Today's Hot Button Topic: Is the NBA Viewing Public Racist?

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Since ebonics was brought up, I thought this was an excellent article from Education Week

Language Lessons

Good article. I enjoyed reading it.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Marmel
John, I saw you coming before I even opened this thread up. You need to be a bit more unpredictable.

[Marmel]

Originally posted by John Galt
Just a few thoughts before I get back to work.

First off, I don't think a dictionary definition is a good way to look at "racism." Dictionaries aren't so good for 'ism type words and don't usually gather the real underlying meaning of a power-charged word.

I guess the John Galt definition is the way we should go?

Originally posted by john galt

Fourth, your stereotype example is good and illustrative. My point is that even when you react the same way to white teenagers, it is in part because of the way they are dressed and act - a way more commonly found in inner-city black kids. Clothes and style become proxies for race.

How exactly do you know this is why people react that way.


Sorry John, you are going to need a lot more cites in your future posts from now on.

[Marmel]

Originally posted by John Galt
whites typically (have power) and define mainstream culture.

Again, where do you get this from?

I can just as easily say that blacks are defining mainstream culture these days. What do you even mean by mainstream culture?

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Marmel
I guess the John Galt definition is the way we should go?

I'm just saying dictionaries don't capture the big picture, not that I have a better definition.

Originally posted by Marmel
How exactly do you know this is why people react that way.

The point isn't that that is why people react that way, just that the way people react has a disproportionate racial effect. Neither you, nor I, nor anyone can know how our subconscious affects our behavior, but when it does so in racial way, we should stop and ask why.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Marmel
Again, where do you get this from?

I can just as easily say that blacks are defining mainstream culture these days. What do you even mean by mainstream culture?

By mainstream I mean majority culture. Things like language, style, movies, TV, etc. are all part of culture. Yes, blacks get integrated in a sort of add-minorities-and-stir sort of way, but inner city and hispanic, asian, black, gay, transexual, etc. minorities have limited opportunity to define and change the mainstream.

[Marmel]

Originally posted by John Galt
By mainstream I mean majority culture. Things like language, style, movies, TV, etc. are all part of culture. Yes, blacks get integrated in a sort of add-minorities-and-stir sort of way, but inner city and hispanic, asian, black, gay, transexual, etc. minorities have limited opportunity to define and change the mainstream.

I would argue that style and music are heavily influenced by minorities, and that your average white person is limited in these categories.

and what does gay, transexual have to do with a race discussion?

[Dutch]

but inner city and hispanic, asian, black, gay, transexual

Gays and Transexuals are not minority racial groups.....

[Marmel]

We know John has to sneak those words into every thread he posts in, so lets give him a break on it.

[Anrhydeddu]

hispanic, asian, black, etc. minorities have limited opportunity to define and change the mainstream.

Not in Latin America, Caribbean, Sub-Sahara Africa, India, China, Japan, etc. (Yes, I purposely took out gay and transwhatever, that was just a sly attempt.)

[Abe Sargent]

I agree that NBA basketball was boring and stuff, and I stopped watching it. But, I have to admit, that if Yao turns in another season like last year, I may have found my own Personal Jordan. He makes me want to be creative....


(To the tune of "Personal Jesus")

Personal Jordan


Reach out and touch Phil

Well your own
Personal
Jordan

Someone to be your friend
Someone who cares

Well your own
Personal
Jordan


Feeling alone
And all on your own?
Take the test
Allow me to suggest
Pick up the remote
You know there's new bloke
There


His name is Ming
And he's the new thing
A player from East
He is such a beast
Even Phil's
Gotta wish he was in
Houston


Well your own
Personal
Jordan

Someone to be your friend
Someone who cares

Well your own
Personal
Jordan

Reach out and touch Mike


Plays ball
And he's really tall
Has handling skills
His team he wills
To wins aplenty
And won't take any
Hell



Well your own
Personal
Jordan

Someone to be your friend
Someone who cares

Well your own
Personal
Jordan


Reach out and touch Yao



-Anxiety

[TroyF]

John,

Marmel posted mainly what I was going to post, but I'll add a couple of things.

The fact that I have a stereotype for white trailer park trash. . . does that make me racist? Racism is hating someone because of the color of their skin John, not having a perception of what a person is because of the clothes he/she is wearing.

Stereotyping someone is making a judgement about someone based off of a perception of that person. (this can be a correct or incorrect perception)

The two are different and I can't believe you can't see that.

Fourth, your stereotype example is good and illustrative. My point is that even when you react the same way to white teenagers, it is in part because of the way they are dressed and act - a way more commonly found in inner-city black kids. Clothes and style become proxies for race.

OK John. I'd speed up if I saw a bunch of kids on motorcycles with leather jackets. Is this racism? I just brought up a WHITE stereotype John. Does that mean I'm racist against whites? Don't give me the clothes and style proxies for race crap. You show a complete lack of understanding of the difference between what racism and stereotyping are and I find it sad. (I have a psychology minor, feel free to borrow some of my books on the subject sometime)

TroyF

[Marmel]

Nice reply Troy.

[Anrhydeddu]

You know, with Galt being a NYC lawyer, I wonder if they have a dress code? (I know, stupid question.) I know if I walk in there with my usual jeans and t-shirt, I would be deemed unprofessional. Seems like even he and his firm has a standard and image to protect and to project. Just a random, silly thought.

[Ben E Lou]

Troy's scenarios remind me of a frank discussion on race we had with a group of inner-city black teenagers and suburban white teenagers, all from metro Atlanta. It was a GREAT and very honest dialog, with about 60ish teenagers there, with right around a 50/50 racial mix. One of the black teenagers expressed frustration and hurt that when whites pull up to an interstate exit near the inner-city neighborhoods of downtown and black kids are hanging out, they'll immediately let up the windows and/or lock the doors. Several black heads nodded. Former Oakland Raider and former Black Panther Dennis Pete, who was the leader for the inner-city Atlanta kids at this particular event, asked to speak. He stood up and said something to the effect of: "I'm a black man. I'm FROM the inner city. I WORK in the inner city. I LIVE in the inner city. When I see a group of teenagers in the inner city, I lock my car doors. That's not racism. {chuckle} That's just plain wisdom." His chuckle had a domino effect through the kids, both black and white. Let's not get so P.C. that we just throw wisdom out the door.

As far as the NBA goes, it certainly has an image of being an inner-city-cultured game. However, I don't see "racism" at work here as much as culturalism and generationalism. To the youngsters I work with, both black and white, team basketball is "boring" and "soft," while one-on-one take-it-up-and-dunk-in-a-guy's-face basketball is "exciting" as well as "manly". It isn't up to me, or any of you, to say which way is "better" per se. My guess is that the game will continue to evolve more and more in that direction, and that attendance and viewership will begin to rise again as today's young people, both white and black, become the Nielsen audiences and ticket buyers of tomorrow.

[Marmel]

A-

If you had been paying attention to FOFC instead of spamming everybody about Lahman, you would know that NYC lawyers have a casual dress code that John adheres to.

[vtbub]

Well said Skydog.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Marmel
I would argue that style and music are heavily influenced by minorities, and that your average white person is limited in these categories.

and what does gay, transexual have to do with a race discussion?

That was my point about adding minorities and stirring. There is a difference between how mainstream culture imports black culture and how black culture perceives itself. This is true in any subculture - take alternative music - people in the subculture scene are always arguing about who is a sellout and who is the new cutting edge. Blacks and other minorities participate to some degree, but not the same way. Others (like Asian males and Hispanics) rarely appear on TV or in movies.

And I just brought up gays and transexuals to show that other minorities have little influence on culture (but thanks for asking the question in a non-condescending tone - unlike some people).

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Not in Latin America, Caribbean, Sub-Sahara Africa, India, China, Japan, etc. (Yes, I purposely took out gay and transwhatever, that was just a sly attempt.)

You are right. I was speaking as to American culture.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by TroyF
John,

Marmel posted mainly what I was going to post, but I'll add a couple of things.

The fact that I have a stereotype for white trailer park trash. . . does that make me racist? Racism is hating someone because of the color of their skin John, not having a perception of what a person is because of the clothes he/she is wearing.

Stereotyping someone is making a judgement about someone based off of a perception of that person. (this can be a correct or incorrect perception)

The two are different and I can't believe you can't see that.

Fourth, your stereotype example is good and illustrative. My point is that even when you react the same way to white teenagers, it is in part because of the way they are dressed and act - a way more commonly found in inner-city black kids. Clothes and style become proxies for race.

OK John. I'd speed up if I saw a bunch of kids on motorcycles with leather jackets. Is this racism? I just brought up a WHITE stereotype John. Does that mean I'm racist against whites? Don't give me the clothes and style proxies for race crap. You show a complete lack of understanding of the difference between what racism and stereotyping are and I find it sad. (I have a psychology minor, feel free to borrow some of my books on the subject sometime)

TroyF

TroyF - first off, I would appreciate you be a little more civil and worrying a little less about my psyche.

You offered a definition of racism that I said was incomplete, but even then it includes things like acting on stereotypes. You said in your last post, "Racism is hating someone because of the color of their skin John" - that is not your own definition from the dictionary. The dictionary mentions nothing of hatred - only prejudice. You are right that if racism means hatred then all your other arguments follow - but I'm arguing with your definition. Just restating it as though I'm a moron doesn't answer what I'm saying.

When a person make actions based on a racial stereotype, they are being conscious of race and thus are racist. That is the essence of racism. If you read my above posts, I'm arguing that EVERYONE does this which means we are all racists. We all use prejudice and discriminate based on that prejudice. That does NOT mean we all hate or that we want to be.

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by John Galt
You are right. I was speaking as to American culture.

And the America culture is all of these things, it all depends where you chose to look.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by SkyDog
Troy's scenarios remind me of a frank discussion on race we had with a group of inner-city black teenagers and suburban white teenagers, all from metro Atlanta. It was a GREAT and very honest dialog, with about 60ish teenagers there, with right around a 50/50 racial mix. One of the black teenagers expressed frustration and hurt that when whites pull up to an interstate exit near the inner-city neighborhoods of downtown and black kids are hanging out, they'll immediately let up the windows and/or lock the doors. Several black heads nodded. Former Oakland Raider and former Black Panther Dennis Pete, who was the leader for the inner-city Atlanta kids at this particular event, asked to speak. He stood up and said something to the effect of: "I'm a black man. I'm FROM the inner city. I WORK in the inner city. I LIVE in the inner city. When I see a group of teenagers in the inner city, I lock my car doors. That's not racism. {chuckle} That's just plain wisdom." His chuckle had a domino effect through the kids, both black and white. Let's not get so P.C. that we just throw wisdom out the door.

This is exactly my argument. We ALL make racist decisions. You can call it wisdom or justify it, but ultimately it is a decision informed by impressions of race. I'm not saying a person is bad because they are racist, just that once you recognize your own racism, you can start to analyze it, understand it, and eventually come to terms with it.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
And the America culture is all of these things, it all depends where you chose to look.

Of course, but minorities typically have less access to mainstream culture and thus subcultures form. This is what I've been arguing all along.

[Anrhydeddu]

Galt, you need to lighten up and get over to the Not a QuikSand puzzle thread.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
You know, with Galt being a NYC lawyer, I wonder if they have a dress code? (I know, stupid question.) I know if I walk in there with my usual jeans and t-shirt, I would be deemed unprofessional. Seems like even he and his firm has a standard and image to protect and to project. Just a random, silly thought.

I think this is actually an important point and shows why I'm not at odds with what SD is saying, but I am at odds with TroyF. I agree that we make decisions to look "professional" and other style-based actions. Those decisions are inevitably based in part on race. TroyF thinks that means I'm attacking white America and saying it should be rejected. That isn't what I'm saying at all - I'm saying in an instance like this, you can adopt "professional" clothes, but in doing so you should think about whether that decision was based on a "white" cultural standard. You may reach the same decision, but it is important to turn inward and not reject out of hand that your decision may be based on your own racism. Then again, it may not. Just don't be fooled into thinking racism is only a product of conscious intent.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by John Galt
This is exactly my argument. We ALL make racist decisions. You can call it wisdom or justify it, but ultimately it is a decision informed by impressions of race. I'm not saying a person is bad because they are racist, just that once you recognize your own racism, you can start to analyze it, understand it, and eventually come to terms with it.

Uh...no. That is not exactly your argument. Dennis went on to tell his kids not to blame the suburban white kids for the fact that their neighborhoods are unsafe. He was saying that the decision was NOT racist at all, but just good common sense.

The semantics of this discussion are causing a problem. For most, the word "racist" has a negative connotation that includes hatred or a view that one race is "better" than another. "Prejudice" is probably a better word to use for what you're talking about John. We all make pre-judgments. Just because one factor in a pre-judgment is race does not mean that the "pre-judger" has race-based hatred in his heart.

[Anrhydeddu]

I agree with SkyDog. I understand the word "culturalism" better. Galt seems to want to have everything lumped into the word "racism" so as to re-define that word so we can accept its broader meaning (for whatever agenda). I reject that because historically it had always meant superiority/inferiority by race. But one of the traps I see many fall into is the notion of characteristics, which can be applied to races and certainly to many cultures - otherwise how can one define what a race or a culture is?

[Buzzbee]

I admit it. I am...an...an....NBA racist. There! I said it. Whew! It feels good to get that off my chest.

I used to watch the NBA. Was more into college ball than pro, but still would sit down and watch a game from time to time.

Now, I flip right past. I'll admit, part of that is because of the "image" of the NBA. Since I haven't watched a game in several years, only bits and pieces here and there, I can't really tell you what the game is like. I can tell you my thoughts about the NBA.

One thing that bugs me is the recent trend of younger and younger players entering the league. Why is that a problem for me? Several reasons.

Maturity. There are exceptions to every rule, but in general kids coming out of high school aren't as mature as kids who have gone through 4 years of college. When someone like LeBron James (good, recent example) makes a comment about loyalty to Nike vs. loyalty to the team he is playing for, it makes me cringe.

Style of play. I like fundamental basketball. Plain and simple. I played baseketball throughout my youth, and like to watch good, fundamental basketball. I also like to watch Dr. J and Jordan-esque type moves where a player drives the lane, spins two or three times, and makes a miraculous double-pump reverse jam over somebody. But not EVERY PLAY! To me the NBA has become televised street ball. It focuses on the individual ATHLETE rather than fundamental team basketball. I really don't care to watch Allen Iverson vs. the Knicks, or KobeShaq vs. the Suns. I'd rather watch the Pistons with Isiah Thomas, John Salley, Bill Lambier, and Dennis Rodman play the Celtics with Bird McHale, Parrish, and DJ.

Thugness. Here is where the NBA racist in me comes out. I see players like Iverson and Spreewell and immediately transfer my opinion of them to others in the league. It gives me an image that the players in the NBA are simply thugs who have moved from the playgrounds into the arenas. It's not true, I know, but when I see and NBA players with cornrows, tattos from head to toe, baggy shorts and gold chains, I don't think of basketball. I think of gangstas and cop-killing rap songs. This coupled with incidents like those of Iverson, Spreewell and the former player (Williams?) accused (convicted?) of murder tend to re-inforce this image. To me the NBA has targeted itself to a black male audience. I am not in that audience and don't care to watch.

[vtbub]

Nielsen complies numbers based on ethnicity, does anybody knew how the NBA does in "black" demos?

[Buzzbee]

Dola

My post was just TOO damn long so I decided I'd break it up, just so SOMEBODY might read it.

Here is another problem I have with the NBA:

"Youth Movement" This sort of goes along with Maturity above, but I wanted to split it out and make different points. Do I believe LeBron Should have the right to make $90 million if he has the skills, ability, and desire? Absolutely. Do I believe that most of the kids coming out of high school or leaving college early have those skills, ability, and desire? Absolutely not! Yes, Kobe, and Kevin Garnett have been able to make that leap, but in general I believe that they are the exception rather than the rule. For the most part I despise when players leave after their Freshman or Sophomore year.

My reasons are two-fold and I will use my Alma Mater to illustrate my point. Kenny Anderson left Georgia Tech after his sophmore season. He was a tremendous talent, and could handle the ball incredibly well. He was a star player in college, leading Tech to the Final Four, but never dominated. I believe that he came out too early. He struggled his first few years and I believe that staying in college (for at least one more year) would have helped him develop his skills and be more prepared for the pro game. In my opinion leaving early was detrimental to his career.

Next, Stephon Marbury. Left after his Freshman year. Has had a good career so far, but it took him a year or two to adapt. Now, Chris Bosh left Tech after his Freshman year. Again, he played solidly, but Tech didn't even make it into the NCAA Tournament, and was eliminated in the second round of the NIT. And he was picked with the FOURTH OVERALL PICK!?!?!?! Sheer madness.

Oh, for my other reason why I don't like kids going pro early. The effect it has on a college program. A coach spends time recruiting a player and hopes to develop that player over four years. To have that player play one year and bolt can set a program in a tailspin. When Stephon Marbury left, Tech had no one to fill his shoes, and hadn't been recruiting a point guard because they didn't really expect it to be one and done for him. Tech never recovered. To me it seems like college coaches would no longer recruit the star high schoolers for fear that they will go pro after a year. I'd tend to recruit solid players who will stay four years.

[TroyF]

Originally posted by John Galt
TroyF - first off, I would appreciate you be a little more civil and worrying a little less about my psyche.

You offered a definition of racism that I said was incomplete, but even then it includes things like acting on stereotypes. You said in your last post, "Racism is hating someone because of the color of their skin John" - that is not your own definition from the dictionary. The dictionary mentions nothing of hatred - only prejudice. You are right that if racism means hatred then all your other arguments follow - but I'm arguing with your definition. Just restating it as though I'm a moron doesn't answer what I'm saying.

When a person make actions based on a racial stereotype, they are being conscious of race and thus are racist. That is the essence of racism. If you read my above posts, I'm arguing that EVERYONE does this which means we are all racists. We all use prejudice and discriminate based on that prejudice. That does NOT mean we all hate or that we want to be.

I am going to worry about your psyche, because you still don't understand the difference between racism and stereotyping. It is true, racists use stereotyping. That doesn't mean everyone who stereotypes is racist.

You continue to say everyone is racist. I say that is complete hogwash.

According to your definition of racism, whites regularly are racists against whites. Blacks are racists against blacks and hispanics are racists against hispanics. I'm really offended and baffled by this line:

We all use prejudice and discriminate based on that prejudice.

You might. I don't. Walking faster because I'm worried about getting mugged at midnight isn't a racial prejudice. Not hiring someone because of their skin color is.

Thinking I'm better than another individual because of my skin color is racism, calling Randy Moss a thug is not.

The only time in my life I can remember treating someone differently than I would anyone else was when I was 10 years old. A bunch of my classmates started teasing a deaf student. I pitched in and said some things that were mean. We were making fun of the way this guy talked.

I remember walking back to class feeling horribly about it. I went home and just sad on the bed, thinking. I apologized to him the next day and I swore I'd never treat someone badly because they were different than I was.

I don't. I've never refused to hire a black person because of the color of their skin. On the flip side, I've never hired one because of the color of their skin. I smile to a sales clerk and say hi no matter what color their skin is or how many peircings they have.

Maybe you can give some example of what you think John, because I can't recall a single instance in my adult life where I've treated someone differently because of the color of their skin.

If you want to call yourself a racist, that's fine with me. Though I strongly doubt you've discriminated against blacks or any other skin color for that matter. Don't include me and everyone else in the world in with your definition though.

I'm not "scared" or "frightened" about being called a racist. I'm offended by it. If anyone is going to call me one, they had better give me some examples to show it.

TroyF

[John Galt]

Originally posted by SkyDog
Uh...no. That is not exactly your argument. Dennis went on to tell his kids not to blame the suburban white kids for the fact that their neighborhoods are unsafe. He was saying that the decision was NOT racist at all, but just good common sense.

The semantics of this discussion are causing a problem. For most, the word "racist" has a negative connotation that includes hatred or a view that one race is "better" than another. "Prejudice" is probably a better word to use for what you're talking about John. We all make pre-judgments. Just because one factor in a pre-judgment is race does not mean that the "pre-judger" has race-based hatred in his heart.

I agree that definitions are a big problem here. The strange thing is that TroyF offered a definition to defend the "other" side, but then it turns out to be contrary to his and your position and I get blamed for a bad definition. Weird.

Anway, Dennis and I are making the same argument, but using different labels. You are right about that.

My point (or agenda as some have said) is to argue that these decisions should be called racist because they are based on race. This does not diminish the importance of the word, but allows us to recognize that we may not be as innocent as we believe. Too often in discussions of race, it devolves into, "I'm not a racist. How dare you call me a racist." That prevents any meaningful discussion (see what is happening between me and TroyF). I think that our racially prejudiced decisions aren't that dissimilar from when a classic race-based decision. For example, an employer doesn't hire someone because he is named Tyrone, says "ax" instead of "ask" (and thus, seems uneducated), looks like a "gangsta," and has cornrows. I think we all could agree (I hope) that the decision of the employer is racist. The employer doesn't think he/she is being racist, but that is because racism is often subconscious. The same things happen when we flock with our own (if we are white), avoid black neighborhoods, speed up with the hypothetical black teenagers behind us, etc. We all make race based decisions and recognizing that is important to combatting instances like the employment one. Otherwise, the employer just replies, "Don't call me a racist, I had good reasons not to hire Tyrone" and we get nowhere.

[ctmason]

Please.

As most sportswriters do. This guy is overthinking the entire situation.

The NBA, just like any other sports product, has declining ratings because their superstars do not appeal to as many people as before. Furthermore, said stars do not have rivalries to keep the public entertained.

I seriously doubt less people watch the NBA as a whole because it isn't good fundamental basketball anymore. Those fans who even know what that means (I'm not one of them), are in the minority...by far.

The rivalries of Magic vs. Bird, Lakers vs. Pistons, etc. are what generated entertainment value and what brought viewers. The stories, the themes, the conflict. THis is what sells entertainment.

It isn't rocket science. Package a good rivalry better, and youll have more viewers. That may be too far gone for the NBA to salvage, as they've focused far too much on individuals.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by TroyF
I am going to worry about your psyche, because you still don't understand the difference between racism and stereotyping. It is true, racists use stereotyping. That doesn't mean everyone who stereotypes is racist.

You continue to say everyone is racist. I say that is complete hogwash.

According to your definition of racism, whites regularly are racists against whites. Blacks are racists against blacks and hispanics are racists against hispanics. I'm really offended and baffled by this line:

We all use prejudice and discriminate based on that prejudice.

You might. I don't. Walking faster because I'm worried about getting mugged at midnight isn't a racial prejudice. Not hiring someone because of their skin color is.

Thinking I'm better than another individual because of my skin color is racism, calling Randy Moss a thug is not.

The only time in my life I can remember treating someone differently than I would anyone else was when I was 10 years old. A bunch of my classmates started teasing a deaf student. I pitched in and said some things that were mean. We were making fun of the way this guy talked.

I remember walking back to class feeling horribly about it. I went home and just sad on the bed, thinking. I apologized to him the next day and I swore I'd never treat someone badly because they were different than I was.

I don't. I've never refused to hire a black person because of the color of their skin. On the flip side, I've never hired one because of the color of their skin. I smile to a sales clerk and say hi no matter what color their skin is or how many peircings they have.

Maybe you can give some example of what you think John, because I can't recall a single instance in my adult life where I've treated someone differently because of the color of their skin.

If you want to call yourself a racist, that's fine with me. Though I strongly doubt you've discriminated against blacks or any other skin color for that matter. Don't include me and everyone else in the world in with your definition though.

I'm not "scared" or "frightened" about being called a racist. I'm offended by it. If anyone is going to call me one, they had better give me some examples to show it.

TroyF

TroyF, I've tried to play nice, but you seem to react very strongly to everything I've said. Please try to give me some credit when you read my posts.

You used a definition of racism that included "prejudice" and "discrimination" based on race. If you don't want to use that definition, then fine.

My point is that you can use a "hatred" or "superiority" definition, but if you do so, you beg the question with the rest of your argument. You end up using a label to dismiss everything.

Read my above posts (the last couple). I DO understand the difference you are making, but my point is that racism is not always conscious and your new, refined definition doesn't account for that. It treats race as only a belief on conscious hatred. Thus, an employer who never hires blacks because they are "different" (whether he/she realizes it or not) isn't a racist to you and I think that is a shortcoming of your approach.

[GrantDawg]

I'm a racist. I moved back home from an all-white neighborhood, preaching for an all-white congregation, so that I can live in a mix raced neighborhood and preach for a mixed race congregation. Why? Because my daughter would have grown up without having black/Latino friends and I think that would have handicapped her later in life. So I made a decision based on race and according to John I'm a racist. I guess I'll just be a racist then.

[Anrhydeddu]

If we shouldn't label others, why should be then be labeled ourselves?

[John Galt]

Originally posted by GrantDawg
I'm a racist. I moved back home from an all-white neighborhood, preaching for an all-white congregation, so that I can live in a mix raced neighborhood and preach for a mixed race congregation. Why? Because my daughter would have grown up without having black/Latino friends and I think that would have handicapped her later in life. So I made a decision based on race and according to John I'm a racist. I guess I'll just be a racist then.

I agree - you are a racist (with no negativity intended). And I think you made a great decision. I too was raised in a very ethnically diverse neighborhood (SE DC) and I'm a much better person for it. I'm only arguing in this thread that we make decisions based on race and we should question it when we do - it doesn't mean that some of those decisions aren't good.

Not to open a can of worms, but this is why I'm an affirmative action supporter - I believe that AA is a good racist decision when done right.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
If we shouldn't label others, why should be then be labeled ourselves?

We do label others and ourselves. Some labels are good and some are bad. Racist ones should be given heavy scrutiny, but in cases like Grantdawg's, they can lead to good decisions.

[Anrhydeddu]

you are a racist (with no negativity intended).

That's where you get in trouble and the crux of the semantics debate here.

[TroyF]

Thus, an employer who never hires blacks because they are "different" (whether he/she realizes it or not) isn't a racist to you and I think that is a shortcoming of your approach.

Talk about putting words into someone's mouth. Where exactly did I say that? Where did I say that unconscious racism doesn't exist and that unconscious racism "doesn't count"?

One: Most people who treat blacks differently on a consistent basis know exactly what they are doing.

Two: In the rare cases they don't realize it, they are being racist. I'd say more often than not, however, these type of people stereotype EVERYONE, regardless of race. Still, by acting on that stereotyping behavior and treating someone differently because of it, they are acting in a racist manner.

Three: Just because those type of people exist, does not mean that everyone is racist.

Four: The frustrating thing for me in all of this is how loosely you use the word "racism" Walking by a group of teens is racism. Thinking to yourself "man, look at that KKK symbol on that guy's white sweater, what a scumbag" is racist. (hey, I'm judging him on what he's wearing, that's racist by your definition)

I think people throwing out the word every other sentence is hurting the civil rights movement more than people realize. It also still bothers me that you can use such a wide brush on everyone in the world (note: just because you include yourself as a racist doesn't give you the right to include everyone else in the world as one)

I'm not even going to start on the fact you had included gays and trans-sexuals in your group of minorities. What a persons behavior in the bedroom has to do with judging people based on their race would cause me to have an aneurism.

TroyF

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
That's where you get in trouble and the crux of the semantics debate here.

Yeah, I know. I originally was going to post it without the parenthetical, but I wanted to be clear.

I think I've justified my view of racism and thus far, the only definition offered was consistent (though I thought incomplete) with my definition.

View racists as only people with conscious hate for minorities misses too many racist decisions - I just don't know how anyone could be happy with such a narrow definition. I know people just want to say "racism bad" and thus limit it to really, really bad people, but in doing so, they miss a lot of racism in America.

[TroyF]

DOLA,

Racism as a positive word. Wow. I feel so stupid now.

TroyF

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by John Galt
Yeah, I know. I originally was going to post it without the parenthetical, but I wanted to be clear.

I think I've justified my view of racism and thus far, the only definition offered was consistent (though I thought incomplete) with my definition.

View racists as only people with conscious hate for minorities misses too many racist decisions - I just don't know how anyone could be happy with such a narrow definition. I know people just want to say "racism bad" and thus limit it to really, really bad people, but in doing so, they miss a lot of racism in America.

Because there are other words that would apply much better and be more clearer in its context than trying to apply multiple conflicting definitions to one single word.

[Castlerock]

Check out this test. Select the "Race IAT".

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implici...lectatest.html

From the site: It is well known that people don't always 'speak their minds', and it is suspected that people don't always 'know their minds'. Understanding such divergences is important to scientific psychology. This web site presents a method that demonstrates the conscious-unconscious divergences much more convincingly than has been possible with previous methods. It also displays the method in a do-it-yourself demonstration form.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by TroyF
[b]I think people throwing out the word every other sentence is hurting the civil rights movement more than people realize. It also still bothers me that you can use such a wide brush on everyone in the world (note: just because you include yourself as a racist doesn't give you the right to include everyone else in the world as one)

TroyF

I think this is the most powerul argument against what I have said. And I approach it with trepidation. Trivialization of racism is not something I'm after.

Still, I think we can differentiate between racists while still recognizing connections to them. The KKK is clearly bad - no one will deny that. The employer that never hires minority is bad - no one is denying that. The man who won't date a minority is bad - maybe someone here would deny that.

My point is that we should recognize that we are connected to the bad racists in meaningful ways. We make decisions that are inherently cultural (based on style, language, media, etc.) and that culture includes a lot of race-based baggage. We make decisions based on race even when we don't mean to.

Does this mean we are "bad" like the KKK. No. We could even be "good" like Grantdawg. The point is that race-based decisions should be heavily scrutinized and you should question what parts of our culture you use in making them.

P.S. - I didn't mean to put words into your mouth, but you seemed to be using a conscious hatred type definition which would tend to exclude the employer. If that isn't the case, then what is your definition? You said, "Still, by acting on that stereotyping behavior and treating someone differently because of it, they are acting in a racist manner." How does that not include the walking faster or any number of style based assessments?

P.S.S. - I brought up gays and transexuals to show how other minorities have trouble accessing culture, not to argue that they were "races."

[John Galt]

Originally posted by TroyF
DOLA,

Racism as a positive word. Wow. I feel so stupid now.

TroyF

Come on, I didnt' say that and you know it.

[vtbub]

John,

You offend me.

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by John Galt
Come on, I didnt' say that and you know it.

Yes you did.

agree - you are a racist (with no negativity intended). And I think you made a great decision. I too was raised in a very ethnically diverse neighborhood (SE DC) and I'm a much better person for it. I'm only arguing in this thread that we make decisions based on race and we should question it when we do - it doesn't mean that some of those decisions aren't good.

Not to open a can of worms, but this is why I'm an affirmative action supporter - I believe that AA is a good racist decision when done right.

Galt, in the past I have taken your examples and turned them around. Let me do it again and see if you agree.

The Black Panthers are clearly bad - no one will deny that. The employer that never hires a white is bad - no one is denying that. The man who won't date a a white is bad - maybe someone here would deny that.

[Buzzbee]

John - I think the point that many people are trying to make is that you are painting with too broad a brush in how you are using the term racism. Using stereotypes and being prejudice when making decisions about others may be factors in racism, but don't constitute racism in and of themselves. At least as most people generally think of racism.

I can also see your point in that most people generally think of racism as hatred toward another race, or feeling of superiority over another race, but that racism can encompass more than that. However, saying that everyone is racist just because they form ideas or make decisions because of a persons race is, I THINK, taking it a little too far to the other extreme.

{Edited for clarification. Edit in Italics. }

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Yes you did.


Galt, in the past I have taken your examples and turned them around. Let me do it again and see if you agree.

I said racist decisions should be given heavy scrunity, but SOME decisions (like Grantdawg's) are good ones. That is not the same as saying, "Racism is [sic] a positive word."