If the list prefers, I will direct any future comments on this topic
to the
individual/s involved.
> Carol said:
> > Racism, after all, is an attitude; it is not in
> > the ear of the beholder.
>
> Liza said:
> That is incorrect.
>
> If you call me:
>
> "You Black *&%**^!!!!"
>
> Then I don't care what you THINK your intentions are
Are you saying that someone can have intentions of which they are
unaware?
You've got to be kidding.
> - your words are racist.
> Racism is, in fact, "in the ear of the beholder."
You may have an arguable point in some cases, but because your example
is so
extreme, it certainly isn't one of those cases. It is ridiculously
unlikely
that anyone could say "You Black *&%^!!!" without having any intention
or
expectation of offending anyone! :D So let's look instead at an
example
that's useful.
What if someone were to say, "Generally, Blacks are better athletes
than
Whites"? Depending on one's definitions of the terms involved, this
could
be true, false, or untestable. Whichever way, someone could easily
get
offended. Some people might just look at it as a statistics problem
and
think no more of it, but people of any color might get offended
because it
isn't politically correct today to even make such statments, no matter
what
you base them on. Whites might be offended because it makes them look
genetically inferior. Blacks might be offended because some people
equate
better athletic ability with being more animal-like. Those who are
neither
Black nor White might get offended because they feel their group has
been
ignored! The possibilities are almost endless. So this statement
could be
(at the least) non-racist and non-PC, non-racist and PC, racist
against
Whites, or racist against Blacks, depending on the listener. If you
believe
that response is the determiner of racism, the speaker of that
statement is
a non-racist racist! :D
So... To be a racist according to your definition, do I have to offend
a
certain percentage of a population, or is a single individual enough?
How
do you deal with differences of opinion within a racial community?
Some
Blacks are offended by Malcom X. Others are not. Some Whites are
offended
by Malcom X. Others are not. Is he a racist or not?
> The attitude you've expressed above is itself racist, in its ignorance.
I disagree. Racism, in a nutshell, is the belief that races are
intrinsically better or worse than other races (assuming that the
concept of
race is valid to start with). The racist usually, but not
necessarily,
believes that the superior race is his or her own race. If I think
that one
race is better than another, I'm a racist. Doesn't matter whether I'm
black, white, purple or green. It doesn't matter whether I have power
or
not. It doesn't matter whether my knowledge of the subject at hand is
encyclopedic or non-existent. It doesn't matter which way the winds
of
public opinion are blowing.
While I would agree that racists are usually ignorant people, it does
not
follow that all ignorance is a sign of racism.
> You said:
> > To say that someone who does not hold racist
> > beliefs is a racist just because their words have offended someone...
>
> Ah! Look what bubbles up when the pot is stirred!
That phrase worked perfectly well with the rest of its sentence. What
was
your point in chopping it up like that? And what are you so pleased
about?
> You may THINK that you "do not hold racist beliefs." But if you
> offend someone with your words - if you make racist statements -
> then you do, indeed, hold racist beliefs - that you yourself aren't
> even aware of!
I can see how that *can* happen, but your sweeping generalizations and
black
& white thinking do nothing to further your position. It's in those
grey
areas where the tough questions lie and where real thinking has to be
done,
Liza. Life isn't as one-dimensional as you seem to want it to be.
You have probably offended scores of people in your day. Does this
mean
you're a racist? By your definition, we're probably ALL racists,
making the
term useless.
Carol
|
