The "lazy black player" stereotype

Halftrack said:
I wasn't planning on making this a thread about my ideas for the ideal Socialist society, I was using it to illustrate that you'll find idiots and crazies within every group, and finding them within your own group shouldn't be a reason for you to disassociate from said group.
Click to expand...

Yeah and I pointed out the demonstrable failure of the philosophy as the more obvious reason to disassociate from it, as opposed to the 'idiots and crazies' within the support.

Halftrack said:
Then you decided to chime in, and I had to clarify to you that I, a person who dislikes people who worship communist dictators, might not actually be a fan of said dictators' ideologies. If you know that socialism is a very broad term, you should know better than to immediately assume I'm a tankie or something, especially right after I've said that I despise tankies.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that socialism is a very broad term (although it would have to be for most of its adherents). Rather I said that there is a common enough understanding of socialism, and what it entails, in the public consciousness.

Also, said dictator's ideologies have an inextricable link to socialism.
 
Kinsella said:
Yeah and I pointed out the demonstrable failure of the philosophy as the more obvious reason to disassociate from it, as opposed to the 'idiots and crazies' within the support.
Click to expand...
Demonstrable failures of socialist ideologies I don't like nor follow. As a democratic socialist, I'm more in line with the Nordic model. That's social democracy, but it's a good first step towards what I would want.

I didn't say that socialism is a very broad term (although it would have to be for most of its adherents). Rather I said that there is a common enough understanding of socialism, and what it entails, in the public consciousness.

Also, said dictator's ideologies have an inextricable link to socialism.
Click to expand...
I assumed you knew it was an umbrella term, my bad! Regardless, that 'common' understanding is a misunderstanding. I'm happy to explain it to whomever may care, but I'm going to get defensive if you jump to the conclusion that I must be a tankie.

Besides, in my experience, thinking of socialism as purely bad and related to Stalin and Mao is a very American thing. Europeans, and maybe especially us Scandinavians, tend to not assume the worst when people refer to themselves as a socialist. Unless they happen to really hate left-wing ideologies, I suppose.
 
Fridge chutney said:
If that's the conclusion you've drawn from this thread then the only car crash in this thread is your deductive reasoning.
Click to expand...

Relax mate. It was a smart ass response to an otherwise circle jerk of a thread.

There are 100 threads just like this one discussing the same exact topic.
 
villain said:
We’re in a thread that pertains to PoC, just because that’s the group I chose to comment on, doesn’t mean that I’m discounting that non-PoC can be affect by prejudice.
If you actually read what I said, it’s that in the past PoC faced barriers to expressing their opinions in public, is this not true? In the last 100 years, 50 years of that PoC where still not ‘free’ or still under colonial rule, and in the last 50 years or so, you have first generation PoC immigrants in low-level positions, no representation in media, politics or any industry with access to general society. The last 20 years or so has seen a change in that, and the last 10 years there has been a big shift due to the internet and social media.
At no point does that mean that white people arent capable of being prejudiced - but surely you can see the difference between the hoops that PoC have had to jump through to get their voices heard?
If you can’t see that, then yes you’re right - there’s no point discussing further.

Again - insisting that there’s nothing further you can learn, when you’ve shown that you can’t comprehend what I said is blissful ignorance.
Frankly, I don’t wish to change your mind - I pointed you out because your stance was a common one which happens often, and your posts seemingly centre around racism not existing, or race not existing therefore it shouldn’t be important (despite you seemingly caring about discrimination/prejudice/racism happening to anyone who isn’t PoC and me not explicitly pointing this out - it seems to be important to you then) and that’s fine - but the whole point of the forum is to debate various topics.
Click to expand...

That post makes me feel sorry for you, as you seem to have the right intent, but are approaching it in a misguided way

As you've offered me your sage advice along with your misinterpretations, I hope you have a nice life and at some point take the time to reflect on how you view the world. I suggest you have a try a lens of seeing humans as unique individual rather than them being herded than crude racial categories or groupings that they have had no choice over. You may find it liberating, while also enhancing your ability to spot discrimination and similar failings when it comes to human fellowship

Have a good life
 
A question for our US posters.

Do you believe that the pre-draft combines that take place(thinking specifically of the NBA/NFL) contribute to, and almost fetishize, the stereotyping process?

Reduces all the participants, across the racial spectrum, down to purely physical attributes, a key part of sports of course, but as an avid watcher of the NBA I find the excitement over combine numbers a little odd.
 
Gareth Bale often get's compared to chimps due to his facial features, but do people complain about racism when he is labelled a monkey or gorilla?
 
Barca84 said:
More than a glimmer pal. The thing with casual racism 2 man is that it's all over the shop. Just a few comments from that thread -

























His player performance thread is a mine of such comments also.

A lot of white lads getting very worked up in here.
Click to expand...
You have no idea on an internet forum if any of those lads are white.
 
Sayros said:
In fairness, SJW's movement has been somewhat hijacked by deplorable people who are in a constant battle of virtue signaling and shaming of others. We live in a period where people are overly sensitive, and will create drama and call racism where there isn't any. Is there racism? Yes. Is it everywhere? Of course not. However, if you go on Twitter, any and everything can be twisted into racism. One of the poster above calls non-white people PoC (person of color), I guarantee you there are some who will consider that racists as it groups all non-white into this terminology as if they were a subsection of the overall dominant white population.

It gets a bit ridiculous and for some people who are not racists but have had to deal with backlash from this overly sensitive PC culture we live in, it dillutes the important message that racism is still very much alive by going after targets that are not racists but aren't up to snuff on the proper terminology. Avoiding all the buzz words nowadays is like trying to dance tango in a minefield.
Click to expand...
Absolutely spot on.
 
Sayros said:
It gets a bit ridiculous and for some people who are not racists but have had to deal with backlash from this overly sensitive PC culture we live in, it dillutes the important message that racism is still very much alive by going after targets that are not racists but aren't up to snuff on the proper terminology. Avoiding all the buzz words nowadays is like trying to dance tango in a minefield.
Click to expand...

What examples of 'buzzwords' that are tricky to avoid are you talking about? Genuine question.

And if that's the peak of your distress within society I'd just suck it up and consider yourself lucky mate.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
What examples of 'buzzwords' that are tricky to avoid are you talking about? Genuine question.
Click to expand...

I think the buzzwords he is referring to, at least in this thread are - lazy, athletic, dumb, fast, strong, technical, etc.

These are all words that have been used to describe footballers since the beginning, the minefield is created when you can’t use some of them to describe players based on their skin color. In essence, it’s becoming difficult to truly understand what adjectives are going to offend people and ultimately lead to being labeled a racist.
 
His list of lazy players was pretty funny.

Wayne Hennessey

He used to just lay down in the gym on one of those thick blue mats and just relaxed while the rest of us worked out.

Bryan Ruiz

He was never near the gym, I don't think he even knew where it was.

He absolutely hated being even marginally uncomfortable. If it was cold or we were away to Stoke he'd never come along.

Dimitar Berbatov

I've never seen a man get so many massages in my life. I'm certain he spent more hours getting massaged than he trained.

Whenever we were in the gym working out, Berbatov was getting massages.

I knew the guy who gave him massages and usually at the end of the season the players give the physios a gift: a trip, a car, money, whatever.

He'd massaged Berbatov for hundreds of hours this season and he got nothing.

Emmanuel Adebayor

I played for Fulham and he played for Spurs. We were attacking and I was marking Adebayor in the midfield, suddenly he says "Ah, I'm hungry."

I replied, "What?"

"I can't wait for the game to finish, I'm so hungry. Do you know a good restaurant in London, Hangeland?"

Later when he came to Crystal Palace I started to realise where this came from. When we had strength workouts he would sit in the gym with just a cup of coffee and a muffin.

He was being paid by Manchester City, Tottenham and Palace at the same time, and he was sitting in the gym drinking coffee.

Incredible natural talent, very lazy.

Bobby Zamora

A strong man, but hated the gym intensely. Whenever it was time for deadlifts he'd start feeling his hamstring.

This happened every single time we went to the gym.

Wilfried Zaha

Amazing physique and very athletic, huge potential. On some Mondays he would come over to me and say "I'm starting my program now!"He'd clearly decided to start it during the weekend.

We'd then go to the gym together and he'd do like five push-ups, sigh, and leave. He would be incredible if he was serious.

Jimmy Bullard

Great player, but so incredibly weak. Never interested in going into the gym - at all.

Also his story about Bellamy as the biggest idiot in football.

During the handshakes before the game, Bellamy took my hand. He was a head lower than me. He looked me straight in the eye and said, "You f****** w*****".

I was thinking, “What the hell? I've never even met you!"





 
bpet15 said:
I think the buzzwords he is referring to, at least in this thread are - lazy, athletic, dumb, fast, strong, technical, etc.

These are all words that have been used to describe footballers since the beginning, the minefield is created when you can’t use some of them to describe players based on their skin color. In essence, it’s becoming difficult to truly understand what adjectives are going to offend people and ultimately lead to being labeled a racist.
Click to expand...

You can use any of those, the real issue is about whether the tag is correct or part of a narrative which lacks critical analysis.

Also to be honest I don't see why anyone isn't allowed to get offended if they feel you are wrong (like Zaha above)

The race issue is a minefield indeed, but it makes sense to be aware about stereotypes and generalisations which are largely baseless and often contradictory when you make assertions. Again boils down to if you can backup your statement with critical analysis or not in many cases.
 
Bola said:
That post makes me feel sorry for you, as you seem to have the right intent, but are approaching it in a misguided way

As you've offered me your sage advice along with your misinterpretations, I hope you have a nice life and at some point take the time to reflect on how you view the world. I suggest you have a try a lens of seeing humans as unique individual rather than them being herded than crude racial categories or groupings that they have had no choice over. You may find it liberating, while also enhancing your ability to spot discrimination and similar failings when it comes to human fellowship

Have a good life
Click to expand...

There’s nothing crude about talking about race especially when it pertains to discrimination. Earlier you tried to make out that I wasn’t for all forms of discrimination, since I debunked that you are now trying to suggest there’s something wrong with my ‘world view’ because I’m able to talk about race without finding it uncomfortable or unnecessary - unlike those who chose not to have a conversation about it.
All I did was give a quick timeline of why in the past these conversations weren’t had as it pertains to PoC - and what events have happened that enable these discussions to happen more frequently these days - meaning it’s nothing to do with SJWs, or people being overly sensitive, as I said in my post which you’ve failed to comprehend, again. I did that because you were under the impression that talking about race merely reduces humans to a category. It doesn’t.
What you fail to realise is there’s nothing wrong with identifying someone’s race, and if you believe in true equality between everyone then you would understand that, there’s more liberation in celebrating that fact - everybody has pride in their culture and heritage, but this idea that if you ‘don’t see colour’ you will rid discrimination is incredibly flawed and ignorant - so it’s no surprise that you think that’s the best way to go about things.
I’m confident in my ability to spot discrimination just like I’ve been confident in my ability to predict what you were gonna do, only for you to either prove my point or fail to comprehend what I’ve said, while not answering or being able to debunk a single point Ive made,despite you saying you have ‘nothing further to learn’.

Not once have you challenged anything I’ve said, instead you’ve either tried to end the conversation for fear of you getting reprimanded by the mods, or you’ve missed the point entirely and said I was wrong. This is now the third time you’ve quoted me just to dismiss me - so either let’s have a debate on the matter, since you seem to continue to skirt everything I’ve actually said, or you can stop quoting me, I don’t really care either way - and if you are scared of the mods, my messages are open for us to discuss there. Finally, saying you think I’m wrong doesn’t actually make you right.

Now, goodbye.
 
Please, no one go directly from this thread to the Fosu-Mensah thread - your minds will blow.
 
Wow, I read a couple of posts and the conversation has gone pretty deep. I do think racism does exist with footballers of color, sometimes unconsciously. Think about it, Laurent Blanc was caught saying black players are stronger and because in the youth ranks, coaches want to win, they focus on physical attributes and choose black players over other players and therefore, France was not having any Messi or something like that. It’s huge! It may be true, but it’s huge nonetheless.

I still think the right way to fix these things are to dissociate racial issues with personal characteristics and focus on individual traits. And then we need to come back to a football that doesn’t focus only on physical attributes but also on technical and tactical aspects. And then we get a Paul Pogba!!! A player who's strong but technically gifted, and can digest the tactical subtleties.

Discrimination is a tough topic because as someone rightly pointed out, few people want to be called racists but many are convinced the world is worst because of those new people who look different. It could have been the color of hair but it happens to be the color of skin.

Sometimes it’s a joke that has some connotation, sometimes it’s some opinion about how if you don’t like it you should go back, sometimes it’s just plain hate... it’s diverse. Can that be stopped? I’m not so sure. Even more because some jokes are actually funny! But they may not preserve the dignity of the people targeted.

I also believe when people get to know each others better, it creates a personal connection that self restrict bad jokes or hate comments. Like the guy who makes fun of disabled persons until someone in his family becomes one, maybe one guy who berates about poor people taking all the money from tax payers and never pay for hefty medical bills until someone in his family is hit by a car and needs intensive care to survive, with the crazy bills that come with it, or one that is quick to label people of color with anything until he finds out he's in love with a girl of color, or whatever. That's why it's important we create those connections somehow. Obviously the language is one step but not enough. But when people are perceived as more familiar and closer, it certainly makes it harder to "hate" them.
 
Gasolin said:
Wow, I read a couple of posts and the conversation has gone pretty deep. I do think racism does exist with footballers of color, sometimes unconsciously. Think about it, Laurent Blanc was caught saying black players are stronger and because in the youth ranks, coaches want to win, they focus on physical attributes and choose black players over other players and therefore, France was not having any Messi or something like that. It’s huge! It may be true, but it’s huge nonetheless.

I still think the right way to fix these things are to dissociate racial issues with personal characteristics and focus on individual traits. And then we need to come back to a football that doesn’t focus only on physical attributes but also on technical and tactical aspects. And then we get a Paul Pogba!!! A player who's strong but technically gifted, and can digest the tactical subtleties.

Discrimination is a tough topic because as someone rightly pointed out, few people want to be called racists but many are convinced the world is worst because of those new people who look different. It could have been the color of hair but it happens to be the color of skin.

Sometimes it’s a joke that has some connotation, sometimes it’s some opinion about how if you don’t like it you should go back, sometimes it’s just plain hate... it’s diverse. Can that be stopped? I’m not so sure. Even more because some jokes are actually funny! But they may not preserve the dignity of the people targeted.

I also believe when people get to know each others better, it creates a personal connection that self restrict bad jokes or hate comments. Like the guy who makes fun of disabled persons until someone in his family becomes one, maybe one guy who berates about poor people taking all the money from tax payers and never pay for hefty medical bills until someone in his family is hit by a car and needs intensive care to survive, with the crazy bills that come with it, or one that is quick to label people of color with anything until he finds out he's in love with a girl of color, or whatever. That's why it's important we create those connections somehow. Obviously the language is one step but not enough. But when people are perceived as more familiar and closer, it certainly makes it harder to "hate" them.
Click to expand...

Good post, and I agree with you. People are just complicated beings that it's often more detrimental than not to put them into labeled boxes, no one is a hopeless racist but some take extreme circumstances, that often they'll never get to experience, to even be able to change their point of view on people in all their complexities (sexuality, ethnicity, etc). The problem with all of us as people is that we are so tribalistic by nature, we could look the exact same but depending on where we are geographically, we could be the worst people on Earth for some, without even knowing one another on a personal level. You see it to varying degrees in ridiculous things like PC vs Mac, Xbox vs Playstation, Liverpool vs Manchester United. We have thousands of years encoded in our DNA of a need to belong to a tribe because that's how we survived back in our ancestor's days. You had to be wary of anyone different than your close group of tribe-mates. We now live in a society where that's actually detrimental to us in the advancement of all people in the modern world, but we still have a cave-man instinct whether we are conscious of it or not, to not just belong to a specific tribe, but to also have some kind of competition or animosity towards another.

I don't know if racism will ever truly go away as long as people exist, but in the unlikeliest scenario of say an Independence Day-style alien invasion, all racism would look silly from one day to the next because we'd have an actual, clear common enemy instead of looking for one within ourselves because we just need someone of a different ethnicity to make us feel like we belong to our tribe. I've traveled a lot in my youth because of my parents, and it's taken away the feeling of belonging to any specific tribe or group which was hard at first but I'm grateful for now because I feel like I don't have a common ally or enemy and it helps in just judging people solely based on the individual. I'm not saying I don't suffer from some dumb stereotypes, I think we all do and it doesn't even have to be with someone of a different ethnicity than us, but overall it's helped me a lot in not falling into some of those traps.
 
Last edited:
Sayros said:
People are just complicated beings that it's often more detrimental than not to put them into labeled boxes, no one is a hopeless racist but some take extreme circumstances, that often they'll never get to experience, to even be able to change their point of view on people in all their complexities (sexuality, ethnicity, etc).
Click to expand...

Why bother stating this when clearly not true...

There are millions of out and out racists in the World.

Why do we need to pretend that they don't exist? It's becoming a common theme.
 
walkinhop said:
Also, i bet that if some of the really out there people who fight for the so-called social justice ( it should be justice, period) are to be replaced with more sense-making, less aggressive, ones the overall perception would be more positive.
To put it simply, i feel some give a bad name to the wider group of people who want the world to be a better place for everyone. They push way those sensible individuals who would otherwise support justice and equality. It is also hurtful that many times the loudest noises come from people who push for more than the end of racism. They often have wild ideas about things neither them nor most people understand properly. Things like culture, finance, politics, geography, etc.
Click to expand...

I've never understood this argument.

"You're suggesting I should think twice before I use a lazy stereotype to describe a black person? That's not fair. You're forcing me to become racist." How does that work exactly?

I'm sure you've heard of it but there's a concept in politics called the Overton Window. The idea is that on any given subject there is only a certain range of "acceptable" views that aren't branded as extreme or nonsensical. But, if you have a set of campaigners and a charismatic spokesman who will push the envelope of discussion outside that range, then you can move the discussion. Ideally you then have a second more "acceptable" spokesperson who can gather mass support to actually effect change.

So, for example, in the American civil rights movement, you had Malcolm X pushing the Overton Window way out and challenging assumptions everywhere, and essentially making MLK look "acceptable". And in the UK with regard to Europe, we have had 30 years of frothing Tories in the Telegraph spouting BS which makes Theresa May look reasonable.

In both cases policies that would previously have been decried as "not sensible" became part of the solution. The Overton Window is a handy concept which explains why so-called SJWs push harder than many folk like, and why in the US right now you're seeing the Green New Deal being promoted - they're trying to move the conversation along from the static discussions of the last 20 years.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Theonas
villain said:
What you fail to realise is there’s nothing wrong with identifying someone’s race, and if you believe in true equality between everyone then you would understand that, there’s more liberation in celebrating that fact - everybody has pride in their culture and heritage, but this idea that if you ‘don’t see colour’ you will rid discrimination is incredibly flawed and ignorant - so it’s no surprise that you think that’s the best way to go about things.
Click to expand...
It will not rid discrimination but it certainly won't contribute to it either. There exists sensible people who are not activists for their views. Politically inactive people who aren't ignorant on these matters but are largely passive. 'I don't see colour' is a quick and easy way to explain your values towards human beings, even if it might not belong in deeper discussions about race like this. It isn't flawed because if nobody cared about race, then any discrimination wouldn't be race related. People walking around not caring about anyones race isn't a bad thing. That doesn't automatically make you completely oblivious to race, or uncomfortable when talking about racial issues either.
 
MikeKing said:
It will not rid discrimination but it certainly won't contribute to it either. There exists sensible people who are not activists for their views. Politically inactive people who aren't ignorant on these matters but are largely passive. ... It isn't flawed because if nobody cared about race, then any discrimination wouldn't be race related.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying but it ignores the fact that most racism is built into our society by things like crappy inner city schools, poor diet, lead in the environment, drug policy and policing. Claiming that, "I don't see color, so please don't make me look at these effects or do anything about them," absolutely contributes to their persistence and to ongoing discrimination.

A 10-year old West Indian kid, whose ancestors were slaves, whose parents are incarcerated or working two jobs, whose cognitive ability may be depressed by pollutants and cheap processed food, and who has to attend a school with no text books, is totally a victim of racism, every time you, me or anyone else votes not to address those issues, even though we "don't see colour."

Not "seeing colour" isn't enough.
 
Do people really say they don't see colour with the tone of their voice suggesting they are willingly ignoring societal problems? That is so weird to me.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
Why bother stating this when clearly not true...

There are millions of out and out racists in the World.

Why do we need to pretend that they don't exist? It's becoming a common theme.
Click to expand...

What you said and what you quoted me saying are not mutual exclusives. Plenty of examples to prove you wrong. Here's just one:



No one is potentially hopeless, but some will never get whatever extreme circumstances that can re-wire their views.
 
Sayros said:
What you said and what you quoted me saying are not mutual exclusives. Plenty of examples to prove you wrong. Here's just one:



No one is potentially hopeless, but some will never get whatever extreme circumstances that can re-wire their views.
Click to expand...

Agreed, you need that personal connection to take a closer look at your opinions, and assess them back. And some will never get a chance to have this personal connection.
 
MikeKing said:
It will not rid discrimination but it certainly won't contribute to it either. There exists sensible people who are not activists for their views. Politically inactive people who aren't ignorant on these matters but are largely passive. 'I don't see colour' is a quick and easy way to explain your values towards human beings, even if it might not belong in deeper discussions about race like this. It isn't flawed because if nobody cared about race, then any discrimination wouldn't be race related. People walking around not caring about anyones race isn't a bad thing. That doesn't automatically make you completely oblivious to race, or uncomfortable when talking about racial issues either.
Click to expand...

Well for one, it's a lie - everyone see's colour, everyone notices when someone is black, white, asian, mixed or whatever.
What you're really trying to say is "I treat everyone the same, regardless of race", which is what everyone should do - there is nothing wrong with calling someone black, white or whatever - you're more likely to be conditioned into thinking that talking about race is a topic that's off limits, it's not. Or you're conditioned into not having to talk about race because white people are the default in any given situation, therefore identifying race is unnecessary, unless it's for a PoC.
For anyone who is 'passive' when it comes to racism, to me, they are worse than the racists, because they see what's happening but they don't care - those are the people who keep racism alive by doing so.
So, if you are explaining your passive views by saying you don't see colour - then yes, you are ignorant and your logic is flawed - Read Martin Luther King's Letter From Birmingham Jail if you'd like any further clarification on the stance of what being passive when it comes to matters like these mean to the very people who are victims of it;

MLK said:
I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress.
Click to expand...

The only way we can get to the point where nobody cares about race, is by everyone - especially the passive ones - caring about race, right now. If you walk about not caring about race, what you're doing is ignoring systemic & institutional racism because you are led to believe that treating everybody equally is the only thing that will eradicate racism, sadly it's not. As @chromepaxos points out, PoC are marginalised & penalised in comparison to white people in almost every aspect of life, from education to environment to housing to employment and more - so saying you don't care about race, while all of this goes on makes you either oblivious, or complicit.
 
chromepaxos said:
I get what you're saying but it ignores the fact that most racism is built into our society by things like crappy inner city schools, poor diet, lead in the environment, drug policy and policing. Claiming that, "I don't see color, so please don't make me look at these effects or do anything about them," absolutely contributes to their persistence and to ongoing discrimination.

A 10-year old West Indian kid, whose ancestors were slaves, whose parents are incarcerated or working two jobs, whose cognitive ability may be depressed by pollutants and cheap processed food, and who has to attend a school with no text books, is totally a victim of racism, every time you, me or anyone else votes not to address those issues, even though we "don't see colour."

Not "seeing colour" isn't enough.
Click to expand...

This would be a great definition of what an SJW viewpoint of racism is
 
Bola said:
This is a great definition of what some of the effects of racism are
Click to expand...

Fixed. :smirk:

You seem like an intelligent person. I'm curious as to what in my quote you actually disagree with?

Is it that you don't feel the imaginary kid is a victim of racism?

If that's where your disagreement lies, then what would your definition of racism be?
 
I think the fact that not actively combating racism can be viewed as racist is a bit hard to accept. Because, by not being racist yourself, you would seem like part of the solution, for if everyone acted like you, racism wouldn't exist. But while not being racist yourself, you still actively benefit from white privilege and are, therefore, allowing racism to continue.

Personally, I feel the above definition of racism is problematic outside of any context, but not entirely without merit. On the other hand, I very much understand the resistance people who are not inherently racist feel when being labeled racist for not actively fighting to stop racism in others.
 
KirkDuyt said:
I think the fact that not actively combating racism can be viewed as racist is a bit hard to accept. Because, by not being racist yourself, you would seem like part of the solution, for if everyone acted like you, racism wouldn't exist. But while not being racist yourself, you still actively benefit from white privilege and are, therefore, allowing racism to continue.

Personally, I feel the above definition of racism is problematic outside of any context, but not entirely without merit. On the other hand, I very much understand the resistance people who are not inherently racist feel when being labeled racist for not actively fighting to stop racism in others.
Click to expand...

You might want to read that sentence again. "Not inherently" doesn't mean that they are not racist, it means that it doesn't define them. Now if you meant "not racist" then these people are definitely an issue and I would question their not racist label because if you witness racist acts and does nothing then you are knowingly enabling racism which is a weird thing to do.
 
KirkDuyt said:
I think the fact that not actively combating racism can be viewed as racist is a bit hard to accept. Because, by not being racist yourself, you would seem like part of the solution, for if everyone acted like you, racism wouldn't exist. ... I very much understand the resistance people who are not inherently racist feel when being labeled racist for not actively fighting to stop racism in others.
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from but the problem is that "if everyone acted like you" the effects of racism will never be addressed (e.g. the fact that housing policy has historically concentrated black people in inner city areas and defunded the nearby schools). Which then means that many of those black folk have different accents and are less well educated, which maintains the kind of stereotypes such as "lazy blacks" that began this thread.

If you look at my post above, and @villain's, and even that extract from MLK's letter, nobody said that people who aren't racist are racist. The comment is that if you do nothing, or worse if you tut-tut the people who are trying to do something, then you are complicit with the system. That's a different thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.