»
Discussion
»
Philosophy 101
»
By the mere word race, do we worsen the problem?
| Philosophy 101 |
|
By the mere word race, do we worsen the problem? |
|
PoetryIsLife 
since 2001-10-27
Posts 1763...in my boxers... 
|
 I was pondering recently, and a thought came to me... by merely having the word race, don't we worsen the problem of racism? Should we not even HAVE the race, thus, the differences in the COLOR of our skin wouldn't even come to our attention? What am I trying to say.... *thinks* It seems to me that by merely even noticing differences in color of skin, merely another physical characteristic, we further the being of racism. We may not be racist, but the only way for it to disapear is for it be nonexistent in our minds. ~ Titus "My body is merely the canvas of my soul." |
||
| © Copyright 2002 Daniel Redding - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
I agree with you almost completely. Racism, since it is a concept, can't be eliminated by simply telling people not to do it. Either way, people will practice the belief if it exists to be practiced. If you keep bringing it up, more people will see it as a choice of action, and therefore more people will practice it even if told not to. So the only way to abolish racism is to destroy it as a concept, and halt any use of the term race, or any reference to past events of racism. While this is almost impossible to do, eventually it might be a possibility. It's all similar to one of the concepts discussed in George Orwell's "1984": If people lack a word for something, they lack the ability to conciously experience it. All images begin in mirrors and end inside our subconsious. |
||
|
PoetryIsLife
since 2001-10-27
Posts 1763...in my boxers... |
"So the only way to abolish racism is to destroy it as a concept, and halt any use of the term race, or any reference to past events of racism. While this is almost impossible to do, eventually it might be a possibility." Exactly. ~ Titus  "My body is merely the canvas of my soul." |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
Discrimination isn't limited to racism, guys. You ready to get rid of gender, too?  |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Uh, are you sure you're not confusing two very different theories of language. 1. Language represents reality. 2. Language determines the way we see reality. The two really can't mix. Why do you want to change what we see anyway? Don't deny difference, celebrate it. Don't make race disappear, explode it into an infinite gradation. |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
quote: How can you celebrate something, without glorifying it? And how can you glorify something without placing it above others? Once we say that we have a right to "celebrate" our difference in race, as trivial as race may be, we inevitably are saying that race does make a difference. Which, in turn, promotes racism itself. Celebration of your race isn't much better than racism itself. It's just the other side of the race-makes-me-different-somehow coin. Sure, race and culture are often linked, but they are not the same thing. Now, I admit there is logic behind celebration of cultures. And yes, I also admit that there is logic behind discrimination against cultures, as well, because cultures are lifestyles that have factors we can consider in deciding our view of a people. Race and culture are different. Celebrate culture all you want, but don't celebrate race unless you like to promote racism. [This message has been edited by Allan Riverwood (03-23-2002 12:45 AM).] |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
Ron: There's more logic to sexism than there is to racism. I personally don't agree with any sexist notions myself, but males and females are both culturally and biologically very different. Sexism strikes me as stupid, but gender is something that has a significant effect on a person's development and personality. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
Ever seen a turtle, Allan? Can YOU tell the gender of one just by looking? If an alien landed on Earth, are you sure "it" could tell men from women? The truth is, on a larger scale, there is virtually no difference between male and female humans. The only reason you think otherwise is because you happen to have a few hormones that magnify those small differences in your mind. I think you're missing the point, Allan, the same point Brad and I were both making in very different ways. If you can appreciate the minor differences that exist between men and women, you can just as well appreciate the minor differences between races. It is, after all, those differences that make life interesting! That does NOT mean glorifying one above the other. I like women. Doesn't mean I want to be a woman. |
||
|
PoetryIsLife
since 2001-10-27
Posts 1763...in my boxers... |
Well put Ron. But are not thsoe differences very different? Between races, it is merely skin. Between sexes, it is a whole lot more.... physicaly, yes, mental, yes, roles, yes. I could go on. Those differences have more of an impact on our lifes and require more care to deal with. And they create different things which pull us to them, male or female. Skin color does not. ~ Titus "My body is merely the canvas of my soul." |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
Ron... I do think that women and men should be treated equally in all respects. I stated that clearly. However, human men and women are extremely different, by biological and cultural means. I think you're downplaying it by saying there are only "minor" differences. If a black person and a white person were raised in the same environment, under normal and similar circumstances I'm willing to believe they'd turn out pretty much the same. The differences would be cultural, perhaps... the black person might act slightly differently based on media portrayals of black culture. There is a huge difference between men and women, compared to the difference between races. Go into an elementary school, for example, and I'm willing to bet the cliques are more based on gender than they are on race, correct? It's because we do have different biological and cultural values, Ron. Have you ever heard of estrogen and testosterone, Ron? It alters more than just our sexual drives, you know. And the cultural differences between men and women are present in pretty much all world cultures. The reason for the global magnitude of cultural difference between men and women is obviously that men and women coexist in all cultures worldwide, whereas people of different races don't necessarily coexist in all places. Since the beginning of the species, men and women have had different roles. It even exists in the animal kingdom, if you want to take your example of a turtle. Monitor their behavior, Ron. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the roles of the male and the female are much different, perhaps not visually (aren't visual differences what we're trying to devalue, anyways?), but definitely by behavior and role. Women and men are different, Ron. Far more different than blacks and whites are. They deserve to be treated equally, sure. But there is still reasonable cause for the belief that one gender is superior to the other. Because they are different. Whether one is better than the other depends on an individual's values. |
||
|
PoetryIsLife
since 2001-10-27
Posts 1763...in my boxers... |
Well... again, well put. *waits for responses* ~ Titus "My body is merely the canvas of my soul." |
||
Skyfire
since 2000-12-27
Posts 3381Riding |
Aw, Ron, why don't you wanna be a woman? Aside from all the mood swings and cravings for chocolate and chips.... Anyway, Ti, I... think that even if we didnt' use the word "race" there'd still be a large amount of racism. I mean, even if we used the word "culture" that would probably become a problem word as well. I don't know if I made any sense, but that's just my thought on this. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
I wouldn't want to be a woman, Skyfire, because I wouldn't want to have to put up with me. Allan, most of the differences you cite between men and women ARE cultural differences, not biological ones. The roles we play are shaped by society, not hormones. Except for reproduction functions, there is nothing one gender can do that the other gender can't do just as well. Again, the only reason you "perceive" greater differences is because that perception is built into your system. Do you recognize the same large degree of difference in dogs? But we're really getting off the original topic. My point was that we can NOT ignore gender, because it's very much a reflection of reality. Some people emphasize the differences and decide one is better than the other. Discrimination. Others emphasize the differences and decide both are better BECAUSE of the differences. One without the other would be boring. And, uh, short-lived. My point was that getting rid of the words centering on race wouldn't eliminate the differences, any more than getting rid of the words for brunette and blonde would eliminate differences in hair color. The differences exist. But it's not the differences that cause discrimination. It's our reaction to the differences. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
"aren't visual differences what we're trying to devalue, anyways?" I don't want to do this. I like visual differences. Getting rid of the concept of race doesn't fix the problem anyway. Japan still has the burakumin and Korea still has regionalism. Besides, isn't it important that genetic cluster groups (race) are important determinations for medical reasons (sickle cell anemia, the inability to metabolize alcohol, no immunity to small pox etc.). No, we don't want to get rid of race, we want to get rid of stupid connections. It's just as silly to say that blondes can't drive BECAUSE their blonde as it is to say that a person can be prime minister because he follows cricket BECAUSE he follows cricket. |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
Ron: Those differences are cultural, yes. Why is that so significant? They're still differences, very common differences, and are still logical reasons for someone to discriminate against a certain gender. Brad: We could still describe different races, we just wouldn't have the term "race" to distinguish them as groups of people. To use your example, we could do without the words "blonde" and "brunette." Instead we'd just have to say "people with blonde hair" and "people with brown hair." Don't you think that the presence of the word "people" is important here? If we think of them as people before we think of them by their difference, we'd be more likely to treat them as people, instead of as their difference. We would still know that races exist, we just wouldn't have terms that describe them so importantly. |
||
|
hush Senior Member
since 2001-05-27
Posts 1653Ohio, USA |
"It's all similar to one of the concepts discussed in George Orwell's "1984": If people lack a word for something, they lack the ability to conciously experience it." Hmmm. I see. So, are you saying that the government should seek to eliminate the word "race" from our vocabulary? That the governemnt should limit the horizons that we can think on? Hate to break this to you, but if you live in the U.S. (as many of us do) we live in a country that protects our right to free thought, free speech. I have the right to be racist if I so choose... in fact, our government still promotes it in some forms. My boyfriend signed up for the Marines recently, and his recruiting officer told him they have a video game where Arabs jump out of holes in the desert and you have to shoot them. This isn't just the attitude of an individual, but of an entire sect of a national service, our military. You want a government to limit your thought? You're actually promoting an Orwellian dystopia, or aspects thereof? That's comepletely ridiculous.... Besides, do you really think if we eliminated the word race, it would cahnge the differences we have? Would we stop teaching about the enslavement of the African-Americans, the Japanese internment camps, the smallpox that killed most of the Indians and the reservations that restrict the rest? It's impossible to stop racism, either as discrimination or pride in one's race (I don't really see the problem with being proud of one's race anyway... it doesn't necessarily mean you think your better than another race. I am proud to be a woman, but I don't think I'm any better than men.) Besides the "people with (insert color)(insert feature)" idea is really just one of semantics. Are we going to say "people who believe in Christ" instead of Christians? "People who voted for G.W." instead of republicans? (LOL, I think the former in that case has more negative connotations that the latter!) I mean, it's simply a drawn out way of saying exactly the same thing. "Love is a piano |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
quote: I agree completely. But look at it this way... If this were utilized, as it already is with many features (eyes for example), we wouldn't be able to say something such as "I am a blonde" or "she is a blonde." Instead, you would say "I have blonde hair," or "she has blonde hair." It becomes a statement about a person, instead of a classification. Think it'd be easy to discriminate against people who have specific characteristics, if we don't normally categorize them as such? When was the last time you saw discrimination by eye colour? In your everyday life, I mean. It doesn't happen often. Maybe in World War II, but seriously... it doesn't happen all that often in everyday life. Oh and, your example of "Christian" being replaced with "people who believe in Christ" is invalid... I'm only discussing physical differences in people. Discrimination by religion actually has a lot of rationality behind it. Belief system is a characteristic of a person that is profoundly descriptive of them. Assuming everyone has a general idea of what their religion means, there's nothing wrong with condemning a person because of their belief system. Any fundamentalist will tell you that God does it all the time.  |
||
|
Poet deVine
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-26
Posts 22612Hurricane Alley |
I was raised in a very small town during the 50's and 60's. There were exactly three black families in this town. I went to school with those kids. Hung out with them, danced with them at school dances. Went to parties with them, even had 'sleep overs' with them. To me, they were just people of a different 'hue'. What if for the next few generations, we intermarried? What if a thousand years from now, there was only one 'hue'....maybe a dark golden tan color? How boring! I don't think you can eliminate racism until you eliminate prejudice - ALL prejudice. We should not judge any man/woman/child on ANY part of them - intelligence, sex, color, religion. And Allen, this quote: quote: I hope you don't believe that. |
||
|
Krawdad Member Elite
since 2001-01-03
Posts 2597 |
Do we really all want to be the same? Let's not forget the bigger picture, the evolutionary function in this. When all races have blended into one, the evolution of the human will have, in large part, ceased. With no isolation of groups of organisms apart from the whole, the changes that might occur, good or bad, are unlikely to succeed. The small genetic changes that are the basis of a species' future would be swamped. In this sense, races are indeed different (diverse, if you will) and it would appear, necessary. |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
quote: With the way communications are working nowadays, world cultures are becoming progressively more similar to one another. Do we really need any more biological growth? Do you think one race will grow wings, and the others will grow gills, or something? Humanity thrives on its intelligence. The only things that remain to evolve, and actually serve some applicable purpose, are either our minds or our technology. Humanity looks pretty good as it is, and last time I checked, differences within cultures outweighed differences between cultures. |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
PDV: As I said above, it all depends on someone's values. Because males and females differ, whatever traits you consider to be deciding traits in "superiority" are what will decide which gender you favour, if you favour one over the other. If I believed that physical strength alone makes one superior, I'd conclude that males are superior to females. If I believed that high empathy levels alone make one superior, I'd conclude that females are superior to males. Again, as I said above, I don't personally agree that one gender is superior. You're taking my statement the wrong way, obviously... I didn't say that sexism is logical. I merely said that sexism is capable of having logical basis. [This message has been edited by Allan Riverwood (03-23-2002 11:34 AM).] |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
PoetryIsLife said, "Between races, it is merely skin. - That statement is mired in naivity. |
||
|
Poet deVine
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-26
Posts 22612Hurricane Alley |
Allen, I bet I can show you a few men whose physical strength is not equal to some women's! But collectively, why should one sex be considered superior? Why should ANYONE be considered superior for any reason? Why do we generalize? A race of people or a whole gender? There are exceptions to every argument anyone makes here... |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
Opeth Instead of making simple observations, why not justify them as well? You'll sound a lot more credible, and a lot less like a peanut gallery. Discuss your own points a little, instead of just taking shots at someone's naivety. |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
quote: How often do you read my name without being able to spell it right? Anyways, the fact remains that men are genetically predisposed to be stronger than women. It requires less work for a man to become stronger, and on average, men are physically stronger than women. It's built into our biological composure. Men have an entire chromosome in difference from women, and it's not all reproductive, by any means. [This message has been edited by Allan Riverwood (03-23-2002 12:32 PM).] |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
Allan stated, "Instead of making simple observations, why not justify them as well? You'll sound a lot more credible, and a lot less like a peanut gallery." - To justify my observation, I would have to expound on a subject matter that may not be suitable for this audience. Therefore, I will stay in the "peanut gallery" and merely observe, not interact, from a distance. |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
I'm interested in what you have to say. If it wouldn't be too much trouble, could you send me a brief email? |
||
|
Poet deVine
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-26
Posts 22612Hurricane Alley |
Allan (got it right this time!!) Why do men need to be strong? To clear the forests? To slay the foes in battle? To build the castles? Nope! They don't need to anymore. A woman can clear a forest. Slay foes in battle. Build a castle. The genetic need for man to be strong is gone. The only men who NEED to be strong are the ones who WANT to be...those icky body builder types who oil and shave their bodies. We have evolved out of the 'strong man' race and into the 'equality' race. [This message has been edited by Poet deVine (03-23-2002 01:37 PM).] |
||
|
PoetryIsLife
since 2001-10-27
Posts 1763...in my boxers... |
PoetryIsLife said, "Between races, it is merely skin. - That statement is mired in naivity. You merely take what I said the wrong way. And I too would appreciate it if you didn't attack my opinion without backing it up. I appreciate being told when I am wrong, but not in such a way. In that statement, I'm saying SKIN has no matter. It's what is in our minds that makes us different. The differences between whites, blacks, mexicans, europeans are merely differences of cultures, not of race. To think them because of race is incomplete. In our mind, we created differences in races. If we merely saw it as differences in cultures, I feel we would be better of. People then would join people for who they are, not merely for their skin. Skin to me, is pointless. Am I white? Am I black? DOES it matter? No. ~ Titus "My body is merely the canvas of my soul." ~ The Night Owl [This message has been edited by PoetryIsLife (03-23-2002 01:44 PM).] |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
PDV - I agree that the NEED for a man to be strong is no longer present culturally. However, it's just not the case biologically... men are still stronger. We haven't evolved physically past that point just yet. |
||
|
Krawdad Member Elite
since 2001-01-03
Posts 2597 |
Allan, you said: "Do you think one race will grow wings, and the others will grow gills, or something?" This is an uneducated cheap shot, Allan. I'm embarrassed for you. Clearly, you are not equipped to enter into this argument. When you know something elementary about evolution, we'll talk, ok? |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
Kraw, I was being half-serious. Lighten up. |
||
|
Phaedrus Member
since 2002-01-26
Posts 180 |
Ron said: “Ever seen a turtle, Allan? Can YOU tell the gender of one just by looking?” The answer if I was asked would be no, but the real question should be can turtles tell the difference, they obviously can otherwise the turtle as a species wouldn’t have been around as long as it has. Do turtles differentiate and place other turtles into pigeonholes (or turtle holes ) categorising each in order of their superiority? If the answer is yes here’s another question, are turtles racist?Differences are important, eliminating the words that describe them have no effect on the differences themselves or peoples perceptions of those differences. One way of eliminating the word race from general usage would be, as has already been suggested, to eliminate the differences and render the word redundant. In a world filled with ‘dark golden tan coloured humans’ segregation based on eye colour might not be that rare, we judge things every second of our lives and make decisions on those judgements. Without big differences to deal with we just get better at picking out the minor ones, after all turtles do it, right? On another note I don’t think growing gills or wings is out of the question if evolutionary theory is correct, growing both in two separate races is even possible though growing both at the same time probably wouldn’t happen. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Allan said: "If we think of them as people before we think of them by their difference, we'd be more likely to treat them as people, instead of as their difference." But it doesn't seem that you've seen the point that Ron and I have been making. It's not the difference, it's the reaction to difference. The assumption in this statement and others is that if we were all the same, if we ignored the differences, we would get along better. I think this is mistaken. And given the two homogenous countries I've lived in its not what I've seen. We should see difference as a strength, not an obstacle. Titus privileges the mind over physical traits but under certain conditions that makes no sense. I may have a higher IQ than Kobe Bryant, but that's not gonna help me on the court, is it? What both of you are still assuming is that you can separate the physical from the mental instead of seeing this dichotomy as an abstraction of what is one person. Would Kobe Bryant be a poorer basketball player if he were white? The question makes no sense because his skin color did shape his being, his identity. He was forced into certain paths and not others and skin color was a factor. The mistake is then to assume that all black men can then play basketball like Kobe Bryant. The mistake is that Kobe Bryant can only play basketball -- that he's not good for anything else. Those are stupid connections. As has already been shown, this works with gender differences as well. Skin color is not trivial. Is it the sole determining factor in the complexity of personality and ability? No, but it is a factor because people will react to you differently forcing you to react to them differently and so on and so forth. The mistake is not the physical versus the mental but to assume that there's one factor that is or should be the determining factor in how we deal with other people. It's like saying something even more abstract like physical beauty (not all that abstract actually, it seems intricately intertwined with symmetry) shouldn't be a determining factor in certain businesses. Of course it should. If you don't, somebody else will because beauty is an effective tool to get what you want. It works. In other businesses, activities, hobbies, it may not be relevant. Does that mean beauty should be devalued? No, it means it's a factor in certain situations, not in others, and that's how we should see it. Sharon brought up the idea of superiority, but somebody is always superior to someone else at a certain time and in a certain place. We don't, couldn't, shouldn't drop this idea of superiority. It's not in our personal self-interest -- if you haven't noticed, I like basketball and I'm a Lakers fan. I don't want to see those amazing things done on the court devalued because it's merely physical. --------------------------- Promised myself I wouldn't write a book today but I've got a lot more to say here. Let me try the bullet point approach: --all traits will be privileged under certain conditions at certain times and that includes skin color. --That's not a bad thing. --The mistake is to drop 'at certain times and at certain places' from the idea of superiority. --When making the assessment of superiority we have two options, neither of which involves dropping the idea of superiority: 1. We judge using our assumptions. 2. We change our assumptions and try to look at things from a different perspective. --When we attempt to limit thought, you don't create a better society, you limit the ability to see diversity. This is not enlightening, it is impovershing. --Embrace difference: skin color, beauty, the physical, the mental, sexual difference, cultural difference, religious difference. --To go in the other direction, to believe that seeing difference is somehow wrong, that we should make the attempt to abolish it, will only turn us into a Vonnegut short story. Brad |
||
|
Allan Riverwood
since 2001-01-04
Posts 3502Winnipeg |
Brad, I agree with most of what you're saying. Let me clarify something: When I said that you should think of the person before the difference, I didn't mean you should disregard the difference at all. People are different, and we'll always know that. But the idea behind anti-racism is that everyone should be treated equally until they prove that they should be treated with more or less privelege than others. Think of the person before the difference, sure. I mean see them equally at first (free of prejudice), and after you have done that, regard their differences. Clearer now? And I know the point that you have been making, it's the response to differences, not the differences themselves. Well, what I've been discussing is the response to differences. I agree that one's life is affected by race, and therefore it shapes many aspects. However, any trait that was rooted to the person's skin colour can be observed without actually observing the race itself. Perhaps he's a good basketball player because he's black, and played basketball with his friends who were also black, because it is a game that is linked to his particular race socially. But you could see just how good he is at basketball before seeing that he is black. There might be distinct differences in people because of their races. I admit that much. But all of these differences, if they are at all important, can be seen independent of a person's race. Of course I don't mean we should ignore race. Someone mentioned sickle cell anemia and its connection to racial difference. Race is therefore a significant factor in diagnosing someone with sickle cell anemia, isn't it? Race can be (and sometimes, should be) observed. But it should be primarily observed for precisely what it is - the colour of the skin. Other traits, as they vary in individuals, deserve to be found out and not simply assumed by skin colour. Don't say Kobe Bryant is a good basketball player because he's black -- say that because you've seen him play, and he's a good basketball player. Simple as that. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Now I think we're getting somewhere. Don't deny that Kobe's black (one factor), don't deny that he's a good basketball player (one factor), but there's more to Kobe Bryant than either of these things. If you ever meet him, look for that 'more' or if that seems too strong, at least be open to that 'more'. |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
Mankind originated in Africa. |
||
|
PoetryIsLife
since 2001-10-27
Posts 1763...in my boxers... |
I remember it being more in the middle east.... *ponders* ~ Titus "My body is merely the canvas of my soul." |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
No, it was Africa. But what does that have to do with this thread? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
I read the rant in the Teen version and Allan's and Titus' 'preach it' comments. Two points strike me as interesting: She might have a point if the quality of education were brought up, but it wasn't. It's her ability to be a cheerleader, her inability to choose whatever school for whatever reason that infuriates her. But she further undermines that position by arguing, not that she should have the same rights as a black person, but that they shouldn't be allowed to do things she isn't? This didn't strike you as odd? There are a number of issues that could have been brought up but I think that rant shows more that minority status and the attempt to give minority rights in a majority rules society is always controversial. Oh, one more point, the most qualified person for any particular position rarely has to worry about a quota system. They'll get the job, it's those that are only slightly more 'qualified' that have to worry. Brad |
||
|
hush Senior Member
since 2001-05-27
Posts 1653Ohio, USA |
Okay, people keep saying that if we put emphasis on cultural differences rather than skin color, all would be fine. This really isn't a valid idea. I really don't think it's color so much that seperates us- it's the culture. however, most races of people have culutural ideosyncracies particular to their race, certain stereotypes and mannerisms. Accents/speech patterns are a big one. I can clearly remember a time my mother and I went to eat at the mall and I practically had to translate for her what the black girls serving us were saying. It's not that she's racist- it's simply that she isn't exposed to African-American speech patterns that much. There are also certain religious and idealogical patterns- a great deal of the mexican people I know have been Catholics. (More likely than not related to the religious issue, most Mexicans I have met are comepletely homophobic.) Speaking of homosexuals, they have a certain notoriety for promiscuity. (does homosexuality count as a physical difference? It certainly is a cultural one.) What I have noticed is people lumping together in cultural cliques as opposed to those based purely on race. Why does Eminem work with so many black people? Because rap is a primarily African-American cultural trend. On the same token, why are all of Hootie's Blowfish white? Because rock and roll tends to be rooted more in white culture. Anybody can be a part of any social group as long as the social qualifications exist. "Love is a piano |
||
|
Tim Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794 |
most mexicans I have met are completely homophobic??? |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Allan, It seems like to me that what you are proposing is to somehow do away with the terminology of racism ... and assuming that such terminology includes the word "race" or any terms identifying people by their biological traits. First of all I don't necessarily think that any of these terms foster racism, any more than the differences themselves foster racism. I agree with Brad on this one, that it is the attitudes, the way of thinking, the deep-rooted problems of humanity (like pride, fear, selfishness, jealousy, envy, suspicion, etc...) which are the causes of racism. Eliminating words for one would be impossible. Practically, I ask, how would you, or anyone accomplish this? By not using them yourself I suppose, and hoping it would "catch". But what is the guarantee that it would catch, especially seeing there is so much racism? It would not work for me, because I think there is a legitimate usage for the word "race". And I, like Brad, think differences are a thing to be celebrated. Yes this is a problem if we only celebrate our differences, but what if we learned to celebrate the differences of others? What if we learned to admire things we don't possess. God created the human race and all of it's branches to have much diversity, all needed! And if you say it is the governments who are to do this, can or should government squelch the use of certain words? To do so would be a "Big Brother" scenario. The only other way is to make the word, by political means, "politically incorrect". And can we change racism with mere politics? I have serious doubts. Take a look at the uneducated to see that racism doesn't have to have a terminology. If it doesn't, then words are created. "Nigger, Chink, Honkey, Wetback, etc...". See what I mean? You are wanting to treat the disease of racism, by eliminating a symptom manifest in our linguistics. I just don't think that will work. Apart from that, not everyone (even those who are not racist), believes that words like race, ethnic group, culture, are symptomatic at all. The words above that I quoted certainly are, but there is a difference in my opinion. To want racism gone, is a noble desire. And I am with you there. I just don't think that solution will do anything. But give it a try! Stephen. |
||
|
hush Senior Member
since 2001-05-27
Posts 1653Ohio, USA |
Tim- maybe that sounded bad. I never said all Mexicans were homophobic- but because many Mexican people are Catholics, I can only infer that the two go hand-in-hand. A lot of strongly religious people are very homophobic, but I haven't personally noticed as strong an inclination towards one particular religion in other races- maybe statistically there is, but it isn't one that I've noticed. My point was that people make judgement calls based on culture, rather than skin color. I mean, if many Mexicans are Catholics and many Catholics are revolted by homosexuals, that's an observation made on culture that happens to coincide with the skin color of the people in question. And because of my experience that many Mexicans are Catholic and many Catholics hate/fear/whatever gays, that leads to my mind automatically jumping to conculsions about both Catholics and Mexicans. We all do this sort of thing, whether we mean to or not; if our minds observe a pattern long enough, we begin to expect the stereotype from the people who fit it. If it's a behavior we don't like or find ourselves uncomfortable with, we become apprehensive, and perhaps judgemental. Eliminating the word race will do nothing to change this- there will still be cultural stereotpyes about religion, lifestyle, speech patterns, etc., many of which are common to a particular race. I really think that in order to overcome the problem of racism, we need to at the very least respect different cultures; ideally, we should celebrate them. So really, it's not color that seperates us- it's culture. "Love is a piano |
||
|
PoetryIsLife
since 2001-10-27
Posts 1763...in my boxers... |
It would seem that it comes down to one thing: If you have race and culture, which go hand in hand, you leave yourself open to racism. It's a matter of people being bigots and mentally regressed. If you eliminate the word race, or not merely the word, but the seeing of race and anything more then hair color, or the size of a nose, you eliminate what many people find their identity in. In different races, tehre are different culutre. As the world becomes more and more of a melting pot, there is less of that.... but as was pointed out, rap is usually black, and rock usually white, etc etc. Is this a form of racism? Or merely attributes of certain races/cultures? We were all created differently. We need to celebrate differences. But putting a level of worth on race is perhaps what is wrong. It is merely a part of a person as much as musical preferences or food likings are. No? "But she further undermines that position by arguing, not that she should have the same rights as a black person, but that they shouldn't be allowed to do things she isn't?" I think she was getting at the fact people shouldn't be given more of a chance at anything merely because of their color of skin. Better chance at a job because they are minority, or more of a chance at succeding at rap merely because they are black. It should be on talent alone. You could add in the sexual type, sexual preferences, dress, et all. People should be accepted for who they are, nothing more. Sorry if I rambled. I'm not as talented at organizing my ramblines as you all.  ~ Titus "My body is merely the canvas of my soul." |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Titus, There are Koreans living in America today who don't eat kimchi because it makes them smell. Food preferences, like everything else you've said, do matter. More to say but no time, Brad |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Ha, I knew Stephan and I would find something to agree on someday. But he also makes a point that I tried to make earlier much clearer. When we make decisions, we make judgements -- no way around them. When we make judgements, we either use the assumptions we already have or we change those assumptions. What assumptions are present in a color blind society? 1. Quality, objectively defined, is the single factor that matters. 2. Quality is easily recognizable by all people regardless of color. If they don't, they have an agenda (Isn't that funny, don't we all have an agenda?). Attempting to put either of these assumptions in most every day scenarios and I think they both fall apart. So, instead why don't we change our assumptions, and think about living and learning from each other, why not start judging ourselves, asking ourselves what is really wrong with someone living a different life than I do? How does it effect me? Is that okay? These aren't rhetorical questions, they need to be asked and answered. In other words, make it personal. Brad |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Hey Brad, I don't always disagree with you.... I just don't always tell you I don't.  Stephen. |
||
|
PoetryIsLife
since 2001-10-27
Posts 1763...in my boxers... |
Brad, I belive mankind originated in Africa, near the Tigris and Euphrates (sp?). I was curious what sources you have for your opinion. For mine, I use the Bible, which, for most, even if you don't agree with it on some things, is seen as an accurate historical text. Off the subject. Carry on.  Brad, just curious if you could email me. ~ Titus "My body is merely the canvas of my soul." |
||
|
Opeth Senior Member
since 2001-12-13
Posts 1543The Ravines |
As mankind evolved, he began to journey to the colder and other types of climates other than Africa's. At that point in time the physical differences between races began. |
||
|
hush Senior Member
since 2001-05-27
Posts 1653Ohio, USA |
'It's a matter of people being bigots and mentally regressed.' No it's not. For regression to occur, progression needs to take place first. I would agree that in the grand scheme of things, much progression in racial equality has occured. But what about progression on the individual basis? I would imagine that once a person progresses beyond a certain opinion based on racial stereotypes, they don't seem very apt to change their opinion back again. ("Aw, I was right to begin with, black people are bad...") I also don't think it's a matter of bigorty in most cases. People just tend to identify more with people who have similar interests, which is often a racial/cultural thing. Another point to be made is that (at least in the city where I live) there are still very strong ethnic divisions among neighborhoods. In Toledo, there are areas that are mainly black, Mexican, Hungarian, and Polish. This tendency causes city-wide segregation. You know, until I went to Jr. High, I had never been in a school with more than three black people in it? And all of a sudden, here I am in a completely integrated school (which is questionable to begin with- I'd be more inclined to say that both my Jr. high and High School have been racially mixed without a great deal of actual integration) and all I can think is "why do all these black girls think theycan just cut in front of us white girls and get away with it?" But you can bet I never sai a word, becaause white girls who confronted black girls with that sort of think got beaten up. It happened. It was completely racial... so what can you expect a terrified white girl to think? Was I supposed to appreciate black culture with this kind of thing going on all the time? Now, this kind of thing still happens to seniors in high School. I don't stand for it anymore, because I don't see black girls and insurmountable, or somehow fundamentally unlike me. And now that I am completely aware that they are completely human, and that I can communicate with them properly, I don't think if a black girl cuts in front of me in line or tries to start a fight with me, it's going to change my opinion. However, turning away from things like this will only make things worse- we need to recognize that this happens, and we need to discuss why. Why is always us vs. them? Why is there the prevailing sense among whites that blacks will take advantage of them with rude elbows, big mouths, and flailing fists whenever possible? What influenced me so strongly that I fell under this belief for years, too? These aren't easy questions, but racism isn't an easy issue. Every aspect of the situation needs to be looked at to even attempt to get anywhere. "Love is a piano |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
"However, turning away from things like this will only make things worse- we need to recognize that this happens, and we need to discuss why. Why is always us vs. them? Why is there the prevailing sense among whites that blacks will take advantage of them with rude elbows, big mouths, and flailing fists whenever possible? What influenced me so strongly that I fell under this belief for years, too?" --Good questions. My own experience shows just the opposite of 'rude elbows, big mouths, and flailing fists'. --I suspect the answer (no surpise here) lies more in people wanting to be right and wanting to have the right than in trying to live together. |
||
|
Phaedrus Member
since 2002-01-26
Posts 180 |
“Quality, objectively defined” Given the name that I’ve chosen to post under in this incarnation I can’t avoid asking the obvious: Brad, please define quality. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
