Is racism acceptable if it is against "whites"?

Page 7 of 10 [ 148 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

08 Sep 2010, 6:39 pm

NeantHumain wrote:

As a U.S. liberal, I'll tell you the answer you've been longing to hear: yes. Liberals love to devise policies that take from hardworking white people only to give it to racial minorities; it's just what we do. We liberals do get a kick out of getting back at the white colonialist oppressor for all the sh*t they've done over the years. As a white liberal, I'm not worried about being called a "race traitor" because I can just retort that my accuser is a member of the KKK. Your deepest prejudices are confirmed. :wink:

AHA! Just as we all suspected!! !

NeantHumain wrote:

No, really, what do you think? Racism against white people is no more acceptable than racism against black people, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, Arabs, and whoever else. Your disagreement with liberal policies does not make them racist.

No, that some people disagree does not make the policies under discussion racist, that they discriminate based on race does. The argument is about whether or not the policies do what they are supposed to, and whether this sort of discrimination is justified in order to correct historical inequities.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

08 Sep 2010, 6:39 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Did you know that, according to my introduction to business textbook (Contemporary business, 8th edition 2009 or something like that) that approximately 8 out of 10 of "sexual harassment" claims are filed by women? Meaning that only 2 out of 10 are filed by men. Why are there 4 times as many claims made by women than by men? The textbook never said anything, but I think it's because it's more socially acceptable to consider women as victims and as such

There are plenty of possible explainations of that. Off the top of my head:
- males are conditioned to think of it as 'horsing around', so they are less likely to be irritated (or as irritated)
- males are more likely to think of it as a compliment, rather than as harassment (although this one and the one above depend greatly on the severity)
- males are more likely to have a high sex drive, so they are more likely to be the harasser than the harassee, all other things being equal
- males are conditioned to not think of themselves as sexual victims, so if it does happen, they are less likely to want anyone to know
- males are culturally less likely to be supportive of another male being sexually harassed, and more likely to make fun of them

Certainly these aren't good descriptions of all men, but it's enough to demonstrate that it isn't just whiny women bitching.

Probably there are some whiny women and some false accusations by women, etc., but I can't see that as explaining even most of the difference between men and women. I'm actually surprised that men actually made up 20% of complaints; I would have expected less.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

08 Sep 2010, 6:40 pm

iamnotaparakeet it is not necessary to resort to mocking victims of sexual harassment. men are accused more often because they commit acts of harassment more often. simple reason.

_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

08 Sep 2010, 6:41 pm

NeantHumain wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Plain and simply, is it acceptable to promote racism against any group of people in particular? Perhaps as a form of vengeance for wrongs done in previous generations or out of serious paranoia? Is it acceptable to instill such blind hatred in children? Is it acceptable to do this in general? Is it acceptable to do this in specific?

No, really, what do you think? Racism against white people is no more acceptable than racism against black people, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, Arabs, and whoever else. Your disagreement with liberal policies does not make them racist.

Thank you for your concession.

BTW, what would your opinion be regarding the conquest of Earth by parakeets armed with miniaturized phaser rifles?

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

08 Sep 2010, 6:43 pm

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet it is not necessary to resort to mocking victims of sexual harassment. men are accused more often because they commit acts of harassment more often. simple reason.

Do you really think that just because a person has been accused of a crime that they are therefore also guilty?

hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

08 Sep 2010, 6:54 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet it is not necessary to resort to mocking victims of sexual harassment. men are accused more often because they commit acts of harassment more often. simple reason.

Do you really think that just because a person has been accused of a crime that they are therefore also guilty?

no. but even if half are lies that doesn't change the proportion of female vs male accusations

_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

08 Sep 2010, 6:56 pm

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet it is not necessary to resort to mocking victims of sexual harassment. men are accused more often because they commit acts of harassment more often. simple reason.

Do you really think that just because a person has been accused of a crime that they are therefore also guilty?

no. but even if half are lies that doesn't change the proportion of female vs male accusations

You're right, mathematically the proportion of accusations would remain constant.

hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

08 Sep 2010, 7:10 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet it is not necessary to resort to mocking victims of sexual harassment. men are accused more often because they commit acts of harassment more often. simple reason.

Do you really think that just because a person has been accused of a crime that they are therefore also guilty?

no. but even if half are lies that doesn't change the proportion of female vs male accusations

You're right, mathematically the proportion of accusations would remain constant.

therefore, the proportion of actually instances of sexual harassment would also remain constant, since we men and women are equally guilty of lying. the remaining cases would be truthful if you remove the liars... and more men than women must sexually abuse their coworkers.

this can actually be witnessed with your own eyes if you take the time to observe men and women in the workplace.

_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

08 Sep 2010, 7:35 pm

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet it is not necessary to resort to mocking victims of sexual harassment. men are accused more often because they commit acts of harassment more often. simple reason.

Do you really think that just because a person has been accused of a crime that they are therefore also guilty?

no. but even if half are lies that doesn't change the proportion of female vs male accusations

You're right, mathematically the proportion of accusations would remain constant.

Yes, all humans are deceitful. However, for men there are reasons for not reporting instances of sexual harassment, namely:

Ancalagon wrote:

- males are conditioned to think of it as 'horsing around', so they are less likely to be irritated (or as irritated)
- males are more likely to think of it as a compliment, rather than as harassment (although this one and the one above depend greatly on the severity)
- males are more likely to have a high sex drive, so they are more likely to be the harasser than the harassee, all other things being equal
- males are conditioned to not think of themselves as sexual victims, so if it does happen, they are less likely to want anyone to know
- males are culturally less likely to be supportive of another male being sexually harassed, and more likely to make fun of them

However, for women these reasons are not present, and as such the coefficient by which to multiply the quantity of accusations of males against females would be greater than the coefficient by which to multiply the quantity of accusations of females against males.

hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

08 Sep 2010, 7:51 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet it is not necessary to resort to mocking victims of sexual harassment. men are accused more often because they commit acts of harassment more often. simple reason.

Do you really think that just because a person has been accused of a crime that they are therefore also guilty?

no. but even if half are lies that doesn't change the proportion of female vs male accusations

You're right, mathematically the proportion of accusations would remain constant.

Yes, all humans are deceitful. However, for men there are reasons for not reporting instances of sexual harassment, namely:

Ancalagon wrote:

women also have reasons to not report, namely:

-fear of losing their job
-fear of putting the man's job at risk
-not wanting to appear like a feminazi or mean b*tch
-not wanting to draw negative attention to herself
-fear of the man taking revenge

also, the reasons stolen from the interwebs:

# It can be emotionally difficult to bring a complaint.
# Don't want to get harasser in trouble, they just want the harassing to stop
# Don't think they will be taken seriously
# They hope it will go away on its own, but often by ignoring it, it is usually interpreted by the harasser as approval or consent.
# Don't want people to think of them as overreacting
# A workplace culture may portray that harassing behaviour is acceptable by turning a blind eye to sexism, harassment, or discrimination (ie. "that's just the way men are")
# Embarrassment
# Fear being told they asked for it because of their behaviour or clothing
# Lack of evidence in the workplace that a complaint would be believed or adequately responded to.

i believe there are more reasons here than the ones you listed for men to avoid reporting. but we really have no idea if more men or women report less often than it actually happens, but both sexes seem to let it slide quite a lot. so i'd say the proprtion stays the same.

_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

08 Sep 2010, 9:39 pm

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

iamnotaparakeet it is not necessary to resort to mocking victims of sexual harassment. men are accused more often because they commit acts of harassment more often. simple reason.

Do you really think that just because a person has been accused of a crime that they are therefore also guilty?

no. but even if half are lies that doesn't change the proportion of female vs male accusations

You're right, mathematically the proportion of accusations would remain constant.

Yes, all humans are deceitful. However, for men there are reasons for not reporting instances of sexual harassment, namely:

Ancalagon wrote:

I think the amount of sexual harassment is equal, but guys just don't care most of the time. Like you said, look for it and you'll see it.

zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,615

09 Sep 2010, 8:50 am

I gave some thought to the following....

Macbeth wrote:

BigK wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

out of curiosity, what do you people think of affirmative-action or quota-style hiring practices for persons with disabilities? because it's the same thing... though i guess we'd call it a disablist hiring policy.

Disability will always be debilitating by its very nature. Race is only debilitating because of incorrect and inaccurate prejudice.

Not true. Many disabilities have little or no impact on a person's ability to perform many jobs. Disabled people often have difficulty getting hired because of prejudice.

Missing what I mean. If you have a DISABILITY you are DISABLED. Doesn't matter if your personal problem is relevant to the job or not. A disability IS disabling in one way or another. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be a disability. Race is not disabling. Race should have no effect on your ability to perform any task or job AT ALL or in day to day living. The reason it does affect those things is because of ass-tarded prejudices, and only because of those prejudices. Dealing with that prejudice is NOT helped by preferential treatment. That only encourages the belief that "black people can only get jobs because we are forced to give them jobs" and so on. Maybe black guy A can do the job as well or even better than white guy b, but he is STILL going to be "that n****r that got the job because he's black." There are immigrants here who are substantially better at jobs than the nearest indigenous local, and they get jobs based on that ability, and STILL get the whole "Coming Here Stealing Our Jobs" line.

Its the wrong place to try and deal with prejudice.

If anything Disabled people are dealing with two problems: prejudice towards them simply because they ARE disabled (which is more akin to racism) AND the fact that they have disabilities which may well actually affect their working ability one way or another. It would be equally as wrong to give them a job simply because they are disabled, and much more beneficial to everyone involved if they were to end up with a job that they are capable of performing well.

This I think sums it up well. Most AA policies were intended to counter the disadvantage minorities had at the time. Today, there is no real justification to say an otherwise "normal" (sic) person can't attain what another person of similar economic position is able to obtain through hard work short of PROOF that the person who holds the keys to that opportunity is deliberately biased on issues of gender, race or creed. I can assure you that if a minority group has a shortage of representation in an industry, the larger cause is the failure the current generation to apply themselves for it, not because the industry is trying to shut them out.

However, handicapped people are at a disadvantage that while culture can change the attitude people have in how they look at the handicapped as potential employees, the need to accommodate the disability is never going to go away, and does remain a factor. Hence the "reasonable accommodation" standard in the ADA.

hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

09 Sep 2010, 9:50 am

zer0netgain wrote:

I gave some thought to the following....

Macbeth wrote:

BigK wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

Disability will always be debilitating by its very nature. Race is only debilitating because of incorrect and inaccurate prejudice.

Not true. Many disabilities have little or no impact on a person's ability to perform many jobs. Disabled people often have difficulty getting hired because of prejudice.

i disagree, because it has hardly been 2 generations since certain minorities had equal rights in the united states. it takes longer than that to rise above disadvantage.

many people here on the boards even today make remarks that blame minorities for society's ills like crime. do you think those same people would hire a black person if he or she were best qualified for a job? NO. and that is still the prevailing attitude in many areas of the western world. minorities, disabled people, and in ome cases women still need society's help to reach their full potential.

thank goodness decision makers don't agree with attitudes like yours, or the gains that have been made so far would surely be somewhat reversed and society would regress. and thank goodness people don't get to affect legislation by randomly deciding that the lack of success of minorities is because they are simply failing to apply themselves.

it's true that it may be a limited time accommodation, but it won't stop being necessary until all people have the opportunities, regardless of race.

_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105

tomhead
Blue Jay

Joined: 3 Sep 2010
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 87
Location: Jackson, Mississippi

09 Sep 2010, 9:55 am

I don't agree with the way the poll question is worded.

In a majority-white country, prejudice against whites, while just as invalid as any race-based prejudice, is not racism. Racism refers to social patterns directed by those in the majority, with disproportionate economic and social power, against those in the minority, who face disproportionate economic and social challenges.

For similar reasons (even though women technically outnumber men), a woman who believes men are intrinsically worthless is not a sexist. She's probably an idiot, but she's not a sexist.

So "racism against whites" is not a reality in the United States, period. It might be in Zimbabwe, but not in the United States. And there is no historical evidence to support the idea that there has ever been a culture, anywhere on Earth, in which "sexism against men" would have been a possibility.

But in terms of what I think the question is meant to ask, I think black and Latino separatism, while understandable and morally superior to white separatism, are still outmoded and harmful ideas.

That said: some of my best friends are black separatists (yes, I'm aware of the irony), but I'd get wet before I'd step under a white separatist's umbrella. I think white separatism in America, given our history, is a particularly evil kettle of fish. And I feel the same way about misogyny.

Cheers,

TH

zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,615

09 Sep 2010, 12:06 pm

hyperlexian wrote:

i disagree, because it has hardly been 2 generations since certain minorities had equal rights in the united states. it takes longer than that to rise above disadvantage.

I can see your position, but I think 2 generations is more than ample time.

Show me any minority who claims to be disadvantaged, and I could likely find 10 times as many majority people from the same economic background (I acknowledge that wealth is the biggest legal form of discrimination in society) who are just as bad off.

The failure of a generation to achieve is largely tied to the effort they put into being intelligent, cultured, educated, and hard working. Any kid who lives on MTV, playing Xbox, never worked a job until they turned 17, treated school as a social club where getting Cs was good enough has ZERO right or expectation of opportunity, regardless of skin color, and I consistently see that when ANY minority makes any significant effort to prepare for adulthood, they go places and doors do open for them...often at a greater pace than would be so for a member of the majority who has worked just as hard.

Short of a given person/company choosing to discriminate, society just does not hold minorities back. Whites don't go to better schools or get better teachers. The rich do, but you have poverty affecting all races, creeds and genders, not just selected ones.

hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

09 Sep 2010, 12:24 pm

zer0netgain wrote:

hyperlexian wrote:

i disagree, because it has hardly been 2 generations since certain minorities had equal rights in the united states. it takes longer than that to rise above disadvantage.

no disadvantaged group has ever, ever recovered to the status of the dominant group within 2 generations, so i don't know why you would like it to be different for american minority groups.

systemic disadvantage resonates for a long time. considering some of the racism and sexism that is still rampant in our society, there is a long way to go still.

_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105

Page 7 of 10 [ 148 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Jump to:

Is racism acceptable if it is against "whites"? Post Reply New Topic

Is racism acceptable if it is against "whites"?