• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Racism is contextual

Mycroft said:
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.



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.



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.



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.



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.


Aren’t I?




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.
Click to expand...
I like this post.

Prior to the online tests for racist tendencies, I'd say you were spouting nonsense. After surprising results, I like your suggestion.

I'm not consciously racist. I don't believe in racist ideology. But I seem to have some latent racist tendencies of which in not aware. It's a shame.
 
phiwum said:
I'm not consciously racist. I don't believe in racist ideology. But I seem to have some latent racist tendencies of which in not aware. It's a shame.
Click to expand...
Actually, what those tests establish doesn't necessarily need to be a bias you have yourself. Another interpretation of the same results would be that you are, momentarily at first, thinking of biased ideas that you're aware some other people have.
 
The problem isn't racism, it's bigotry. Show me someone who prides themselves on not being racist, and I'll show you a colossal bigot on half a dozen other axes. I'll take an honest racist over a self-deluding SJW bigot any day.
 
theprestige said:
The problem isn't racism, it's bigotry. Show me someone who prides themselves on not being racist, and I'll show you a colossal bigot on half a dozen other axes. I'll take an honest racist over a self-deluding SJW bigot any day.
Click to expand...

Is this a new take on the old "People who call out racism are the actual racists" thing?
 
phiwum said:
I like this post.

Prior to the online tests for racist tendencies, I'd say you were spouting nonsense. After surprising results, I like your suggestion.

I'm not consciously racist. I don't believe in racist ideology. But I seem to have some latent racist tendencies of which in not aware. It's a shame.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'm not entirely convinced that those online tests show much. Not to say that they definitely don't, but I've never seen real research into their effectiveness.

It strikes me that minority students tend to perform worse on tests when told of how important it is, due to "stereotype threat", and I have to wonder if we aren't seeing the same sort of thing in these results.
 
Mumbles said:
Honestly, I'm not entirely convinced that those online tests show much. Not to say that they definitely don't, but I've never seen real research into their effectiveness.

It strikes me that minority students tend to perform worse on tests when told of how important it is, due to "stereotype threat", and I have to wonder if we aren't seeing the same sort of thing in these results.
Click to expand...
I heard a podcast about this recently, might have been you aren't so smart or Science Vs. The implicit bias seems to be real but its not all clear whether it translates to real world behavior.

IIRC, someone gave the test to a bunch of cops and found that cops. Cops in cities with evidence that cops are racially biased in their behavior had similar test results to cops in cities with little evidence of racially biased practices. A different study found that there was a correlation between cities where the population as a whole showed high implicit bias and increased likely hood that the cops show signs of racially biased practices. If I remember the podcast, I'll post a link.

So, remember that article going around a few years back showing that blacks and whites are just as likely to be shot by police? What it actually showed was that once you are in an encounter with police, you are just as likely to get shot but that black men deal with police a lot more. That would imply two problems that need to be dealt with to me. Trigger happy cops and racial bias by cops/black people disproportionately live in bad neighborhoods. Maybe 3 problems.
 
Belz... said:
Why stigmatize something that everybody does constantly, by your own admission? That's like asking us to stigmatize breathing.
Click to expand...

The number of people who do something shouldn't affect the decision to stigmatize it. If breathing should be stigmatized, it shouldn't matter that everyone does it.
 
Racism can't be contextual, because hatred and bigotry are not contextual. That's the very definition of racism/xenophobia/bigotry: "All people who belong to (insert race category) are inherently (insert negative value)". That's a belief that is held regardless of context. The people from KKK don't say "All black people are bad.... except that one black guy who I know from high school. That one is off the hook. Oh... also, the black lady from that Tv show. She's hot, so she's off the hook too"
 
Ron_Tomkins said:
Racism can't be contextual, because hatred and bigotry are not contextual. That's the very definition of racism/xenophobia/bigotry: "All people who belong to (insert race category) are inherently (insert negative value)". That's a belief that is held regardless of context. The people from KKK don't say "All black people are bad.... except that one black guy who I know from high school. That one is off the hook. Oh... also, the black lady from that Tv show. She's hot, so she's off the hook too"
Click to expand...
I've heard it said that in the South, they hate the race but the black folk they know are okay, whereas in the North the opposite is true. In my experience, there's some truth in that, which indicates different kinds of racism.
 
ahhell said:
I heard a podcast about this recently, might have been you aren't so smart or Science Vs. The implicit bias seems to be real but its not all clear whether it translates to real world behavior.

IIRC, someone gave the test to a bunch of cops and found that cops. Cops in cities with evidence that cops are racially biased in their behavior had similar test results to cops in cities with little evidence of racially biased practices. A different study found that there was a correlation between cities where the population as a whole showed high implicit bias and increased likely hood that the cops show signs of racially biased practices. If I remember the podcast, I'll post a link.

So, remember that article going around a few years back showing that blacks and whites are just as likely to be shot by police? What it actually showed was that once you are in an encounter with police, you are just as likely to get shot but that black men deal with police a lot more. That would imply two problems that need to be dealt with to me. Trigger happy cops and racial bias by cops/black people disproportionately live in bad neighborhoods. Maybe 3 problems.
Click to expand...

Policing, in particular, is a bit different, in that it's often deliberately racist and violent - we have Michael Wood JR. from Baltimore, and Michael Bloomberg in NYC, outright stating that police target young black and Hispanic men (with Bloomberg apparently thinking that this was a good thing to say in an interview). And we also have the entire "warrior police" and "Bulletproof Warrior" training, with cops stealing the logo from Marvel character the Punisher (which - talk about the wrong person for police to imitate!).

I'm thinking more in terms of the average person who hears about these implicit bias tests, and just go out and take one. The idea that it could follow a similar route to stereotype threat is something that has been floating in the back of my mind for a while now, so I wouldn't be shocked if researchers had thought it through more methodically. But I do have to wonder about it.
 
phiwum said:
I've heard it said that in the South, they hate the race but the black folk they know are okay, whereas in the North the opposite is true. In my experience, there's some truth in that, which indicates different kinds of racism.
Click to expand...

From "How Half of America Lost Its (Effing) Mind" by David Wong:

"But isn't this really about race? Aren't Trump supporters just a bunch of racists? Don't they hate cities because that's where the brown people live?"

Look, we're going to get actual Nazis in the comment section of this article. Not "calling them Nazis for argument points" Nazis, but actual "Swastikas in their avatars, rooted against Indiana Jones" Nazis. Those people exist.

But what I can say, from personal experience, is that the racism of my youth was always one step removed. I never saw a family member, friend, or classmate be mean to the actual black people we had in town. We worked with them, played video games with them, waved to them when they passed. What I did hear was several million comments about how if you ever ventured into the city, winding up in the "wrong neighborhood" meant you'd get dragged from your car, raped, and burned alive. Looking back, I think the idea was that the local minorities were fine ... as long as they acted exactly like us.

If you'd asked me at the time, I'd have said the fear and hatred wasn't of people with brown skin, but of that specific tribe they have in Chicago -- you know, the guys with the weird slang, music and clothes, the dope fiends who murder everyone they see. It was all part of the bizarro nature of the cities, as perceived from afar -- a combination of hyper-aggressive savages and frivolous white elites. Their ways are strange.
Click to expand...
 
phiwum said:
I like this post.

Prior to the online tests for racist tendencies, I'd say you were spouting nonsense. After surprising results, I like your suggestion.

I'm not consciously racist. I don't believe in racist ideology. But I seem to have some latent racist tendencies of which in not aware. It's a shame.
Click to expand...


Thank you.

Now, addressing some of the broader issues in this thread:

I recognize my own racist tendencies.

While I consider myself to be pretty "woke", and I don't believe myself to be superior in any way, nor do I believe anyone else should be considered inferior in any way based on their ethnicity or culture. At the same time I recognize that sometimes in some circumstances I have a tendency to react to people who are black differently than I would if they were not black.

This is not something I do on purpose. Because I don't do it on purpose it doesn't fall under the definition of "racism" used by many people in this thread. I think that's wrong. I think it's entirely appropriate to use the word "racism" to cover biases and prejudices that are subconscious, unconscious, and unintentional because these biases permeate our culture and continue to unfairly disadvantage people.

I believe the term “racism” is appropriate whenever a person’s race or ethnicity influences what you think about them. This is not always hostile or disadvantageous, but can also be benign or even advantageous.

For example, if I expect that a black person would have a particular interest in a documentary or museum exhibit about slavery just because they’re black, that’s a racist assumption even though it’s not hostile or disadvantaging them in any way. Similarly, expecting that an Asian person would be better at computers or other technical areas than a comparably qualified non-Asian person is also a racist assumption, even if it’s to the advantage of an Asian person.

Not everyone will agree with that, so…thoughts?
 
I do sorta get, not 100% agree with but do somewhat get, the intention here, trying to remove the stigma from a word because, yeah I do agree that the stigma around the word, deserved as it may be, does make having this discussion near impossible.

So yeah in the abstract "We need to talk about how racial biases can in some cases is, while not benign at least not always intentionally malicious" is not a bad place to try to take a social discussion which sadly has stalled out to some degree. I'm not against the idea or the intent here.

That being said we have to be realistic here. This discussion is not going to take place in some perfect hypothetical perfect friction-less vacuum of debate. Word usage doesn't exist in some sort of linguistic control group where every usage of the word that doesn't make your argument easier doesn't exist.

You just can't pretend that the common, everyday usage/definition of "racism" doesn't exist. And you can't deny that in 99% of common usage admitting you're a racist isn't the sort of statement you're gonna be congratulated for "being so woke" about.

Nobody is going to rush to pin the label of your version of the word "racism" on their chest in a world where having that label makes you the worst possible thing a person can be in almost every real world instance.

I mean seriously "People don't want to be called a racist flippantly" is not a statement I feel should really require this degree of defense.

And honestly this whole "Once everybody admits they are flawed the problem is just gonna magically fix itself" is just not how reality works.

Like I've said Liberals/Progressives have got to stop thinking the solution is some new minor variation on "Liberal White Guilt." Stop trying to make it happen.

So no, damn me if need be but I'm not particularly interested in purging myself of the Tumblr version of "Original Sin" which this is rapidly turning into. And I don't say that flippantly. That's what this is really, really starting to track as. I'm started to legit get that same creepy vibe off of the "Admit you are racist! Admit it! Admit it and be woke!" thing that I get off of the "Admit you are a dirty sinner! Admit it! Admit it and be saved!" stuff the fire and brimstone crowd plays.

Because... it is sort of the same thing. Some inherent flaw in my self separate from any of my actual opinions or stances that I inherited due to someone else's evils in the past that I have to admit to and surrender myself to, for which the very denial of is sign of me having it, which I require some special elevated class of people to convince me I have and absolve me of it.

I'm sorry I just can't get onboard with that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom