary issues, complex history of the topic, and all is covered in tons of political correctness .. nobody can really understand it all. Also I have no idea where it's all going.
I believe white people are, on average, more intelligent than black people. I see no problem in stating this.
I also believe that Asian people are more intelligent than white. I believe black are more athletic, and more musically talented. Denying things like that would be stupid, cause it's untrue.
But the difference between races average is lot smaller than difference within the race.
That's where I define racism .. if you imply somebody's qualities based on the average. That's not fair .. and also stupid, cause it's untrue.
That's obviously quite simplistic view .. in US there is so many secondary issues, complex history of the topic, and all is covered in tons of political correctness .. nobody can really understand it all. Also I have no idea where it's all going.
Last edited:
Thermal
August Member
Aah, Jesus...here we go....
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,771
This is from a few years ago and it occurred when I had confronted an Australian Aboriginal woman who was abusing Asian students on a bus, in her final attempt to 'refute' my criticism of her actions she stated that her grandmother had been raped by a white man, therefore her actions were simply a case of her 'white blood' talking.
Eg Racism is a genetic trait linked to the 'white gene'.
Eg Racism is a genetic trait linked to the 'white gene'.
Try catching a bus in Footscray without getting abuse from all types of drugged out races
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
Sounds to me you disagree ..
What do you mean by this? Given how confounded this is with environmental factors (as you state at the end), I think the statement needs a little unpacking.
This was also the view of the white supremacists who held that press conference and Trump ended up condemning.
For some definition of athletic, this may well be true from a genetic standpoint.
Do you mean intrinsically, or including environmental and cultural factors. Even so, I think some unpacking is needed. White people are not untalented in Music. Look at Mozart (not a typical example of course), classical music, folk music, etc... I don't see that one can easily say that one group is "better" without being pretty explicit about what is meant.
If you aren't making a positive claim about it definitely due to genetics, then you can probably turn that into a defensible argument. If you mean that intrinsically black people are less intelligent due to, say, genetics... then I think you will have a hard time on your hands.
Generally, yes.
Last edited:
Thermal
August Member
Claiming that "whites are more intelligent than blacks" is often the opening volley for a very thinly veiled racist rant. Hence, here we go...
You genuinely don't see why saying that hackneyed racist stereotypes fit your beliefs might be viewed as deliberate provocation?