Rolling Race 2021

The people who need to hear this are not consuming information from MSNBC

Take who you can get.

The people who need to hear this are not consuming information from anywhere.

Depending on your definition of 'information', sure.

ugh idk why this of all things sets me off. maybe it’s the chinstroky nature of the framing, as if this is a purely academic inquiry that like “merits further study” or possibly the self-important “now I, a person whose opinions are important, see things differently...”

gonna log off for a bit I think - this has pushed me over some stupid edge

pomemitul (and everyone) *of course*

I’m just seeing too much red to respond to this thoughtfully. as noted, gonna step away.

best way to approach this from a personal perspective imo would be to present the capital riots in shorthand as "seditionist race riots" whenever discussing them and see who pushes back

a good inevitable latter half "how it started/how it's going" photo
http://hyperallergic.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Image2-resized.jpg

this should require a link to the "how do you wipe your ass" thread

you don't see the leaves?

actually the confederate flag gets usage in the follow-up picture

I would never desecrate my ass by rubbing it on a filthy Confederate flag

I hear you, but there are ways of making sure it only comes into contact with the expellable contents of one's ass.

Uh, what the fuck is this?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2021/04/27/louisiana-lawmaker-argues-schools-must-teach-good-of-slavery/

His suggestion was immediately met with disgust from fellow Republican state Rep. Stephanie Hilferty, who noted, "there's no good to slavery, though."

succinct and clear! should put a swift end to this--

The bill's committee vote ended up being a 7-7 deadlock, meaning the bill will not move forward to the full House but also hasn't officially been killed.

oh

"there's no good to slavery, though."

that's just your OPINION, stephanie

jesus fuckin christ, we are in the stupidest timeline.

shoulda known he was a fellow Italian, a lot of us are really racist.

you guys can't cancel slavery! you signed up for the 12-month plan!

I would like for life to stop being a Colin Quinn monologue

So, we were voted the anti-Asian hate crime capital of North America:

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2021-vancouver-canada-asian-hate-crimes/

Damn. Had no idea.

not surprised, definitely appalled

that articles explains the history and scapegoating really well

"positive"

Another positive cause of fertility decline has been the assimilation of Hispanic Americans to U.S. fertility norms.

In 2007, Hispanic American women had about 67% more kids than their White counterparts; by 2018, the difference had shrunk to under 20% https://t.co/w5AUpMdzV1 pic.twitter.com/5s8vigEzke

— Bloomberg Opinion (@bopinion) May 7, 2021

Taken down already?

Not to take any heat off Bloomberg media or whatever, but it is my understanding that when women gain control of their fertility & reproductive agency, they overwhelmingly choose to have fewer children than was the prior norm? I thought that was widely considered a good thing for women. But that's not the same as being in charge of Bloomberg's twitter account, obviously.

“Assimilation to US fertility norms” is a preposterous way to put it

not reading the article but the tweet is clearly not about reproductive freedom

bestie’s gonna be okay, right? 💔 pic.twitter.com/fhT7DrQrIz

— Saturday Night Live - SNL (@nbcsnl) May 9, 2021

I'm tired of this shit

Yikes

Also regarding that Bloomberg news tweet, discussions of falling birth rates in the US and Europe always feel like crypto-white nationalism, even before it gets as blatant as that tweet.

why did I make the mistake of reading the comments on that tweet? a lot of good takes screamed over by a lotta "NUH UH" tweets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uf1c0tEGfrU
Would hope black hair would be something people could get some kind of a clue about by nowl. But this is a subject I've seen a few webinars on over the last year. What is supposed to be acceptable in allowing somebody to look both 'professional' and attractive or whatever while at the same time I'm seeing white women with hair coloured blue or fucshia or whatever in work spaces.
Also finding places easily that can cut it properly since it seems that its outside the remit of a lot of salons.
PLus white media personaliies, pop musicians etc adopting black hairstyles seems to have a habit of undermining the legitimacy of the hairstyle for black people who do need to wear their hair in some manner that looks both fashionable and controllable.
Anyway this seemed to be a good summary of the subject.

the fuck is going on in that snl skit?

Black, primarily LBGQT, slang and AAVE being relabeled as “Gen Z-speak” and then mocked

Is it like an idea that was being thrown around during a writing session or something that somebody was messing around with and suggested be brought to one.
Does look like somebody was looking around at the comic possibilities of something that possibly shouldn't have gone any further than that.
Hope its not going to be something that reappears with any frequency.
Looks like it's a signifier that people are getting older if they are looking at the youth of today are all like this like tropes.

or overly safe in their cis whiteness or token acceptance within if the caricatures come from elsewhere.

Does it change the meaning at all if those involved include people who aren't actually white or straight?

Michael Che is taking credit for the sketch and is apparently claiming to not have heard of AAVE prior to this.

He is also the type of guy to post things on instagram and then delete them, so here:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E1C6hXwX0AMohLO?format=jpg&name=medium

I don't follow SNL very closely, so I don't know Che's deal.

"I don't know the right way to deal with this but it's not great that there is a whole industry now catering to "anti racist allies" which seems to have a primarily therapeutic purposes for the "anti racist" on a personal level- like this is how acknowledging your privilege will make you a better person and relieve you of your burdens etc. despite all the theatrics it's a hell of a lot easier to acknowledge one's privilege than to actually try to dismantle it and there's way too much of the former that doesn't even seem to acknowledge that the latter is also necessary"

this is true. im on a fbk group called race talk and a lot of (white) peoples posts use therapeutic language and are very into (often quite lengthy) self reflection, rather than simply contending with the actual issues, maybe as they dont quite know how, not sure. i guess they mean well, but it just reads a bit weirdly.

but it just reads a bit weirdly

We know the feeling.

I was at a webinar on white privilege done by some white supposedly anti racists a few weeks ago. They were talking about confronting racism i the workplace. I asked if there wasa stigma about talking about race in the workplace generally thinking taht it might be gaining weight from that when if it could actually be talked about it might no longer be so much of a folk devil(or is it moral panic?) . They couldn't work out what a stigma would have been tried to marginalise this to a place where i would just be discussing it with teh one black person on their panel.
Is that not the problem summarised in itself.
Like I thought the idea of a stigma about something being discussed would be something recognised.Is that me assuming too much.

JUst does very much strike me that having a stigma about subjects taht are going to need to be addressed in some way because they're not simply going to go away is going to be a problem in itself. Like people are not going to cease to be of different ethnic backgrounds than teh supposed norm and therefore it is not going to be something that can be swept under the rug. & Talking about something like that is more likely to be a point where you can address obvious misunderstandings. Like we're not less intelligent tahn the most arrogant idiots we're going to meet and no we don't want self appointed people to be our representatives because that should very much be more than a stigma, like a total no-no. Room 101 do not do level. & yet seems to be something that I've run into several times and has pissed me off every time i have done. Seems to be so unbelievably smug taht somebody would step in to try to behave like that.

My biggest problem with the "therapeutic antiracism" stuff is how little impact it seems to have vs how much energy is expended on it. I think there are real phenomena identified and analyzed by people like Robyn DiAngelo and Ibram Kendi, and it's probably good to reflect on ideas like privilege and fragility on occasion, but (1) you're never going to get to the bottom of those problems by gazing inward and (2) the phenomenon seems to divorce racism from its economic and class context. And I don't want to overgeneralize about this, because in the real world there is of course overlap between people who focus on personal/cultural racism and people who focus on structural/economic racism. But all the trainings in the world on how to be more sensitive to your black coworkers (in many cases, I think, hypersensitive to the point of interfering with normal human relationships) aren't going to address the fact that you don't have as many black coworkers as you'd expect based on the population of your city (and diversity hiring committees alone aren't going to be enough to address that either).

It reminds me a little bit of trying to solve global warming through consumerism - it's not that installing solar panels and eating less meat are bad ideas, they're great ideas! It's just that this alone will never do more than scratch the surface, because entire structures need to be changed, and some people drive themselves crazy obsessing over their personal carbon footprint while getting very little "bang for their buck" in terms of effort expended vs result.

Sorry Kendi not really the right person to reference there now that I think about it, moreso DiAngelo

yeah, kendi's antiracist book was required reading for my company last year and i thought it was refreshing that it's more about changing policy than staring inward to root out the racist within

man alive OTM. for me, its the apparent prizing of personal introspection that bothers me, as it just ends up being all about the persons personal feelings, skirting around the actual topic of race, and ends up being all about that person, and their struggles to be anti/non racist. maybe there are circles where this kind of thing really works, group therapy specifically about racism, but unless people are really coming clean about their racist thoughts, thereby allowing you to really address them, and not drowning it in introspection around those thoughts, i just cant see the effectivenesss of it. maybe getting to the bottom of a persons personal resistance to discussion of race/acceptance of racism really can help in a broader sense, but i think people will always be racist, its just ingrained in humanity, so im doubtful that approach is really going to tackle all that much.

people weren't always racist so it's not just human nature or anything. but the racist colonial institutions learning to speak antiracism are clearly just trying to prolong their own survival (therefore of racism, colonialism etc)

oh for sure

If a person had a white saviour complex how would they see it?
JUst wondering, like its probably not a single idea but surely there would be some recognition of a perspective taht would be seen from outside as being 'classic white saviour complex'.

Like the idea that somebody would take a supposedly radical theatre group based on theory that was upposed to be addressing this idea of heirarchy and then come out as though their perspective was the only one necessary to the exclusion of people supposedly involved. Leaving the coloured people in the group in a really tokenist position and being treated like they were children who didn't have her insight. When she appeared to be totally tone deaf on the subject of race. As she showed several times.
God, what an annoying person. I think she thought she was like woke and needed to help people along with her great understanding. I now think she is a complete idiot and should be removed from any position of authority. Gah, what can you do.

I think "people were always racist"/"people weren't always racist" is probably a difficult thing to parse out, sort of like ideas about homosexuality in history. Like I think racism in some sense probably always existed, but the particular ways in which it's constructed and the role it plays have changed over time. In other words, I think people have probably always been aware of difference, including difference in features, skin tone, etc., and I think that those superficial differences have probably been linked to class or status at various times throughout history in ways that were sometimes negative or discriminatory, but I don't think the particular form of anti-black racism we have in America is ahistorical or inevitable.

But, at the same time, it can't be excised on an individual level alone so long as it exists at the structural level.

"people weren't always racist so it's not just human nature or anything"

not sure how you can say racism hasnt always been there. white racism might be most pernicious and dominant because of how european countries sought to dominate the world in recent centuries, but prejudice, and discrimination based on genetic differences (if not skin colour, then something else) is as old as humanity. basically, what man alive said.