It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
While viewing "Crash" may make some people, especially white people, uncomfortable during and immediately after viewing, the film seems designed, at a deeper level, to make white people feel better. As the film asks us to confront personal prejudices, it allows us white folk to evade our collective responsibility for white supremacy.
originally posted by HarlemHottie
I still think you missed the point. Jso attacked me for not denouncing Ceci. His reasoning, as stated, was that she's "one of my own." I responded that I have no more responsibility to denounce her than jso has to denounce those murderers.
Jso's original comment was not in the vein of conducivity and neither was my response. In essence, I was calling him on his racism, in assuming that, because I'm black, it's my place to control another black poster.
Originally posted by jsobecky
If you're going to drop my name, get the story right, not "The World According to HarlemHottie".
Originally posted by jsobecky
It had to do with the fact that you've been quick to attack white people for their comments, yet when it comes to ceci, she can insult an entire race and you are silent.
Do you do that because you are both black?... And yes, you have no responsibility to speak out when ceci attacks the white race, even though a good friend would caution her to control her temper.
And it had nothing to do with "because you're black, it's your place to control another black poster." It had to do with the fact that you've been quick to attack white people for their comments, yet when it comes to ceci, she can insult an entire race and you are silent.
Do you do that because you are both black? I don't know and I don't give a damn. And thinking back on it, it was probably not the right thing to ask, because I could have predicted that you'd try to make it a racist statement by me, simply because there is no good defense for your actions.
Silence often means assent when a wrong is committed.
And yes, you have no responsibility to speak out when ceci attacks the white race
... even though a good friend would caution her to control her temper. But that nullifies your right to criticize white people for their words.
Originally posted by HarlemHottie
You come out of nowhere with such a vitriolic post.
I give you a thoughtful response, and you disappear.
Originally posted by riley
I don't see how my strongly reacting to your claim that racism 'doesn't affect whites that much' could be considered vitriolic. In fact I'd call it 'reasonable'.
I disapeared because offline I had an unexpected family re-union [] so I had to keep the phone line free for the last couple of days. I was also very excited so had trouble concentrating.
I'll be sure to inform you in future if this happens again and I'm really sorry that I didn't make responding to your post a priority. I'll answer it later tonight.
Originally posted by HarlemHottie
The points you made were reasonable, I agree, but you did use quite a few exclamation points, caps, and flaming faces.
I hope it was the good kind of "unexpected family reunion." If it was, then I'm glad you had some time to relax with your family. Always a good thing.
I'm not taking offense at your sarcasm because I was a little snippy myself. I admit it.
It's just, you haven't posted here in a while, and then you swoop down and write a whole angry essay in response to two sentences. That was kind of out-of-nowhere, you have to admit, but I understand it's an issue you're passionate about.
Originally posted by HarlemHottie
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.
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.
Originally posted by riley
Originally posted by HarlemHottie
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.
Proxy? I wasn't addressing someone else. Your comments on 'anti-white/reverse racism' were equally as offensive and I added them to that list.
Thus far this has been about race, not nationality.
This thread is riddled with 'but blacks have it worse' .. well that depends on when, where you are and the political climate.
On June 7, 1998, Byrd, 49, accepted a ride from Berry, Brewer, and King. Instead of taking him home, however, the three men beat Byrd, tied him to a pickup truck with a chain, and dragged him about three miles. An autopsy suggested that Byrd was alive for much of the dragging and died only after his right arm and head were severed when his body hit a culvert.[2]
King, Berry, and Brewer dumped their victim's mutilated remains in the town's segregated black cemetery, and then went to a barbecue. [3]
State law enforcement officials and Jasper’s District Attorney determined that since King and Brewer were well-known white supremacists...Numerous aspects of the Byrd murder echo lynching traditions, including mutilation or decapitation, and revelry, such as a barbecue or a picnic, during or after.
article on wiki
...I've also heared that they have 'rape rooms' in frat houses. If thats true thats quite disturbing.
Of course if it had've been a standard rape they would've spent only a couple of months in jail as per usual.
The racist generalisations on these threads have been about all whites.. not just american ones.
Yes society needs to remember history.. but people shouldn't be holding grudges against those who are innocent.
What does that accomplish? I get the impression some want to avenge history
Originally posted by riley
It would probably be more helpful to 'race relations' if you, Ceci and Saph communicated your own experiences...Why haven't you?
What is it like to be the decendents or slaves? Does it define who you are at all? Influence relationships between family and friends? How can you sill feel opression from it even though it was so long ago?
Originally posted by HarlemHottie
we (current adults) were raised by people who survived in a world peopled with those sickeningly racist whites. Everyday was, quite literally, a life or death struggle to them. If you were allowed in the store, the clerk would treat you bad, but don't sigh or roll your eyes because, within 5 minutes flat, your ass could be strung up on the nearest tree. Or, you could 'get away with it', only to put your kids to bed that night, and wake up with a molotov cocktail in your bed.
Imagine the stress of knowing that any day could be your day, and of course, you pass that along to your kids. It's like having a Vietnam vet for a parent. [I love 'em, but the majority are so scarred psychologically that being raised by one was probably very difficult.] So now, here we are, the kids, like Ceci and me, some of us incredibly pissed that "white people" (as it was generalized, because it was true at the time) screwed our parents over/up, whatever the case may be. But, we learned in school that some white people came together with our parents generation and tried to fix all that. So, we were relieved.
Then, you grow up, and look around in the real world and see that, while the more overt examples of racial terrorism have mostly been eradicated, it's still there. So now, we have a few problems, the first of which is, apparently, we've been lied to, en masse. That's enough to piss anybody off. Look, again, to Vietnam, and those disillusioned youth. Second, wth are we supposed to do??? The world seems to think we solved that problem, so how are we supposed to get the attention needed to make something happen? How do we make the story break? We try to use tragedies to highlight the continuous nature of the problem, and, instead of talking about it, people make fun of Jesse Jackson. Then, they "sweep it under the rug." I'm sorry to use that contentious phrase again, but that's why she said it.
Take Hurricane Katrina. While I'm fully aware that white homeowners in the area suffered as much property damage, if not more, than local blacks, the human suffering inflicted on survivors after the storm was mostly directed at blacks. I'm sure you heard about the group of survivors who, trying to escape the water, attempted to cross a bridge into the next town. They were shot at by local law enforcement. The only reason we heard the story was because there were a few British citizens in the group and they told the BBC when they got home.
Do you know where abouts in Africa your family came from?
Do you know anything about their culture? Ever been to Africa?
Do schools teach African languages and culture at all? Tribal customs [if possible]? Should they?
Originally posted by gallopinghordes
I work in a mainline prison with about 2,000 inmates...
Drug Busts=Jim Crow
by Ira Glasser, retired Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union, President of the Board of the Drug Policy Alliance.
[from the July 10, 2006 issue of The Nation]
This article is adapted from a speech Ira Glasser gave to the Correctional Association of New York.
...Despite these patterns of racial targeting, it has not been fashionable among liberals to see drug prohibition as a massive civil rights problem of racial discrimination. Perhaps it would be easier if we examined the way racially targeted drug-war incarceration has damaged the right to vote, a right quintessentially part of the rights we thought we had won in the 1960s with the demise of Jim Crow laws.
Until recently (there have been some changes in the past few years in some states), every state but two barred felons from voting--some permanently, some in a way that allowed, theoretically but often not as a practical matter, for the restoration of voting rights. Because of the explosion of incarceration driven by drug prohibition, more than 5 million people are now barred from voting. The United States is the only industrial democracy that does this. And the origin of most of these laws--no surprise--is the post-Reconstruction period after slavery was abolished. Felony disenfranchisement laws, like poll taxes and literacy tests, were historically part of the system that arose after slavery to bar blacks from exercising equal rights and, in particular, equal voting rights. Felony disenfranchisement laws were, to a large extent, part of a replacement system for subjugating blacks after slavery was abolished.
If you want to contemplate what this means, consider the state of Florida in the 2000 presidential election, where 200,000 black Floridians were barred from voting because of prior felonies in an election in which the presidency was determined by 537 disputed votes. If even one-third of these people had actually voted--say, 70,000--and if they voted in the usual proportions that blacks vote for the Democratic candidate--say, 80 percent, probably a low estimate--those 70,000 voters would have produced a 42,000 net gain for Al Gore.
...
The kicker for all this is that all these black citizens who were disproportionately targeted for arrest and incarceration and then barred from voting are nonetheless counted as citizens for the purpose of determining how many Congressional seats and how many electoral votes states have. During slavery, three-fifths of the number of slaves were similarly counted by the slave states, even though slaves were not in any way members of the civil polity. This is worse. In the states of the Deep South, 30 percent of all black men are barred from voting because of felony convictions, but all of them are counted to determine Congressional representation and Electoral College votes. If one wants to wonder why the South is so solidly white, Republican and arch-conservative, one need look no further.
The fact is, just as Jim Crow laws were a successor system to slavery, so drug prohibition has been a successor to Jim Crow laws in targeting blacks, removing them from civil society and then denying them the right to vote while using their bodies to enhance white political power. Drug prohibition is now the last significant instance of legalized racial discrimination in America.
Originally quoted by Duzey
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'?
Originally posted by HarlemHottie
Originally posted by riley
I don't see how my strongly reacting to your claim that racism 'doesn't affect whites that much' could be considered vitriolic. In fact I'd call it 'reasonable'.
The points you made were reasonable, I agree, but you did use quite a few exclamation points, caps, and flaming faces.
Originally posted by jsobecky
If you're going to drop my name, get the story right, not "The World According to HarlemHottie".
As it is my post, I am completely in my rights in stating my opinion.
I refuse to willfully derail the thread any further. If you wish to continue this, U2U me.
Edit to add: In retrospect, I realize that other posters may feel the way you feel about my so-called "silence," and also that you deserve an answer, just as another human being. My behavior does appear unfair. So that you, and they, don't walk away thinking I'm racist, I thought I would respond to the argument you raise.
When this thread began, I did not know any other posters here. I had spoken with BH before, but we weren't 'buddies'. Therefore, when I found other posters insensitive in their remarks, regardless of whether I agreed with them or not, I called them on it, on the board. I would not have done so had I been in U2U-communication with them.
For example, I have spoken with Ceci, privately, about her approach on this topic.
I think that covers it. I still think you, jso, presented your argument poorly, surrounded by abusive language.
originally posted by ceci2006
What should be asked is why do you stay silent when others attack the Black race?
Why should she feel she has to do the same to her own race?
Believe me. You've done your fair share of insulting behavior toward Blacks. Still, no one tries to restrain your behavior. So, yes, the double standard remains.
Saph, HH and myself have remarked at different times on the thread how racist you are.
Three posters and four mods have called attention to the behavior directed toward me on this thread. Their words have not stopped it. So why would you think coercing Saph and HH would work?
Furthermore, your remark is a continued defamation on my character. I've never attacked the white race.
And it is racist of you to attribute my race to a type of "violent action". The stereotype of attributing violence to black people has been used and given a lot of mileage through comments like yours.
However, I have defended myself against constantly repeated insults and virulent actions that continue to defame my character, behavior, parentage, education, race and posting style.
quote: ... even though a good friend would caution her to control her temper. But that nullifies your right to criticize white people for their words.
It does not. This is a specious argument. It doesn't make sense what you are trying to say. How does her action of not getting involved in a situation that isn't hers, render her unable to criticize white people?
I still claim the action of defense after being called denigrating names while being accused of behaviorial issues amongst other things.
It is as if the White media has become so enamored with the truth of its propaganda and so confident of its effectiveness on the psyches of other races and ethnic groups that it does not hesitate to make these ridiculous and arrogant declarations. And it does so over and over again.
…
We were force-fed the poison of White racism into our minds and we began to look at the world (and ourselves) through strange, inverted glasses. And our world, the marvelous world of Blackness, the African world of strength and beauty; was effectively turned upside down and we began to believe the lies and to accept them as facts and (even more devastating) we began to assault the minds and the spirits of our children with the bitterness of our self-hatred. We threatened in our fits of anger, to "beat all the Black" off of them.
We told our daughters and our sons to do something with their "ugly nappy head" or we threatened to "slap all the naps off" their heads. And in doing this to our children to our men and to our women, we adopted the mind-set of our enslavers and our enemies and we passed this sickness down from one generation to the next and it is still with us now.
If we don’t know ourselves, not only are we a puzzle to ourselves; other people are also a puzzle to us as well.
"So my dear sisters, please be your Black self and keep your natural Black beauty ...... your strong, bold, and beautiful naps as opposed to weak, limp, and lifeless strands of hair. Your Creator made your beauty naturally unique! Your Creator wanted your Black natural beauty to stand out amongst the peoples of the world."
For years, I ran away from "naps." That's shorthand for nappy hair. Old folks in my family called it "bad hair." For African-American women of my generation, leaving our hair in its natural state was taboo. But that way of thinking is passé.
...
More than a decade later, styles such as locks, twistees, microbraids and Afros are cropping up more and more in the workplace as younger generations of African-American women, and men, embrace their natural hair.
For most people - including the two of us - that's painfully true; such untangling is a life's work in which we can make progress but never feel finished. But that can obscure a more fundamental and important point: This state of affairs is the product of the actions of us white people. In the modern world, white elites invented race and racism to protect their power, and white people in general have accepted the privileges they get from the system and helped maintain it. The problem doesn't spring from the individual prejudices that exist in various ways in all groups but from white supremacy, which is expressed not only by individuals but in systemic and institutional ways. There's little hint of such understanding in the film, which makes it especially dangerous in a white-dominant society in which white people are eager to avoid confronting our privilege.