Microaggressions

Or, Has the World Gone Stark Raving Mad?

Anthropology, Economics, History, Sociology etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Microaggressions

#521  Postby Oldskeptic » Jul 24, 2015 2:39 am

OlivierK wrote:Oldskeptic, your trite and overused harangue above ignores the fact that homicide rates are strongly linked with disadvantage, as is being black in America.


What a patronizing attitude. That's all it takes to justify young men killing other young men? Maybe the courts should consider allowing the 'disadvantaged defense' in murder trials?

Maybe you could explain to me exactly what you mean by 'disadvantaged'. Does it have something to do with being poor? There are an awful lot of poor white people. Does it have to do with being looked down upon? There are an awful lot of white people that are looked down upon by other white people, and for that matter there are black people that look down upon other black people, and black people that look down upon other types of people.

Doesn't matter that blacks, just as whites do, occupy every rung of the economic ladder, is all it takes to be disadvantaged is to be black? Bit of special pleading going on there, I think. Ever heard the term 'poor white trash'? I guarantee that the term didn't originate with black people.

There is no underclass that is comprised only of black people, or "people of color". But there is an economic underclass comprised of people of all "colors".

Where I went to junior high and high school we were mainly divided by Main Street. East side and West side. East side was synonymous with the right side and West side with the wrong side. My group of friends from my neighborhood was made up of people. People that I guess today you'd be obligated to further divide into blacks, whites, Hispanics, native Americans, and Asians, but that never really came up other than Kevin's mom was from Italy and made the best lasagna, Kenny's Dad was from East Los Angles and his grandparents were from Northern Mexico, and his Dad made the best beef burritos. Brian's grandparents were from Greece and us boys loved going to his house on holidays for stuffed squid and grape leaves, spanakopita and lemon rice. We didn't really hang out at Ray's house because his parents were Lutheran and pretty weird. Ronny's house was pretty interesting because his father was black and his mother was Italian. The other Kevin's parent's were both Irish and Catholic through and through, originally from Chicago. I was the Mormon in the group, a boy with little of an ethnic heritage worth noting except that I was descended from both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. And finally there was Ralph. Ralph was black and his parents were black, not brown or dark brown, they were black. Ralph stayed at the top of the academic list for all of high school, and senior year was elected student body president. He joined the police force after college, and eventually became police chief and then Mayor.

So, excuse me if I don't automatically see white prejudice of "race" as the motivating factor in all societal problems. I've been around the block a few times. Almost sixty years of watching things unfold, and I find it rather disappointing that simply asking someone where they are from or inquiring about their ethnic heritage is deemed racist now.

I remember when FM radio stations were new, and playing new music. Not white music or black music, just music. Jimmy Hendrix' Purple Haze followed by Van Morrison, followed by, Sly Stone or Stevie Wonder or George Clinton or the Chamberlain Brothers. Led Zeppelin or Deep Purple followed by Aretha or James Brown. James Taylor and Gordon Lightfoot playing on the radio along side Santana and Joan Baez. The Who, angry young Britons juxtaposed to what, and identified with by who?

Maybe I'm just pining for the old days, the days of my youth, the way that I remember it. The way that I think it was and should have been and continue to be, the way that I think it should be now.

Pitting Black against White is not going to do anyone any good. It's a no win proposition except for the likes of Al Sharpton and fellow travelers who intend to cause animosity and outrage at any turn of events.

I stand on the sideline now, along with many others, and can declare honestly that I have never been racist or committed a racist act. Yet I am convicted of such only by my ethnic heritage. I am guilty by accident of birth.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 64
Male

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Microaggressions

#522  Postby Oldskeptic » Jul 24, 2015 3:05 am

proudfootz wrote:
OlivierK wrote:
Oldskeptic wrote:So, social justice warriors can go around telling people that they are racists but don't know it all they want. And they can continue to tell other people that they are being insult even when those people don't realize it. But people should also have the right to deny or attempt to refute, in writing or verbally, those opinions without fear of reprisals that effect their careers and or academic status. On university campuses today calling someone a racist is a big deal and shouldn't be condoned much less promoted where it arises over differences of opinion or where whether there actually was a racist remark is ambiguous.

Again, the blue bit is an appeal for "free speech without consequences". I agree it's a big deal to call someone out as a racist, which is presumably why the policy does no such thing, but merely concerns itself with trying to avoid small remnants of casual racism, sexism or homophobia (note the "micro" in microagressions) that persist in the speech of even those who intend no offence and harbour no overt bigotry. We all do it. I find it hard to let go of words like "gypped" for getting a raw deal, and still occasionally use "hysterical" out of habit, despite deploring its origin.

Oldskeptic wrote:Something that concerns me about the list of microaggressive racist examples is that in a conversation with a racist that tries to claim that there are genetic differences between "races", such as intelligence, the counter argument that there is only one race, and that is the human race, is now also considered racist.

The child of immigrant parents saying that their parents came to the US because it is the land of opportunity can be considered to be uttering racist remarks.

The person complaining about or pointing out racism when the more qualified ethnic minority doesn't get the job is committing racism by saying that the best qualified person should get the job.

My apologies to professor Sue, but in my opinion his list or racist microaggressions wasn't very well thought through. It's full of contradictions, inoffensive phrases made offensive by who uses them, and phrases that would probably never come up in a realistic conversation.

Yeah, it's almost as if context is important :roll:


Context? Don't be silly. Context can't change the impact of a statement.

What do the experts say?



It's a matter of contention whether Sue is correct or not. Yet you want to propose it as settled by introducing a lecture by Sue that supports his contentions.

Can we have his anecdote of being asked to move to the back of the plane again? That one was oh so convincing.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 64
Male

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#523  Postby Oldskeptic » Jul 24, 2015 6:53 am

And of course we can talk about upcoming movies like Straight Out of Compton that are going to glorify the thug life. And Yeah Niggers With Attitude are now icons of street life. Fat fucking highboys of generations past scavenging new corpses.

I really like the plurbs that say things like "The group NWA emerges from the streets of Compton, California in the mid-1980s and revolutionizes pop culture with their music and tales about life in the hood." Yeah boy, Niggers with Attitude sure changed my life. And I'm sure that they are all going to work to make the life of boys in the hood much better.

What we need to learn about black culture is busting a cap in a cop's ass and fist fucking Yo bitches?

And while professor Rust, professor Sander, and professor Kipnis defend them selves against frivolous accusations of racism the world keeps turning.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 64
Male

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#524  Postby Oldskeptic » Jul 24, 2015 7:23 am

nope
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 64
Male

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#525  Postby OlivierK » Jul 24, 2015 9:54 am

Oldskeptic wrote:
OlivierK wrote:Oldskeptic, your trite and overused harangue above ignores the fact that homicide rates are strongly linked with disadvantage, as is being black in America.


What a patronizing attitude. That's all it takes to justify young men killing other young men? Maybe the courts should consider allowing the 'disadvantaged defense' in murder trials?

Maybe you could explain to me exactly what you mean by 'disadvantaged'. Does it have something to do with being poor? There are an awful lot of poor white people. Does it have to do with being looked down upon? There are an awful lot of white people that are looked down upon by other white people, and for that matter there are black people that look down upon other black people, and black people that look down upon other types of people.

Doesn't matter that blacks, just as whites do, occupy every rung of the economic ladder, is all it takes to be disadvantaged is to be black? Bit of special pleading going on there, I think. Ever heard the term 'poor white trash'? I guarantee that the term didn't originate with black people.

There is no underclass that is comprised only of black people, or "people of color". But there is an economic underclass comprised of people of all "colors".

Where I went to junior high and high school we were mainly divided by Main Street. East side and West side. East side was synonymous with the right side and West side with the wrong side. My group of friends from my neighborhood was made up of people. People that I guess today you'd be obligated to further divide into blacks, whites, Hispanics, native Americans, and Asians, but that never really came up other than Kevin's mom was from Italy and made the best lasagna, Kenny's Dad was from East Los Angles and his grandparents were from Northern Mexico, and his Dad made the best beef burritos. Brian's grandparents were from Greece and us boys loved going to his house on holidays for stuffed squid and grape leaves, spanakopita and lemon rice. We didn't really hang out at Ray's house because his parents were Lutheran and pretty weird. Ronny's house was pretty interesting because his father was black and his mother was Italian. The other Kevin's parent's were both Irish and Catholic through and through, originally from Chicago. I was the Mormon in the group, a boy with little of an ethnic heritage worth noting except that I was descended from both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. And finally there was Ralph. Ralph was black and his parents were black, not brown or dark brown, they were black. Ralph stayed at the top of the academic list for all of high school, and senior year was elected student body president. He joined the police force after college, and eventually became police chief and then Mayor.

So, excuse me if I don't automatically see white prejudice of "race" as the motivating factor in all societal problems. I've been around the block a few times. Almost sixty years of watching things unfold, and I find it rather disappointing that simply asking someone where they are from or inquiring about their ethnic heritage is deemed racist now.

I remember when FM radio stations were new, and playing new music. Not white music or black music, just music. Jimmy Hendrix' Purple Haze followed by Van Morrison, followed by, Sly Stone or Stevie Wonder or George Clinton or the Chamberlain Brothers. Led Zeppelin or Deep Purple followed by Aretha or James Brown. James Taylor and Gordon Lightfoot playing on the radio along side Santana and Joan Baez. The Who, angry young Britons juxtaposed to what, and identified with by who?

Maybe I'm just pining for the old days, the days of my youth, the way that I remember it. The way that I think it was and should have been and continue to be, the way that I think it should be now.

Pitting Black against White is not going to do anyone any good. It's a no win proposition except for the likes of Al Sharpton and fellow travelers who intend to cause animosity and outrage at any turn of events.

I stand on the sideline now, along with many others, and can declare honestly that I have never been racist or committed a racist act. Yet I am convicted of such only by my ethnic heritage. I am guilty by accident of birth.

Bollocks from start to end. Strawmen everywhere, centred around a failure to distinguish correlation from causation, and anecdote from data, ending with a completely false self-vicitmising conclusion. More than my time's worth to respond in greater detail. Beyond your irrelevant childhood anecdotes, pretty much every sentence that's on topic is wrong.
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9826
Age: 54
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#526  Postby Made of Stars » Jul 24, 2015 11:01 am

THWOTH wrote:You know what OK, you're quite eloquent for and Aussie.


:whistle:

Whoa, are you negging Olivier? Watch out OK, dude's trying to score. :whistle:
Made of Stars, by Neil deGrasse Tyson and zenpencils

“Be humble for you are made of earth. Be noble for you are made of stars” - Serbian proverb
User avatar
Made of Stars
RS Donator
 
Name: Call me Coco
Posts: 9820
Age: 52
Male

Country: Girt by sea
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#527  Postby Forty Two » Jul 24, 2015 12:43 pm

proudfootz wrote:'Black lives matter' is a thing in the US because it is blatantly obvious that they generally don't.


Assuming that to be true, it still doesn't make "all lives matter" racist, or "not a thing" (to use that unfortunate turn of phrase...).

proudfootz wrote:

Racism is alive and well in the US, and the 'black lives matter' is there to point up the fact.


So? How does that make "all lives matter" racist?

proudfootz wrote:

People who insist on diluting it with platitudes are simply trying to stifle the message that America needs to hear.


So what? Let's assume some of them ARE trying to dilute the message. It STILL doesn't mean it's racist or even an improper thing to say. And, people might be of the view that special mention of "black" lives mattering is itself microaggressive, and they would prefer to hear "all lives matter" such that black lives and other lives are referred to equally and not in some special way, singling out blacks. The people who are upset by "black lives matter" and who would prefer that "all lives matter" not warrant protection from microaggression? They're less worthy? Why?
Forty Two
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Harcourt Mudd
Posts: 1431

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Microaggressions

#528  Postby Forty Two » Jul 24, 2015 1:27 pm

OlivierK wrote:
Forty Two wrote:No, it's listening, but considering the complaint unreasonable, or too rare/insignificant to matter. Listening doesn't mean agreeing.

Sure. People are saying that they experience racism through an accumulation of small, each not particularly serious by itself, instances of casual racism, and they'd like that addressed. You've listened to that, and don't agree that it should be addressed, as each instance by itself is not particularly serious. We get that.


Not only that. Not only are the generally "not particularly serious," the listed items are "not particularly racist/sexist" or "not racist/sexist at all." Example -- walking into a room and saying "hey guys!" to a mixed group -- that is not sexist. Saying "affirmative action is racist" is not racist, and it's not an "aggression." It's not that these are .001, and that 1000 of them add up to 1. It's that they are zero, and 1000 of them are still zero.


OlivierK wrote:
Forty Two wrote:
OlivierK wrote: It's like you just sat there and decided that "All lives matter" can not be taken as racist, even if in a certain context some people have taken it to be so, and explained why.

Anything can be "taken as" anything. I can walk into a room full of people and say "hey guys" and that can make someone really upset, because they don't like being lumped in with "guys." In my culture, however, the word "guys" is used to refer to mixed groups. If someone is offended by it, I can't help that and it's really not my responsibility to have to worry about every tiny little thing that might cause someone somewhere to take offense.

That's even more true with a comment like "all lives matter." All lives DO matter. It's a true statement -- in our culture, all born persons are supposed to matter the same, we're all supposed to have equal protection of the laws (in the US). All lives matter. So, now, I have to make sure that when I say that there isn't someone around who'll be offended by it?

How is this supposed to be done, short of just never saying it?

Well, some people seem to manage, so perhaps if you wanted to know you could listen to them, and then not decide they're wrong.


Why don't they listen to others? I don't hear anyone caring whether "I bathe in male tears" or "kill all men" or "black lives matter" bothers anyone. If you look online in discussions, you'll see that people do consider these statements to be sexist and racist. Some people do -- in certain contexts, they are racist statements. Shouldn't people who say those things stop? How would they "manage" to know if the time they are saying those things is microaggressive or not? Since it depends on the feelings of the listener, when are those things not microaggressions?

OlivierK wrote:

Forty Two wrote:
OlivierK wrote:
If you have a good reason why we should take your word that such things could not be taken as as racist, over the word of people who attest that they are taken that way, perhaps you could give it?


Well, first, I never said they "could not" be taken as racist.

Yeah, you sort of did. Here's you saying it:
Forty Two wrote:Of course, in reviewing the items put forth of microaggressions, we all are, in fact, considering whether they could be taken as a bit racist. Determining that the answer to that question is "no" is not a failure to consider the question.


Poor phrasing -- whether it "could" be taken as racist should more properly be "could reasonably" be taken as racist. I mean, "affirmative action is good" and "affirmative action is bad" can both be taken as racist by someone. They ARE taken as racist by someone. However, to suggest that it's a microaggression to say either of them is bizarre.

OlivierK wrote:

Forty Two wrote:Anything can be "taken" any way. Offense is not given, it's always taken.

And, at bottom, if someone "takes" the phrase "all lives matter" as racist, because they think the only thing that should be said is that "black lives matter," then I really wouldn't care even if they were offended or upset. All lives DO matter. I mean, look at this ludicrous example we're even talking about. "All lives matter" - we have to consider that racist, but "black lives matter" which explicitly refers to one race, and no others, is not racist?

What if people out there think the term "black lives matter" is racist, just as racist as "all lives matter?" Are we to ignore that?

Proudfootz has already given a reasonable enough response to this, but it someone thinks that "black lives matter" is racist, then I think they deserve a bit of patient dialogue to explain why others feel differently, just as O'Malley is receiving after his comments. Fair's fair.


Oh, o.k., so, what we're saying about "all lives matter" is that the people objecting to that as a microaggression "deserve a bit of patient dialogue to explain why others feel differently?" Fair is fair, after all, yes. Isn't that dialogue itself a potential microaggression?

OlivierK wrote:

I note in passing that even after I emphasized that the racism in that statement was context-dependent, your defence of it ignores context. It's almost as if these problems stem from a failure to consider context.


It does not ignore context.

First off, explain a concrete context in which you would see "all lives matter" as "racist." Everyone knows "context matters" -- context matters in ever statement, written or verbal. We know that. I've said it many times, and I agree with it. I don't ignore context. But, you're the one saying there are contexts that occur in the real world to real people in which someone saying "all lives matter" is racist -- provide an example of such a context.

It is not enough to say "all lives matter is racist." Then be asked "how? how is that racist?" And, then you answer "context matters!" When someone asks "how is that racist?" They are asking for the context. Tell me how that statement would be racist in a conversation?

Would it be because someone is protesting outside with signs that say "black lives matter" and then someone else holds up a sign that says "all lives matter?" Would it be in a conversation in class about racism in America, and someone says black lives matter and someone else says all lives matter? Would it be at lunch during a casual conversation and the current events come up and someone says "hey, you know, I'm sick of hearing about how black lives matter -- I think all lives matter, not just one race."

What?

You know, my point is that most of these items listed are so innocuous that only tortured interpretations could suggest them to be racist, and I think that is intentional -- it's part of the purpose behind the movement to push the concept of microaggressions. They want to get the average white male to have to govern his tongue at the behest of other identity groups. It's about, like George Carlin used to say, controlling the language. If you control the language, you control the debate.

Next thing you know it's going to be a microaggression to say "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" or "self-reliance is a virtue" or "Protestant work ethic." Seriously, folks. That's what this list of microaggressions sound like. It'll be a microaggression for a religious student to say grace out loud over lunch in the cafeteria. It'll be a microaggression for a person to say that the minimum wage is too high, or shouldn't be raised.

This concept sounds good to progressive folks, who focus on identity politics as if the concept will only benefit "marginalized" groups. However, this concept will expand -- naturally - to include non-marginalized folks, that most progressives are not particularly keen on. Is the statement "there is no God" or "religion is racist/sexist" -- a microaggression? By the usage of that term, if a person who is a member of a religious group feels it is a microaggression, then it is a microaggression. So, should we "listen" to those people? Should we atheists hold our tongues and "have patient dialogue" with them about it?
Forty Two
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Harcourt Mudd
Posts: 1431

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#529  Postby Oldskeptic » Jul 24, 2015 5:06 pm

OlivierK wrote:
Oldskeptic wrote:
OlivierK wrote:Oldskeptic, your trite and overused harangue above ignores the fact that homicide rates are strongly linked with disadvantage, as is being black in America.


What a patronizing attitude. That's all it takes to justify young men killing other young men? Maybe the courts should consider allowing the 'disadvantaged defense' in murder trials?

Maybe you could explain to me exactly what you mean by 'disadvantaged'. Does it have something to do with being poor? There are an awful lot of poor white people. Does it have to do with being looked down upon? There are an awful lot of white people that are looked down upon by other white people, and for that matter there are black people that look down upon other black people, and black people that look down upon other types of people.

Doesn't matter that blacks, just as whites do, occupy every rung of the economic ladder, is all it takes to be disadvantaged is to be black? Bit of special pleading going on there, I think. Ever heard the term 'poor white trash'? I guarantee that the term didn't originate with black people.

There is no underclass that is comprised only of black people, or "people of color". But there is an economic underclass comprised of people of all "colors".

Where I went to junior high and high school we were mainly divided by Main Street. East side and West side. East side was synonymous with the right side and West side with the wrong side. My group of friends from my neighborhood was made up of people. People that I guess today you'd be obligated to further divide into blacks, whites, Hispanics, native Americans, and Asians, but that never really came up other than Kevin's mom was from Italy and made the best lasagna, Kenny's Dad was from East Los Angles and his grandparents were from Northern Mexico, and his Dad made the best beef burritos. Brian's grandparents were from Greece and us boys loved going to his house on holidays for stuffed squid and grape leaves, spanakopita and lemon rice. We didn't really hang out at Ray's house because his parents were Lutheran and pretty weird. Ronny's house was pretty interesting because his father was black and his mother was Italian. The other Kevin's parent's were both Irish and Catholic through and through, originally from Chicago. I was the Mormon in the group, a boy with little of an ethnic heritage worth noting except that I was descended from both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. And finally there was Ralph. Ralph was black and his parents were black, not brown or dark brown, they were black. Ralph stayed at the top of the academic list for all of high school, and senior year was elected student body president. He joined the police force after college, and eventually became police chief and then Mayor.

So, excuse me if I don't automatically see white prejudice of "race" as the motivating factor in all societal problems. I've been around the block a few times. Almost sixty years of watching things unfold, and I find it rather disappointing that simply asking someone where they are from or inquiring about their ethnic heritage is deemed racist now.

I remember when FM radio stations were new, and playing new music. Not white music or black music, just music. Jimmy Hendrix' Purple Haze followed by Van Morrison, followed by, Sly Stone or Stevie Wonder or George Clinton or the Chamberlain Brothers. Led Zeppelin or Deep Purple followed by Aretha or James Brown. James Taylor and Gordon Lightfoot playing on the radio along side Santana and Joan Baez. The Who, angry young Britons juxtaposed to what, and identified with by who?

Maybe I'm just pining for the old days, the days of my youth, the way that I remember it. The way that I think it was and should have been and continue to be, the way that I think it should be now.

Pitting Black against White is not going to do anyone any good. It's a no win proposition except for the likes of Al Sharpton and fellow travelers who intend to cause animosity and outrage at any turn of events.

I stand on the sideline now, along with many others, and can declare honestly that I have never been racist or committed a racist act. Yet I am convicted of such only by my ethnic heritage. I am guilty by accident of birth.


Bollocks from start to end.


How dare you dismiss my experiences and feelings so callously?

Strawmen everywhere, centred around a failure to distinguish correlation from causation, and anecdote from data,...


Are you questioning my anecdotes? I'm going to have to report you to the microaggression police. I'll have you know that my anecdotes are just as valid as anyone's. And it doesn't matter how unbelievable they are because they are mine and that makes them true, so there.

...ending with a completely false self-vicitmising conclusion.


Are you really questioning my victimhood? One more report to the microaggression police. This will go down on your permanent record.

More than my time's worth to respond in greater detail. Beyond your irrelevant childhood anecdotes, pretty much every sentence that's on topic is wrong.


Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -!

You just invalidated my personal experiences and hurt my feelings, and I'm telling.
Image
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 64
Male

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#530  Postby Oldskeptic » Jul 24, 2015 8:21 pm

proudfootz wrote:
Oldskeptic wrote:
proudfootz wrote:'Black lives matter' is a thing in the US because it is blatantly obvious that they generally don't.

Racism is alive and well in the US, and the 'black lives matter' is there to point up the fact.

People who insist on diluting it with platitudes are simply trying to stifle the message that America needs to hear.


If the numbers of young black men being murdered every year points to racism being alive and well in the US then who is it pointing at? Nearly half of deaths of young black men 16-24 are homicides and a third of the deaths of black men 24-35 are. So, the question should be who's doing the killing? The answer is young black men around 90% of the time.

If the "Black Lives Matter" movement is really sincere why aren't they pointing the finger at the demographic that is doing the vast majority of the killing? Instead of addressing the real source of the problem they invade a conference and shout down speakers who are, as far as I can see, on their side. It's as if they can't see or smell the garbage in their own house.

Where is the rage and indignance that erupts when one young black man is killed by a non-black when nine young black men are killed by other young black men? Where are the angry demonstrations and protests against the perpetrators of the bulk of the killings? Why isn't Al Sharpton, and those like him, these "black leaders", agitating for change where change is really really needed? I have no answer for these things other than it's easier to blame someone else than yourself. Especially if the problem seems implacable.

So, who is it diluting black problems with trite and overused harangues? Big changes have happened since I was a boy, and more changes need to be made, but it's not all all about "whites" changing. The burden rests on everyone's shoulders, but there's only so much that anyone else can do about some "black" problems, and shouting down politicians that have a track record of trying to solve these problems isn't going to get anyone anywhere.


You don't know black leaders address this very issue you've mentioned?

It's mostly because 'mainstream media' apparently doesn't give a flying fuck about black folks.


Black folks? There's got to be a microaggression there.

...it’s easy to find examples of marches and demonstrations against crime. In the last four years, blacks have held community protests against violence in Chicago; New York; Newark, New Jersey; Pittsburgh; Saginaw, Michigan; and Gary, Indiana. Indeed, there’s a whole catalog of movies, albums, and sermons from a generation of directors, musicians, and religious leaders, each urging peace and order. You may not have noticed black protests against crime and violence, but that doesn’t mean they haven’t happened. Black Americans—like everyone else—are concerned with what happens in their communities, and at a certain point, pundits who insist otherwise are either lying or willfully ignorant.


There were more demonstrations over the Michael Brown shooting in a week than all of the demonstrations mentioned above in four years.

To that point, it’s worth noting the extent to which “what about black-on-black crime” is an evasion, an attempt to avoid the fundamental difference between being killed by a citizen and being killed by an agent of law.


How big is the difference? Dead is Dead. And no matter which brush you want to paint it with people shot by police are generally putting themselves in a position where shooting is going to be the outcome.

And it’s not new. “When Ida B. Wells … tried to explain to a wealthy suffragist in Chicago that anti-black violence in the nation must end,” writes historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad for The Nation, “Mary Plummer replied: Blacks need to “drive the criminals out” of the community. ‘Have you forgotten that 10 percent of all the crimes that were committed in Chicago last year were by colored men [less than 3 percent of the population]?’ ”

Regardless of cause or concern, a community doesn’t forfeit fair treatment because it has crime. That was true then when the scourge was lynching, and it’s true now that the scourge is unjust police violence.


Equating lynchings of the past with police shootings now is quite a stretch, but when engaging in hyperbole I guess anything goes. During the Michael Brown frenzy I remember listening to over two hours of dispatch transmissions of the Ferguson police department. Constant calls for police intervention in all sorts of disputes and crimes by a population that is over 70% black. Blacks calling white police to solve their problems when it suits them, but when a black man gets shot by a white police officer doing his duty all fucking sorts of hell breaks loose.

Say what you will about “black-on-black crime,” just don’t pretend it has anything to do with unfair killings at the hands of the state.


Yeah, it's just over there all alone. Black lives matter when blacks say they do. Is that the message? Shut the fuck up when we kill each other, that's none of your business?



Now I know why I'm glad that I never made watching John Stewart a habit, and wont miss him. When you have to strawman Fox News and lie to get laughs it's really time to retire.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 64
Male

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#531  Postby proudfootz » Jul 25, 2015 12:55 am

Forty Two wrote:
proudfootz wrote:'Black lives matter' is a thing in the US because it is blatantly obvious that they generally don't.


Assuming that to be true, it still doesn't make "all lives matter" racist, or "not a thing" (to use that unfortunate turn of phrase...).

proudfootz wrote:

Racism is alive and well in the US, and the 'black lives matter' is there to point up the fact.


So? How does that make "all lives matter" racist?

proudfootz wrote:

People who insist on diluting it with platitudes are simply trying to stifle the message that America needs to hear.


So what? Let's assume some of them ARE trying to dilute the message. It STILL doesn't mean it's racist or even an improper thing to say. And, people might be of the view that special mention of "black" lives mattering is itself microaggressive, and they would prefer to hear "all lives matter" such that black lives and other lives are referred to equally and not in some special way, singling out blacks. The people who are upset by "black lives matter" and who would prefer that "all lives matter" not warrant protection from microaggression? They're less worthy? Why?


When the topic is racist cops being overzealous with the killing of unarmed ethnic minorities, it's just shitty to the nth degree to try to change the subject to something else.

But then, some people like acting shitty.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10971

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#532  Postby proudfootz » Jul 25, 2015 1:25 am

Oldskeptic wrote:
proudfootz wrote:
Oldskeptic wrote:
proudfootz wrote:'Black lives matter' is a thing in the US because it is blatantly obvious that they generally don't.

Racism is alive and well in the US, and the 'black lives matter' is there to point up the fact.

People who insist on diluting it with platitudes are simply trying to stifle the message that America needs to hear.


If the numbers of young black men being murdered every year points to racism being alive and well in the US then who is it pointing at? Nearly half of deaths of young black men 16-24 are homicides and a third of the deaths of black men 24-35 are. So, the question should be who's doing the killing? The answer is young black men around 90% of the time.

If the "Black Lives Matter" movement is really sincere why aren't they pointing the finger at the demographic that is doing the vast majority of the killing? Instead of addressing the real source of the problem they invade a conference and shout down speakers who are, as far as I can see, on their side. It's as if they can't see or smell the garbage in their own house.

Where is the rage and indignance that erupts when one young black man is killed by a non-black when nine young black men are killed by other young black men? Where are the angry demonstrations and protests against the perpetrators of the bulk of the killings? Why isn't Al Sharpton, and those like him, these "black leaders", agitating for change where change is really really needed? I have no answer for these things other than it's easier to blame someone else than yourself. Especially if the problem seems implacable.

So, who is it diluting black problems with trite and overused harangues? Big changes have happened since I was a boy, and more changes need to be made, but it's not all all about "whites" changing. The burden rests on everyone's shoulders, but there's only so much that anyone else can do about some "black" problems, and shouting down politicians that have a track record of trying to solve these problems isn't going to get anyone anywhere.


You don't know black leaders address this very issue you've mentioned?

It's mostly because 'mainstream media' apparently doesn't give a flying fuck about black folks.


Black folks? There's got to be a microaggression there.


:nono:

NIce to know you're willing to make feeble jokes when you have no rational response. :thumbup:

...it’s easy to find examples of marches and demonstrations against crime. In the last four years, blacks have held community protests against violence in Chicago; New York; Newark, New Jersey; Pittsburgh; Saginaw, Michigan; and Gary, Indiana. Indeed, there’s a whole catalog of movies, albums, and sermons from a generation of directors, musicians, and religious leaders, each urging peace and order. You may not have noticed black protests against crime and violence, but that doesn’t mean they haven’t happened. Black Americans—like everyone else—are concerned with what happens in their communities, and at a certain point, pundits who insist otherwise are either lying or willfully ignorant.


There were more demonstrations over the Michael Brown shooting in a week than all of the demonstrations mentioned above in four years.


Yes, context matters. Apparently cops offhandedly killing people in the streets and not even being charged is the same as when citizens get arrested and go to trial for the same thing. At least in Bizarro No Context World.

To that point, it’s worth noting the extent to which “what about black-on-black crime” is an evasion, an attempt to avoid the fundamental difference between being killed by a citizen and being killed by an agent of law.


How big is the difference? Dead is Dead. And no matter which brush you want to paint it with people shot by police are generally putting themselves in a position where shooting is going to be the outcome.


Yes. And apparently going about your life while black, you're always in someone's crosshairs. Shot while playing in the playground, shot at a costume party, shot while walking home with soft drink and candy, shot for jaywalking, etc.

No matter how much you try to whitewash it - ethnic minorities are more apt to be harassed, assaulted, murdered by cops than others.

And it’s not new. “When Ida B. Wells … tried to explain to a wealthy suffragist in Chicago that anti-black violence in the nation must end,” writes historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad for The Nation, “Mary Plummer replied: Blacks need to “drive the criminals out” of the community. ‘Have you forgotten that 10 percent of all the crimes that were committed in Chicago last year were by colored men [less than 3 percent of the population]?’ ”

Regardless of cause or concern, a community doesn’t forfeit fair treatment because it has crime. That was true then when the scourge was lynching, and it’s true now that the scourge is unjust police violence.


Equating lynchings of the past with police shootings now is quite a stretch, but when engaging in hyperbole I guess anything goes.


Just noting the same bullshit excuses when it was lynching as when it's cops shooting blacks for stupid shit.

During the Michael Brown frenzy I remember listening to over two hours of dispatch transmissions of the Ferguson police department. Constant calls for police intervention in all sorts of disputes and crimes by a population that is over 70% black. Blacks calling white police to solve their problems when it suits them, but when a black man gets shot by a white police officer doing his duty all fucking sorts of hell breaks loose.


..and that adds up to what? Fuck all?

Yes, we need police. No, we don't need police shooting unarmed people in the streets. You seem to think there's no middle ground between having no police at all and Robocops acting as prosecutors, judges, juries, and executioners all at once.

Say what you will about “black-on-black crime,” just don’t pretend it has anything to do with unfair killings at the hands of the state.[/b2]


Yeah, it's just over there all alone. Black lives matter when blacks say they do. Is that the message? Shut the fuck up when we kill each other, that's none of your business?


You just want the victims of racism to shut the fuck up.

Prepare to be disappointed.



Now I know why I'm glad that I never made watching John Stewart a habit, and wont miss him. When you have to strawman Fox News and lie to get laughs it's really time to retire.


No one needs to strawman FOX News - it's like a nationwide POE: so insanely stupid and pandering it's almost impossible to believe it's for real. Yet some people get their misinformation from that source. Studies prove conclusively FOX viewers are among the most ignorant.

I'd put Jon Stewart up against O'Reilly, Coulter, Beck, Hannity, or any of the wise opinion leaders of the FOX stable of fuckwits.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10971

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#533  Postby OlivierK » Jul 25, 2015 9:38 am

Oldskeptic wrote:
OlivierK wrote:
Oldskeptic wrote:
OlivierK wrote:Oldskeptic, your trite and overused harangue above ignores the fact that homicide rates are strongly linked with disadvantage, as is being black in America.


What a patronizing attitude. That's all it takes to justify young men killing other young men? Maybe the courts should consider allowing the 'disadvantaged defense' in murder trials?

Maybe you could explain to me exactly what you mean by 'disadvantaged'. Does it have something to do with being poor? There are an awful lot of poor white people. Does it have to do with being looked down upon? There are an awful lot of white people that are looked down upon by other white people, and for that matter there are black people that look down upon other black people, and black people that look down upon other types of people.

Doesn't matter that blacks, just as whites do, occupy every rung of the economic ladder, is all it takes to be disadvantaged is to be black? Bit of special pleading going on there, I think. Ever heard the term 'poor white trash'? I guarantee that the term didn't originate with black people.

There is no underclass that is comprised only of black people, or "people of color". But there is an economic underclass comprised of people of all "colors".

Where I went to junior high and high school we were mainly divided by Main Street. East side and West side. East side was synonymous with the right side and West side with the wrong side. My group of friends from my neighborhood was made up of people. People that I guess today you'd be obligated to further divide into blacks, whites, Hispanics, native Americans, and Asians, but that never really came up other than Kevin's mom was from Italy and made the best lasagna, Kenny's Dad was from East Los Angles and his grandparents were from Northern Mexico, and his Dad made the best beef burritos. Brian's grandparents were from Greece and us boys loved going to his house on holidays for stuffed squid and grape leaves, spanakopita and lemon rice. We didn't really hang out at Ray's house because his parents were Lutheran and pretty weird. Ronny's house was pretty interesting because his father was black and his mother was Italian. The other Kevin's parent's were both Irish and Catholic through and through, originally from Chicago. I was the Mormon in the group, a boy with little of an ethnic heritage worth noting except that I was descended from both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. And finally there was Ralph. Ralph was black and his parents were black, not brown or dark brown, they were black. Ralph stayed at the top of the academic list for all of high school, and senior year was elected student body president. He joined the police force after college, and eventually became police chief and then Mayor.

So, excuse me if I don't automatically see white prejudice of "race" as the motivating factor in all societal problems. I've been around the block a few times. Almost sixty years of watching things unfold, and I find it rather disappointing that simply asking someone where they are from or inquiring about their ethnic heritage is deemed racist now.

I remember when FM radio stations were new, and playing new music. Not white music or black music, just music. Jimmy Hendrix' Purple Haze followed by Van Morrison, followed by, Sly Stone or Stevie Wonder or George Clinton or the Chamberlain Brothers. Led Zeppelin or Deep Purple followed by Aretha or James Brown. James Taylor and Gordon Lightfoot playing on the radio along side Santana and Joan Baez. The Who, angry young Britons juxtaposed to what, and identified with by who?

Maybe I'm just pining for the old days, the days of my youth, the way that I remember it. The way that I think it was and should have been and continue to be, the way that I think it should be now.

Pitting Black against White is not going to do anyone any good. It's a no win proposition except for the likes of Al Sharpton and fellow travelers who intend to cause animosity and outrage at any turn of events.

I stand on the sideline now, along with many others, and can declare honestly that I have never been racist or committed a racist act. Yet I am convicted of such only by my ethnic heritage. I am guilty by accident of birth.


Bollocks from start to end.


How dare you dismiss my experiences and feelings so callously?

Strawmen everywhere, centred around a failure to distinguish correlation from causation, and anecdote from data,...


Are you questioning my anecdotes? I'm going to have to report you to the microaggression police. I'll have you know that my anecdotes are just as valid as anyone's. And it doesn't matter how unbelievable they are because they are mine and that makes them true, so there.

...ending with a completely false self-vicitmising conclusion.


Are you really questioning my victimhood? One more report to the microaggression police. This will go down on your permanent record.

More than my time's worth to respond in greater detail. Beyond your irrelevant childhood anecdotes, pretty much every sentence that's on topic is wrong.


Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -Microaggression alert -!

You just invalidated my personal experiences and hurt my feelings, and I'm telling.
Image

User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9826
Age: 54
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#534  Postby Rachel Bronwyn » Jul 25, 2015 9:57 am

Lemme tell y'all what it's like
Being male, middle-call and white
what a terrible image
User avatar
Rachel Bronwyn
 
Name: speaking moistly
Posts: 13495
Age: 32
Female

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#535  Postby OlivierK » Jul 25, 2015 10:19 am

Makes me wanna say...
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9826
Age: 54
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Microaggressions

#536  Postby laklak » Jul 25, 2015 2:49 pm

The thing about being a cisgendered, straight, old white dude is it ain't easy. Y'all should try walking a mile in my Zimmer frame. I'm not allowed to call Brazil nuts "nigger toes" or pinch women's asses on the bus. Hell, I can't even beat up openly gay people any more. What's the world coming to? This PCSJW stuff will end in tears, mark my words.

On a serious note, I was pulled over by the cops the other day, for doing 44 in a 30 zone. I was on a road I don't generally use and didn't notice the speed limit change. She ran my license plate number before she got out of the car, as they do, and walked up to the car smiling. Said "Everything looks OK, do you know why I stopped you?" I said no, and handed her my license, registration, and insurance card. She ran those and came back, told me to keep the speed down and have a nice day. Not even a written warning. This got me thinking. How would things have turned out if I'd been a young black guy wearing a do rag and driving a tricked out Monte Carlo instead of a stereotypical Southern white man wearing a USF Bulls baseball cap in a white pickup with Florida Sheriff's Association stickers on the back window? What if my plate number returned several infractions, or my insurance had lapsed, or I'd been surly and aggressive instead of polite and smiling? How much of the encounter was driven by privilege and how much by the other circumstances?
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20878
Age: 66
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#537  Postby Forty Two » Aug 03, 2015 2:01 pm

I think this link can be discussed in light of the overall issue of microaggressions -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- ... age-guide/ (note, the University President has made clear that this is not a policy of the University -- it appears to have been created by some students and staff, and they somehow got it posted to the University's website. But, it does illustrate where the PC-activists want to take things.

The word "American" is considered to be a term to avoid, and we should say "US Citizen" or "US resident" (although, a US resident doesn't make you an American...., but, I guess that's the point - it's bad to say one person is an American, and another isn't). (The guide doesn’t address whether or not the terms “Canadians” and “Mexicans” should be abandoned in favor of “Residents of Canada” and “Residents of Mexico,” respectively.)

Other terms also considered problematic include: “elders,” “senior citizen,” “overweight,” “speech impediment,” “dumb,” “sexual preference,” “manpower,” “freshmen,” “mailman,” "homosexual" and “chairman,” in addition to many others.

The guide clarifies that saying “illegal alien” is also problematic. While “undocumented immigrant” is acceptable, the guide recommends saying “person seeking asylum,” or “refugee,” instead. Even saying “foreigners” is problematic; the preferred term is “international people.” That I found interesting, because calling someone a person seeking asylum or refugee, when they aren't that, would seem to me to be just as offensive as calling them an illegal alien. Also, the term "alien" is a defined term in US immigration law, and it means "any person who is not a citizen or national of the United States." It has meant that since about 1798, and had nothing to do with Mexicans or any racial group, at all. Immigrants are a subset of aliens. There are many federal statutes that use the term "illegal alien" and it's been in common usage as a legal term for centuries, and really grows out of prior existing English law which came to the colonies during colonial times.

Using the word “Caucasian” is considered problematic as well, and should be discontinued in favor of “European-American individuals.” This I find strange, too, because to say "European-American Individuals" instead of Caucasian would exclude Europeans who were not American, like foreign students (but, foreign is also "problematic" in this guide), and then it would also exclude the many Caucasian Asians, like from Asian Russia, from Turkey, from the Caucasus region -- Georgia, Ossetia, etc., northern Africa, South Africa, Indians (from India), etc.

Using the words “rich” or “poor” is also frowned upon. Instead of saying “rich,” the university encourages people to say “person of material wealth.” Rather than saying a person is “poor,” the university encourages its members to substitute “person who lacks advantages that others have” or “low economic status related to a person’s education, occupation and income.” My response to that is -- are you fucking kidding me?

"The guide defines words such as “homosexual” as “problematic,” offering “Same Gender Loving” as a more inclusive substitute. Similarly, a lack of gender-neutral bathrooms is, according to the university, “ciscentrism.”
Forty Two
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Harcourt Mudd
Posts: 1431

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#538  Postby laklak » Aug 03, 2015 2:26 pm

Three less visually abled members of Muridae Mus,
Three less visually abled members of Muridae Mus,
Observe how they perambulate!
They appeared to follow the life partner of an agrarian worker,
[Reveal] Spoiler: "Trigger"
Ze severed their trailing appendages with a sharp object,

An unconscionable act of speciesism.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20878
Age: 66
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#539  Postby Forty Two » Aug 03, 2015 4:34 pm

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:Lemme tell y'all what it's like
Being male, middle-call and white


This has been done -- the secret is out: http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/ ... e-me/n9308
Forty Two
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Harcourt Mudd
Posts: 1431

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#540  Postby Jerome Da Gnome » Aug 04, 2015 10:17 pm

Oldskeptic wrote:
Pitting Black against White is not going to do anyone any good.


It sure does help get out the vote though ...
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.
-Albert Camus
User avatar
Jerome Da Gnome
Banned User
 
Name: Jerome
Posts: 5719

Country: usa
United States (us)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Social Sciences & Humanities

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest