rolling "Is This Racist?" thread

Matt P, are you a little illiterate?

shlubby whitetards

u ____ist

He's certainly cranky, at the very least.

a lot illiterate, just did a lot of sb-ing, now i'm a lot done with this thread but your book recommendation above looks a lot good mordy, i'll have to practice being illiterate with it some time. xp

the important thing here is that ppl who agree 99.8% with each other argue dictionary definitions while the TERRORISTS WIN

Terrorists would've won anyway, dude.

did you sb me, Matt P?

The clash in this thread in this thread, as I have read it, boils down to defining racism very broadly and purely as an idea, or defining it with greater reference to how it is propagated and experienced. The white ppl tend to go with the first, while non-whites have a much stronger affinity for the latter.

― Aimless, Friday, January 27, 2012 11:32 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

making this into a race thing in such cut-and-dried terms strikes me as absurdly presumptive (and horribly counter-productive besides). are we really so certain that most people of color people share a common definition of the term? asians, non-white hispanics, native americans, etc? can we say with any confidence that they collectively agree that only people who enjoy a significant social power advantage can be racist? i kind of doubt it. i've known many people of color to complain about the racism of other people of color.

Still waiting to hear frogbs' times when racism is not harmful.

among friends, talking shit to each other?

I mean there's a permeating attitude around here that says "anytime you use a stereotype or put down someone based on their culture, then you are a racist, and racism is always wrong and hurtful", which is okay in theory, but in practice this kind of shit happens all the time. Obviously this discussion has turned a bit but I wasn't a fan of how nobody tries to distinguish between things that are actually harmful and demonstrate our culture divide vs. someone making a joke in bad taste without any real malicious intent, kind of implying that it's all equally bad

well if u ever come back maybe u can c/p a post that shows shlubby whitetards cry about the ways it may be possible if they can just fly away w their imaginations they can be racised against.

eh that's basically every contenderizer post itt?

making this into a race thing in such cut-and-dried terms strikes me as absurdly presumptive (and horribly counter-productive besides). are we really so certain that most people of color people share a common definition of the term? asians, non-white hispanics, native americans, etc? can we say with any confidence that they collectively agree that only people who enjoy a significant social power advantage can be racist? i kind of doubt it. i've known many people of color to complain about the racism of other people of color.

― his hands are a dirty fountain through which lives spurt (contenderizer), Friday, January 27, 2012 11:44 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Mostly, I blame myself - I didn't manage to contribute to the last funds drive, and I understand that stet was just under the level where he was going to write that filter, the one where you can write [racist1] and [racist2], and depending on your setting you see them as "institutionally racist"/"racist" and "racist"/"bigoted".

so absurdly presumptive

Ah, you are a little illiterate.

fuck off limey

what exactly is at stake for you, Matt, with racism ONLY referring to institutional racism or also referring to the concept of judging/stereotyping ppl based on their race? why does the latter become a weasely way for white ppl to imagine racism against them, but the first definition is the legit one?

lol @ asking Matt this and not me when I made the same post with less swearing an hour ago

you should probably answer then. *steams off*

jesus christ ur a wormy motherfucker...

zach so obviously otm. hilarious to see so many shlubby whitetards cry about the ways it may be possible if they can just fly away w their imaginations they can be racised against.

― try again, fascist (Matt P), Friday, January 27, 2012 11:37 AM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

just because i agree in principle with an idea doesn't mean that i have to see equal merit in every application of that idea. i've tried to articulate a fairly complex response ITT.

the immediate and idiotic recourse to cheap playground shaming isn't worth responding to, so...

Your mistake was not swearing tbh xps

I'm okay with anyone answering it. Also, maybe explain what you see as the meaning of the term 'institutional?' Are all of these things examples of institutional racism?
1. A belief in the racial superiority of people on your own race
2. Not hiring qualified POC bc you believe they aren't as intelligent as non-POC
3. Crafting drug policy that targets particular people of color
4. Beating someone up bc you don't like what race they come from
5. Believing that people have different strengths and weaknesses because they belong to an inherent racial category
etc etc

I think they're all examples of racism, but I don't get necessarily what makes them all institutional. Certainly some might have systemic qualities (particularly #3) but racism is not always an institutional conspiracy, I don't think. Maybe it is -- but what do we gain from believing that?

Kind of remembering the battle between black customers and Korean convenience store/bodega owners documented in early 90s LA that didn't need white people to tell each group how to be racist

but its modern form and the term itself were invented by white ppl, so we feel a somewhat proprietary interest in its definition.

Please direct all your "ask a white man" questions to Aimless.

Does a thread exist for the movie Crash?

eh that's basically every contenderizer post itt?

― try again, fascist (Matt P), Friday, January 27, 2012 11:45 AM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

horseshit. nowhere in this thread have i made a big, weeping deal about the ability of white people to be racised against. i've gone much farther out of my way to condemn white complaints of "reverse racism".

i feel like i'm being taken to task by an idiot with an axe to grind.

Well, I don't think it has to be a "conspiracy" for it to be institutional (although it certainly can be). I'm sure many of the roots of institutional racism are learned, just as with personal, bigotted racism.

institutional racism = things posted on rolling "Is This Racist?" thread

waiting for deej to show up and call me a fascist again, tbh

I believe the meaning of institutional ____ is that certain beliefs, policies, and prejudices exist at a number of different levels of an institutional structure, and that they often work in tandem to deny the rights of a particular group and privilege another group. But I also believe that there are numerous institutions, some as large as the colonial project of the Western world, some unique to particular governments in particular countries, some corporate cultures, communal cultures, familial cultures. Is racism that primarily exists and is perpetuated within a familial system 'institutional'? Not all of these institutions share the same racist beliefs. In some it is very pronounced, in others it is totally silent + implicit. I think an intelligible discussion of race will account for all these nuances and subtleties, and not try to argue that racism means one particular thing and nothing else.

contenderizer, since you have been taking a very semantically-based approach to this discussion, I defy you to defend your characterization of my speaking one the one hand of a 'tendency' and on the other of an 'affinity' as being "cut-and-dried terms". This is like trying to beat me about the face and head using a cloud for a weapon.

Holy shit guys, the gawker guy getting fired for a racial slur was over half a thread ago!

welcome to ilx, beachville

actually I think I have changed my mind and I'm more in tune with DJP and Matt P

you can't take a semantically-based approach to a semantics argument, you can either make a semantics argument or you can argue about something else entirely

contenderizer is doing #1 everyone else is doing #2

btw frogbs, it might be ok among your friends to crack racist shit and have amateur comedian hour or whatever, but... really, it's a bad idea in the long term. There's only so much you can do with that and talk shit and pretend that you have "real" feelings underneath before your public persona is completely the racist/sexist/homophobic bullshit. If people only see you acting that way, then guess what? That's you.

you can't take a semantically-based approach to a semantics argument
you can't take a semantically-based approach to a semantics argument
you can't take a semantically-based approach to a semantics argument
you can't take a semantically-based approach to a semantics argument

actually I think I have changed my mind and I'm more in tune with DJP and Matt P

― mh, Friday, January 27, 2012 12:02 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

cool, then i'm the one you'll want to be calling a "shlubby whitetard".

a semantics argument is inherently semantically-based xp

I have basically been in agreement with DJP and zach, but I am a little mystified by the severity of Matt P's beef with contenderizer. I don't think contenderizer was ever making an argument form the "white people are victims of racism too" camp. Unless I missed something? This went by quickly, but I only recall seeing a few posts early on that were actually arguing that.

contenderizer must die for frogbs' sins

http://www.seeklogo.com/images/T/tumblr-logo-941B107660-seeklogo.com.gif

I believe the meaning of institutional ____ is that certain beliefs, policies, and prejudices exist at a number of different levels of an institutional structure, and that they often work in tandem to deny the rights of a particular group and privilege another group. But I also believe that there are numerous institutions, some as large as the colonial project of the Western world, some unique to particular governments in particular countries, some corporate cultures, communal cultures, familial cultures. Is racism that primarily exists and is perpetuated within a familial system 'institutional'? Not all of these institutions share the same racist beliefs. In some it is very pronounced, in others it is totally silent + implicit. I think an intelligible discussion of race will account for all these nuances and subtleties, and not try to argue that racism means one particular thing and nothing else.

The "institution" under discussion here as I understand it is American society, which is why pretty much all of these things fall under the umbrella of institutional racism. If you want to make the distinction between, say, society at large and specific businesses/organizations within that society, that's fine I guess, but it misses the point that there are a lot of things that are, if not outright barriers, definitely impediments in the way of a person of color and assumptions about them in our society that an otherwise equivalent white person wouldn't have to deal with.

Like, a good chunk of the things that pop up on this thread can be chalked under "idiot didn't think things through" but that idiot also grew up in a society that never actually made him/her think about those things in the first place.

xp: lol iatee OTM

btw frogbs, it might be ok among your friends to crack racist shit and have amateur comedian hour or whatever, but... really, it's a bad idea in the long term. There's only so much you can do with that and talk shit and pretend that you have "real" feelings underneath before your public persona is completely the racist/sexist/homophobic bullshit. If people only see you acting that way, then guess what? That's you.

I think I understand the value of not making race jokes in public

you can't take a semantically-based approach to a semantics argument because a semantics argument is inherently semantically-based?

unless I am mistaken, this means your approach is required to be semantically-based.

I went to south africa recently and boy are my arms tired

Dan, it'd be useful for someone who does get it to point out how a possible less egregious case of the "idiot didn't think things through" is actually explaining a manifestation of something systemic.

but seriously folks race and racism is pretty crazy in south africa

contenderizer, since you have been taking a very semantically-based approach to this discussion, I defy you to defend your characterization of my speaking one the one hand of a 'tendency' and on the other of an 'affinity' as being "cut-and-dried terms". This is like trying to beat me about the face and head using a cloud for a weapon.

― Aimless, Friday, January 27, 2012 11:58 AM (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i meant that describing this discussion in terms of a position that "white ppl tend to go with" in opposition to one that "non-whites have a much stronger affinity for" racializes an otherwise abstract disagreement in very explicit terms. i don't reject your argument, but i'm not sure that it's either true or productive.

http://www.newstatesman.com/200003270024