What can we do to address race-relations and solve racism?

I know this isn't really what we were talking about, but I thought it was interesting so I'll bring it up.

I was watching the new season of America's Next Top Model (I love that show!) and there were several things that came up that were relevant to this discussion. In the first episode, we got to meet the new girls competing.

One of the girls who was black came in and talked about how she never felt pretty because she was the darkest one in her family. Her siblings made fun of her and called her 'Blackula'. Another girl, whose family was from India, came in wearing blue contact lenses. When Tyra asked her why, she said it was because girls with dark hair and eyes aren't as attractive. At some point, Tyra also made the comment that she was still trying to fit in and wished she had the guts to walk around in an afro.

Then, in the photo shoot, they did model stereotypes. One of them was 'Turning the black girl into a white girl'.

Is this kind of attitude common? Do thousands of little black girls all over the US feel like they aren't pretty because they are 'too dark'?

If so, that's just horrible.

[edit on 22-9-2006 by Duzey]

Ceci,

If you want to have a thread or a forum in which you discuss the toils, hardships and debasement of Blacks in America, then please do so. I have no problem and I am sure that others do not either. I would even jump in on occasion.

What you have here is that you represented this as a forum for ALL Races, "Race Relations;" without being specific about one race over another.

You have defended the Black race on here and when anyone brought up discrimination in regards to other Races, ie, "Reverse Racism" "Irish Racism" Jewish Racism"; you accused them of "Not Answering the Tough Questions, or Avoiding Issues."

You refused to accept that prejudice knows no racial boundaries. In so doing, this thread at times degraded into one of the most blatant race hate discussions only mildly hidden in innuendo and hyperbole.

That was confusing. I thought that this was about Race, not one specific Race. There are many instances of "Man gone Mad" in the world. Not the least of which is the way that Blacks were treated in our past and, yes, even in the present.
That does not however, eliminate the suffering that other races have received in the past and again, yes in the present.

How can we ever think to solve or understand racism, unless we examine every race and the human proclivity to subjugate their fellow man based on skin color, or religion or ethnicity?

All I am suggesting is that if you want to discuss only White on Black Racism, then you should possibly consider starting a thread that has a more clear title.

Racism is NOT exclusive to anyone. This thread is a clear example that EVERY color of Human can be racist.

Semper

On crime:

I in no way meant to imply that crimes can be justified by poverty or by one's skin color. The question was why is there so much "black on black" crime. From what I have seen the crimes done by these black folk are money crimes. There are plenty of reasons to do crime but we were talking about a specific kind of crime.

So far as "rising above it". That's nearly impossible. If you go down for a drug crime--say you are caught with a dub (twenty dollars worth of crack)--that is automatic federal time because of mandatory drug sentencing laws. You are charged as an adult, which means you aren't seen as a juvenile and your records can't be sealed. Plus, you do your time in big boy jail. Two to four years on average. When these guys come out grown men and they can't get a job or federal student aid, that is why many of them go back to crime. It's just the easiest why to make a living. That's not a justification, it's just the reality. Unless they find Jesus or Muhammad while in the pen, its more than likely they'll go back to crime just to survive. Lately, there have been more and more of these guys hitting the streets of Indy and we have seen a huge crime wave over the summer because of these throw-aways.

Crime is crime. It is totally unacceptable. I'm a firm believer in if you do the crime you do the time. I really don't care why you did it.

If you go down for a drug crime--say you are caught with a dub (twenty dollars worth of crack)--that is automatic federal time because of mandatory drug sentencing laws. You are charged as an adult, which means you aren't seen as a juvenile and your records can't be sealed. Plus, you do your time in big boy jail.

I have worked in 3 different states, and that is not true in any of them.

There are specific crimes for which the officer is required to charge on a federal level. However short of "Trafficking" , drug charges are not among them. Trafficking requires more "weight" than 20 dollars worth in every state I can find and the ones I have worked Narcotics in. ( a lot more)

The juvenile laws, and whether you are charged as a Juvi or not, are very clear cut and only allow the Judge a small amount of "leaway" in the charging document.

As a rule NO child shy of 16 will ever be charged as an adult for any drug charge; again short of trafficking.

The laws on Juvi's is pretty clear. Most states require a Class A charge to lower the age standard. ie, Homicide, Rape etc.

Some people are criminals, whether it be black on black or green on purple.

Semper

Originally posted by jsobecky
Absolutely true, BH. Many are puzzled because of the actions of HH and Saphronia. I have asked straight out why they do this, and have received no response.

This thread was never intended to solve or improve race relations, from the very beginning where HH and ceci attacked GradyPhilpott. It's degenerated into a forum of denial that they can do or say anything wrong. It's disgusting.

This, friends, is an stunning example of what keeps us off-track here. Racism is an emotional subject. There will be times when ideological differences become personal differences.

Let the parties involved work it out on their own.

This entire post could have been sent by U2U. It was not necessary that the poster involve himself in the fray, except in an attempt to get us back on-topic.

And, jso, you're lying. I did not "attack" Grady. I U2U'd him because I wanted to know if his comments were addressed to me. I also spoke with BH on U2U. In my short time here, even I know how to use that function. These off-topic issues did not need to be worked out in public. By aligning yourself with BH, in righteous indignation, you were obviously attempting to villify my character.

Not just deplorable on a personal level, but also dragging us ever further off-topic. And you have the nerve to disparage me.

It seems like whenever reparations comes up, the common response is, "I didn't do it." Since FF's views on reparations seem representative of the 'anti-reparations group,' even though he said he won't be returning to the thread, I thought the conclusion of our exchange could benefit the discussion.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
No one alive had anything to do with it. Nor did their parents. Nor their grandparents.

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
If we forget about anything that happened before about 1920... that still gives us 2,647 such murders committed by people who are still alive... each lynching, presumably, required at least two 'lynchers'...So, that gives us, at least, 5,294 murderers, still alive...These lynchings were very public events...they took pictures and distributed postcards.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I appreciate that 4-5000 people were lynched, but I didn't do it.

You dismiss a whole paragraph replete with sources and the numbers with just a sentence. Now your argument is that you didn't do it. If you change your argument everytime I refute a point, I don't believe that you're basing your opinion on the facts.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I shouldn't have to pay anyone anything...

Again, why is your opinion on how our tax dollars are spent more important than mine? I asked this question before and you never answered.


[That last bit was kind of a rhetorical question, since he said he's not coming back, but if anyone wants to answer it, or reply to the rest, feel free. That's why I posted it.]

Originally posted by semperfortis
Do you feel that reverse discrimination does NOT exist?

Absolutely not. I mean, I do believe that it does exist. Did I imply otherwise?

Are "People of color" the only group that does not discriminate?

No, we definitely discriminate, but I think the effects are different.

If you're white, and the check-out girl is rude to you because of your color (you think), you can feel comforted in the knowledge that, while it may have been unpleasant, it is not an everyday occurrence. For those of us dealing with discrimination on a regular basis, it haunts you. You cannot avoid it. The long-term psychological effects are much worse on 'our' end.

If there are other groups that discriminate, what is the criteria? Is it a personal action, or part of a group dynamic?

This is a specialized question and I wasn't trained in this field. I can only speak of what I know. I'm sure there are tons of studies about this, though.

How do you feel about the supposition that programs such as "Affirmative Action", [as a program designed and implemented to specifically assist one race of people,] are comparative to reparations?

I think that it's a ridiculous supposition. Affirmative action was implemented to force the 'Old Boys' to allow women and people of color into 'their' schools and businesses.

That does not begin to address the fact that this country has stood by watching, and sometimes helping, its former slave class flounder in unremitting poverty.

How do you stand on reparations for the other cultures and races that have experienced slavery and discrimination such as the Irish, the Chinese and Hispanics?

I believe that the US has a responsibility to all the people it has wronged, starting at the very beginning.

But, to which 'Hispanics' were you referring? I think we owe Mexico big-time although, as I understand it, the US did pay them for their land. I could be wrong, but if they did, the issue should be dead. As for the other 'Hispanics,' I believe that responsibility falls on Spain, but again, I'm not too familiar with their specific concerns.

Allow me to add some unsolicited thoughts on reverse discrimination. What bothers me about it is that people throw it in my face when I'm talking about plain ol' discrimination. The only time I ever hear about reverse discrimination is when someone brings up the regular kind. To me, that means that it's obviously not affecting people that much, otherwise they would bring it up without prodding.

Originally posted by HarlemHottie

Originally posted by jsobecky
Absolutely true, BH. Many are puzzled because of the actions of HH and Saphronia. I have asked straight out why they do this, and have received no response.

This thread was never intended to solve or improve race relations, from the very beginning where HH and ceci attacked GradyPhilpott. It's degenerated into a forum of denial that they can do or say anything wrong. It's disgusting.

This, friends, is an stunning example of what keeps us off-track here. Racism is an emotional subject. There will be times when ideological differences become personal differences.

Let the parties involved work it out on their own.

This entire post could have been sent by U2U. It was not necessary that the poster involve himself in the fray, except in an attempt to get us back on-topic.

And, jso, you're lying. I did not "attack" Grady. I U2U'd him because I wanted to know if his comments were addressed to me. I also spoke with BH on U2U. In my short time here, even I know how to use that function. These off-topic issues did not need to be worked out in public. By aligning yourself with BH, in righteous indignation, you were obviously attempting to villify my character.

Not just deplorable on a personal level, but also dragging us ever further off-topic. And you have the nerve to disparage me.

HH, you just provided a stunning example of what I said. You are quick to jump on whitey for everything that "offends you" here, yet you allow one of your own to talk trash all over this thread. Your reasons "why" are as shallow and hypocritical as you are. Just admit it - you're as racist as ceci is. And don't say she isn't - how many times do people have to point it out there?

And don't go down that cowardly road that other posters have. "I'm not your black "slap-down" chick". You're either afraid of ceci or racist just like her.

Edit: To remove personal attack. Please review.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by intrepid]

I also spoke with BH on U2U. In my short time here, even I know how to use that function.

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
It seems like whenever reparations comes up, the common response is, "I didn't do it." Since FF's views on reparations seem representative of the 'anti-reparations group,' even though he said he won't be returning to the thread, I thought the conclusion of our exchange could benefit the discussion.
:
[That last bit was kind of a rhetorical question, since he said he's not coming back, but if anyone wants to answer it, or reply to the rest, feel free. That's why I posted it.]

So you learned to use the u2u function. Now get ready for lesson 2: FF is a woman. She's only pointed it out several times.

Originally posted by jsobecky
You are quick to jump on whitey for everything that "offends you" here, yet you allow one of your own to talk trash all over this thread.

"Whitey?" "One of my own?" In a single sentence, you have proven yourself capable of more racism than I could muster.

Your reasons "why" are as shallow and hypocritical as you are. Just admit it - you're as racist as ceci is. And don't say she isn't - how many times do people have to point it out there?

1. shallow
2. hypocritical
3. racist

That's three personal attacks.

And don't go down that cowardly road that other posters have. "I'm not your black "slap-down" chick".

What does any of this mean? "Black 'slap-down' chick?" Where are you getting this?

You're either afraid of ceci or racist just like her.

Oh, so now you make your point clear: You want me to denounce Ceci. For what reason, exactly? To make you feel better?

Then, to make me feel better, I want you denounce the white men who, in 1998, dragged James Byrd down the street until he was a bloody frickin' pulp. Denounce that.

If I'm supposed to be responsible for Ceci's words because of her race, then you have to be responsible for the actions of white people.

Will you also be serving their jail time?

To give you a venue to be even more vile than you are here, out of the public eye?? Kiss my arse. Sunlight is the best antiseptic, and you're being sanitized. Deal with it.

4.vile

That's four personal attacks. What a waste of bandwidth.

Originally posted by jsobecky
So you learned to use the u2u function. Now get ready for lesson 2: FF is a woman. She's only pointed it out several times.

Now I know why we keep getting side-tracked!

Jso can't stay on topic.

Seriously, if all you're going to do here is stir up trouble between other people, no wonder we spend so much time arguing.

First, a definition:

Main Entry: rep·a·ra·tion
Pronunciation: "re-p&-'rA-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English reparacion, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin reparation-, reparatio, from Latin reparare
1 a : a repairing or keeping in repair b plural : REPAIRS
2 a : the act of making amends, offering expiation, or giving satisfaction for a wrong or injury b : something done or given as amends or satisfaction
3 : the payment of damages : INDEMNIFICATION; specifically : compensation in money or materials payable by a defeated nation for damages to or expenditures sustained by another nation as a result of hostilities with the defeated nation -- usually used in plural
Merriam-Webster on reparations

As we see here, reparations does not necessarily mean money.

I do not think financial reparations are appropriate for the issues being discussed here. My reasons have to do with the following questions:

- Which race receives it? Black people are an obvious choice, but as Semper pointed out, equally obvious choices abound.

- Which individuals of the recipient race(s) get it?

- How does an individual prove they are eligible? Fraud will be rampant if such a program is established.

-How much is enough?

On that last point. I've already stated that I consider that any apology given by the government at this point in time would be worthless. Insincere, and designed to manipulate, rather than truly atone for the wrongs. And I think a financial reparation would be the same. Manipulation.

Personally, as someone who like nearly everybody has been on the receiving end of bigotry (not always racial), I would consider it ample reparation if such bigotry just stopped. If we as a species could get over the fear and insecurity that are IMO the ultimate foundation of bigotry.

If all the issues listed above were solved, and the gov't forked over some impressive amount of money to all the wronged people and the culture did not change, what good has been done? I submit, more harm than good. People on the receiving end of bigotry would still be, their economic opportunities would be unchanged, etc. So after a while all the money is gone and now what? Back to square one, nothing has improved.

Conversely, if the culture woke up and put a stop to bigotry - which would take a while - then what need for a cash payment remains? If everyone truly did have the same opportunities, if the GOBC truly was a thing of the past, etc? Would a cash payment make any difference there?

So my opposition to a cash settlement is that it won't be effective. It will be just another nod to the almighty dollar that Americans seem to think will solve everything. A payment will be made and nothing substantive will have changed.

Which will do nobody any good.

edit: GOBC --> Good Ol' Boys Club


[edit on 23-9-2006 by Open_Minded Skeptic]

HH

If you're white, and the check-out girl is rude to you because of your color (you think), you can feel comforted in the knowledge that, while it may have been unpleasant, it is not an everyday occurrence. For those of us dealing with discrimination on a regular basis, it haunts you. You cannot avoid it. The long-term psychological effects are much worse on 'our' end.

Why would the effects of racism be any more profound because of skin color? Is that a cumulative effect? The darker you are the more your effected?
Are you saying that every time someone is rude to you, it is because you are Black, White, Hispanic, Asian? What if they are simply rude?

I spent 19 years working Uniformed Narcotics in a predominantly Black Area. Does that mean that for 19 years I "dealt with discrimination on a regular basis?" Or am I immune because I am white? Should I now expect "Long Term Psychological Effects?"

That does not begin to address the fact that this country has stood by watching, and sometimes helping, its former slave class flounder in unremitting poverty.

Are you accepting or denying the Irish in this illustration? Or the Chinese?

Allow me to add some unsolicited thoughts on reverse discrimination. What bothers me about it is that people throw it in my face when I'm talking about plain ol' discrimination. The only time I ever hear about reverse discrimination is when someone brings up the regular kind. To me, that means that it's obviously not affecting people that much, otherwise they would bring it up without prodding.

I used the term "Reverse Discrimination" to exemplify a point. What I would like to know now, is are you defining "Plain ol' discrimination" as white against black? Is it your contention that other forms are something other than Plain ol'?
You are still falling into the idea that discrimination was invented because of the African. Your words indicate an unwillingness to accept that EVERYONE has been discriminated against.

You bring up Byrd being dragged down the street in 1998, would you like to begin posting white on black crime against me posting black on white crime? We could do it all day and never once repeat, we also would not accomplish anything productive; other than to again illustrate that some crimes are racially motivated on the many sides of the race coin.

You say that reverse discrimination is only brought up under prodding. What prodding are you referring to? I'll take a leap here and assume that you mean- when you talk about what ever your referring to as "Plain ol' Racism, as white on black racism. Using that as the foundation, what would you expect people to do when accused of something that they consider you doing as well?
(example) If we are in a store, you steal a bracelet, I steal a watch. At the counter you tell the manager that I stole a watch. Would you expect me to be quite and not say you stole the bracelet?
If you call someone on racism and they think your being racist, they are going to call you on it.
If you are 100% free of any reverse racism, ie. black on whate, then why would it bother you? People on here accuse me of many things. It effects me not at all unless I know it to be true. Then I have to retreat, reevaluate and either reenter the conversation or apologize. (Something I have had to do with some posting here. HAHAHAHA)
If whites feel discriminated against by blacks, are we not allowed to speak up just because of something our forefathers did?

When is everyone going to understand that racism has NO COLOR BOUNDARY.
No one race has the patent on victimization.

Slavery and discrimination crosses all lines of race, creed, color and religion.

Does that mean we should all play the victim and ask for an appology, reparations or whatever else you want to call it?

Semper

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
Allow me to add some unsolicited thoughts on reverse discrimination.

Sorry but there is no such thing as 'reverse discrimination'.. it's just a racist term that allows peaple to dismiss the validity of it by also implying that, if white, the victim is the racist by default. I am not accepting that and will NOT tolerate the assertion that all whites a racist through it's use.

What bothers me about it is that people throw it in my face when I'm talking about plain ol' discrimination. The only time I ever hear about reverse discrimination is when someone brings up the regular kind.

'Plain ol'? 'the 'regular kind'? I'm really surprised that you would make such a distinction as though validity of discrimination only depends on the skin colour of the victim. When I've been attacked for being white [i've already recounted just one experience].. it now seems Ceci and youself think we have to qualify it.
Even when I first mentioned it I was asked if maybe I provoked it or remembered it wrong.

To me, that means that it's obviously not affecting people that much, otherwise they would bring it up without prodding.

It didn't take much prodding from me.. unless just answering the 'race tabboo' thread was prodding? Still have a chipped bone in my foot that plays up now and again from the guy who through a rock at me for being a 'white slut' [didn't mention that insult before as I didn't want to violate the rules but it seems they don't matter anyway]. Still remember being chased across paddocks near a railway station by a gang of [self proclaimed] vietnamese girls intending to beat the crap out of me for being white [I outran them]. Still remember spending my whole school life being teased, bullied and even mobbed at one point by italian and lebonese [mediteranian] girls for being a 'skip'.. [I'm not going to retell those expriences but DO NOT tell me that didn't affect me much. ] I'm sure an old friend of mine still remembers being pack raped by 'middle easterns' with various 'things' lieing on the ground [which rendered her infertile- she almost bled to death]. I believe she would've been one of the first of milatary style serial gang rapes which were specifically targetting 'aussie pigs'. It came out later that they would kidnap one.. then round up their friends via mobiles and they'd all drive to the 'rape site'.

I'm wondering, aside from death, race and time.. how is this any less of a 'show' than black lynching? Even the spectators have a go.

There are MANY such incidences that I and others could list to prove that this happens regulary but why the hell should we? Because we're white?! :shk: THIS is why some whites are reluctent to tell of their experiences.. you've already dismissed them as 'not affecting them much'.
You've even decided that if they don't immediately bring them up 'without prodding' that they weren't really a victim anyway?.. but hang on.. Ceci had already just claimed that the only reason we do bring it up is to 'change the subject' away from slavery and lynching [again inferring that we're racist]. Whih is it? Damned if we do damned if we don't but think thats the point. Maybe you should have let us know what context we are alloud to tell our own stories to prove your 'reverse discrimination'. Atm, seems like we have to jump through hoops just to prove that we aren't racist [just for being white].. let alone victims of it.

Regardless of your history and race.. you had NO RIGHT to belittle our own experiences of persecution by saying it 'doesn't affect us much'.

I believe the whole point of this discussion was to bash whites and then justify it by claiming their skin colour proves racist intent. ANYONE who honestly believes that they can morally convict someone of racism [or anything else for that matter] based on skin colour needs to have a long hard look at themselves and what they stand for. I'm done feeding this bs propoganda.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by riley]

WATS for Riley. There is no such thing as reverse descrimination, its only discrimination...period.

I'm a little confused by the comments that you guys have written so far. So I'm going to ask you some questions:

Originally quoted by ceci2006

1)What can we do to address race-relations?

2)How can racism be solved?

This is from the OP. What exactly is racist about these two questions? Where do you see an agenda to bash whites? To other people reading these two questions, they are simply two questions.

1)Racism affects all of us, some more than others.

2)We all need to learn about racism more. No one is left out of the picture.

7)This is more than recognizing racism. It is trying to find that middle ground for us to understand each other. If people don't want to seek that middle ground and focus too much on who has been hurt, then we will never get anywhere. As emotional as race is, this is still an intellectual exercise as of any other topic. And people, have to be willing to look past the petty issues and go forward to discuss these issues regardless. Talking about race is not about highlighting who is the most patient or kind. This is a situation that has delve deeply into unknown territory in which we can find out different things about each other. But if people are stuck on issues of control, then perhaps we will never get anywhere.

8)This is not a conversation that focuses on penalizing anyone. I've seen how this discussion went. And even, by going through the back pages, I am not upset by it as others are. I'm happy that people were brave enough to engage this conversation. When people took sides, things went awry.

These points I have brought up in a previous post explicitly state the goals of this thread. I would like to know where it bans reverse racism? Where does it promote an agenda against whites? Where does it reflect racism against whites? How do these statements belittle whites in any way?


I would like to know, because it is important to recognize where in the goals of the thread, whites feel as if they are left out of discussing their issues of racism when it has been the contrary all through the thread.

The funny point is, you all have been dominating the conversation with your own agenda that is built upon an utopian world in which your concerns and matters are only recognized while the rest of the concerns bent on other races are ignored. And when you agree with each other about "revisionist history", you don't even check the sources where this "revisionist history" comes from.

You just praise it.

All I can say is you need to look toward your own behavior before you start to cast stones.

What makes you think that your statements are not racist? Point out your methodology in terms of making the perfect "non-racist" statement. Please analyze your posts and explain to us why your posts are "exempt" from being racist.

Is it racist to have an opinion not agreeable to your agenda?

And a special note to jsobecky: before you start saying who is racist around here, I would most definitely suggest your own track record of racism against people of color. You are not free of sin. You are probably more racist than I am. And that's not based on your color. It's based on your actions.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by ceci2006]

Before I begin, Semper, let me ask you, why do I feel like we're arguing? You asked me some questions and I answered with my opinion. I understand that you disagree, but why so argumentative?

Originally posted by semperfortis
Why would the effects of racism be any more profound because of skin color? Is that a cumulative effect? The darker you are the more your effected?

Are you being funny? You know that isn't what I meant. I'm referring to the sheer numbers of 'racial encounters' that people of color experience in this country.

Are you saying that every time someone is rude to you, it is because you are Black, White, Hispanic, Asian? What if they are simply rude?

No, I am not saying that. Of course there are times when people are just rude.

Does that mean that for 19 years I "dealt with discrimination on a regular basis?" Or am I immune because I am white? Should I now expect "Long Term Psychological Effects?"

Again, are you being funny? How could I possibly know, from here?

You would have to see a qualified medical professional.

Are you accepting or denying the Irish in this illustration? Or the Chinese?

I wrote the following in response to a private message.

Do Irish-Americans feel that their past as slaves currently affects them?

I see reparations as the national equivalent of 'pain and suffering.' If you're not in pain or suffering, then no, I don't think you should 'get reparations,' although to me, this is just a hypothetical debate, bc I don't think the US will ever give the descendents of slaves a penny.

If, instead of giving me ethnic groups to choose from, you had given me an open-ended question, I would have told you, I believe Native Americans deserve twice the amount blacks deserve. Or, if we're talking current events, and I know you disagree, but I think our (collective, American) hands are pretty dirty in the Middle East situation.

I used the term "Reverse Discrimination" to exemplify a point.

Which was?

What I would like to know now, is are you defining "Plain ol' discrimination" as white against black?

Yes.

Is it your contention that other forms are something other than Plain ol'?

I can definitely tell you're a cop by the questioning, and I didn't mean that in a bad way. In trying to answer your question, I worked with the terms you provided. I was forced to make a distinction between what you referred to as 'reverse discrimination' and 'discrimination.'

You are still falling into the idea that discrimination was invented because of the African.

Whoa- I wasn't aware that I had ever said that in the first place, so I'm unclear as to how I could "still" feel that way. This thread is pretty long and I don't remember every word I typed. Would you mind providing a quote to back up this assertion?

Your words indicate an unwillingness to accept that EVERYONE has been discriminated against.

No, you asked me some questions and I answered them.

You bring up Byrd being dragged down the street in 1998...

And you completely missed the point. The only reason I brought up that terribly depraved and uncivilized moment in recent American history was to make the point that, if I have to take resposibility for Ceci's words, then I expect jso to take responsibility for their actions.

Did you even read the rest of what I said, or did you just pluck out Byrd's name to make a point?

What prodding are you referring to? I'll take a leap here and assume that you mean...

You don't need to. I was quite clear.

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
The only time I ever hear about reverse discrimination is when someone brings up the regular kind.

When is everyone going to understand that racism has NO COLOR BOUNDARY.

You seem to be chastising me for comments I never made. When you originally asked the question, I answered it.

Originally posted by semperfortis
Do you feel that reverse discrimination does NOT exist?

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
Absolutely not. I mean, I do believe that it does exist. Did I imply otherwise?

You never answered. Did I?

I have some questions for you.

Could you please provide me with some specific examples of what you termed 'reverse discrimination?'

You asked me a laundry list of questions, and I was happy to answer them. Now, are we going to debate, or are you going to continue to ask me questions and then twist my words?


[edit on 23-9-2006 by HarlemHottie]

Why is it that people completely ignore anything I say unless they want to tell me off? What is wrong with you(pl.)? Can we not just have a discussion?

I just had to get that out. I apologize for the outburst. Most of your comments, riley, were answered in my response to semper.

Originally posted by riley
Even when I first mentioned it I was asked if maybe I provoked it or remembered it wrong.

You were not asked those questions by me. If you are addressing someone else, do not use me as a proxy.

I'm sure an old friend of mine still remembers being pack raped by 'middle easterns' with various 'things' lieing on the ground [which rendered her infertile- she almost bled to death]. I believe she would've been one of the first of milatary style serial gang rapes which were specifically targetting 'aussie pigs'.

JESUS! I had no idea. If you notice, in my last post to semper, I did ask him to provide me with specific (American) examples. Thank you for sharing your friend's story with me. It will help me to understand how racism works in other places. That is disgusting, and just as bad as lynching... except for the small difference that lynching was state-sanctioned. [I'm not saying that to take away from the horror of what your friend and other women experiences. As a woman, I am personally disgusted, and don't take that as bs. I knew a black girl in college who was raped by white boys in a frat. If you knew me in RL, you would know I don't play that rape self-censored expletive, nevermind who or why] At least your friend and the other victims can rest easy knowing that the perpetrators will be punished, as they should be.

Also, I didn't know, or had forgotten, that you were in Australia. The conversation we were having here had kinda focussed on the US, and our race problems. I really don't know what goes on, 'on the ground,' in other countries, so I guess none of the information that I've gathered in my young life applies to you. That's okay. It doesn't cost anything to be wrong.

HH,
Not arguing, at least not intending to. I on occasion, insert some humor, Lord knows this has been stressful enough.

Are you being funny? You know that isn't what I meant. I'm referring to the sheer numbers of 'racial encounters' that people of color experience in this country.

And my contention is that NO ONE can know what the full extent is of racist behavior. White or Black. I have known Blacks personally that hated anyone Mexican, Whites that hate Blacks and Blacks that hate Whites. What are the numbers? Who hates who more, or more often? There is, to my knowledge no way of calculating a variable that is dependent so completely on outside influence. You are making a blanket statement based on personal observations and presenting it as a fact. White on Black racism is far and away the most touted, yes, but to confine one humanistic behavior to any one class of people creates formulation gaps in any empirical data that may be derived.

quote:
Does that mean that for 19 years I "dealt with discrimination on a regular basis?" Or am I immune because I am white? Should I now expect "Long Term Psychological Effects?"

Again, are you being funny?

Not at all, it is a simple fact. I worked and lived in an area where I was an outsider and had racism directed at me every day of my 19 years there. So according to your assertion, I must therefor be affected as well.

quote:
I used the term "Reverse Discrimination" to exemplify a point.

Which was?

It was a commonly used term on here. I used the term in reference to Black on White racism.

Whoa- I wasn't aware that I had ever said that in the first place, so I'm unclear as to how I could "still" feel that way. This thread is pretty long and I don't remember every word I typed. Would you mind providing a quote to back up this assertion?

Sure

As for 'recrimination,' the only recrimination going on around this topic applies to the whites who cry reverse-discrimination.

Indicating that reverse racism does not exist or at least should not be brought up as a point?

Actually, if the US gov't didn't have its hands so full after the Civil War, preventing petulant Southerners from committing wholesale murder, maybe they would have done it. Or, maybe, they didn't do it because, alas, blacks were still being discriminated against.

No Irish Discrimination?
It is a common thread here, that instead of discussing RACISM, we are discussing Black History.

And you completely missed the point. The only reason I brought up that terribly depraved and uncivilized moment in recent American history was to make the point that, if I have to take resposibility for Ceci's words, then I expect jso to take responsibility for their actions.

Did you even read the rest of what I said, or did you just pluck out Byrd's name to make a point?

No I read your post HH, several times as is my usual pattern. My comment is directed at the intense subject matter and EVERYONE'S propensity of inflaming and then not expecting to be inflamed. Specific instances or racial behavior can be quoted back to the Jewish enslavement by the Egyptians, how is this conducive to any conversation or the possibility of understanding.

You seem to be chastising me for comments I never made. When you originally asked the question, I answered it.

quote: Originally posted by HarlemHottie
The only time I ever hear about reverse discrimination is when someone brings up the regular kind.

Is this your comment? I assumed it was as it was in your post.

Could you please provide me with some specific examples of what you termed 'reverse discrimination?'

Sure thing:

Here is a case of Affirmative Action, unfairly discriminating against Asians.
www.asianam.org...
Several Court Cases involving what is commonly termed Reverse Racism.
www.adversity.net...
And more:

In rapid succession, a slew of blacks have screamed that illegal immigrants are to blame for the towering ills that plague poor, underserved, crime-ridden black neighborhoods.

Next, Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney screamed that she was racially profiled by a Capitol police officer who demanded to see her ID when she entered the Capitol building. The officer was only doing his job, and McKinney subsequently apologized.

Then a black female student who moonlighted as a part-time stripper screamed that she was sexually mauled by a pack of white Duke University lacrosse players. DNA tests on the players proved that a sexual attack likely didn't happen. The District Attorney could still bring charges, but it would be a criminal case -- not a race case.

In each instance, the racism cry is just another tired example of blacks overplaying the race card. But even more disturbing is the refusal of black leaders to open their mouths and condemn them for it.www.alternet.org...

With the Court so divided, light on the constitutionality of affirmative action was anticipated in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 134 but again the Court fragmented. The Davis campus medical school each year admitted 100 students; the school set aside 16 of those seats for disadvantaged minority students, who were qualified but not necessarily as qualified as those winning admission to the other 84 places. Twice denied admission, Bakke sued, arguing that had not the 16 positions been set aside he could have been admitted. The state court ordered him admitted and ordered the school not to consider race in admissions. By two 5-to-4 votes, the Supreme Court affirmed the order admitting Bakke but set aside the order forbidding the consideration of race in admissions.caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...

It is actually begining to be studied far more extensively and if you go to the links provided, you can gain an understanding of the problems and social impacts involved.

twist my words?

And please. I debate on a professional level at all times. My understanding of what you have posted, is by no means a perfect process. Your use of little gibes like this that you and others have thrown around the thread as of it's beginning are irrelevant and counter productive to a conversation.
If I have misunderstood, correct my misunderstanding and leave the quips in the past posts please.

Semper

Very nice post semper, the one about 4 posts up, very well put.

Second thing, things are starting to get out of control. Personal attacks are not permitted ANYWHERE on the ATS forums. Please review Slugfest rules. NOWHERE does it say that personal attack are allowed.

politics.abovetopsecret.com...

Further conduct of like this will warrant Red Flags.