Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nograviti, it's actually YOU that doesn't "get it". People are getting absolutely ridiculous with the race card, it's being pulled out for every stinking thing under the sun regardless of it being racist or not. As a result, people are getting frustrated and TIRED of it and they are just opting out of the conversation about racism because we are just beating our heads against the wall. This thread is a prime example of faux racism that is being made out to be real racism and it just isn't.
REAL racism is denying you a job or a promotion strictly because of the color of your skin. REAL racism is you being denied to rent an apartment or buy a house in a certain neighborhood because of the color of your skin. REAL racism is not allowing you to vote because of the color of your skin. THESE are the REAL battles we need to be fighting but people are so tired of the faux racism claims muddying the waters they are giving up fighting the REAL problem altogether.
You assume that because this poster is "presumably a middle aged white male" that he has no skin in the game to end racism and that he couldn't possibly understand the plight of one who has been discriminated against. We, regardless of race, gender, whatever have ALL felt discrimination and some of us feel it on a daily basis. NEWS FLASH: Black folks are not the only race that experiences racism. We ALL have skin in the game to end discriminatory practices. For you, and anyone else, to think white people don't "get it" simply because of the color of our skin (which is racist, by the way) and vilifying us as a result is NOT going to help stop the practice of discrimination it's only going to make it worse.
Ah but they are all part and parcel of the same thing my friend.
Also nice try with the "we have all experienced prejudice line". Sorry mate, the real issue with racism is who holds economic power. Last time I checked the majority of fortune 500 companies were run by old white men. Likewise minorities have fewer opportunities open to them precisely because of prejudice and racism.
Case and point take unskilled workers, white and black unskilled workers are equally uneducated and unemployable as neither have any useful skills. But if you look at data across all western nations, unskilled whites have higher levels of employment and lower levels of poverty. That is down to racism and prejudice as we can make a fair assessment that both sets of people are the same. If outcomes were the same for both groups then I would agree the problem of racism is the same for both groups. They are not the same, so it is clear blacks are affected disproportionately more... get it!!
As I explained to another poster, racism comes in many shades of grey. I don't care for outdated textbook definitions of racism. Address my point, if an exchange between two different sets of similar individuals is different primarily because of ethnicity then racism is probably a factor.
It is not for you to define what is REAL racism. Such a position is arrogant and patronizing. If the OP was offended, then address her concerns. Especially when the transgressor in this case fails the simple litmus test I outlined above (would she have said that if the OP was white? Probably not)
Tired or not, the demographics of America will mean this will be more of an issue in the future not less.
What this thread is actually about is change, when you try to kill what was previously a social norm (as racism was), with each massive leap forward you will see periods of resistance to further change. I believe we are in period of resistance, as certain individuals want to roll back the clock.
Some of this is also down to competition, racism makes it easier to exclude certain groups from full socio-economic participation. Take away those barriers and you have new market entrants and hence more competition..
You can quote as many definitions by mainly white academic men (which is part of the problem in itself).
Your own world view will define how you see the world. Its the reason why as a male I never try to pretend I fully understand sexism. I cant as I am a man and in some respects consciously or unconsciously part of the problem.
I am sorry, Racism comes in many shades of grey and for me what you have defined as prejudice / stereotyping is very much a component of Racism.
If it wasn't, the sort of prejudice and stereotyping which led to the Zimmerman and numerous other recent cases would not have been viewed by the African American community as examples of Racism!!
What is most interesting is that most of the posters including yourself have not even attempted to address my arguments. But merely rolled out the typical mainstream ad hominem responses to the question of racism/prejudice and stereotyping.
Illegal or not, they are a problem. I personally think Stereotyping and Prejudice should be frowned upon and tangible products of it (like a higher stop and search rate for innocent black and hispanic teens or biased hiring patterns) should be made illegal.
Prejudice : So not hiring a black or Hispanic worker due to unfavorable opinions of that person's ethnic group is ok to you??
Stereotyping : So assuming any black male who approaches you is going to mug you or if you are a white female rape you is again ok to you??
Sorry, but the lines between what you have defined as racist and not racist are not so clear when you actually bother to look at them in more detail..
So, using your logic, since an Audi, a Kia and a Ford are all cars, I should be able to just use any of those when referring to a vehicle???
No.
Words matter. Each of these things has a specific meaning, and yes, they overlap in SOME ways, but they are NOT interchangeable.
I see that we still have people joining this thread who (understandably) chose not to read through the 20+ pages of posts before replying. Allow me to fill in some of the details.
The OP is someone of Asian heritage who was born and raised in the states. She has a degree in English and speaks it with no accent and has not encountered any race-specific incidents in the state where she used to reside. She recently moved to a new state and started a new job, and on her first day had this exchange with "RB" right after they were introduced. Having lived with, and gotten used to, people (white, black, Asian, Latino, etc.) who knew how to act around people with different backgrounds she found the encounter to be jarring and griped about it in an online forum, neglecting to fill in all essential details.
Since the encounter that left a bad taste in her mouth is race-related (i.e. it would not have taken place if it were not for her race) she used the "r" word to label it, not realizing that many people have strong feelings regarding how that term should be defined in relation to other, similar words like "bigotry" or "prejudice."
I hope this clears up some of the confusion.
Wow, thank you for clearing this up for all us noobs.
Ah but they are all part and parcel of the same thing my friend.
Also nice try with the "we have all experienced prejudice line". Sorry mate, the real issue with racism is who holds economic power. Last time I checked the majority of fortune 500 companies were run by old white men. Likewise minorities have fewer opportunities open to them precisely because of prejudice and racism.
So because the power is held by "old white men" all white people should be vilified?
Case and point take unskilled workers, white and black unskilled workers are equally uneducated and unemployable as neither have any useful skills. But if you look at data across all western nations, unskilled whites have higher levels of employment and lower levels of poverty. That is down to racism and prejudice as we can make a fair assessment that both sets of people are the same. If outcomes were the same for both groups then I would agree the problem of racism is the same for both groups. They are not the same, so it is clear blacks are affected disproportionately more... get it!!
You know, it's funny because I've actually been ENCOURAGED to hire the black guy in situations like this because of corporate inclusion and diversity initiatives. I happen to know a LOT of companies who have the same policy for hiring and promotions. Some take it way too far to the point where whites are affected disproportionately when they sometimes have more experience than the black guy
As I explained to another poster, racism comes in many shades of grey. I don't care for outdated textbook definitions of racism. Address my point, if an exchange between two different sets of similar individuals is different primarily because of ethnicity then racism is probably a factor.
We have ALL had times where we miss judge others based upon little or no information. That's due to being human not from being racist. In no way do I feel there is no racism because there is but I also think people are using the term far too loosely.
It is not for you to define what is REAL racism. Such a position is arrogant and patronizing. If the OP was offended, then address her concerns. Especially when the transgressor in this case fails the simple litmus test I outlined above (would she have said that if the OP was white? Probably not)
It absolutely IS for me to define what is REAL racism. Who are you to tell me that I don't have a right to determine what is racism and what isn't? Does the black race own the market on racism? Do you think only black people experience it? Really?? I'd say you are the arrogant one. The OP left out critical information in her post that when revealed later proved the situation was not racist at all.
Tired or not, the demographics of America will mean this will be more of an issue in the future not less.
What this thread is actually about is change, when you try to kill what was previously a social norm (as racism was), with each massive leap forward you will see periods of resistance to further change. I believe we are in period of resistance, as certain individuals want to roll back the clock.
THIS is a statement I can actually agree with. HOWEVER, I do not believe that you and I would agree on who is actually trying to roll back the clock.
Some of this is also down to competition, racism makes it easier to exclude certain groups from full socio-economic participation. Take away those barriers and you have new market entrants and hence more competition..
This is the most ridiculous accusation I've heard yet. REALLY?? Everybody would benefit if everyone were doing well economically.
You can quote as many definitions by mainly white academic men (which is part of the problem in itself).
Your own world view will define how you see the world. Its the reason why as a male I never try to pretend I fully understand sexism. I cant as I am a man and in some respects consciously or unconsciously part of the problem.
I am sorry, Racism comes in many shades of grey and for me what you have defined as prejudice / stereotyping is very much a component of Racism.
If it wasn't, the sort of prejudice and stereotyping which led to the Zimmerman and numerous other recent cases would not have been viewed by the African American community as examples of Racism!!
What is most interesting is that most of the posters including yourself have not even attempted to address my arguments. But merely rolled out the typical mainstream ad hominem responses to the question of racism/prejudice and stereotyping.
Illegal or not, they are a problem. I personally think Stereotyping and Prejudice should be frowned upon and tangible products of it (like a higher stop and search rate for innocent black and hispanic teens or biased hiring patterns) should be made illegal.
Prejudice : So not hiring a black or Hispanic worker due to unfavorable opinions of that person's ethnic group is ok to you??
Stereotyping : So assuming any black male who approaches you is going to mug you or if you are a white female rape you is again ok to you??
Sorry, but the lines between what you have defined as racist and not racist are not so clear when you actually bother to look at them in more detail..
Quote:
Prejudice : So not hiring a black or Hispanic worker due to unfavorable opinions of that person's ethnic group is ok to you??
Stereotyping : So assuming any black male who approaches you is going to mug you or if you are a white female rape you is again ok to you??
This is a straw man argument you're resorting to because you don't have a toenail, let alone a leg, to stand on.
Prejudice can be favorable or unfavorable. You know, like when people assume Asian people are smart and do well in school, are hard workers, rule the field in certain industries, etc. Not unfavorable but a prejudice just the same. AND NOWHERE IN MY THREAD DO I STATE WHAT IS, AND WHAT IS NOT, OKAY WITH ME.
As for your example with stereotyping, even 30 years ago when walking down the street after midnight, if I happened to approach a young woman, she would speed up. Not because she was afraid of all men who were white, and it didn't matter what race the woman was, but because she did not know what this one man entering her space was going to do. AND NOWHERE DO I STATE WHAT IS, OR WHAT IS NOT, OKAY WITH ME.
Prejudice and stereotyping are not illegal. If they were, most minorities would find themselves behind bars because of the way they feel about the police, only they would have no representation because people are also prejudiced against and stereotype lawyers. Many people here would be in court all day because of the prejudice and stereotyping they do against Managers. And the courts would be tied up with cases about stereotyping Catholics, doctors, the wealthy, blue collar workers, people who are overweight, etc.
You may be fine with not adhering to definitions, but thank God our lawmakers did see a need to define what institutes a crime, otherwise people who were victims of racial discrimination, rape, or any other crime, would have no recourse under the law.
Remember that next time you feel you're a victim, which I suspect is on a regular basis.
This is a straw man argument you're resorting to because you don't have a toenail, let alone a leg, to stand on.
Prejudice can be favorable or unfavorable. You know, like when people assume Asian people are smart and do well in school, are hard workers, rule the field in certain industries, etc. Not unfavorable but a prejudice just the same. AND NOWHERE IN MY THREAD DO I STATE WHAT IS, AND WHAT IS NOT, OKAY WITH ME.
As for your example with stereotyping, even 30 years ago when walking down the street after midnight, if I happened to approach a young woman, she would speed up. Not because she was afraid of all men who were white, and it didn't matter what race the woman was, but because she did not know what this one man entering her space was going to do. AND NOWHERE DO I STATE WHAT IS, OR WHAT IS NOT, OKAY WITH ME.
Prejudice and stereotyping are not illegal. If they were, most minorities would find themselves behind bars because of the way they feel about the police, only they would have no representation because people are also prejudiced against and stereotype lawyers. Many people here would be in court all day because of the prejudice and stereotyping they do against Managers. And the courts would be tied up with cases about stereotyping Catholics, doctors, the wealthy, blue collar workers, people who are overweight, etc.
You may be fine with not adhering to definitions, but thank God our lawmakers did see a need to define what institutes a crime, otherwise people who were victims of racial discrimination, rape, or any other crime, would have no recourse under the law.
Remember that next time you feel you're a victim, which I suspect is on a regular basis.
Wish I could rep you but I have to spread the love. Great post
She might be ignorant or a fool but I would not automatically say she is a racist.
What she did was racist. That does not mean that she hates people of whatever the OP's background is. It doesn't mean she's a bad person. But the situation described by the OP was racism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerseygal4u
Maybe she looked at your last name and your appearance,and thought you were an immigrant.
Who knows,but why label the woman a racist?
You are not getting off on a good start......
Maybe she was just trying to have dialogue?
Maybe she also speaks the langauge she thought you spoke and wanted to find common ground?
Trust,if she was TRULY racist then she would not have said anything to you at all.
I find the true racists do not talk to people of other races at all.
None of us know what was in her head. The first statement--"so what's your first language?" could be merely a rude verbalization of her stereotype. The second and third . . . that's just sad. OP is being introduced to co-workers in English. Assuming that the OP's heritage is obvious (let's say Indian, for example), then I think a reasonable question about the person's background would be: "do you speak Hindi?" or better, "what part of India is your family from?" Although it would pay to be more tactful, because the OP could actually be Pakistani, and those questions would be a faux pas. Better to avoid the background question when being introduced in a professional setting.
It's not like good people don't do racist things sometimes and hold unconscious biases. It's not like average people don't hold conscious and unconscious stereotypes and prejudices and act on them sometimes.
The problem with a lot of the people defending the woman in this scenario is that these defenders think that she might not be a bad person so they don't want to cast her as a "true racist." The defenders see "true racism" as the white-hooded exception to the rule of equal treatment. As a result, they want to find alternative motivations for unequal treatment that is quite clearly on the basis of race.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wmsn4Life
It's not racism. It's prejudice. Learn the difference.
Racism: discrimination on the basis of race.
Discrimination: differential treatment
Yeah, it's racism. There was a prejudice (more specifically a stereotype) that the OP's first language was other than English. Acting upon it, by asking OP what his/her first language is (when first meeting and being introduced in English!) is racism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marlinfshr
Lighten up! That's called conversation. Not racism. Please!!! Do you have any accent by any chance? And before you accuse me of being racist, many people have accents they may have picked up from their parents.
As the OP quite clearly stated that his/her first language is English, why would you expect the OP to have an accent? And the woman continued to press the issue after being told by the OP that the OP's first language is English.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe from dayton
Um, no. It is not called racial profiling, nor does it meet the definition of racial profiling.
It is an inappropriate question based on an incorrect assumption, but I would not call it racist.
Why wouldn't you call it racist? Do you think it was not asked on the basis of race?
This is a straw man argument you're resorting to because you don't have a toenail, let alone a leg, to stand on.
Prejudice can be favorable or unfavorable. You know, like when people assume Asian people are smart and do well in school, are hard workers, rule the field in certain industries, etc. Not unfavorable but a prejudice just the same. AND NOWHERE IN MY THREAD DO I STATE WHAT IS, AND WHAT IS NOT, OKAY WITH ME.
As for your example with stereotyping, even 30 years ago when walking down the street after midnight, if I happened to approach a young woman, she would speed up. Not because she was afraid of all men who were white, and it didn't matter what race the woman was, but because she did not know what this one man entering her space was going to do. AND NOWHERE DO I STATE WHAT IS, OR WHAT IS NOT, OKAY WITH ME.
Prejudice and stereotyping are not illegal. If they were, most minorities would find themselves behind bars because of the way they feel about the police, only they would have no representation because people are also prejudiced against and stereotype lawyers. Many people here would be in court all day because of the prejudice and stereotyping they do against Managers. And the courts would be tied up with cases about stereotyping Catholics, doctors, the wealthy, blue collar workers, people who are overweight, etc.
You may be fine with not adhering to definitions, but thank God our lawmakers did see a need to define what institutes a crime, otherwise people who were victims of racial discrimination, rape, or any other crime, would have no recourse under the law.
Remember that next time you feel you're a victim, which I suspect is on a regular basis.
straw man argument, was wondering when that old chestnut would pop up.
Look engage with my points instead of trying to muddy the water. You haven't addressed the fact that your definitions are based on conclusions drawn up by old white men in the main, which makes them questionable.
Also you have ducked my points about the differences in interaction based upon solely race.
Also, I couldn't give a figleaf about positive stereotypes, I was talking about negative ones aimed at specific groups and the effects of them.
What's even funnier is that as with all white males when discussing this issue the views of the person feeling slighted are ignored and your interpretation of events is what is important.
Going on your last argument, previously it was ok to enslave a black person if he had no documentation proving that he was a free man. If we just blindly accept the status quo, which you are happy to do as the problem doesn't affect you, proving my point exactly, then laws would never change. Laws and regulations are fluid and are changed are updated as society progresses, I assure you this very debate is indicative of change.
I have received a few reps, so not everyone is buying the nonsense your selling.
As for the victim argument hardly, couldnt be further from the truth. There is a reason why I have homes in London, NYC and LA...
First of all, I gave those of you who are arguing about what words mean, way too much credit when I hoped we would have an intelligent exchange.
Secondly, I mistakenly thought you were all educated enough to use a dictionary, but no. We keep going round and round in circles much like one does with a three year old who isn't getting his way.
Third, nograviti, you are all over the board with your bloviating. You want to argue just to argue, and you're making statements about white men that show your true colors. I'm guessing that you are like Scratchie - white twenty-somethings tilting at windmills for a cause you're not even willing to a) do something meaningful about, and b) educate yourself on.
Just another Ben Affleck talking about the middle east.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
