Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why is race such a taboo subject?

page: 22
1
<< 19  20  21   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
HH, My intent is neither to patronize nor argue.
I apologize if I 'sound' that way. I certainly am not interested in either. I swear there is no intended 'tone' to my communications here. I thoroughly enjoy this discussion and wouldn't do anything to compromise it. I am honestly looking for an exchange of information, opinions, views, ideas, nothing more. Please don't take my frankness as anything else.

The reason I posted more information was to keep a conversation about racism going by further exploring a different aspect of the discussion. I presented information and asked questions about it. I think you'll see there was nothing accusitory in my post at all. Just questions.
I was trying for a fresh start... to see where people stand on the aspect of racism against whites.

I've had enough arguing. I really meant that.


Good. I'm glad. If you noticed, I mentioned the perceived tone, but I tried to answer with as little attitude as possible which, if you knew me personally, you would know is very difficult for me. I'm a Taurus... a typical, textbook Taurus.


So what do you think about the rest of what I said? I'm enjoying our conversation too.




posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
If you noticed, I mentioned the perceived tone,


I don't find where you said a "perceived" tone. You said, "The patronizing tone of your response..." Regardless, I wasn't feeling patronizing when I wrote it. It would be nice if you and I could just extract the issues between ceci, riley and I and assume that each other has good intentions.




So what do you think about the rest of what I said?


I think that is how you see things. Some I agree with, some I don't, some I'm curious about. Like this:


Originally posted by HarlemHottie
Because we know the exact numbers, we can agree that racism is a societal problem exacted against all races.


I wasn't aware that we know the exact numbers... I'm a little confused by this... Sounds like you have some sources I don't?


To be absolutely honest, I'm very concerned about our discussion turning into another argument and I won't let that happen, even if it means stepping out. I don't wish to change your opinions on anything or argue my views about racism. I think it's pretty clear we have (at least slightly) different opinions.

I keep referring back to the title of this thread. Why is racism such a taboo subject? I now have a pretty good idea of why people have a hard time discussing it civilly, without sarcasm, accusations, 'tones' and anger. It's a sensitive subject, especially for people who have suffered it a lot.

It's like me discussing rape. I don't have much sympathy when people start talking about the poor men who are falsely accused of rape. How it ruins their lives. Boo-Hoo. Because of my biased position, it's hard for me to acknowledge that men are not only sometimes the victims of rape (by women and other men) but that they are sometimes falsely accused and hurt by the accusation.

But I manage (grudgingly) to see that side of it. AND I don't want to concentrate on it because that's a vast minority of the cases.

So, I think I can see where you're coming from. It seems to me (and I could be wrong) that when black people talk about 'racism', they basically mean white racism against non-white people. And so I find myself (a white girl) in the defensive position. I find myself saying, "Let's look at the overall picture." And I have felt resistance to that since like page 1 or 2 of this thread.

I fully acknowledge white racism. I have acknowledged that I was raised in a racist environment and still have some prejudicial tendencies I'd like to shake. But having read my posts, you know I 'fight' for the victims of racism, prejudice and discrimination, for whatever reason. In this thread, specifically about racism, I wanted to explore all facets of it. But time after time, it is indicated to me that racism against white people is either 'classism', doesn't exist (because racism requires power), is from invalid sources, or in some other way mis-labeled or questionable.

And that's ok. I don't wish to argue the point.


For now, I don't really have any questions or points I wish to make. So, I'd actually like to see what some others have to say (if anyone else is still checking in.
)



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I don't find where you said a "perceived" tone.

I was emphasizing that I perceived a tone that wasn't there. I wasn't trying to change what I initially said.



You said, "The patronizing tone of your response..." Regardless, I wasn't feeling patronizing when I wrote it. It would be nice if you and I could just extract the issues between ceci, riley and I and assume that each other has good intentions.


Since you explained that I was 'hearing' stuff that wasn't actually there, I got what you meant. I'm sorry if it seemed like I was still arguing. In my mind, we're just friends having a spirited debate.



Originally posted by HarlemHottie
Because we know the exact numbers, we can agree that racism is a societal problem exacted against all races.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I wasn't aware that we know the exact numbers... I'm a little confused by this... Sounds like you have some sources I don't?


Well, the statistics from the FBI are a very good start on 'the numbers' of anti-white racism. I asked for background, and you gave it. You've convinced me! In my response, I was trying to make the point that it was those numbers that made me see it as a societal problem, instead of one really crappy thing that happened to Riley.



To be absolutely honest, I'm very concerned about our discussion turning into another argument and I won't let that happen, even if it means stepping out.

It won't happen. It seems like the both of us, and correct me if I'm wrong, are reading additional meanings into what each other said, if that made sense. You know what I mean. And don't step out.




Why is racism such a taboo subject? I now have a pretty good idea of why people have a hard time discussing it civilly, without sarcasm, accusations, 'tones' and anger. It's a sensitive subject, especially for people who have suffered it a lot.

I agree with what you said about the sensitivity of the subject, but I would also posit that the medium, a discussion board, leaves a lot open to interpretation unless you just abuse the emoticons.




It's like me discussing rape. I don't have much sympathy when people start talking about the poor men who are falsely accused of rape. How it ruins their lives. Boo-Hoo. Because of my biased position, it's hard for me to acknowledge that men are not only sometimes the victims of rape (by women and other men) but that they are sometimes falsely accused and hurt by the accusation.

But I manage (grudgingly) to see that side of it.

Yep, you hit it right on the nose.



And I have felt resistance to that since like page 1 or 2 of this thread.

Incidentally, I wasn't as heavily involved in the thread at that point as I am now, but I see what you're saying.



I fully acknowledge white racism. I have acknowledged that I was raised in a racist environment and still have some prejudicial tendencies I'd like to shake. But having read my posts, you know I 'fight' for the victims of racism, prejudice and discrimination, for whatever reason.

Let me say this now, because I'm now seeing that I never stated my position. I started out not prejudiced at all. My mom went out of her way to expose me to whites, since there weren't that many in our neighborhood when I was growing up in the 80's. As a child who read a lot, I found out about all the stuff that had happened to my people in this country before I was born and thought, with a sigh of relief, Whew! Thank God I missed that. When my mom explained to me that her father had been run out of his small Southern hometown, where our ancestors had been enslaved, for standing up for himself against a white man, I felt relief that they had relocated to NY.

No one ever called me the N-word, but I have been referred to as a 'colored gal,' which I found offensive, but more ignorant than racist. I explained to the person who said it that we're no longer 'colored,' and she was appropriately embarrased, and we got over it. Over time, I've personally been affected by institutional racism, and that's why I've made that my focus in this thread. I'm not prejudiced against white people individually, at all. Of course, white people are just people, with the same concerns and issues as everybpdy else. What I don't like is the way they act in groups, for example, lynch mobs, the NYPD, and the US government. (I don't like the way other people act in groups either, but I didn't really think that was pertinent to our conversation.) My prejudice shows itself when I'm immediately suspicious of those groups.

I'm sure that someone will take offense to what I said, but it's my opinion, and I thought that honesty would be more useful here than tact.



In this thread, specifically about racism, I wanted to explore all facets of it. But time after time, it is indicated to me that racism against white people is either 'classism', doesn't exist, is from invalid sources, or in some other way mis-labeled or questionable.

Some of the stuff you bring up here was said by Ceci, so I'll let her defend herself, but I'll address my classism remark and the whole invalid sources thing. The reason I mentionned classism was because, in all of my conversations about race with black people, what tends to come up the most is that white people are rich, to which I respond, not true, since I've personally known poor white people. But, the assumption remains that, since white business owners are more likely to 'give a chance' to a fellow white person, they have more opportunities to improve their economic status. In fact, I'm sure that a majority of the wealth in this country is controlled by whites, and so, just a theory here, as a criminal of any color, wouldn't you rob the person with the most likelihood of having something worth stealing? That's why I said what I said. Also, the stats of the website you provided left out the percentage of white-on-white crime, so I can't say with say with any certainty if the white criminals in those years robbed/beat/etc other white people, as a result of classism.

About the initial sources, yes, they were invalid because they were biased. I wouldn't give you a link to a Black Power website to try to make a point in this discussion.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
What I don't like is the way they act in groups, for example, lynch mobs, the NYPD, and the US government. (I don't like the way other people act in groups either, but I didn't really think that was pertinent to our conversation.) My prejudice shows itself when I'm immediately suspicious of those groups.


Thanks for sharing some history and some of your experiences and beliefs.


This paragraph reminded me of something. On my first date with my now husband, I wanted to get any crap out of the way so we exchanged some ideas and ideals that we considered important. Deal breakers, if you will. No need to waste time dating someone I couldn't live with. I had 3. One, I smoke (I did at the time). Two, I have cats. If you can't live with these conditions, we might as well say our goodbyes now. Three. I will not be with someone who is prejudiced. He hesitated on that one... Then he told me, "I am prejudiced against people in suits." That, I decided I could live with!




I'm sure that someone will take offense to what I said, but it's my opinion, and I thought that honesty would be more useful here than tact.


I SO appreciate your honesty!
Thank you.



most is that white people are rich,


I really wish that were true!
(I know you countered that, I just thought it was funny.)



But, the assumption remains that, since white business owners are more likely to 'give a chance' to a fellow white person, they have more opportunities to improve their economic status.


I certainly hope it's not as cut and dried as that. I mean, I hope white business men wouldn't give someone a chance based on their color, but you may be right. I have that same judgment about black people. They would help out a fellow black person, given the opportunity. I don't think it's right either way, but you're probably right that it happens. It's sad.



In fact, I'm sure that a majority of the wealth in this country is controlled by whites,


The majority of wealth in this country is controlled by about 5% of the people, but yes, most of them are white.



The richest 10 percent of families own about 85 percent of all outstanding stocks. They own about 85 percent of all financial securities, 90 percent of all business assets. These financial assets and business equity are even more concentrated than total wealth.
...
MM: What happens when you disaggregate the data by race?
Wolff: There you find something very striking. Most people are aware that African-American families don’t earn as much as white families. The average African-American family has about 60 percent of the income as the average white family. But the disparity of wealth is a lot greater. The average African-American family has only 18 percent of the wealth of the average white family.


Wealth and Income Inequality



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Let's face it. Talking about racism is a very interesting business. And since, I have been able to take some space from the thread awhile and get a breather, I have the most appreciation for the people who continue to discuss these issues while I was gone. One of things I also learned from taking time from this discussion is that race-relations are complex, connected with life-experience and rather bitter at times.

But from this bitterness comes the realization that good can come from having conversations like these. It takes care, compassion and committment to keep these talks going without walking away. And yes, it is frustrating at times when you are trying to get your point across to others, but the beauty of sharing experiences about race is that everyone can go away feeling changed at one point of time.

However, in my forays into other threads, I've also discovered that racism means different things to different people. It doesn't lessen the experience of racism. And it doesn't make the said person a racist. But of course, there are some people who think that one act brands someone a racist. And there are others who are willing give others the benefit of the doubt to see whether a specific person changes or not.

There are people who exist that don't want to open up about race because they are afraid. There are also people who talk about race all the time and aren't bothered by it. In a relevant way, it can either win you friends or enemies depending on what position you take. Not everyone will be moved by discussions of race and racism. In fact, there are people who don't want to readjust their positions on race because that's all they know and what they live by. But for those who can be reached, conversations like these can help especially when seeing how society, culture and politics play with the notion of race.

For myself, I have taken very hard stands that even shock me at times. But, for the sake of honesty, I rather have done it because it gets people talking and seeing other sides than having a singular view of race-relations. In taking those positions, sometimes you get a lot of abuse by people who don't really want to understand your point of view. But the hope is that people are wise and at least considerate enough to see both sides of the issue and then contribute their views.

That is the most important thing when engaging others in disucssions about race. Personality has nothing to do with it. Information and education does. Tenacity plays a close third. And when people discuss these different aspects of race here, the hope is that they could at least come away with something new to think about when they deal with others in the "real world". The ultimate yearning is that when talking about different issues regarding race-relations and racism, that each one of us become more compassionate and understanding of others despite the fact that the conversation about race on these threads become contentious and rather acidic at times.

The bigger goal here is to learn from the contributions of different cultures and ask questions of them rather than using stereotypes. That common courtesy can go a long way toward building bonds with others. And it would even be more beneficial if we could talk about race with care and politeness rather than anger.

If just one person would treat another with empathy and understanding, then I know I would have done my job helping people to get along.

So, it's not the time to be bitter. It's the time to be proactive and continue to ask questions of one another to reach another plateau of understanding.

[edit on 5-7-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 11:21 AM
link   


posted by danigirl1974

That doesn't clarify why (1) Native Americans are the only group required to provide such documentation. That's great that the employers get a break for hiring Native Americans. Is that not true for (2) every other minority? if you are fighting for equal rights, fight for everyone. Not one group because it affects you personally. In that stance, you are fighting (3) racism with racism. [Edited by Don W]



Where do you think all the gambling casinos and cigarette sales on Indian reservations came from? Treaties, to answer my own question. Treaties made from 1607 onward, with the Indiana tribes and which the US choose to regard as “foreign” nations. “Foreign” in their own land!? Is that arrogance or is it not?

(1) The US only has treaties with the NA.
(2) The 14th Amendment - national citizenship defined - the bane of Republicans - is the primary resource for others.
(3) I do not see this - legal preference to NAs - to be any form of racism.

Other Minorities.
I am unaware of any Africans migrating to the United States on their own before 1865. America “acquired” many people of Hispanic ethnicity - primarily Mexicans - in the annexation of Texas in 1845. Aside: Texas was the only state to come into the Union via a treaty and not under US Con. Article 4.

The conquest of northern Mexico began in 1846 to running to 1849. The US took California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and part of Colorado. All Mexican nationals living in those states who did not vacate in 1 year were granted US citizenship - like it or not. The grant of citizenship was not motivated by generosity, but was part of a devious plan to take their property in local courts.

If the Mexicans had been citizens of a foreign nation, the Federal courts would have had jurisdiction. By making them American citizens, they were subjected to kangaroo courts in the states. Do you see why Mexicans and others laugh at our protestations of innocence and claims for good intentions?


[edit on 7/7/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Despite the cantankerous nature that the "race-relations" thread has taken, I still hold on to my principles.

1)Defining who is racist is much more complex than the simple naming of names.

2)People can talk about this issue if a multi-lateral view is taken.

3)Respect is not defined by one culture, race or ethnicity. Nor, should it be.

4)And basically, there is a hope that everyone can see past the problems and look at the possibilities.

5)One race, ethnicity or culture cannot define how race is discussed because it affects all of us.

There are many questions that I still would like to ask. And when the time comes, maybe they will be answered by earnest and serene people who will build a bridge towards understanding. At this point, it is time to get back to the business at hand: creating a true dialogue between people of different races that will precipitate change.


[edit on 6-10-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Frankly, I didn't know race was a taboo subject. Sometimes, I think we focus on it too much. Some people seem to talk only about race. Some people seem to make everything into a racial issue.


I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. --Martin Luther King, Jr.

www.usconstitution.net...



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 06:27 PM
link   
And some people ignore race and pretend it doesn't exist.

Isn't it nice that this is a board that can entertain different views conveyed by our members?

However, there are people who talk about race all the time. They are in Ethnic, Cultural, American, Anthropological and Race-related studies. I wonder what those who complain about "talking too much about race" has to say to those who make their livelihoods in such fields of study?

[edit on 7-10-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
The reason talking about race is taboo, is that it suits lots of people to be that way. Without it the vast quantities of money wasted by being sent to Africa which has solved no problems, could be talked about: people get paid for raising money. Also the idea of racial quotas could be talked about too: is it fair for a disabled person to not take presidence over a coloured person: is race really a disadvantage?

No it suits people just fine to stop people rationally discussing things without being called racist.



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Racial quotas in the UK are really black quotas. I agree with the idea that all races are equal and therefore they should compete equally. The idea of these EU imposed racial quotas is corrupt. There are many policy institutes( normally called think tanks) that push for greater advantage if you are black for no good reason other than that is what they do. Why must we all suffer under the continual stupidity of racial quotas. Am I a bad person because I want a GP who got there through talent alone? I do not mind the race of my GP or surgeon: but I do want one who succeeded because of talent alone. I do not want a person on the board of a company to make the numbers up, or a person on a television show because there isn't enough black people on that show: I want actors and presenters there because of talent.

These racial quotas are a race to the bottom. With people further up who wouldn't be there normally, they will cause worse standards further down: people look up to those further up for as an example. A teacher of lecturer who was hired because of racial quotas would do irreprible damage. The unfortunate thing is, they probably already have. They become the start of a cycle of lessening standards, a race to the bottom.

edit on 14-10-2013 by werewolf99 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 19  20  21   >>

log in

join