Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

How can we expose more people to critical thinking?
User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 78054
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:22 pm

Yes, I am suggesting that particular number is very like a minstrel show.
I know nothing of his oeuvre in general.

Ever read Dewey "Pig meat" Markham's autobiography?

African American vaudevillians used to "black up" for certain acts same as white performers. To be all the same shade and to go with the wig and white gloves etc that were all part of that look.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
The arc of the moral universe bends towards chaos.
People who believe God or History are on their side provide the chaos.

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 23067
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by gnome » Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:52 am

Abdul Alhazred wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:37 am
gnome wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:28 am
Believe it or not, a large number of people debating politics are actually trying to promote their opinion by honest means.
Not if they use the expression "institutional racism".
I am explaining how an honest person can get into this kind of argument.
An honest person who argues with a post modernist is a sucker.

What you call "honest argument" is against their religion.
I use the term, am I being insincere?

By insisting that my argument would be made only by someone with ill intentions, you are poisoning the well instead of responding.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 23067
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by gnome » Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:55 am

ed wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:03 am
gnome wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:37 am


The other meaning, and the one most likely to be referred to by the left these days, can be called "institutional" racism. This refers to systems of oppression in our society that have racial impact--it pertains to how power is used, rather than the nature of people's opinions, so it can be deliberate or implicit. Because it is intended to mean an abuse of power, that is why lots of people on the left bristle at the term "reverse racism"--because someone with little power isn't able to oppress a demographic even if they are personally prejudiced.

OK, I understand.

The problem is is that this is a racist stance from the gitgo. That power is somehow magically wielded in such a way as to only impact race or that race is differentially effected is a silly contention and one that is simply a lie invented to advance an agenda.

A far more compelling argument would take into account the economic factors that are, today, far far far more relevant than race, or gender for that matter.

The left's objective is to simply punish white men. They can wrap words around it and redefine things but that, at it's core, is what they want. They want white men to suffer for the sins of their fathers.
Bolding mine. "Only" impacting race is not part of the argument. There are simultaneous impacts affecting many demographics--it is a specific case of a larger phenomenon of institutional power harming marginalized groups--which is the whole point of these groups allying instead of each waging their own battle.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 78054
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Thu Sep 06, 2018 9:00 am

gnome wrote:
Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:52 am
I use the term, am I being insincere?
You are being insanely naive.

It is a term invented for the purpose of confusing the issue and making reasoned discussion impossible.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
The arc of the moral universe bends towards chaos.
People who believe God or History are on their side provide the chaos.

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 23067
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by gnome » Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:42 am

When was the term invented, by your reckoning? And I described a perfectly useful definition, so nice try.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 78054
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Thu Sep 06, 2018 2:52 pm

gnome wrote:
Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:42 am
When was the term invented, by your reckoning? And I described a perfectly useful definition, so nice try.
A definition which may be useful if everyone agrees to it.

Good luck with that.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
The arc of the moral universe bends towards chaos.
People who believe God or History are on their side provide the chaos.

User avatar
sparks
Posts: 15570
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by sparks » Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:08 pm

Give up gnome. You've already lost the argument.
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 23067
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by gnome » Sat Sep 08, 2018 6:41 am

Lost at a fallacy-flinging contest, perhaps.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2

User avatar
xouper
Posts: 9473
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: has left the building

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by xouper » Sat Sep 08, 2018 7:41 am

gnome wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:37 am
. . . There is a semantic problem here but it's explainable.

The term "racism" is being used to refer to two different things. Perhaps the more commonly used meaning is what I'll call "personal" racism. This is what most people think of when the term comes up--as it's done by individual choice. Someone decides to discriminate, someone thinks an ethnic minority is genetically inferior, someone thinks their race should be legally privileged, or that someone else's shouldn't be trusted most of the time. This can absolutely go against or for any race at all.

The other meaning, and the one most likely to be referred to by the left these days, can be called "institutional" racism. This refers to systems of oppression in our society that have racial impact--it pertains to how power is used, rather than the nature of people's opinions, so it can be deliberate or implicit. Because it is intended to mean an abuse of power, that is why lots of people on the left bristle at the term "reverse racism"--because someone with little power isn't able to oppress a demographic even if they are personally prejudiced.

There's lots to argue about in the boundaries and significance of either term. But before you can get anywhere you do need to make sure you're talking about the same thing, and I see this over and over again. The common practice on the left lately is for default meaning to be "institutional" when they mention it. I've often argued that's a mistake, as most people are thinking of the personal meaning when they hear the term, so when they hear that "blacks can't be racist against whites," they think someone's denying their observation of a black person that was prejudiced--it contributes to the idea of the reality-denying leftist. What is really meant is that blacks don't have the political power in our society to successfully oppress whites as a group. Maybe that's so and maybe it isn't, but if people don't realize that's what you mean, you're not getting anywhere with a slogan like that.

Rather than try to carve out a specialized version and make it the default meaning, how hard is it to add the term "institutional" when talking about it? I think it would get more real conversations going and less defensive hostility.
Here's my understanding:

If a social institution results in disparate outcomes of certain demographics (whether explicitly or implicitly, intentional or unintentional, exclusively or only partly) on the basis of race, then that is "institutional racism". But when a social institution results in disparate outcomes (whether explicitly or implicitly, etc) on the basis of other factors and not the result of race, then that is not racism, by definition.

More specifically, the mere fact that a certain demographic group finds itself at a systemic disadvantage does not automatically imply that the social system that put them there (or keeps them there) is racist. It is only racist if race is (or was) part of the motivation for that outcome.

It is not reasonable to stretch the definition of institutional racism to include social institutions where race is not why the outcome is what it is.

Many of the examples of so-called "institutional racism" are not based on race and thus are not racist, even if the outcome affects one race more than another.

Meritocracy is one example of non-race based discrimination, and thus it is not racist, by definition, because it specifically does not use race as a criteria for choosing (neither explicitly or implicitly). And this is true even though sometimes it may seem that some races (or ethnic groups) experience a less favorable outcome.

Example: Are the NFL or NHL to be considered racist because the percentage of black players does not represent the population at large? Of course not. Their use of meritocracy in those leagues is not racist.

And this concept is not just my personal opinion. See for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism wrote:Institutional racism was defined by Sir William Macpherson in the 1999 Lawrence report (UK) as: "The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people."[4][5]
In other words, if race is not part of the motivation or decision-making process (explicitly or implicitly), then it is not racism, whether by an individual or an "institution".

On this basis, I reject the label "institutional racism" being applied merely because the outcome seems to affect certain races or ethnic groups more than others. If that outcome is not because of race (whether in whole or in part), then it is not racist. Power is not relevant.

This is why I say meritocracy is not racist and why I reject the claim by professor Laurie Rubel (of Brooklyn College City University of New York) that meritocracy is racist.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 78054
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:51 am

gnome wrote:
Sat Sep 08, 2018 6:41 am
Lost at a fallacy-flinging contest, perhaps.
You cannot ignore the history of post modernism.

The whole point was always to prevent meaningful discussion.

"Institutional racism"? That's the trope you use to accuse people who want to cut taxes of genocide.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
The arc of the moral universe bends towards chaos.
People who believe God or History are on their side provide the chaos.

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 25390
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Anaxagoras » Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:29 pm

Image

Someone says this is offensive. Can you guess why?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latime ... utType=amp
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 78054
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:44 pm

Looks to much like this guy, of course.

Image

What else could it be? :BigGrin3:
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
The arc of the moral universe bends towards chaos.
People who believe God or History are on their side provide the chaos.

User avatar
ed
Posts: 36199
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: The Hero of Sukhbataar

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by ed » Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:51 pm

"Someone"
Who is this "someone"? Will they stand up and debate their contention? If not then they are dismissable.

Incidentially, Ican find offence in anything, it is my gift.

That picture:
1. employs moorish (Islamic) architecture yet juxtaposes an unveiled woman over it. Deeply offensive.
2. Shows a human likeness. Deeply offensive to a number of cultures
3. Suggests a "rising sun" motif which is cultural appropriation
4. Uses the colors of the Florida Gators which is theft
5. Uses the team colors of Florida International University which is elitist
6. Uses colors which mocks and minimizes those with color perception challanges
7. Is visual which mocks the unsighted
8. Shows an idealized caucasian nose which is antisemitic, islamophobic and pisses off Danny Thomas

I could go on.
My services are available for a small fee.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 21190
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Rob Lister » Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:55 pm

Or just the monkey.

User avatar
ed
Posts: 36199
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: The Hero of Sukhbataar

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by ed » Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:08 pm

The monkey certainly but more than that the fact that he is giving the Heil Hitler salute.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 25390
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Anaxagoras » Mon Mar 18, 2019 3:11 pm

Abdul Alhazred wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:44 pm
Looks to much like this guy, of course.


What else could it be? :BigGrin3:
:x Hey, my wife and kids are Japanese!! :x :x

But, yeah.
The debate over a school mural in Koreatown has pitted community members who called the work racist against anti-censorship artists and free-speech advocates. Now a new and surprising voice has entered the fray: A coalition of artists, curators and local museum staffers advocating for the mural to be removed or substantially altered.
The mural by Beau Stanton at the Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools complex depicts the face of Ava Gardner, who frequented the Cocoanut Grove nightclub that once stood on the Wilshire Boulevard site. But the orange-red and blue rays fanned out around her face, critics said, evoke the World War II-era imperial Japanese battle flag. The imagery is offensive to some Koreans and Korean Americans who live or work nearby, critics have said.
The Los Angeles Unified School District agreed in early December to erase the mural. The school district then reversed its position after fierce pushback from artists, arts advocates and others, such as the National Coalition Against Censorship, citing the importance of freedom of speech, particularly on a school campus named for the champion of social justice who was murdered at the site in 1968. LAUSD officials said they would explore potential solutions, but no action has been taken.
Now a group of art-world professionals organized under the name Gyopo (loosely meaning Korean diaspora) is resurrecting the issue and calling for the mural to be removed or substantially altered. Gyopo has sent a letter to LAUSD Superintendent Roberto Martinez and board President Monica Garcia imploring that they take fast action and adding that silence from the school board has been troubling. The artwork, Gyopo said, distresses locals and triggers memories of atrocities committed against Koreans and others by Japanese forces during the war.
Last edited by Anaxagoras on Mon Mar 18, 2019 3:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 78054
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Mon Mar 18, 2019 3:18 pm

I will now confess that I clicked your link before I posted.

Don't tell ed. ;)
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
The arc of the moral universe bends towards chaos.
People who believe God or History are on their side provide the chaos.

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 25390
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Anaxagoras » Mon Mar 18, 2019 3:33 pm

Cheater! Figamagee rescinded!!
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 71309
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Doctor X » Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:43 pm

I saw it immediately, but then I am awakened to the need to feel deeply offended.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." --gnome

ImageWS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! ImageNBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup!Image SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!! Image

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 23136
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Witness » Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:13 pm

↑↑↑ Kitsch, especially well-meaning kitsch, is always offensive. (To Humanity, of course.)