More Politically Correct Lunacy

[Ben E Lou]

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=1640&u_sid=981030 (http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=1640&u_sid=981030)


<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>Students disciplined for posters on King Day

BY MICHAELA SAUNDERS

</TD><TD vAlign=top></TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top colSpan=2>http://www.omaha.com/c_images/fills/black.gif
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=ftr colSpan=2>WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
A small group of Westside High School students plastered the school Monday with posters advocating that a white student from South Africa receive the "Distinguished African American Student Award" next year.

The students' actions on Martin Luther King Jr. Day upset several students and have led administrators to discipline four students.

The posters, placed on about 150 doors and lockers, included a picture of the junior student smiling and giving a thumbs up. The posters encouraged votes for him.

The posters were removed by administrators because they were "inappropriate and insensitive," Westside spokeswoman Peggy Rupprecht said Tuesday.

Rupprecht said the award always has been given to black students.

Westside Assistant Principal Pat Hutchings said the award has been given for eight years on Martin Luther King Jr. Day to a senior selected by teachers.

Rupprecht said disciplinary action was taken against the students involved but, citing student privacy policies, she declined to specify the penalties or what about the students' action led to them.

Karen Richards said her son, Trevor, who was pictured on the posters, was suspended for two days for hanging the posters. Two of his friends also were disciplined for hanging the posters. A fourth student, she said, was punished for circulating a petition Tuesday morning in support of the boys. The petition criticized the practice of recognizing only black student achievement with the award.

One of the school's students, Tylena Martin, said she was hurt by the posters and the backlash she said it caused.

Martin, a junior, said she is the only black student in her homeroom class, and the poster was on the door to her classroom when she arrived Monday morning.

Westside has fewer than 70 blacks out of 1,843 students this year.

Hutchings said she heard from several students about the posters Monday.

"Many students were offended," she said.

Karen Richards said her son and his friends were not trying to hurt anyone.

"My son is not a racist," she said. "He has black friends, friends from Bangladesh and Egypt. Color has never been an issue in our home."

"It was a very innocent thing," she said.

Richards said her family moved to Omaha from Johannesburg six years ago. Trevor, she said, "is as African as anyone."

[cuervo72]

Maybe they should change the name of the award then?

[Ben E Lou]

Dola--

This sounds like a "When you call the tune, you have to pay the piper" kind of situation to me. If you take an inaccurate, nebulous term, and try to make it the "proper" P.C. terminology, it is eventually going to backfire and make you look stupid. To say that Trevor isn't qualified for an award recognizing African-Americans is completely ridiculous. :D

I honestly hope that more white South Africans will do this kind of thing, and insist on being called African-Americans. I HATE that term. My mama was born in Georgia. My grandmama was born in Georgia. My great-grandmother was born in Georgia. My GREAT-GREAT grandmother was born in Georgia.

Face the facts: I have WAY more in common with white Georgians who have been here for multiple generations than I do with black folks in Africa. As a whole, black Southerners have WAY more in common with white Southerners than Africans. (I'd imagine this is true in other parts of the country as well...)

I wish more dark-skinned Americans would realize this.

[Noop]

I know this is a touchy subject but I am laughing at the thought of that. I mean he is from South Africa and is a citizen of the United States of America hence he is a African American....wild. I can stop laughing *Sorry if I offended anyone with my humor*

:)

noop

[Ben E Lou]

Maybe they should change the name of the award then?But they can't do that. It wouldn't be P.C., now would it? ;)

[pskov]

What did he do to deserve the award anyway?

[Bonegavel]

I'm sure Dr. King would have had no problem with it going to a white student. Wasn't that what he stood for?

[WussGawd]

Gonna have to disagree with you on this one, Skydog. I think that such an action is an attempt on the part of a certain part of the conservative white majority of this school to provoke an angry response.

On the other hand, my first thought is why have such an award in the first place. It seems to me that in a school that's more whitebread than most in America that it's pretty silly to try to elevate one of what amounts to about 4% of the student population to win the award. Particularly since I can assure you there isn't an equivalent Distinguished WASP student award. LOL.

[wig]

Gary Anderson is an African American. (ex Vikings Kicker)

I heard he gets pulled over when he drives through white neighborhoods all the time.

Cop: "Excuse me son, aren't you in the wrong neighborhood?"
Gary Anderson: "No, I live here"
Cop: "Sure, son. Mind if I take a look in your trunk?"
Gary Anderson: "I guess, but I really do live here."
Cop: "....... What do we have here? Visited a sporting goods store lately, I see. Where did you get 20 brand new footballs with a little 'K' on them?"
Gary Anderson: "I am the kicker for the Vikings"
Cop: "Oh, a wise guy, huh? Step out of the car."

Just another case of The Man keeping the African Americans down. :(

;)

wig

[Ben E Lou]

Gonna have to disagree with you on this one, Skydog. I think that such an action is an attempt on the part of a certain part of the conservative white majority of this school to provoke an angry response.I don't disagree that it was attempt to provoke a response. I'm not sure "angry" is the intended response. My guess is that is intended to provoke the response, "Oh yeah, that IS a stupid term..."

[HornedFrog Purple]

They should get rid of the "award" period. It like affirmative action and others in its ilk encourage separation. That never was the message of Martin Luther King.

Dr. King would not want an award like this in his name.

[scooper]

So, can we call you a Georgian-American?

[Bonegavel]

Wig is back in town?

[Fritz]

Tubby has it dead right.

----------

I wish they would put a box on forms saying "Ethincly Ambiguous due to Adoption American." I would be in the high hay then boy.

[Ben E Lou]

So, can we call you a Georgian-American?;)

I guess my point is that the whole hyphenated American thing is nonsense. This will probably be the only time I'll quote Jesse Jackson to defend my point ;), but he said it right in his '88 speech, speaking about Dukakis: Providence has enabled our paths to intersect. His foreparents came to America on immigrant ships; my foreparents came to America on slave ships. But whatever the original ships, we're in the same boat tonight. (Applause) Our ships could pass in the night-- if we have a false sense of independence-- or they could collide and crash.Whatever the history, we ARE in the same boat now.

[Maple Leafs]

So of all the issues in the world, these students decide that this is the one that needs to have attention focused on it?

And in order to do so, they feel it's appropriate to ruin an award meant for black students, at an overwhelmingly white school, on Martin Luther King day?

I'm sorry, but I'm glad they were suspended. They should have been suspended longer.

[Ben E Lou]

So of all the issues in the world, these students decide that this is the one that needs to have attention focused on it?

And in order to do so, they feel it's appropriate to ruin an award meant for black students, at an overwhelmingly white school, on Martin Luther King day?

I'm sorry, but I'm glad they were suspended. They should have been suspended longer.Exactly what is wrong with someone who moved to America from Africa being touted for an award honoring African-Americans. It sounds like he's the very definition of the term.

When you call the tune, you have to pay the Piper.--Rowdy Roddy Piper

The school officials called the tune by giving a vague and ambiguous name to the award.

[Ben E Lou]

Dola--

On of the more ridiculous quotes I've read in a while was from a public figure (I can't remember which one) trying to refer to the plight of black Africans vs. white Africans. She referred to "African-American Africans."

Huh??????????? :confused:

[HornedFrog Purple]

I wish they would put a box on forms saying "Ethincly Ambiguous due to Adoption American." I would be in the high hay then boy.

American Mutt. :)

[Maple Leafs]

The school officials called the tune by giving a vague and ambiguous name to the award.Given that the award was being present on MLK day, do you honestly feel that any reasonable person could have any confusion about the school's intention?

Sorry, this just seems like one of those cases of playing "gotcha!" with semantics. You seem to think these kids are fighting some war against the PC police. I think it's the opposite. Feigning confusion and offense over terms that every rationale person can understand is exactly the sort of PC routine we're all sick of.

What's next? The shcool renames it the Black Student award and the white kids nominate someone named Jimmy Black?

[Huckleberry]

Maple Leafs -

Yes, I bet these students did this based on the assumption that it would garner regional and national attention. Kids these days are bright, you know.

[Fritz]

I once worked at a blockbuster that had an employee of the month, and a black employee of the month. We didn't have any black people working there.

[Fritz]

dola

Okay, that is not true. the point is really that it is a shame none of the kids apperntly qualify for a regular old "Distinguished Student Award" and have to settle for one based on race.

[QuikSand]

Aside from the specifics of this incident... I'd offer at least a nominal defense of the use of some connotative euphemisms to describe classes of people, even if they don't necessarily connect perfectly to their plain meaning.

We hear this all the time when a term like "minority" group is used with its contextual meaning. From time to time, someone goes out of his way to point out that "minority" also has a mathematical meaning (less than 50%) and raises a stink about it. I don't think, however, that this fact alone invalidates what most people can clearly understand is the intended meaning of a phrase like "minority group."

Much the same for the term "African-American." It's pretty obvious why the term is used-- some people felt that describing a class of people purely in terms of their skin color may be untoward. (I'll take a pass on whether this is unimpeachable logic) Looking for another way to descrbe such classes, they somehow reached the conclusion that since most black-skinned Americans hail from Sub-Saharan African ancestry, that the term "African-American" was a fair proxy. An inprefect one, most would admit, but not a wholly unreasoned one.

Yes, that makes for some weirdness when you speak of Algerian-Americans, or Egyptian-Americans, or white-skinned South African emigrees. Absolutely true, those people techncally fit the denotative (dictionary) definition of the term. They also, pretty obviously, don't fit the contextual use of the term.

The use of a term like "minority" or "African-American" in these contexts is obviously a benevolent attempt to be less offensive to the named group. Unfortunately, the fact that the words people chose to use in both cases are not precisely connected to their dictionary meanings gives rise to the kind of surface absurdity that we see in this story, and elsewhere in this thread.

I guess it would theoretically be better if there were a term that could be used in this instance that had no common meaning other than that use... regrettably most such terms that I can think of are not really appropriate for public discourse. But I don't think it's necessarily apropriate to tear apart the people who are seeking to be respectful because the consensus word choice has another potential interpretation when stripped of its context.


I don't claim to have the answer on PC-terminology. I understand the notion of attempting to refer to groups of people (when it's necessary to do so) by terms that are not needlessly offensive. To me, it's conceptually like calling someone by his full name rather than a nickname that he doesn't like. I don't really rage about it (just like I don't rage about people who in real use a nickname for me that I never use), but I'll try and be courteous if it's obvious how to do so.

I agree that there are limits of reasonableness to this -- I recently choked a bit upon hearing that a disability advocacy organization sought to change all legal references in state law to the "people first" nomenclature -- e.g. referencing "people with diabetes" rather than "diabetics" and the like. But, after gving it some thought, I can see a point there... I'm not sure it's worked its way into my own speech yet, but it doesn't seem a wholly unreasonable perspective.

I suppose I just get frustrated, to some degree, that the term "politically correct" has essentially become an insult in modern parlance -- when the underlying principle (treating people with respect) doesn't seem so bad to me.

[Subby]

I think it would be interesting to interview each one of the black kids at that school and ask them how seeing those posters made them feel...

[QuikSand]

Given that the award was being present on MLK day, do you honestly feel that any reasonable person could have any confusion about the school's intention?

Sorry, this just seems like one of those cases of playing "gotcha!" with semantics. You seem to think these kids are fighting some war against the PC police. I think it's the opposite. Feigning confusion and offense over terms that every rationale person can understand is exactly the sort of PC routine we're all sick of.

What's next? The shcool renames it the Black Student award and the white kids nominate someone named Jimmy Black?

That was more or less what I wanted to say, just a lot more concisely done.

[Samdari]

this just seems like one of those cases of playing "gotcha!" with semantics.

But it points out the ridiculous emphasis that is placed on "proper" language by political correctness. The whole idea that noone should ever be offended has led to (as SkyDog so eloquently points out) inaccurate and ambiguous terms being applied to ethnic groups, sometimes against their will. I don't think these students were protesting PC so much as recognizing the ridiculousness of the term and using it to protest an award that they were prevented from competing for due to their skin color. They have a beef with this award, and were exercising their first amendment rights (in a rather clever way, IMO) to protest it.

I do think that we should now refer to Ben as a "darker pigmented Georgian."

[Celeval]

I do think that we should now refer to Ben as a "darker pigmented Georgian."

HDPGIC?

[wig]

When did we amend the Constitution to afford people "The right not to be offended"?

[wig]

You never hear Gary Anderson complaining about racism.

:)

wig

[Fritz]

I think it would be interesting to interview each one of the black kids at that school and ask them how seeing those posters made them feel...


This is a hell of a test to apply to something.

[Ksyrup]

I don't disagree that it was attempt to provoke a response. I'm not sure "angry" is the intended response. My guess is that is intended to provoke the response, "Oh yeah, that IS a stupid term..."
Or how about provoking the thought that maybe we have a lot more in common than labels would suggest?

Wasn't there a story recently about a principal getting in trouble for indicating that two robbery suspects were black? How ridiculous is that? If he had no idea they were black yet described them that way, then that's one thing. But describing the individuals based on known characteristics - that's "racist" and/or "insensitive"? Huh?

While I understand the notion that referring to someone by their skin color has an historically negative tone, I thinnk we've come far enough to understand that in the vast majority of instances in which someone is referred to as "black", it is done so in a descriptive way, with no connotations attached. If, in a conversation about racial diversity in the workplace, I mention that one of my co-workers is black, I'm not saying anything different than if I used the term African-American. I think most people can fairly determine when someone is using the term "black" in a negative way, but then again, the term African-American can also be given the same connotation. So, it adds nothing, and it's incorrect, to boot.

My grandparents came over from Greece. As SD suggests, many black people can't claim even that kind of indirect line to Africa. And I can guarantee that if I was raised to consider myself a Greek-American above all else, I'd have less of an attachment and feel less a part of this country than I would otherwise. And that's the real issue, in my mind, with the use of a term like African-American - it places the emphasis on place of origin, rather than where that person is now and what they are a part of now. We're all Americans, except most black people consider themselves African-Americans first. It's one thing to be proud of your heritage; it's another to place your heritage above the here-and-now. And when you refer to yourself race-first, that is the kind of thing that will continue to divide races who are otherwise working toward the same goals.

[rwprice]

I think SkyDog did a good job of making his point on this. My objection to hyphenated names is that I feel it only serves to divide, not unite. Our country was once called a "melting pot" because people came here to become Americans, no matter what their country of origin. I understand that these terms are meant to be descriptive, but if we really want a dialog that is free of racial undertones, why do we need to label ourselves this way? I see myself as an American--period. I know that I have a heritage that came from somewhere else, but frankly I don't think that defines me at all.

I realize that a lot of people actually care about skin color and stuff like that, but I prefer to judge a person on their individual merit, and not what group they belong to. We used to be about rugged individualism, now it seems like we're more about group membership.

As to why these students did this, I too think it was most likely to call attention to what they saw as a ridiculous term, and not to create anger and resentment. Why have an award in which the primary qualification is skin color? Just a thought...

[QuikSand]

When did we amend the Constitution to afford people "The right not to be offended"?

I don't think that I, nor anyone else in this thread, is claiming that this is a matter of anyone's rights. In my judgment, making reasonable efforts not to offend people needlessly is just a matter of common decency.

[QuikSand]

The whole idea that noone should ever be offended...

While I am sure that there are some people out there who might embrace this as their philosophy... I think there are many more perfectly sensible people (not raging PC zealots) who would just prefer to make reaosnable attempts to minimize offending people, when it's easy to do so. There honestly is a reasonable middle ground here... as hard as that may seem.

[wig]

I don't think that I, nor anyone else in this thread, is claiming that this is a matter of anyone's rights. In my judgment, making reasonable efforts not to offend people needlessly is just a matter of common decency.

Nobody here is making that point, but it's the central point of all this PC crap.

[HornedFrog Purple]

And that's the real issue, in my mind, with the use of a term like African-American - it places the emphasis on place of origin, rather than where that person is now and what they are a part of now. We're all Americans, except most black people consider themselves African-Americans first. It's one thing to be proud of your heritage; it's another to place your heritage above the here-and-now. And when you refer to yourself race-first, that is the kind of thing that will continue to divide races who are otherwise working toward the same goals.

How is it a black persons fault when they have been catagorized this from the moment of their birth by the state?

Years ago we were just Negros.

Why can't I call myself an African-American when the state forces me to?

It's not placing myself above the here and now. It's placing myself where I am expected to be.

[Ksyrup]

How is it a black persons fault when they have been catagorized this from the moment of their birth by the state?

Years ago we were just Negros.

Why can't I call myself an African-American when the state forces me to?

It's not placing myself above the here and now. It's placing myself where I am expected to be.That's a valid point - the government bears some responsibility in that regard. Still, I don't see why that requires you to accept it. Years ago, slavery was where you were "expected" to be, and it's a good thing that people eventually decided not to accept it.

Also, I'm not saying you can't refer to yourself that way - you can refer to yourself in any way you want. My point is that instead of embracing the philosophy that supports this kind of labeling - especially if it is promoted by the government - the black community should recognize that relations between races will only improve if we do away with labels like this.

[John Galt]

Nobody here is making that point, but it's the central point of all this PC crap.
No, no, it isn't. Setting up strawmen about what this PC "crap" is about is nonsense. Using the extreme to prove the opposite extreme is just bad argument and many in this thread are guilty of it.

African American does not mean those with American and African connections. Just as a Jamacian American (whose ancestors were taken or moved from Africa) would be eligible for this award, a white South African student would not. Just as I would not be eligible because "we all came from Africa," someone with the last name "Black" (as Maple Leafs pointed out) would not be eligible for an alternatively named award. Race, culture, and natural origin labels are not precise and to pretend they are (and play silly semantics games) is nonsense.

You don't have to like the award, but to pretend that a white South African should be eligible is just silly.

[Subby]

This is a hell of a test to apply to something. It wasn't meant as a test or even a point. It was just a general wondering....

[GrantDawg]

It wasn't meant as a test or even a point. It was just a general wondering....
But I think you would be shocked at the number that would laugh at the joke.

[wig]

Race, culture, and natural origin labels are not precise and to pretend they are (and play silly semantics games) is nonsense.

You don't have to like the award, but to pretend that a white South African should be eligible is just silly.

I'm not saying that white kids should be allowed to win this award. It's clearly for black kids, which is fine. Just call it an award for black kids only, then.

I just find it amusing when you say calling Gary Anderson an African American is a silly semantics game, when we use "African American" because people didn't like the word "black".

This is all a silly semantics game, and many of you take it way too seriously.

wig

[Fritz]

this is a tad off topic

John,

You are lawyering here. When something suits your (the big your, not finger pointing) purpose, you talk about intent. When something does not, you look for loopholes and literal meaning.

Seems both approaches are viewed as being legitimate, and thus not silly.

[Noop]

I am one proud American. If someone wants to judge me by my color thats their lost because I think I'm a barrel of laughs in real life.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Also, I'm not saying you can't refer to yourself that way - you can refer to yourself in any way you want. My point is that instead of embracing the philosophy that supports this kind of labeling - especially if it is promoted by the government - the black community should recognize that relations between races will only improve if we do away with labels like this.

It's not just the government. Fill out an application for a job or apply for a credit card or buy a house. It is there plain as day. What does that really have to do with anything? You and I both pay our bills with something that is green! :D

I am not saying that blacks are absolved from any responsibility because they shouldn't be. But not all of what is called black leadership are reincarnations of Malcolm X either.

I like Colin Powell... a lot. But I don't believe he realized what exactly he was stirring. Mistrust on all sides. All things like this award do is keep stirring it.

[Fritz]

I am one proud American. If someone wants to judge me by my color thats their lost because I think I'm a barrel of laughs in real life.


From where I sit you are blue, just like everyone except Tubby, who is obviously purple.

[Maple Leafs]

Beyond the bigger issue of naming and grouping people based on race... do people here really believe that these high school kids were trying to make a political point about these issues?

Maybe they were, and I don't claim to read minds. But my guess is that this is just another example of wise-ass high school kids trying to find a technicality to make the teachers and administration look bad. This happens at every high school -- it's almost a right of passage. "They" make the rules, "we" find ways to break them.

Every year we see stories about some wacky high school who elected the high school QB as prom queen. Are they doing it to make a statement on gender equality issues? No, they're goofing around, having a laugh. Same as these kids. It's just that these kids were dumb enough to think that making racial jokes on MLK day was appropriate.

Yes, sure, maybe they really were aiming higher than that, trying to make a political statement. I'm sure they'll claim that now. But occam's razor says they got caught playing a dumb joke and now they don't want to take their punishment.

[Noop]

But not all of what is called black leadership are reincarnations of Malcolm X either.
Goodness I was thinking the same thing after I read his book( I had to stop reading :() Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc. to me are just playing the racist card for money. Having a one hour protest doesnt really help problems some of the people are facing. Excuse my french but fuck them....

[Noop]

From where I sit you are blue, just like everyone except Tubby, who is obviously purple.
Consider me Garnet and Gold my friend. ;)


;)

noop

[wig]

I'm with you, Mable Leafs. They were probably just being dumbasses.

[Samdari]

Beyond the bigger issue of naming and grouping people based on race... do people here really believe that these high school kids were trying to make a political point about these issues?

Maybe they were, and I don't claim to read minds. But my guess is that this is just another example of wise-ass high school kids trying to find a technicality to make the teachers and administration look bad. This happens at every high school -- it's almost a right of passage. "They" make the rules, "we" find ways to break them.

Every year we see stories about some wacky high school who elected the high school QB as prom queen. Are they doing it to make a statement on gender equality issues? No, they're goofing around, having a laugh. Same as these kids. It's just that these kids were dumb enough to think that making racial jokes on MLK day was appropriate.

Yes, sure, maybe they really were aiming higher than that, trying to make a political statement. I'm sure they'll claim that now. But occam's razor says they got caught playing a dumb joke and now they don't want to take their punishment.

Well, even if they are only doing what you claim they were doing, "trying to find a technicality to make the teachers and administration look bad" I don't think they deserve to be punished in any way. They looked at something from a different point of view than it was presented to them, and pointed out a flaw they percieved. That is exactly the kind of thing schools should be teaching them to do - think on their own. Punishing them for it is insane.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Goodness I was thinking the same thing after I read his book( I had to stop reading :() Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc. to me are just playing the racist card for money. Having a one hour protest doesnt really help problems some of the people are facing. Excuse my french but fuck them....

You get no argument from me. Sadly many many years ago they weren't the way they are now. Now they just prey on fear and mistrust just like Malcolm did. :(

[Senator]

I was thinking the other day what an opportunity Jesse Jackson had, and he squandered it. I remember at the 88 Democratic Convention, thinking, "he makes so much sense", and now he has become his worst enemy.

A week a ago a friend of mine sent me an email from his Blackberry at LaGuardia Airport. He was sitting eating breakfast waiting for his flight, when a man ask if he could share his table because all the others were full. It was Jesse Jackson. I emailed back and told him to ask to see a picture of his newest daughter, but I was only kidding.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Yup I really believed in him too and I was wrong. :(

I would have loved to see what JC Watts would have become but I guess we will never know now.

[Senator]

I have had many dealings with JC, and he was the one guy I had high hopes for. He is one of those types of people that just exude leadership. He is a very personable guy, a quick study, and I just hated to see him leave politics. He is the only guy I can think of that I would go back into full time politics for.


ADD ON: Some would argue that I am already in politics full time, and I would be the last one to argue that point.

[Maple Leafs]

Well, even if they are only doing what you claim they were doing, "trying to find a technicality to make the teachers and administration look bad" I don't think they deserve to be punished in any way. They looked at something from a different point of view than it was presented to them, and pointed out a flaw they percieved. That is exactly the kind of thing schools should be teaching them to do - think on their own. Punishing them for it is insane.I don't think we do our kids any favors if we encourage them to think independtly with no regard for the impact of their actions.

Whatever motives you want to assign to the kids in question, their actions ruined an event that was (presumably) important to a lot of people. All for a laugh. That's low-class, any way you slice it.

If they really feel like their point was so important that it had to be made without consideration of the consequences, then fine. Accept your punishment and move on, happy in the knowledge that you made your statement. Civil disobedience has its place. But the fact that they're fighting the (relatively minor) punishment handed out is pretty telling as far as their motives.

[Young Drachma]

Dola--

I honestly hope that more white South Africans will do this kind of thing, and insist on being called African-Americans. I HATE that term. My mama was born in Georgia. My grandmama was born in Georgia. My great-grandmother was born in Georgia. My GREAT-GREAT grandmother was born in Georgia.

Face the facts: I have WAY more in common with white Georgians who have been here for multiple generations than I do with black folks in Africa. As a whole, black Southerners have WAY more in common with white Southerners than Africans. (I'd imagine this is true in other parts of the country as well...)

I wish more dark-skinned Americans would realize this.

I think more of us realize it than the media gives us credit for. But you're making good points and I agree wholeheartedly. I always joke when people ask me "where are you from?" I always say I'm fifth generation New Jerseyean. People look puzzled and go, "right, but where are you really from?"

Ugh. My friend goes to college with four white girls from Uganda. She was flabbergasted to find out that there are white folks from Africa. Granted, there are not many and the PC crowd has problems with it, but I've always argued that the only way to make things (e.g. black history month) relevant is to include people rather than make them feel excluded.

The King holiday is just becoming more mainstream and becoming embraced, but more people choose to marginalize and make it some sort of black-only thing.

It's so frustrating.

[Desnudo]

That would have made a good Onion story if they'd made it so he won. If you're an American you're an American, no hyphen, end of story.

[Butter]

That would have made a good Onion story if they'd made it so he won. If you're an American you're an American, no hyphen, end of story.

Yes, blacks are never persecuted here. We're glad to note that all of our racial problems have disappeared, thanks to the dropping of hyphenated terms!

Get real.

[Fritz]

Yes, blacks are never persecuted here. We're glad to note that all of our racial problems have disappeared, thanks to the dropping of hyphenated terms!

Get real.


Can we assume from your statement that you think hyphenated terms are having a positive impact on racial problems?

[GrantDawg]

Can we assume from your statement that you think hyphenated terms are having a positive impact on racial problems?
Sure it has. Segregation always works. Isn't that what history tells us?

[Desnudo]

Yes, blacks are never persecuted here. We're glad to note that all of our racial problems have disappeared, thanks to the dropping of hyphenated terms!

Get real.

I'm not sure what your problem is. And please don't pull conclusions from my statements that have nothing to do with what I was saying.

[JonInMiddleGA]

... do people here really believe that these high school kids were trying to make a political point about these issues?


I can't speak for everyone here, but I suspect these high school kids were highlighting this particular piece of biased b.s. for what it is -- an insult to all Americans, regardless of skin color.

Whether that's a "political statement" in their minds or just a way of highlighting this sort of absurdity, I couldn't tell you.

[sabotai]

I think this is more PC nonsense. One, having an award like this is patronizing to the black community (and I'm surprised more don't see it like that). Second, what exactly did these kids do that was so wrong to warrent a suspension? Offend people? Now we're suspending kids just because they offend some people?

When I was in high school, it got out that I was an atheist when I was a senior and some of the more "religious" people in my class took offense to me saying a couple of things (that were neither directed at them on in a coversation with them). I guess I should have been suspended because I offended them...

[Franklinnoble]

Well, I'm glad SkyDog is taking a stand against political correctness...

... now if he would only bring back the QOTM...





:D

[Butter]

Can we assume from your statement that you think hyphenated terms are having a positive impact on racial problems?

Sure. This PC subject is awfully tired here anyway, but all you conservative types just LOOOOOVE to argue about it. I'm not gonna bite.

Desnudo, you said "if you're an American, you're an American". For many minorities, I don't think they feel like they're afforded all the protections that an American should be afforded. That's all I meant. I guess you didn't really say much with that statement, so I'll lay off my inferring nature today, and apologize if I inferred more than I should've.

[Glengoyne]

Whatever their motivation, they were making a commentary about the name assigned to the award. The didn't expect this white kid to win the award. They were making a statement. Other than humor, I don't think we can ascribe any motive to their actions.

You can call them rabblerousers, nogoodnicks, pranksters, morons, or even insensitive. I just don't think they should be called racists, which is what the school district did by suspending them.

[Maple Leafs]

When I was in high school, it got out that I was an atheist when I was a senior and some of the more "religious" people in my class took offense to me saying a couple of things (that were neither directed at them on in a coversation with them). I guess I should have been suspended because I offended them...In my high school, which was heavily Jewish, we had a guy who thought it was funny to draw swastikas on peoples lockers. That offended people too.

Look, the problem with slippery slope arguments is that, if accepted, they force you to condone all behaviour, no matter how extreme. There's a difference between all three situations - yours, mine and the one in the article. There are shade of grey between the extremes. Just because you were given a rough ride does not mean that all offensive actions, by definition, must be accepted.

Who gets to determine what gets punished and what doesn't? I'd say it's the administrators. That's their job, after all. If they do it poorly, they deserve to take the heat for it. In this case, I think they made the right call.

[sabotai]

In my high school, which was heavily Jewish, we had a guy who thought it was funny to draw swastikas on peoples lockers. That offended people too.

Well for one, that's also vandelism...(and did they get suspended for it?)

I just don't think the school should be suspending people simply for offending people (your example include vandelism). Once you start doing that, then you open the door for people to expect suspensions for all kinds of "offensive" actions. Or are we just going to treat black people different in another situation. They're going to suspend white people when they offend some black people. Will they suspend black people if they offend some white people, or will they continue to treat whites and blacks differently?

[Maple Leafs]

Well for one, that's also vandelism...Do you honestly think vandalism is the big problem in that scenario?

[sabotai]

I think vandelism is the suspendable action in that scenario.

[Maple Leafs]

I think vandelism is the suspendable action in that scenario.Sigh.

So let's pretend he taped signs to their lockers.

[sabotai]

Sigh? I'm not just laying down and following you opinions and that's hard on you?

Anyway, if he just taped signs, and the school has no rule about that sort of thing (and if it's largely jewish, I would imagine they do...), then tough luck for the school and the kids should not get suspended. (Beaten savagly in the bathroom, yes.) But what rule of the school's did they break that is classified as suspendable if broken?

[Desnudo]

Sure. This PC subject is awfully tired here anyway, but all you conservative types just LOOOOOVE to argue about it. I'm not gonna bite.

Desnudo, you said "if you're an American, you're an American". For many minorities, I don't think they feel like they're afforded all the protections that an American should be afforded. That's all I meant. I guess you didn't really say much with that statement, so I'll lay off my inferring nature today, and apologize if I inferred more than I should've.

No worries Butter, it's easy to infer more than was intended from message board posts. I really did mean it in a literal sense, with no underlying message.

[mckerney]

"Distinguished African American Student Award"

"I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Yep, sounds like that's about what he was hoping for.

[astralhaze]

I assume the conservatives who just looooove to rail against political correctness have no problem with calling African-Americans niggers, Jews kikes, Asians gooks, Mexicans spics, homosexuals fags, and etc?

If you do, and you still continue the argument, you are being extremely inconsistent.

[sabotai]

I assume the conservatives who just looooove to rail against political correctness have no problem with calling African-Americans niggers, Jews kikes, Asians gooks, Mexicans spics, homosexuals fags, and etc?

Nope. (But I guess the question was not directed at me since I'm not a conservative)

[GrantDawg]

I assume the conservatives who just looooove to rail against political correctness have no problem with calling African-Americans niggers, Jews kikes, Asians gooks, Mexicans spics, homosexuals fags, and etc?

If you do, and you still continue the argument, you are being extremely inconsistent.
And I'm guessing the liberals that just loooove talking about freedom of speech will be calling the ACLU to help sue the school for restricting these kids rights.


If you're not, then your inconsistent.

[astralhaze]

And I'm guessing the liberals that just loooove talking about freedom of speech will be calling the ACLU to help sue the school for restricting these kids rights.


If you're not, then your inconsistent.
Avoiding the question?

[Easy Mac]

Dave Matthews is the greatest African American recording artist of all time.

And if the kids are just pulling a prank, fine, give them detention... I got detentions for untucked shirts. If they are trying to create a disturbance in order to disrupt school, then suspend them.

[GrantDawg]

Avoiding the question?
Nope, showing the same is true either way you look at it.

[sabotai]

Dave Matthews is the greatest African American recording artist of all time.

And if the kids are just pulling a prank, fine, give them detention... I got detentions for untucked shirts. If they are trying to create a disturbance in order to disrupt school, then suspend them.

Detention of an untucked shirt?

*takes out personal tape recorder*
*presses record*

Note to self...do not move to South Carolina...in fact, just stay away from the south completely.

*presses stop.*

[Easy Mac]

Detention of an untucked shirt?

*takes out personal tape recorder*
*presses record*

Note to self...do not move to South Carolina...in fact, just stay away from the south completely.

*presses stop.*
and it was a saturday detention, which meant I had to go to school and sit in a room for 4 hours for not tucking in my shirt... I guess I could conceal a weapon or a pen or something.

[wig]

"I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Yep, sounds like that's about what he was hoping for.


Game-Set-Match to mckerney

Well timed and well said.

wig

[Butter]

And I'm guessing the liberals that just loooove talking about freedom of speech will be calling the ACLU to help sue the school for restricting these kids rights.

Kids' rights CAN be restricted. Unfortunate (or not) as you may view that, your point is misplaced in this argument.

[John Galt]

And I'm guessing the liberals that just loooove talking about freedom of speech will be calling the ACLU to help sue the school for restricting these kids rights.


If you're not, then your inconsistent.
I'll take the challenge.

I don't support using racial slurs (astralhaze's example), I don't support the kid's suspensions (although I don't think I support a lawsuit to get them back in either), and I do support free speech.

Is that inconsistent? I don't think it is at all. I don't think using slurs and diminishing other people's cultures has anything to do with free speech. Sure, people are "free" to say what they want, but it doesn't mean they aren't dumbasses for doing it. Just because this country enjoys "free speech," doesn't mean that everything that is said is equal. A lot of crap gets spewed out and I'll call it that.

In this case, you have a group of minority students who preferred to call themselves African-American (not a term that I endorse, but my opinion doesn't count) and the dumbass white students took a joke/prank/argument too far. I'm not sure what their posters said, but I'm guessing they were a little in-your-face. Should they be allowed to say it? Sure, but they are still dumbasses.

Now, are you going to take astralhaze's challenge or agree that slippery slope arguments are dumb? ;)

[GrantDawg]

I'll take the challenge.

I don't support using racial slurs (astralhaze's example), I don't support the kid's suspensions (although I don't think I support a lawsuit to get them back in either), and I do support free speech.

Is that inconsistent? I don't think it is at all. I don't think using slurs and diminishing other people's cultures has anything to do with free speech. Sure, people are "free" to say what they want, but it doesn't mean they aren't dumbasses for doing it. Just because this country enjoys "free speech," doesn't mean that everything that is said is equal. A lot of crap gets spewed out and I'll call it that.

In this case, you have a group of minority students who preferred to call themselves African-American (not a term that I endorse, but my opinion doesn't count) and the dumbass white students took a joke/prank/argument too far. I'm not sure what their posters said, but I'm guessing they were a little in-your-face. Should they be allowed to say it? Sure, but they are still dumbasses.

Now, are you going to take astralhaze's challenge or agree that slippery slope arguments are dumb? ;)
I've always thought slippery slope arguements were dumb.

[John Galt]

I've always thought slippery slope arguements were dumb.That's all I wanted to hear. Can you tell everyone else here to stop using them? And while you are at it, tell them to stop using the same bad strawmen (especially the one that is both a strawman and a slippery slope - that the PC police would have us say nothing because someone will always be offended).

[Desnudo]

That's a slippery slope John. The next thing you know we'll all be wearing tracking bracelets.

[yabanci]

So of all the issues in the world, these students decide that this is the one that needs to have attention focused on it?

And in order to do so, they feel it's appropriate to ruin an award meant for black students, at an overwhelmingly white school, on Martin Luther King day?

Nice post.

[Samdari]

I don't think we do our kids any favors if we encourage them to think independtly with no regard for the impact of their actions.

Whatever motives you want to assign to the kids in question, their actions ruined an event that was (presumably) important to a lot of people. All for a laugh. That's low-class, any way you slice it.

If they really feel like their point was so important that it had to be made without consideration of the consequences, then fine. Accept your punishment and move on, happy in the knowledge that you made your statement. Civil disobedience has its place. But the fact that they're fighting the (relatively minor) punishment handed out is pretty telling as far as their motives.

So, whateves motives they had, they were definitely doing it only for a laugh. You cannot seem to get away from tying their punishment into motives you have ascribed.

And besides, making one's point should not have consequences, unless they broke a law or published school rule. They endorsed a candidate for an award (appropriate or not). There is no rule against that. There should be no punishment.

[Barkeep49]

Whatever motives you want to assign to the kids in question, their actions ruined an event that was (presumably) important to a lot of people. All for a laugh.

Satire is a legitmate form of expression. When John Stewart plays the clip of Howard Dean ranting and compares it to a monster truck rally it probably helps to "ruin" the memory of a speech that was really important to a lot of people. This idea that because they did it for a laugh that it doesn't have legitimacy or is wrong, strikes me as condescending at best.

[BigJohn&TheLions]

When Bobby Brown & Whitney Houston visited an Israili community of black Hebrews a NYC news broadcast called the community "African-American." So to be politically correct anyone with African heratige and dark skin must be refered to as "African-American" no matter whether they have even seen America. Ridiculous...

[John Galt]

When Bobby Brown & Whitney Houston visited an Israili community of black Hebrews a NYC news broadcast called the community "African-American." So to be politically correct anyone with African heratige and dark skin must be refered to as "African-American" no matter whether they have even seen America. Ridiculous...
Yes, that is the logical conclusion to draw. :rolleyes: More strawmen.

[Fritz]

I'll take the challenge.

I don't support using racial slurs, I don't support the kid's suspensions (although I don't think I support a lawsuit to get them back in either), and I do support free speech.


RUN FOR YOUR LIVES

jg and I agree on something

[BishopMVP]

The PC thing has been played out in this thread already, but I just wanted to add a couple points.

One problem with the award is that, unless there is an accompanying one solely for white students, which I'll guarantee there isn't, it implies that black students are not as good as white students and can't compete on the same level. Another is the qualification for the award. How is that determined? Should you be able to trace your heritage back to Africa within x generations - apparently that's not it, so then does your skin pigment have to be x darker than 'white' students - this would include many Latino people, which I'm sure isn't the intent either. So then are we going back to the one-drop theory or what?

Also, as for the students doing it on MLK day, that was the day the award was handed out. It wasn't like this was an award handed out during graduation and the students chose to bring it up on a holiday that celebrates a prominent black American. The fact that an award based on segragating a small portion of the population is entirely antithetical to King's professed beliefs has already been pointed out in the thread.

In this case, you have a group of minority students who preferred to call themselves African-American
I don't profess to know what percentage of students at this school prefer to be called African-American versus black or Negro-American as you brought up in the other thread, but I very much doubt that they had any choice in the issue. This was the school district that hands out the award, and was responsible for its creation and naming.

[Fritz]

dola

except jg does overuse the strawman thing

[John Galt]

dola

except jg does overuse the strawman thing
How can you even pretend to dola with the monster post in between? ;)

As to the strawman thing, I'm guilty as charged.

[Fritz]

sorry, it was a ddola

[Ben E Lou]

Been pretty busy today. Nice read in this thread. Some thoughts...

Quik, I understand where you're coming from on the inexact terminology, but I offer my own ethnic ancestry as another example of why this bothers me.

Father--Robert Lewis

His parents--Benjamin and Mary Lewis--Benjamin's parents were a black woman (We assume of West African slave lineage. The British brought over a number of slaves to Barbados in the 1600's.) and a man of pretty much 100% Carribean/South American lineage. As far as we can tell, Mary was of purely Carribbean/South American descent.

So, my father's ancestry is basically 25% African, and 75% Latino/Hispanic/Carribean native. He was born in Havana, Cuba, but raised in New Orleans, LA. Being raised stateside, he spoke with no accent, and furthermore he was very dark-skinned. He looked definitely looked Negro/black/African-American, and was therefore classified as such by the government. (Actually I think the law in Louisiana is that if you have 12.5% "black blood" you were considered "Negro", "Black", "African-American", or whatever the term du jour is.)

Mother--Esther Allen Lewis

Her mother--Ruby Carter Allen--Ruby's mother was pretty much of full Cherokee Indian descent, and her father was 3/4 African descent, 1/4 European descent--makes Ruby's lineage 1/2 Cherokee, 3/8 African, 1/8
European

Her father--Harold Allen--His father was white (slave owner/slave copulation) and his mother was of mainly African descent (although her lineage is part Cherokee as well). For argument's sake, we'll call him 50% European, 50% African

So....that means that my mom's lineage is 1/4 Cherokee, 7/16 African, 5/16 European


Doing all the cypherin', that in reality means my heritage is approximately:

37.5% South American/Carribbean/Latino
34.4% African
15.6% European
12.5% Cherokee

Maybe understanding my true heritage will help folks understand why calling me "African-American" is just flat-out offensive to me. One reason I don't like that term is that it completely discounts over 60% of my heritage. My brothers and I happen to look "black" (at least by American standards). However, nearly all of our first cousins on our mother's side look at least somewhat ethnically ambiguous. I have two first cousins with green eyes, and all but one of my mother's six brothers have straight hair. :eek: We don't mind being called "black", mainly because for me the term connotates the cultural experience/history of those of us with partial/full African ancestry, but it also doesn't leave out the reality that a LARGE number of us have a good bit of non-African lineage. All of my extended family members grew up in black neighborhoods, were victims of Jim Crow laws in the South, etc. etc. etc., so we definitely consider ourselves "black"--but "African American" is a real stretch.

This "mixed" cultural heritage isn't uncommon in American "blacks." In fact, I'd venture to say that it is more the norm than "pure" African ancestry. There's a reason that American "blacks" look quite different from African "blacks," and it isn't just the way we dress. ;)

(Sorry this is being posted now and maybe sort of off-topic with where the thread has gone. I started this post yesterday, but things got even busier than expected getting ready for camp. I looked at my computer this morning and realized that I was 2/3 done with this post, so I figured I'd finish it. :))

--Ben

[JonInMiddleGA]

They endorsed a candidate for an award (appropriate or not). There is no rule against that.

True.

Democrats do it all the time :D

[Ben E Lou]

For many minorities, I don't think they feel like they're afforded all the protections that an American should be afforded.Yes and no. I strongly believe that these three things are equally true in America:

1. There still exist pockets of unfairness (justice system is the most obvious one).
2. As a whole, blacks in the public eye over-exploit race in a demagogic manner to acquire/maintain political power.
3. As a whole, whites cry "reverse racism" too quickly.

[QuikSand]

Yes and no. I strongly believe that these three things are equally true in America:

1. There still exist pockets of unfairness (justice system is the most obvious one).
2. As a whole, blacks in the public eye over-exploit race in a demagogic manner to acquire/maintain political power.
3. As a whole, whites cry "reverse racism" too quickly.

I'd agree that all those things are true... not sure about equally, but I'd agree with each of them.

[Ben E Lou]

I'd agree that all those things are true... not sure about equally, but I'd agree with each of them.Good point. I probably should have left off "equally".

[Sun Tzu]

What would happen if the same school had an award called "The David Duke Award", and a bunch of black kids attempted to win the award.

The MLK award is the biggest sham I have ever heard of in a public school. It's blatant reverse racism towards non-blacks, and is no different then having a "lets drink from seperate water fountains" day. What would happen if an Asian person who was born in Africa attempted to win the award?

We have become so obsessed with being PC that if somebody were to even bring up the idea of creating a "whites only" award they would be fired on the spot, branded a racist, and shunned from ever working in the school system again. It truly is amazing how sick this country is becomming.

Keep in mind while reading this that I am not white, I am Jewish. :D

[Easy Mac]

Well, since the originalaward in question is not named for a radical black supremacist, I think people would rightly have a problem with a David Duke award... since its a completely different concept.

I don't think its being PC to say I don't want an award named after a racist... I think its called common sense.

If you're going to make an argument at least use the same concept, like an Anglo-saxon achievement award.

We had that at my school, its called graduating... see, now thats not being PC.

[Sun Tzu]

Thank you for taking my post completely out of text Mac. :)

[JonInMiddleGA]

We had that at my school, its called graduating... see, now thats not being PC.

Oh that was good. Very good, at least an eight-pointer.

[MJ4H]

This board needs a "zing" sound effect for those one-liners. Or how about a "badoom-ching" drum set tag? Sorry, just thinking "out loud" here.

[Maple Leafs]

This board needs a "zing" sound effect for those one-liners. Or how about a "badoom-ching" drum set tag? Sorry, just thinking "out loud" here.I'd rather have a Fox-style studio audience going "Ooohhhh...."

[John Galt]

Been pretty busy today. Nice read in this thread. Some thoughts...

Quik, I understand where you're coming from on the inexact terminology, but I offer my own ethnic ancestry as another example of why this bothers me.

Father--Robert Lewis

His parents--Benjamin and Mary Lewis--Benjamin's parents were a black woman (We assume of West African slave lineage. The British brought over a number of slaves to Barbados in the 1600's.) and a man of pretty much 100% Carribean/South American lineage. As far as we can tell, Mary was of purely Carribbean/South American descent.

So, my father's ancestry is basically 25% African, and 75% Latino/Hispanic/Carribean native. He was born in Havana, Cuba, but raised in New Orleans, LA. Being raised stateside, he spoke with no accent, and furthermore he was very dark-skinned. He looked definitely looked Negro/black/African-American, and was therefore classified as such by the government. (Actually I think the law in Louisiana is that if you have 12.5% "black blood" you were considered "Negro", "Black", "African-American", or whatever the term du jour is.)

Mother--Esther Allen Lewis

Her mother--Ruby Carter Allen--Ruby's mother was pretty much of full Cherokee Indian descent, and her father was 3/4 African descent, 1/4 European descent--makes Ruby's lineage 1/2 Cherokee, 3/8 African, 1/8
European

Her father--Harold Allen--His father was white (slave owner/slave copulation) and his mother was of mainly African descent (although her lineage is part Cherokee as well). For argument's sake, we'll call him 50% European, 50% African

So....that means that my mom's lineage is 1/4 Cherokee, 7/16 African, 5/16 European


Doing all the cypherin', that in reality means my heritage is approximately:

37.5% South American/Carribbean/Latino
34.4% African
15.6% European
12.5% Cherokee

Maybe understanding my true heritage will help folks understand why calling me "African-American" is just flat-out offensive to me. One reason I don't like that term is that it completely discounts over 60% of my heritage. My brothers and I happen to look "black" (at least by American standards). However, nearly all of our first cousins on our mother's side look at least somewhat ethnically ambiguous. I have two first cousins with green eyes, and all but one of my mother's six brothers have straight hair. :eek: We don't mind being called "black", mainly because for me the term connotates the cultural experience/history of those of us with partial/full African ancestry, but it also doesn't leave out the reality that a LARGE number of us have a good bit of non-African lineage. All of my extended family members grew up in black neighborhoods, were victims of Jim Crow laws in the South, etc. etc. etc., so we definitely consider ourselves "black"--but "African American" is a real stretch.

This "mixed" cultural heritage isn't uncommon in American "blacks." In fact, I'd venture to say that it is more the norm than "pure" African ancestry. There's a reason that American "blacks" look quite different from African "blacks," and it isn't just the way we dress. ;)

(Sorry this is being posted now and maybe sort of off-topic with where the thread has gone. I started this post yesterday, but things got even busier than expected getting ready for camp. I looked at my computer this morning and realized that I was 2/3 done with this post, so I figured I'd finish it. :))

--Ben
These are good points, but I still don't think they answer all the claims made. Maybe I depart from some of the others here, but I'm a strong believer that race is entirely a social construction. Yes, there are biological and pigmentation differences, but the values ascribed to race are entirely cultural. Blood quantum tests really don't get at the issue because race is determined by society, not by a math test.

I believe when it comes to calling people by certain labels (like "African-American"), the key issue is one of self determination. And I mean the self determination of you as an individual and the group with whom you want to be identified. If you don't want to be called "African-American" I'm not arrogant enough to believe I know the "proper" label for you and so long as the name you want to be identified as isn't objectionable to others using that name, I'll call you that.

The problem with lots of those arguing here is that they lack manners (as QS pointed out) and they are arrogant. They believe they know better than those at Omaha Westside what is best for them and what they should be called. Believe it or not, some people don't think being called "American" is enough and want to recognize their roots. Just as I don't call Skydog "Hornsmaniac" because I'm arrogant enough to believe I know his "proper" name, you should respect others who wish to be called something else. Is that really too much to ask?

[Butter]

Yes and no. I strongly believe that these three things are equally true in America:

1. There still exist pockets of unfairness (justice system is the most obvious one).
2. As a whole, blacks in the public eye over-exploit race in a demagogic manner to acquire/maintain political power.
3. As a whole, whites cry "reverse racism" too quickly.

I agree with all of these. I guess the "reverse racism" gets on my nerves more than it should.

[Butter]

Dola - although I tend to think that unfairness is more widespread than just existing in "pockets".

[John Galt]

Dola - although I tend to think that unfairness is more widespread than just existing in "pockets".
I agree and would also add that although I agree with SD's 2), I don't have a problem with it.

[clintl]

As I see it, for the most part, all PC really amounts to is a desire by groups who have historically been crapped on by the majority to be treated according to the Golden Rule. Sometimes, the application is overzealous and produces silly results, but in its basic essence, that's all there is to PC.

And while I appreciate and understand Skydog's objections to using the term "African-American" in reference to him, as far as anyone else is concerned, I'm not sure why this particular term stirs up so much resentment when other similar terms identifying original ethnicity (such as Italian-American, Polish-American, Irish-American, etc) don't. There are lots of white people of European ancestry who maintain a cultural connection with their ancestral roots, without being vilified for it. And as imperfect as it IS a more accurate description than "black", and it does seem to have become the preferred term by much of the segment of the population it refers to.

[WSUCougar]

A few general comments and overall blather. Let me state up front that my comments are merely meant for discussion’s sake and are not intended to be preachy or offensive. Sorry for the long post.

I think this incident is both a conspicuous and also quite subtle blending of issues, interpretations, and resultant reactions.

As has been discussed throughout this thread, the term “African-American” is an unsuccessful euphemism for a segment of our nation’s society that has, throughout various stages of American history, been an enslaved, despised, repressed, terrorized, segregated, de-segregated and then subsequently (and still not yet fully) unfettered minority. To deny any of these stages of black history in the United States is to reject documented fact.

In recent years Americans have, in either the form of laws, institutions, governmental agencies, or individual efforts, made substantial efforts to alleviate some of the social wrongs that continue to plague our society with regard to minorities, and specifically in this instance to black Americans. Many embrace these efforts; a significant number of people do not. Human history is replete with countless examples of groups (be they racial, religious, national, or other) not liking one another. It is one of the unfortunate human conditions.

Anyway, one such thread of this pattern is the use of encompassing terms that capture this segment of society. Up through the 20th century, the n-word was standard parlance, frequently used as a casual term of identification by whites rather than in a strictly derogatory sense (although that was certainly a dominant use, too). Other terms (such as “darkies”) were also commonly used. Then came the term “colored” – a distinction obviously based on differentiating physical traits. “Negroes” was more of a racial specification, but again a clear distinction from whites. Yet “African-American” brought with it a sense of inclusion; supposedly, we are all something-Americans based upon our heritage. Indians are “Native Americans,” there are Asian-Americans, Italian-Americans, and so on. But, as SkyDog’s example indicates, the silliness comes from lumping people of any color or background into one slot of society with a convenient tag. Me, I’m a German/English-American. SkyDog’s a European/African/Caribbean/Native-American. My skin is white (very much so in the winter!), his is black. He’s a native Georgian, I’m a displaced Washingtonian living in Missouri. What are we? Well, society has labeled him an African-American and me a white.

Today, we have a generation of kids who don’t have many obvious national examples of racial hatred and disharmony. The cultural lines are blurred, through sports, music, entertainment, education, whatever. Martin Luther King happened 40 years ago; Jim Crow, race riots, de-segregation, bussing, David Duke, even Rodney King and O.J. Simpson are stuff in a history book. Certainly racial hatred remains, evident every day in some form or fashion. But the difference, IMO, is that the attempts to counter it are significantly institutionalized now. In the field of history, slavery, Civil Rights, and other aspects of black history are mainstream now. Depending upon what part of the country you’re in (I’m sure), such topics are just another blip in a student’s studies. There is no obvious urgency or inherent tension to them. Sure, there are parents who pass along the hatred and ignorance, and it shows up all the time throughout the country. But as an item on the national agenda, race relations are back-page news.

But layered on that you have things like the “Distinguished African-American Student Award.” Rather than including all students in something like a “MLK Distinguished Student Award,” something which celebrates inclusion, you throw a wrench into the works by excluding a majority of students. Toss the minority a bone so that we look tolerant. The reaction? A group of students rebel (as students are wont to do) and say “How stupid is that?” Perhaps their anger is mistakenly transposed onto black students, when it should be aimed at the administrators who, in their desperate attempt to do the socially-correct thing, flub it up. I can’t know what the kids were truly thinking, but my bet would be a simple attempt to say “this is a stupid thing” that didn’t take full account of the consequences.

Then, layered on that, you have the knee-jerk response; fearful of looking insensitive to something racially charged, the powers that be label the action as insensitive and inappropriate. The various segments of society respond; oh! How callous! Oh! It’s racial tension! Oh! How PC!

Eventually, a generation of American children will need to carve their own rendering of race relations without it being done for them. Kids are smarter than they are often given credit for.

Note: I’ve been tinkering with this post for a couple days now. Apologies if it is redundant with any of the thoughts already stated by others.

[Fritz]

nice post WSUcougar

[QuikSand]

10/10.

[Sun Tzu]

Eventually, a generation of American children will need to carve their own rendering of race relations without it being done for them.

I agree in full with this. However It saddens me to say that I don't think we're anywhere near being able to accomplish this.

[Maple Leafs]

I can’t know what the kids were truly thinking, but my bet would be a simple attempt to say “this is a stupid thing” that didn’t take full account of the consequences.[/I]Excellent post. And I agree, they clearly weren't thinking much about the consequences.

I guess my problem is that I'm just not especially interested in what some white kids in oerwhelmingly white school think is an appopriate activity for MLK day. I don't think it's their call to make.

[Fritz]

because they get the rest of the year to make that call.....

[Glengoyne]

...I'm not sure why this particular term stirs up so much resentment when other similar terms identifying original ethnicity (such as Italian-American, Polish-American, Irish-American, etc) don't.
Actually I think most of the people speaking up about the term African-American, are also talking about all of the hyphenated descriptors. In my mind those terms are intrinsically devisive. There are times when they are used innoculously as descriptors, and others when they are not so innocent in my mind. The award in this article smacks of ill conceived pandering. I think if I were black I might find the award offensive, as it seems to imply black might never win the award if it were to go simply to the outstanding student. If a school had an award for the outstanding Irish American student, I would be similarly offended. Now if an Irish American Club wanted to do so, that is different. The school, however, should not take part in any sort of discrimination or racial separatism.

Mckerney's post with the King quote sums up how I feel about that award more than I can probably put into words. Nice post Mckerney.

[John Galt]

The award in this article smacks of ill conceived pandering. I think if I were black I might find the award offensive, as it seems to imply black might never win the award if it were to go simply to the outstanding student.
But you're not. And that is why I say it is arrogant to presume your belief in what "African-Americans" should be called should be determined by what you say. As long as the minority students are happy with the label, I don't see how your opinion should matter.

[Glengoyne]

But you're not. And that is why I say it is arrogant to presume your belief in what "African-Americans" should be called should be determined by what you say. As long as the minority students are happy with the label, I don't see how your opinion should matter.
To first address the notion that I can't say "if I were black I would be offended". I call BULLSHIT this case. No matter what race, color, or creed I am, I can imagine being embarrased and or offended that someone would think I need to be considered for some "second-rate" award that excludes a number of my peers .


Just in case you aren't buying that. I do know, and I did state, that if the school had a special award for the "outstanding Irish American Student", I would be offended by the apparent motivation behind the award. I am Irish(well Scottish actually, but the family had to flee after supporting the wrong side in the civil war...Damn parliament), so I can own THAT.

[Noop]

To first address the notion that I can't say "if I were black I would be offended". I call BULLSHIT this case. No matter what race, color, or creed I am, I can imagine being embarrased and or offended that someone would think I need to be considered for some "second-rate" award that excludes a number of my peers .


Just in case you aren't buying that. I do know, and I did state, that if the school had a special award for the "outstanding Irish American Student", I would be offended by the apparent motivation behind the award. I am Irish(well Scottish actually, but the family had to flee after supporting the wrong side in the civil war...Damn parliament), so I can own THAT.
:rolleyes:

[Butter]

No matter what race, color, or creed I am, I can imagine being embarrased and or offended that someone would think I need to be considered for some "second-rate" award that excludes a number of my peers .


And from what perspective are you considering this award "second-rate"?

Perhaps the school does have an outstanding student award, for which black students would be eligible. But I view this somewhat as having an MVP award and then several sub-awards in major sports. Sure, everyone would like to win the MVP, but recognizing sub-groups within each sport is also prestigious, maybe just as prestigious or even moreso within that sub-group.

[Easy Mac]

Thank you for taking my post completely out of text Mac. :)
No problem, and yeah, sorry. :)

[yabanci]

Very good post, WScougar, and a lot of intelligent discussion from all perspectives in this thread.

The problem I've had with even forming a real opinion on this results from poor reporting. What the article does not tell us is what the hell is a "distinguished African American Student Award."

First, what is the criteria for giving this award? Is it for doing well academically in school? Is it for being involved in school projects? Is it for the quarterback of the football team if he leads them to a good season? Is it doing something that's considered fighting against racism? Is it for following and promoting MLK's teachings?

Second, how did this award come about? Did the school administrators sit around one day wondering what they should do for MLK day and decide, let's make a special awrd for black kids? Are there other awards in the school? Was there something they were trying to remedy, such as blacks being excluded from the "regular" awards, if any? What motivated them to create such an award?

I think the award in general could be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on the intent and history behind the award, which we are not given in the article.

The fact is that MLK was not fighting for separate awards for black kids, so if the school administrators are trying to honor MLK by making this separate award, they have missed his point. If they want to give an award to someone who promotes MLK's teachings, it shouldn't be limited to blacks -- after all, MLK simply took Gandhi's teachings in South Africa and India and applied them to the civil rights movement in the US. So would we say MLK wouldn't be eligible for an award honoring Gandhi because MLK was black and not Indian? Absurd. If they want to give an award honoring MLK, the award should be open to anyone who promotes his ideals.

That being said, I think what the white kid did was wrong. He might have a legitimate complaint, depending on background information that is not included in the article, but in my opinion he didn't go about registering that complaint in an honorable or effective way. The way I read the article, he did it in a mocking, meanspirited way. Rather than making a point of racial inclusiveness, he increased racial tensions.

Based on the facts we are given, however, I do not agree that he should be severely punished for what he did. It sounds to me like the school administrators are scapegoating the white kid for questionable decisions that they have made in their zeal to "honor" MLK.

.

[BishopMVP]

This is going to be a somewhat jumbled post just trying to respond to some different points.

First of all, nice posts by WSUCougar and Skydog.

To Skydog's list of three "1. There still exist pockets of unfairness (justice system is the most obvious one).
2. As a whole, blacks in the public eye over-exploit race in a demagogic manner to acquire/maintain political power.
3. As a whole, whites cry "reverse racism" too quickly." I would add 4. For the vast, vast majority of Americans growing up/entering the workforce these days, the main determinant of their success in life will be merit and the choices they make, not race.

John Galt - I don't see how you can say that you don't mind #2 at all. The prominent black leaders, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, are not helping race relations at all. Certain people take some of their views and things like the OJ Simpson case and link it to an ugly stereotype about people and a belief that there is a divide in American culture between black and white people that can't be overcome. As SD and HFP have pointed out in other threads, when celebrities play this card in questionable circumstances it detracts from the power of the argument when there are occurences of real racism, which still do happen occasionally in America.

Also, you seem to have inconsistencies in your posts about this case. While you say "The problem with lots of those arguing here is that they......believe they know better than those at Omaha Westside what is best for them and what they should be called." Yet elsewhere you say "In this case, you have a group of minority students who preferred to call themselves African-American" and "As long as the minority students are happy with the label." I'm not sure if the second one was dealing entirely with the Omaha students, but neither you nor I know the views or beliefs of any of these kids, except for maybe a couple quotes in newspaper articles. As Skydog has pointed out, there are black people that find the term African-American offensive on some label, so I think it is wrong of you to continue saying that the kids chose and prefer this label.

Clintl - "And while I appreciate and understand Skydog's objections to using the term "African-American" in reference to him, as far as anyone else is concerned, I'm not sure why this particular term stirs up so much resentment when other similar terms identifying original ethnicity (such as Italian-American, Polish-American, Irish-American, etc) don't." The reason why African-American is different from any of the three you have listed is because while Italian, Polish and Irish-American denote fairly direct ancestry from a specific other geographic area, African-American has evolved into a quite different meaning based mainly on skin color. So, not only is it undefinable, it also looks stupid in many contexts because of this. This is a part of why I reject the term African-American in general. If I bother to include skin color when talking to or about a person, what should I refer to him/her as? African-American and Black, along with other harsher words, are all going to have their supporters and people who are offended by them. QS's suggestion that you be sensitive even if you don't agree with the term is a good one, but it is impractical when meeting new people.

Maple Leafs - "I'm just not especially interested in what some white kids in (an) overwhelmingly white school think is an appropriate activity for MLK day." For one, that was the day it was awarded, and second, I don't think awarding something based upon racial seperatism is an appropriate activity for MLK day either.

Butter_of_69 - "from what perspective are you considering this award "second-rate"?

Perhaps the school does have an outstanding student award, for which black students would be eligible. But I view this somewhat as having an MVP award and then several sub-awards in major sports. Sure, everyone would like to win the MVP, but recognizing sub-groups within each sport is also prestigious, maybe just as prestigious or even moreso within that sub-group." An award that is selectively given for which only a portion of students are eligible is by nature second-rate. The other 2 flaws with your argument is that in a sport like baseball, people are divided into sub-groups by classifications such as what position they play or what team they play for and also that every sub-group is recognized. This school is classifying students by skin color and almost certainly not recognizing the 'white' students at the school. This is segregation in practice, and if the races were reversed, there would be a national outcry and the administrators would almost certainly be fired.

[Glengoyne]

And from what perspective are you considering this award "second-rate"?

It is second rate because it is qualified by race. Who wants to win an award that says "I am the most outstanding student in this school, well the most outstanding student that happens to be black. I think I am the most outstanding student in the whole school, but the award just says I am more outstanding than the rest of my fellow black students."

If the award was for the "best" student, it could not be in any way considered second rate. The winner could be black, white, asian, or latino. The award is "second rate" because it excludes viable candidates on superficial terms.

I certainly am not saying that the black students as a group are second rate compared to any other ethnic group.

[Glengoyne]

:rolleyes:
What word didn't you understand Noop? Just let me know, and I'll help you with it.;)

[Noop]

What word didn't you understand Noop? Just let me know, and I'll help you with it.;)
:rolleyes:

[BishopMVP]

I've been guilty of doing the roll-eyes thing before and was called on it. Unless what someone says is clearly beyond the pale, and IMO it wasn't in this case, they at least deserve a response to what you have a problem with. I too am curious what you found so bad in his post.

EDIT - Apparently it was towards the poster more than the post, so I'll back out of that argument.

[Glengoyne]

I've been guilty of doing the roll-eyes thing before and was called on it. Unless what someone says is clearly beyond the pale, and IMO it wasn't in this case, they at least deserve a response to what you have a problem with. I too am curious what you found so bad in his post.
Doh! hehe when I first replied, I thought Noop had used the confused smiley. If I would have paid more attention I would have had a more appropriate reply. In any case I thought you had to say something to actually employ sarcasm.

[BishopMVP]

On a completely unrelated to the thread note, I wish the smilies actually rolled eyes and stuff still. They look silly just sitting there like that.

[Noop]

I roll my eyes at him because of his past actions toward me. So fuck him

[The Afoci]

Glengoyne and Noop need to Paper, Rock, Scissors to the death.

[clintl]

Clintl - "And while I appreciate and understand Skydog's objections to using the term "African-American" in reference to him, as far as anyone else is concerned, I'm not sure why this particular term stirs up so much resentment when other similar terms identifying original ethnicity (such as Italian-American, Polish-American, Irish-American, etc) don't." The reason why African-American is different from any of the three you have listed is because while Italian, Polish and Irish-American denote fairly direct ancestry from a specific other geographic area, African-American has evolved into a quite different meaning based mainly on skin color. So, not only is it undefinable, it also looks stupid in many contexts because of this. This is a part of why I reject the term African-American in general. If I bother to include skin color when talking to or about a person, what should I refer to him/her as? African-American and Black, along with other harsher words, are all going to have their supporters and people who are offended by them. QS's suggestion that you be sensitive even if you don't agree with the term is a good one, but it is impractical when meeting new people.



"African-American" did evolve at all. It was specifically created as new alternative to "black." Furthermore, nobody objects to Asian-American, which is EXACTLY the same kind of term as "African-American," and is very commonly used to describe Americans of Asian descent. I stand by my assertion, that for the most part, the objections to "African-American" as a description of Americans of African descent seem to be an irrational objection that is not applied to any other group.

[Glengoyne]

Glengoyne and Noop need to Paper, Rock, Scissors to the death.
Glengoyne:"Allright Rock beats paper!"
Noop:"I thought paper covers rock?"
Glengoyne:"Nah rock flies right through paper."
Noop:"Well what beats Rock then?"
Glengoyne:"Nothing beats Rock!"
Noop:<shrug>
Noop and Glengoyne:"Rock, Paper, Scissors Match... Rock!"
Noop and Glengoyne:"Rock, Paper, Scissors Match... Rock!"
Noop and Glengoyne:"Rock, Paper, Scissors Match... Rock!"
Noop and Glengoyne:"Rock, Paper, Scissors Match... Rock!"


credits to Kramer and Mickey on Seinfeld

[clintl]

Dola...

By the way, I agree with most of what WSUCougar said, and I think the school did a stupid thing by having that award in the first place, and for suspending the kids.

[BigJohn&TheLions]

37.5% South American/Carribbean/Latino
34.4% African
15.6% European
12.5% Cherokee

Allow me to be the 1st to nominate Ol' Skydog for "European-American of the Year" ;)

[Glengoyne]

I roll my eyes at him because of his past actions toward me. ...
It is true that I haven't always been nice to Noop.
That all changes now though. I intend to turn over a new leaf, and treat Noop with kid-gloves. I mean if I don't change my ways, I might literally(<-note the proper usage) be accused of child abuse.

[JW]

When did we amend the Constitution to afford people "The right not to be offended"?

Excellent point. The key point in much of the political correctness movement. We have in America today a class of people who might be called "the perpetually offended." They actively seek offense at anything that does not agree with their worldview, and usually they throw in the words "tolerance" and "diversity" while attacking some view or word or position they disagree with. The perpetually offended members of the PC left actually act like the Puritans, seeking to create a society which accepts only their views. The offense by some at anything associated with (excuse me if I offend anyone) a deity (sorry) in the public square is case in point. We have now become a nation where, for example, a Pennsylvania teacher's aide was fired for wearing a crucifix to work and had to go to federal court to get her job back. (I might add that the far right has its own brand of political correctness.)

[BishopMVP]

"African-American" did evolve at all. It was specifically created as new alternative to "black."
Exactly. Italian, Irish and Polish-American are not euphemisms for 'white', so comparing the two is like apples and oranges.

Furthermore, nobody objects to Asian-American, which is EXACTLY the same kind of term as "African-American," and is very commonly used to describe Americans of Asian descent.
I object to it just as much as African-American, but I don't see the term nearly as much. And it is used to describe Asians of Near-Eastern descent (China, Japan, Korea, SE Asia) not places like India, the Middle East or Russia.

I stand by my assertion, that for the most part, the objections to "African-American" as a description of Americans of African descent seem to be an irrational objection that is not applied to any other group.
My objection is to any term that is based on skin color and then covered up by a euphemism that implies something different and 'culturally sensitive' because some people don't want to acknowledge that they actually look at skin color. Should I refer to the kid fro South Africa as a 'black' person because he doesn't fall under the African-American category now?

I think race in this country would be better off is people stopped looking at it as literally a black and white issue. One size fits all groupings, like Asian- and African-American only serve to perpetuate that 'races' of people are different. If you want to argue cultures, then use the individual country instead of the vast continent the person's ancestors originated from.

[Chubby]

why couldn't my school have had an award like this? i would have done the same thing.

soooo...
italian-american = from italy
african-american = someone whose skin color is black, not nescessarily FROM africa

calling someone "black" = bad
calling someone "african-american" = good (even tho it's just another word for black)

1st off, to have that award in the 1st place leads to a separation of the school. there's no need, they're all STUDENTS, CLASSMATES, PEOPLE. who gives a fuck what color they are?

all white frat = bad
all african-american frat = good

a lot of people say "we think everyone is equal" then they turn around and create an award they only want to give to one racial class. well, you're saying THEY'RE NOT if you have that award.

[Noop]

It is true that I haven't always been nice to Noop.
That all changes now though. I intend to turn over a new leaf, and treat Noop with kid-gloves. I mean if I don't change my ways, I might literally(<-note the proper usage) be accused of child abuse.
Why don't you fucking peel the fuck away.

[Fritz]

all white frat = bad
all african-american frat = good



shortening fraternity just irks the shit out of me.

[Chubby]

shortening fraternity just irks the shit out of me.


fine...

all white fr = bad
all african american fr = good

[Dutch]

So the white kid from South African is not an African-American. Is that what I have learned in today's class?

And thanks Skydog for quoting Jesse Jackson from when he used to actually be cool. Was it really that long ago???

[illinifan999]

So if a school were to start an award for white people only, how soon would he/she be fired and lynched?

We're all people, who gives a fuck what your skin color is?

[Fritz]

perhaps we are tackling this all wrong. This is not a race issue per se, but a commonality issue.

If people want to give black kids an award on MLK day, fine. Whats missing is giving kids with false teeth an award on washington's birthday, or giving kids that get laid an award on valentines day, or giving kids born on the 4th of july and award (yeah me), or giving kids in a union an award on labor day, or giving kids the get drunk an award on paddy's day, or giving kids that discoved a new continent an award on columbus day, or giving the kids of jesus an award on christmas.

SPREAD THE LOVE AROUND A LITTLE!

[Fritz]

dola. we just need enough holidays to include everybody.

[Easy Mac]

I'm pretty sure getting laid on valentines day when you're 14 is an award in and of itself.

[Buccaneer]

So the white kid from South African is not an African-American. Is that what I have learned in today's class?


No, it's the kid from Egypt.

Me? I would like to be refered to as English-Irish-German-Dutch-French-Scottish-American, thank you very much. What? My family's heritage is not important enough for hyphens?

[Easy Mac]

I just want to be called a mutt.

[Dutch]

No, it's the kid from Egypt.

Me? I would like to be refered to as English-Irish-German-Dutch-French-Scottish-American, thank you very much. What? My family's heritage is not important enough for hyphens?

I wonder how it works for me. My family originally came from the Netherlands (I don't care what MIJB says, it's true, damnit!). They were in New York/Pennsylvania up until the Revolutionary War then left for Canada (sided with the losing side of that conflict) and then slowly parts of the family migrated back into the US.

Of course, my mother is German. So am I a German-Dutch American? Or am I a German-Canadien American? Or a Canadien German-Dutch American?

And lots of "mutt" thrown in there BTW. Most people just call me, "Hey, white boy" however.

[stkelly52]

I assume the conservatives who just looooove to rail against political correctness have no problem with calling African-Americans niggers, Jews kikes, Asians gooks, Mexicans spics, homosexuals fags, and etc?

If you do, and you still continue the argument, you are being extremely inconsistent.
I know that this is from yesterday, but I will finally get around to answering this one. Rather than call them any of those names the conservatives would prefer the term "person"

[astralhaze]

I know that this is from yesterday, but I will finally get around to answering this one. Rather than call them any of those names the conservatives would prefer the term "person"
That doesn't answer the question I'm afraid.

[BishopMVP]

Racism=Bad
Too much Political Correctness=Bad

Does that answer the question?

[Glengoyne]

That doesn't answer the question I'm afraid.
I think you are afraid it does answer the question. :D

[Glengoyne]

Dola,
So the white kid from South African is not an African-American. Is that what I have learned in today's class?

And thanks Skydog for quoting Jesse Jackson from when he used to actually be cool. Was it really that long ago???Second thoughts first. I really never realized Jesse Jackson was ever cool. I have been hating him and his rhetoric for years. I guess I just wasn't paying enough attention to him back the early days.

Regarding the white kid not being African American. I have a friend who seems to think that the word "African" in African American has a very distinct connotation. That being that since their ancestors were brought over to this country against their will, and essentially weren't allowed to maintain their individual culture or history, they can't point to a specific nation of origin. In other words I can say I am Scottish, and that means my ancestors came from Scottland. Most black people cannot say which country their ancestors originated from. They can't say they are Nigerian or Ethiopian, because that heritage was essentially stolen from them. The term African American was desigated because it was generally descriptive of their ancestry. Since this kid knows he is from South Africa, if you accept this proposition, one would have to say he was South African American. Since I don't completely buy this argument, I still say he is African.

[stkelly52]

That doesn't answer the question I'm afraid.
Technically, there was no question originally asked, just a statment that was made, but the implied question was "what do we call people of the various races?" any my answer does answer that question. We call them people. Racisim will only ceace to exist when we stop segregating ourselves. The conservative viewpoint is that the very fact that we clasify people differently is one of the major causes of racism.

[stkelly52]

Dola

Another interesting story along these lines. I met a girl who was a missionary kid that grew up in the interior of Africa. She moved there when she was 3. With the exception of 2 years of furlough she lived in africa until she was 18 and went to college in the U.S. While she was in college she took a course on African studies and in the class the professor was talking aobut the tribe right next to where she grew up. The things taht he was saying was full of half truths, and complete inaccruacies. When she attempted to correct these she started a rather fierce debate between herself and the rest of the class. During the debate someone said that she doesn't understand African Americans (a true statement as she really didn't understand any americans at the time, but that is a whole different issue). In response to that she said that she was the only one in the room who was a real African American, and to this day she believes that to be true

[astralhaze]

No, there was a very definite question asked. Let me see if I can put it simpler. Do you have a problem or find it offensive if a black person is called a nigger?

[Axxon]

No, there was a very definite question asked. Let me see if I can put it simpler. Do you have a problem or find it offensive if a black person is called a nigger?

As a cuban spick I've tried to ignore this thread that has anglo's attempting to tell minorities how they feel about what they're called.. This one is really important.

I once posted here Lenny Bruce's famous bit on the word nigger but never got one response. Maybe it was too offensive, I don't know. I find it poignant.

I'll repost the same link. Again, he said it better but google likes this example. It was a recurring theme for him. I think it's valid even in this raw form.

"Are There Any Niggers Here Tonight?"

"Oh, my god, did you hear what he said? Are there any niggers here tonight? Is that rank! Is that cruel! Is that a cheap way to get laughs? Well, I think I see a nigger at the bar talking to two guinea owners and next to them....Now why have I done this? Is it only for shock value? Well, if all the niggers started calling each other nigger, not only among themselves, which they do anyway, but among others. If President Kennedy got on television and said:'I'm considering appointing two or three of the top niggers in the country to my cabinet'-if it was nothing but nigger, nigger, nigger- in six months nigger wouldn't mean any more than good night, god bless you...- when that beautiful day comes, you'll never see another nigger kid come home from school crying because some motherfucker called him a nigger."
---Lenny Bruce

http://www.comm.unt.edu/histofperf/hebenstriet/Meredith_generic_intro_page.htm

Let's not get caught up in names but rather concentrate on how we are treated.

It would end a lot of this politically correct bullshit.

[Axxon]

Note, I'm not advocating the use of this word. I'm just not advocating giving the word some mystical power. As soon as the word loses this mystical power then it becomes less of a perjorative. It loses power.

Richard Pryor understood this and that's why he was so vocal in using the word. He was disenpowering it.

http://www.comm.unt.edu/histofperf/hebenstriet/Mer_generic_page_fourHIst-sign.htm

Don't blame me.

[Axxon]

Ps, sorry about directly linking. I shouldn't have done that with "obscene" material.

Here's a good page about the Lenny Bruce for those who may not remember or know. I'll change the link.

hxxp://www.spiritone.com/~darklady/lenny.html

One of my favorite excerpts



But back to the c***sucking. Lenny was playing the Jazz Workshop, a club in San Francisco that had strippers and was down the street from a drag club. Lenny commented on a recent news item; a couple of "faggot" schoolteachers had been reinstated in their jobs, which they were highly qualified to perform, after having been found guilty of homosexuality. The local Hearst newspaper had demanded their immediate removal. Lenny pointed out that there had never been an incident reported in which a kid had gone home and said "Today in school I learned five minutes of geography and ten minutes of c***sucking." Bingo. Obscenity. Oh, not the idea that people could be cruelly judged based on their sexual behaviors... that wasn't obscene. C***sucking, an especially pleasant way to spend an afternoon, was deemed obscene. Uttering the word was deemed obscene. Lenny was obscene, a "dirty Jew" comic.


Posted lest someone just think he was a racist. :rolleyes:

[Axxon]

I'll admit I'm likely wasting my time and effort but from the same article. This for the conservatives in the group. I know we have a few.


Lenny loved to laugh at liberals, too. He felt that most of them talked and marched a lot but didn't do anything inside of themselves. To test your liberal friends, he suggested bringing a date from another race and watch the fun begin. One of his best skits, "How to Relax Your Colored Friends at Parties," illustrates the good-hearted but inept attempt of a white liberal trying to make small talk with a black friend at a cocktail party. The conversation inevitably turns to the size of the black man's dick and what kind of women black men most like to schtup. "Sisters," comes the stereotypical answer. No other choice, he explains, not when you've got the "abnormally large" equipment that ships standard with your mahogany models. Every white man's fear: a dark man with a big dick who fucks willing sisters, standing in front of him, drinking a little drink and making a little small talk. And the white man unable to stop anything. Oh, my goodness. Next thing you know the faggots are going to want to get married.

[Axxon]

All of this oh, 40 or so years ago.

[Axxon]

Am I banned now???? :)

[Dutch]

:crickets:

Actually, I have to disagree with Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor. The use of language for good and bad can be perceived in advance and requires a certain level of discipline in order to speak properly.

Use the same discipine for (perceived) obscene words as you would slang words. Then, if they are used, they are used with emphasis which can enhance your communication not desensitize it to the point where nobody is listening anymore.

[JW]

As a cuban spick I've tried to ignore this thread that has anglo's attempting to tell minorities how they feel about what they're called..

Who exactly you callin' anglo? Anglo, although popularly used to describe white Americans, is an extremely imprecise term, much more imprecise even than African-American. The term more specifically applies to those of English descent. And this white guy's Celtic ancestors were killing Anglo-Saxons a few hundred years ago, and getting killed by them. Watch Braveheart again. The Anglos are the bad guys. The kilt-wearing Scots are the good guys. Anglo? Shows just how silly the name game is. I'm not no stinkin' Anglo.

Link to Anglo definition: http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/Anglo-Saxon
Link to Celt definition: http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/Celt

And, oh, wait. I forgot. This is the 21st Century in politically correct America. I almost forgot to say that I am terribly offended by use of the term anglo and am calling my lawyers. That's how the game is played now by the perpetually offended.

Which of course shows just how silly the whole name thing has become, which was the primary point imho of the students involved in the little insurrection in question.

[clintl]

Technically, there was no question originally asked, just a statment that was made, but the implied question was "what do we call people of the various races?" any my answer does answer that question. We call them people. Racisim will only ceace to exist when we stop segregating ourselves. The conservative viewpoint is that the very fact that we clasify people differently is one of the major causes of racism.

When exactly did this conversion within the conservative movement occur? Because it has mostly been conservatives who fought tooth-and-nail against desegregation and the civil rights movement.

[Buccaneer]

When exactly did this conversion within the conservative movement occur? Because it has mostly been conservatives who fought tooth-and-nail against desegregation and the civil rights movement.

It was the Southern Democrats that had the local and state powers to enforce Jim Crow laws, I believe.

[clintl]

Southern Democrats were conservatives. It was the Republicans who thought that George Wallace's candidacy in the 1968 presidential election might cost them a victory, if you will recall. And the Southern Democrats had quite a few conservative Republican allies in that fight, including Barry Goldwater. Furthermore, Richard Nixon actively cultivated the support of those segregationist Democrats. Many of those Southern Democratic segregationists switched parties in the '60s and '70s precisely because the Republican Party was more likely to support them in opposing the civil rights movement.

[JW]

When exactly did this conversion within the conservative movement occur? Because it has mostly been conservatives who fought tooth-and-nail against desegregation and the civil rights movement.

Political parties change positions. You are correct for that time period, particularly correct regarding Southern Democrats. But parties change. During the Civil War and Reconstruction, the Republican Party was the liberal, almost radical party favoring emancipation and then equal rights for blacks. The Democrats opposed this. Northern Democrats fought tooth and nail against Lincoln during the Civil War, with many even proposing a ceasefire with the Confederacy. They attacked Lincoln in a way far more vicious than Dems attack Bush today. Things change. Today in many ways the left and the Democratic Party are modern-day Puritans, which is pretty much what political correctness is, i.e., no view that differs from our view is acceptable. The REpublican Party is also changing. It is no longer the party of fiscal responsibility. It now believes in greater, not lesser federal government involvement in local affairs (No Child Left Behind, for example). But in many ways it supports diversity more than the left.

[Sun Tzu]

all white frat = bad
all african-american frat = good


While I agree with most of what you said Chubby, and I don't think that it's right, I do have to say this. At colleges/universities there are all-white frats. However they don't have the official title of all white frat, you just kind of "know". The frat with all the good-ole boys with the southern twang in their voice usualy falls in this category. And yes before somebody says it there are good-ole boys who are smart enough to get into college and earn degrees. In fact somewhere out there there is a racist hillbilly son of a gun who is smarter and makes more money than <i>you</i> (points to everybody). Not me though, no sir. :D

[Maple Leafs]

This thread has evolved from a discussion about the specifc incident into one about bigger issues, which is fine.

If anyone's interested, though, here's a followup on the first article that fills in some of the blanks about the award and does a fairly good job of presenting both sides of the story:
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_np=0&u_pg=1640&u_sid=983292

[clintl]

Political parties change positions. You are correct for that time period, particularly correct regarding Southern Democrats. But parties change. During the Civil War and Reconstruction, the Republican Party was the liberal, almost radical party favoring emancipation and then equal rights for blacks. The Democrats opposed this. Northern Democrats fought tooth and nail against Lincoln during the Civil War, with many even proposing a ceasefire with the Confederacy. They attacked Lincoln in a way far more vicious than Dems attack Bush today. Things change. Today in many ways the left and the Democratic Party are modern-day Puritans, which is pretty much what political correctness is, i.e., no view that differs from our view is acceptable. The REpublican Party is also changing. It is no longer the party of fiscal responsibility. It now believes in greater, not lesser federal government involvement in local affairs (No Child Left Behind, for example). But in many ways it supports diversity more than the left.

I agree with a lot of what you said there, JW, but I don't agree that the Republicans of today are any more supportive of diversity, nor are they any more tolerant of ideas that conflict with the party line. Both parties have lost some their ideological diversity over the past 25 years, and I think that's a big reason for the partisan polarization we're seeing now. The liberal wing of the Republican Party that Nelson Rockefeller led in '60s and '70s is pretty much dead, and most of the old conservative Southern Democrats have switched parties.

[JW]

This thread has evolved from a discussion about the specifc incident into one about bigger issues, which is fine.

If anyone's interested, though, here's a followup on the first article that fills in some of the blanks about the award and does a fairly good job of presenting both sides of the story:
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_np=0&u_pg=1640&u_sid=983292

Thanks for the post. I would say the principal, Crook, blew it. Consider this quote from Crook, from the linked story:

Crook agreed. "Obviously, it's a teachable moment. We all need to be more sensitive."

Easy for Crook to say after suspending the students involved in the incident. I would say he was not being sensitive to their position. A better idea might have been call in the students for a discussion of the matter.

[Maple Leafs]

Easy for Crook to say after suspending the students involved in the incident. I would say he was not being sensitive to their position. A better idea might have been call in the students for a discussion of the matter.Probably true that a discussion would have been more appropriate, but keep in mind -- the students had the first opportunity to open that dialog, and they passed on it.

From the article: "Crook defends the idea of giving a special honor to a top black student. Those who feel otherwise should have talked to him, he said, rather than upsetting the tone of Martin Luther King Jr. Day with posters that some viewed as mocking."

I think that's the key to it. Even if you believe the students when they say they were trying to for satire and political comment, and even if you agree with their stance (and obviously a lot of people here do), they went about it the wrong way.

From the article: "My heart sank," said this year's winner, Kingsley Okafor, describing his reaction. "It shows the ignorance of the student body. I don't think they meant badly."

If that's the sort of impact that these kids were trying to accomplish, they're jerks. If not, then they clearly messed up with how they delivered their message. In either case, I still don't find them to be especially sympathetic figures.

[Chubby]

While I agree with most of what you said Chubby, and I don't think that it's right, I do have to say this. At colleges/universities there are all-white frats. However they don't have the official title of all white frat, you just kind of "know". The frat with all the good-ole boys with the southern twang in their voice usualy falls in this category. And yes before somebody says it there are good-ole boys who are smart enough to get into college and earn degrees. In fact somewhere out there there is a racist hillbilly son of a gun who is smarter and makes more money than <i>you</i> (points to everybody). Not me though, no sir. :D

I'm sure there are all-white frats, and there shouldn't be.

The hypocrisy comes when it is "acceptable" to let minorities (not trying to single out african americans) create an exclusive society yet if the majority does it then all hell would break loose. The same thing with Augusta. All male membership??? GASP! Noooooooooo we can't have that... all female membership clubs (which exist), of those are fine... it's crap. either say we're all equal and stand by it, or come out and say that you don't think everyone is equal. By creating exclusive societies based on race/gender/some other genetically inherited trait you just further push people apart.

[Dutch]

The REpublican Party is also changing. It is no longer the party of fiscal responsibility. It now believes in greater, not lesser federal government involvement in local affairs (No Child Left Behind, for example). But in many ways it supports diversity more than the left.

Of course, in the long run, a morally strong family united society is a lot cheaper to run than any state-run law enforced society from top to bottom. So the NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND is much like the FAMILY VALUES the right wing has been preaching for over a decade at least. Not only is it cheaper on for the nation if it succeeds, but it's the right thing to do.

[JW]

Of course, in the long run, a morally strong family united society is a lot cheaper to run than any state-run law enforced society from top to bottom. So the NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND is much like the FAMILY VALUES the right wing has been preaching for over a decade at least. Not only is it cheaper on for the nation if it succeeds, but it's the right thing to do.

In general NCLB may be the right thing to do, but the devil is in the details. And the details of NCLB are going to cause some big problems and place many unfunded and unrealistic requirements on schools. Under NCLB an excellent school will be labeled a failing school, for example, if only one of its various subgroups fails to show progress over a one-year period. So a school might get a group of special education kids, for example, that happens to be weaker than those already at the school, and if test scores for special ed kids at the school drop that one year, then suddenly the school is labeled 'failing' and subject to sanctions. Likewise, the school that finally got rid of that same group of students might show a positive score bump and be praised for its improved test scores. Absurd.

[stkelly52]

I know that this is completly off of the point, but I doubt that the south african kid would qualify for the award. We don't know the whole story, but with just six years in the US, I doubt taht he has citzenship yet, therefor he wouldn't be an American.

[sabotai]

It takes more than 6 years for someone to obtain citizanship?

[BishopMVP]

I know that this is completly off of the point, but I doubt that the south african kid would qualify for the award. We don't know the whole story, but with just six years in the US, I doubt taht he has citzenship yet, therefor he wouldn't be an American.
And I doubt that most of the students eligible for the award ever spent any time in Africa. It is quite obvious that the African in African-American didn't mean a citizen of an African nation, and also that the American didn't mean American citizen. Let's face the truth here: The award went to the best student whose skin color fit the subjective determination of those awarding this award. This idea has many problems which have been pointed out previously in the thread, and trying to apply a double-standard to the South African kid that is not applied to the winner of the award is avoiding the real issues here.

[Glengoyne]

I know that this is completly off of the point, but I doubt that the south african kid would qualify for the award. We don't know the whole story, but with just six years in the US, I doubt taht he has citzenship yet, therefor he wouldn't be an American.
So you wouldn't classify a black immigrant, fresh off the boat from South Africa, as an African American?

[JW]

What do we call a black-skinned American of Australian aboriginal or Melanesian descent?

[Chubby]

So you wouldn't classify a black immigrant, fresh off the boat from South Africa, as an African American?

if the litmus test is citzenship, then no. i think that was his point.

[stkelly52]

And I doubt that most of the students eligible for the award ever spent any time in Africa. It is quite obvious that the African in African-American didn't mean a citizen of an African nation, and also that the American didn't mean American citizen. Let's face the truth here: The award went to the best student whose skin color fit the subjective determination of those awarding this award. This idea has many problems which have been pointed out previously in the thread, and trying to apply a double-standard to the South African kid that is not applied to the winner of the award is avoiding the real issues here.
My point was to show the irony that while they were trying to show that the literal meaning of "African" in Afican-American should include a white South African, the literal meaning of "American" excludes him.

[MIJB#19]

I wonder how it works for me. My family originally came from the Netherlands (I don't care what MIJB says, it's true, damnit!). They were in New York/Pennsylvania up until the Revolutionary War then left for Canada (sided with the losing side of that conflict) and then slowly parts of the family migrated back into the US.

Of course, my mother is German. So am I a German-Dutch American? Or am I a German-Canadien American? Or a Canadien German-Dutch American?

And lots of "mutt" thrown in there BTW. Most people just call me, "Hey, white boy" however.Hey, I only said your name sounded German, I always said if you feel Dutch, you are Dutch to me. Even if you can't live with legalization of using soft drugs, gay marriage, abortion, euthenasia, freedom of religion, murdered politicians and teachers, or whatsoever.

Now what was the code for that sarcasm greamlin/smilie again?

[Bubba Wheels]

That doesn't answer the question I'm afraid.

Astralhaze, another failed product of the Marxist-indoctrinating Public School System, where all the bad guys wear black hats and are called 'conservatives' and all the good guys wear white hats, are called 'liberals', and want to make the world safe for Karl Marx and Hillary.

[John Galt]

Astralhaze, another failed product of the Marxist-indoctrinating Public School System, where all the bad guys wear black hats and are called 'conservatives' and all the good guys wear white hats, are called 'liberals', and want to make the world safe for Karl Marx and Hillary.

Bubba, you just wanted to spread your "wisdom" in another thread? Why don't you quit trolling and attacking people and go hide in your happy little cave where the liberals won't hurt you?

[Bubba Wheels]

Bubba, you just wanted to spread your "wisdom" in another thread? Why don't you quit trolling and attacking people and go hide in your happy little cave where the liberals won't hurt you?

Ha! I see your following me around, Johnny-boy! Perhaps you really can't get enough of me even if you can't admit to yourself! By the way, why don't you enlighten us with some of your 'main-stream' political wisdom? Is your boat taking on water yet, or are you just borrowing that name without the political context of it? ;)

[mckerney]

Ha! I see your following me around, Johnny-boy!

Still Undefeated?