Study: You may be more racist than you think

[agzg]

I don't like the Special Olympics one, so here's a different one:



Now your day is complete, pj.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

I don't like the Special Olympics one, so here's a different one:



Now your day is complete, pj.

That one's cute!! LOL!

[LΩVE]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

Perhaps the reason why people run from them, however, is that either people are posting completely inflammatory remarks, or they dismiss your thoughts because you "just don't understand." This thread, for the first couple of pages, was not the norm. The thoughtfulness of the posters in their responses was actually impressive.

Many threads that get started based on racial issues digress into the shitstorm that we saw between Love, pj, and monet. Someone posts something slightly inflammatory (and I'm not going to go into who that was or why they did it), and let the flaming commence. Name calling, bringing up other threads where the posters have a disagreement, etc.

No one wants to jump in the middle of that. I suppose that's where I base my opinion. It's just amazing to me how sometimes one bad apple (and again, I'm not going to go into who the bad apple is, because depending on what view you have, I could even be the bad apple) can spoil the bunch, and it seems that the bunch gets spoiled more quickly in racially charged threads.

ETA: And for whatever reason, lately, threads regarding Bush. It always seems to be liberals calling other liberals conservatives. I don't even know what any of that is about.

Bullshit from another thread was brought here...personally my posts about this particularly topic weren't terribly opinionated.

I'm not really concerned about my popularity on the internetz lol!!!11!! so I'll just say I'm not up to play the hazing/bullying game here because I'm "new". I don't have incentive to act like the "adult", especially when the "adults" cannot behave as such themselves. Humility is essential, but being a doormat is not.

I attempted to have a conversation with Monet but quickly realized that was just another way to fuck with me so I bowed out.

I wish it were possible to just have a conversation in a thread such as this, but for various reasons it doesn't appear to be. What is most frustrating is the dismissal of the thought processes of the "layperson". How many people have the time and resources to become experts on the many different branches this topic can take? Few. The "layperson" is who normally tackles these issues on a daily basis, therefore lack of research in the area doesn't negate their observations and opinions. Saying "u don't kno wut ur talkin about so stfu" isn't effective as it effectively blocks out all opportunity to LEARN. What is the point in discussing a topic that has so many different viewpoints if not to educate each other?

[LΩVE]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Back to the topic...I think everyone has "racist" tendencies. We are evolutionarily made to suspect "other" and prefer "same." We congregate in groups for safety. Unfortunately, we cannot often control our basic tendencies to show preference, but we have also evolved to use reason to overcome our baser instincts. What I find a sad is that society has been able to ingrain a fear of black people into black people themselves. There have been some very interesting studies that black and white people show the same bias against black faces (they had research subjects hit a button to ascribe good vs evil qualities to words, colors then faces...most people would automatically pick evil for black faces.) We still have more work to do to convince people that they should ignore these ingrained beliefs and TRY to be better. Each generation is improving...

I have this feeling, sadly, that in some pockets of populations it won't entirely disappear, at least not in our lifetimes. On the other hand, brushing aside my own personal opinions on the matter, I have heard many people say they truly feel more inspired than ever before because of Obama's election. It is progress that our country was willing to elect someone for their merits and not their skin color.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by LΩVE

I wish it were possible to just have a conversation in a thread such as this, but for various reasons it doesn't appear to be. What is most frustrating is the dismissal of the thought processes of the "layperson". How many people have the time and resources to become experts on the many different branches this topic can take? Few. The "layperson" is who normally tackles these issues on a daily basis, therefore lack of research in the area doesn't negate their observations and opinions. Saying "u don't kno wut ur talkin about so stfu" isn't effective as it effectively blocks out all opportunity to LEARN. What is the point in discussing a topic that has so many different viewpoints if not to educate each other?

Oh please. Why don't you try learning from what other people are posting. The fact that it's "OMG YOUR OPINION" does not close the door to someone questioning your logic, or questioning your opinion. And there's really no reason to be offended by that. Had you left out the craziness involving pj or monet from previous threads, I doubt you would have had as big a flamewar going on. FWIW, you brought up the other threads to pj by saying "is it possible to communicate without being condescending and rude?" Just to keep the record straight.

Please see:

Originally Posted by KSig RC

The defense mechanism you've noted is the frustrating part - if you express a strong opinion, then you have to be willing to have others judge the logic and utility of that opinion. To put it bluntly, your opinion may be wrong, or poorly formed, or misguided.

I'm not really concerned about my popularity on the internetz lol!!!11!! so I'll just say I'm not up to play the hazing/bullying game here because I'm "new". I don't have incentive to act like the "adult", especially when the "adults" cannot behave as such themselves. Humility is essential, but being a doormat is not.

Once again:

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by LΩVE

I'm not really concerned about my popularity on the internetz lol!!!11!! so I'll just say I'm not up to play the hazing/bullying game here because I'm "new". I don't have incentive to act like the "adult", especially when the "adults" cannot behave as such themselves. Humility is essential, but being a doormat is not.

Here's the thing: hazing/bullying requires a group effort. That really doesn't exist here - especially not in this sort of thread.

Originally Posted by LΩVE

I attempted to have a conversation with Monet but quickly realized that was just another way to fuck with me so I bowed out.

Nah, it's just that there are various parts of conversing with Monet that are quite unique.

Originally Posted by LΩVE

What is most frustrating is the dismissal of the thought processes of the "layperson". How many people have the time and resources to become experts on the many different branches this topic can take? Few. The "layperson" is who normally tackles these issues on a daily basis, therefore lack of research in the area doesn't negate their observations and opinions.

There's a perception issue here in the sentence I deleted (because I'm barely going to address that) - that's because people who have advanced knowledge on a topic can come across as condescending when, in fact, they're not intending to be, and because people hate to feel inferior, abased or subjugated so they react harshly.

Here's the thing, though - when your doctor gives a diagnosis, you don't expect your opinion of illness to be taken as on par with the doctor's. When your attorney gives you legal advice, you'd assume a lay opinion would not be on equal footing or be taken with equal consideration.

So, along the same lines, when people with advanced knowledge of this subject drop some knowledge, don't think that it is meant to 'negate' your opinion, but rather to inform you of places where your opinion may be misguided, or to inform you of biases, beliefs or experiences that may color your opinion in ways you don't expect.

Nothing can "negate" an opinion. That doesn't mean all opinions are correct or well-founded, or that there is no way for knowledge to be interjected. It also doesn't mean your opinion isn't valuable - it's just not equally valuable as facts and knowledge.

[LΩVE]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

Oh please. Why don't you try learning from what other people are posting. The fact that it's "OMG YOUR OPINION" does not close the door to someone questioning your logic, or questioning your opinion. And there's really no reason to be offended by that. Had you left out the craziness involving pj or monet from previous threads. FWIW, you brought up the other threads to pj by saying "is it possible to communicate without being condescending and rude?" Just to keep the record straight.

Please see:







Once again:

Here's what I'd like to learn:

Other peoples' opinion on the topic at hand, their experiences, and especially information that people who ARE experts have to offer.

Here's what I'm not interested in learning:

How to "behave" like an adult while being talked down to and called names. Wah. There was one thread involved, and Monet was not part of it. And yes, I did comment on the rudeness. Again, no one here is going to get to bully me. I responded to their post on a thread, they responded by calling me a little girl and advising me to act like an adult then brought the attitude problem here. I'm not playing...it will be dished right back, and I certainly don't need "adult" lessons from someone who can't behave like one themselves. Everyone has their moments, but I can do without the hypocritic nonsense.

Questioning logic/opinion do not offend me. What did offend me was the fact that instead of questioning my logic or opinion, I found myself repeating everything I had said while my posts were twisted into unrecognizable masses or were simply not read at all yet responded to. It was obviously meant to be a one sided conversation and I caused a problem by actually participating.

And, once again, I'm not interested in being hazed on the internetz. If someone wants me to play nice they can play nice with me. Otherwise I will give back what I am getting.

Here's something to chew: there were two parts to my post, one certainly about the topic at hand. Choosing to ignore that completely in favor of engaging in asinine condescension isn't going to bring the thread back around. It takes two.

[SWTXBelle]

I still think the thread took a dive when different meanings of the word "racist" were being used. Define your terms, and then it is much easier to debate the topic. Otherwise, you are talking apples and oranges, logic goes out the window, and it becomes all about the individuals posting rather than the topic. Same thing happens on GC with some regularity with the use of the word "multi-cultural". It can mean different things to different people, so it's important that everyone at least agree on the meaning enough so the discussion can transcend arguments about definition. It doesn't have to be Webster's, although that can be a good place to start.

[LΩVE]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Here's the thing: hazing/bullying requires a group effort. That really doesn't exist here - especially not in this sort of thread.



Nah, it's just that there are various parts of conversing with Monet that are quite unique.



There's a perception issue here in the sentence I deleted (because I'm barely going to address that) - that's because people who have advanced knowledge on a topic can come across as condescending when, in fact, they're not intending to be, and because people hate to feel inferior, abased or subjugated so they react harshly.

Here's the thing, though - when your doctor gives a diagnosis, you don't expect your opinion of illness to be taken as on par with the doctor's. When your attorney gives you legal advice, you'd assume a lay opinion would not be on equal footing or be taken with equal consideration.

So, along the same lines, when people with advanced knowledge of this subject drop some knowledge, don't think that it is meant to 'negate' your opinion, but rather to inform you of places where your opinion may be misguided, or to inform you of biases, beliefs or experiences that may color your opinion in ways you don't expect.

Nothing can "negate" an opinion. That doesn't mean all opinions are correct or well-founded, or that there is no way for knowledge to be interjected. It also doesn't mean your opinion isn't valuable - it's just not equally valuable as facts and knowledge.

Bullying certainly exists on an individual level, I just won't participate. Not interested in being a doormat or a victim.

I didn't read it like that...interesting at first, purposefully baiting in the end, hence my deciding not to engage with that poster. There's no point in trying to have a one on one discussion when one part is being completely ignored, so I'm happy to leave that dynamic to the group. It's just not my style.

I can recognize the difference between someone who is simply knowledgeable and offering what they know and someone who is being a huge prick. Huge prick seems to be the overwhelming majority at the moment, but certainly some people are simply offering their take.

What I was writing about was the fact that there have been times when, literally, "laypeople" have been told to shut the fuck up because they had no idea what they were talking about. There is a difference between offering a viewpoint and telling someone else theirs is not valid because they are not "knowledgeable" on the topic. Most people here, especially those of an ethnic minority are extremely knowledgeable on the topic-just not on the academic level. People who have experienced racism are knowledgeable on the topic, too, even if they haven't read books on the topic. It is the attitude that they are NOT because they are not experts through research that squashes the opportunity to learn. Experience is just as valuable and sometimes more so. I can read all I want to, become an "expert" in the sense that I've researched racism and its impacts from every level but I'll never see it from the viewpoint of someone who is black or hispanic or who is a Muslim living in America. A book can't make me feel that, and of course neither can a message on a forum, but because it carries the weight of someone's personal emotions and particular experiences it can come a lot closer.

[agzg]

FWIW, there were two POSTS. Obviously I replied to one of them. In fact, when I quoted your first post, your second post had not come through. Chew that.

I question your logic. There is not as much connotation or power behind "snowflake" as there is behind racial slurs against minorities. Maybe, MAYBE words like "cracker" or "whitie," but certainly not frosted flakes, barbie, or what have you.

When white people are oppressed by a majority, then they can say that. Personally, gender-specific slurs are more offensive to me. If someone wants to call me a cracker, let them. I'm much more offended if someone calls me the c-word.

Next:
Cut it out with the hazing crap. This is not hazing. Those posters that have called you out on general douchebaggery are not in concordance with one another. We're not trying to "make your life miserable."

If you didn't start a flamewar everywhere you post when someone questions what you post as your opinion, you will notice that in general, we do "play nice."

[agzg]

In a sort of related note to the thread topic, not to the digression, could anyone tell me if there's been a similar (in method) study about gender biases? How would that go, or can anyone point me to a link?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

There's a perception issue here in the sentence I deleted (because I'm barely going to address that) - that's because people who have advanced knowledge on a topic can come across as condescending when, in fact, they're not intending to be, and because people hate to feel inferior, abased or subjugated so they react harshly.

Here's the thing, though - when your doctor gives a diagnosis, you don't expect your opinion of illness to be taken as on par with the doctor's. When your attorney gives you legal advice, you'd assume a lay opinion would not be on equal footing or be taken with equal consideration.

So, along the same lines, when people with advanced knowledge of this subject drop some knowledge, don't think that it is meant to 'negate' your opinion, but rather to inform you of places where your opinion may be misguided, or to inform you of biases, beliefs or experiences that may color your opinion in ways you don't expect.

Nothing can "negate" an opinion. That doesn't mean all opinions are correct or well-founded, or that there is no way for knowledge to be interjected. It also doesn't mean your opinion isn't valuable - it's just not equally valuable as facts and knowledge.

Exactly.

People think that social phenomena are so subjective and socially constructed that there can't be any objectivity, concreteness, and therefore no understanding of these phenomena. That isn't the case. These concepts are about more than individual perception and opinion based on conjecture and emotions.

There are millions of people in this world and, yet, the more things change the more things stay the same. There are trends and patterns in all of this that surpass personal experiences (and opinions) that people think are so unique. Everyone wants to believe that they are different and that they are thinking/saying/experiencing something brand new.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by LΩVE

People who have experienced racism are knowledgeable on the topic, too, even if they haven't read books on the topic.

This phrase is either overused or underused with little middle ground. A lot of people who think they have "experienced racism" actually have not. A lot of people who think that they have not "experienced racism" actually have.

Suffice it to say that having "experiences" means that someone has had experiences. It does not instantly make someone knowledgeable beyond being able to share their experience. They are experienced in the literal sense but that isn't enough to participate in every discussion of racial and ethnic relations.

[LΩVE]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

FWIW, there were two POSTS. Obviously I replied to one of them. In fact, when I quoted your first post, your second post had not come through. Chew that.

I question your logic. There is not as much connotation or power behind "snowflake" as there is behind racial slurs against minorities. Maybe, MAYBE words like "cracker" or "whitie," but certainly not frosted flakes, barbie, or what have you.

When white people are oppressed by a majority, then they can say that. Personally, gender-specific slurs are more offensive to me. If someone wants to call me a cracker, let them. I'm much more offended if someone calls me the c-word.

Next:
Cut it out with the hazing crap. This is not hazing. Those posters that have called you out on general douchebaggery are not in concordance with one another. We're not trying to "make your life miserable."

If you didn't start a flamewar everywhere you post when someone questions what you post as your opinion, you will notice that in general, we do "play nice."

I wasn't the one who originally posted the comment on the "Bring it On" sequel.

No, "snowflake" is not exactly loaded, but the poster's point was that even had the word "honky" or "cracker" been used it would've been accepted because it is acceptable to use racial slurs against white people. I agree that it would've caused little uproar for two reasons: first because "white people" who are educated are often so PC that they are afraid to react to that sort of behavior. I am not ignorant of the difference in situations, I have just said, and stand by this, that it shouldn't be ok as it does upset people. If someone calls me a cracker they are calling me a racist pig, essentially, and I absolutely find that offensive. What I feel is that I should not have to simply accept that because I am white. I think it is ok to be offended and to say so. The second reason it often causes no uproar is that some "white people" just aren't offended. This is of course a reasonable reaction as well. It just depends on the person. I guess what bothers me most about the issue is that it's somehow ok because it's "getting even". The concept of "sins of the father" isn't one I personally believe in. That just creates a never ending circle where a victim becomes a perpetrator and vice versa, each trying to top the other to "get even".

I question the logic that because "white people haven't been oppressed" they have no right to be offended. See the above paragraph. By that logic eventually the tables could be turned. Some people think "fair is fair" but two wrongs don't make a right in my mind. Getting even never ends.

Fine if you aren't offended by racial slurs, I am and remain so. As for gender issues, that is of course an entirely different topic, but how about this: In society now it's often seen as acceptable to use gender-related slurs and debasing jokes against men because for most of modern history men have been in charge. So somehow turning the tables seems ok. It's more of the "getting even" attitude. Does that make it ok? Yes, women have been oppressed by men historically, but does that mean that my boyfriend is a pig, even though he's respectful of women?

The rationalization for being completely rude to me in the first place is because I'm "new". Here's what I am NOT going to let happen: no one gets to be a bitch then turn it around on me and expect me to lie down and take it. It isn't going to work that way. The logic that someone who calls names and can't let it go is applauded for telling me I'm behaving in a juvenile manner is both amusing and irritating. Both of us were behaving like juveniles-it's the inability to accept that on the part of the other party that kept it going. There's a solution if you don't like it: don't engage. People who are rude can expect it back from me, and if they don't want to deal with it they can avoid it by either being civil or not speaking to me at all.

[LΩVE]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

This phrase is either overused or underused with little middle ground. A lot of people who think they have "experienced racism" actually have not. A lot of people who think that they have not "experienced racism" actually have.

Suffice it to say that having "experiences" means that someone has had experiences. It does not instantly make someone knowledgeable beyond being able to share their experience. They are experienced in the literal sense but that isn't enough to participate in every discussion of racial and ethnic relations.

I disagree with the logic that people who read about experiences are more valuable than people who have been in those situations. They are valuable in different ways.

If these discussions should be limited to only those who spend extensive amounts of time researching the topic, then maybe it should never ever be broached here.