When you disagree with the president or his staff you are racist

[weekender 0]

sfzombie13

pathetic. people like you are what helps to perpetuate the damn "politically correct" bullshit that is at the heart of the government's movement to pacify and divide the people so that they can do whatever the hell they want to in order to make more money.

c'mon. i basically called the guy a tool for using outdated racist terms. i am certainly not part of a gov't attempt at dividing the nation. i am not a member of the PC police by suggesting polite people no longer use terms like mulatto or negroid.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[sfzombie13 314]

that was way too close to getting personal. i apologize. it's a subject that touches a nerve with me, and they have been way too close to the surface today, due to a wealth of unrelated reasons. i should not have posted anything today.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[weekender 0]

sfzombie13

that was way too close to getting personal. i apologize. it's a subject that touches a nerve with me, and they have been way too close to the surface today, due to a wealth of unrelated reasons. i should not have posted anything today.

no apology needed but i appreciate the sentiment. I am actually not at all a fan of the grievance police. i agree, many people are politically motivated to silence opponents using fake outrage. i assure you that was not my motivation. i felt calling the President of the US a mulatto and negroid was in bad taste. actually calling anyone that in 2013 is in bad taste. i felt it was such an obvious act of overt racism i should comment. when you purposely use a term that is meant to be hurtful, you deserve to be mocked. that was my sole motivation. i doubt any decent person would agree that mulatto or negroid is an acceptable term anymore. at least i would hope so.

we agree also that people should be permitted to say what they want. i just feel i also have the right to ridicule them. except for global warming deniers. they need to shut up and go away, obviously.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[winsor 192]

weekender

***that was way too close to getting personal. i apologize. it's a subject that touches a nerve with me, and they have been way too close to the surface today, due to a wealth of unrelated reasons. i should not have posted anything today.

no apology needed but i appreciate the sentiment. I am actually not at all a fan of the grievance police. i agree, many people are politically motivated to silence opponents using fake outrage. i assure you that was not my motivation. i felt calling the President of the US a mulatto and negroid was in bad taste. actually calling anyone that in 2013 is in bad taste. i felt it was such an obvious act of overt racism i should comment. when you purposely use a term that is meant to be hurtful, you deserve to be mocked. that was my sole motivation. i doubt any decent person would agree that mulatto or negroid is an acceptable term anymore. at least i would hope so.

we agree also that people should be permitted to say what they want. i just feel i also have the right to ridicule them. except for global warming deniers. they need to shut up and go away, obviously.

Everything you think you know is wrong.

[davjohns 1]

Andy9o8

******I thought a 'mulatto' was a coffee drink at Starbucks.

That's a Moo Latte from Dunkin Donuts.

Speaking of which, would a "chocolate donut hole" be both racist and homophobic?

Sometimes, I just want to get Andy drunk and follow him around with a video camera.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[davjohns 1]

I keep seeing the title of this thread and it reminds me of something. I'll finally share it.

We are all racist. It is part of the human condition. I was taught it in college. It made sense then. I still see it today. I'm not sure why it isn't still taught.

Psychologists long ago identified this condition as ethnocentrism. People just want to feel whatever group they are a part of is better than other groups. They then seek facts to support this feeling and reject facts that disagree with it. It doesn't matter if it is race, religion, gender, football team, culture, nationality, species, employers, departments within a company...

We see it everywhere and fail to notice it. After the recent Alabama / Auburn football game, I saw posts on Facebook complaining about what bad sports / bad people Auburn fans were after they won. In previous years, Auburn fans claimed Alabama fans were poor sports / bad people. My own father claims Auburn fans are without class and ruffians at heart. (He graduated from UA). The fan base of both teams are from the same state, cross ALL socio-economic strata, and are absolutely undistinguishable from each other. It is logically impossible that the claims of superior character by either side are supportable.

I recognize this condition in myself. It's generally considered bad to admit it, but I do. My first reaction to people who are different from me is usually negative. I have to remind myself that this is an emotional reaction that is not based on fact. I remind myself that things can be different without one being better than the other. Then, I can enjoy the differences.

The first step of problem solving is identifying the problem. People who think they are without this condition have failed to recognize the problem in themselves. That's why I find it interesting when one person calls another person racist. We are all racists to some degree or another. Even if you reverse polarity (so to speak) and start villifying your own group, you are still acting on those same human emotions. You are still attributing personal characteristics to someone based on skin color, religion, gender, etc. I had a friend who was caucasian and married to a black woman. He once told me he didn't need EO training because of who he was married to. His contention was that he could not be racist because he was married to a black woman. He clearly didn't get it.

Wizard's First Rule.

Something to think about. I'm not trying to berate anyone. I am first among fools.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[masterblaster72 0]

davjohns

I keep seeing the title of this thread and it reminds me of something. I'll finally share it.

We are all racist. It is part of the human condition. I was taught it in college. It made sense then. I still see it today. I'm not sure why it isn't still taught.

Psychologists long ago identified this condition as ethnocentrism. People just want to feel whatever group they are a part of is better than other groups. They then seek facts to support this feeling and reject facts that disagree with it. It doesn't matter if it is race, religion, gender, football team, culture, nationality, species, employers, departments within a company...

We see it everywhere and fail to notice it. After the recent Alabama / Auburn football game, I saw posts on Facebook complaining about what bad sports / bad people Auburn fans were after they won. In previous years, Auburn fans claimed Alabama fans were poor sports / bad people. My own father claims Auburn fans are without class and ruffians at heart. (He graduated from UA). The fan base of both teams are from the same state, cross ALL socio-economic strata, and are absolutely undistinguishable from each other. It is logically impossible that the claims of superior character by either side are supportable.

I recognize this condition in myself. It's generally considered bad to admit it, but I do. My first reaction to people who are different from me is usually negative. I have to remind myself that this is an emotional reaction that is not based on fact. I remind myself that things can be different without one being better than the other. Then, I can enjoy the differences.

The first step of problem solving is identifying the problem. People who think they are without this condition have failed to recognize the problem in themselves. That's why I find it interesting when one person calls another person racist. We are all racists to some degree or another. Even if you reverse polarity (so to speak) and start villifying your own group, you are still acting on those same human emotions. You are still attributing personal characteristics to someone based on skin color, religion, gender, etc. I had a friend who was caucasian and married to a black woman. He once told me he didn't need EO training because of who he was married to. His contention was that he could not be racist because he was married to a black woman. He clearly didn't get it.

Wizard's First Rule.

Something to think about. I'm not trying to berate anyone. I am first among fools.

+1

Great post

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[weekender 0]

davjohns

I keep seeing the title of this thread and it reminds me of something. I'll finally share it.

We are all racist. It is part of the human condition. I was taught it in college. It made sense then. I still see it today. I'm not sure why it isn't still taught.

Psychologists long ago identified this condition as ethnocentrism. People just want to feel whatever group they are a part of is better than other groups. They then seek facts to support this feeling and reject facts that disagree with it. It doesn't matter if it is race, religion, gender, football team, culture, nationality, species, employers, departments within a company...

We see it everywhere and fail to notice it. After the recent Alabama / Auburn football game, I saw posts on Facebook complaining about what bad sports / bad people Auburn fans were after they won. In previous years, Auburn fans claimed Alabama fans were poor sports / bad people. My own father claims Auburn fans are without class and ruffians at heart. (He graduated from UA). The fan base of both teams are from the same state, cross ALL socio-economic strata, and are absolutely undistinguishable from each other. It is logically impossible that the claims of superior character by either side are supportable.

I recognize this condition in myself. It's generally considered bad to admit it, but I do. My first reaction to people who are different from me is usually negative. I have to remind myself that this is an emotional reaction that is not based on fact. I remind myself that things can be different without one being better than the other. Then, I can enjoy the differences.

The first step of problem solving is identifying the problem. People who think they are without this condition have failed to recognize the problem in themselves. That's why I find it interesting when one person calls another person racist. We are all racists to some degree or another. Even if you reverse polarity (so to speak) and start villifying your own group, you are still acting on those same human emotions. You are still attributing personal characteristics to someone based on skin color, religion, gender, etc. I had a friend who was caucasian and married to a black woman. He once told me he didn't need EO training because of who he was married to. His contention was that he could not be racist because he was married to a black woman. He clearly didn't get it.

Wizard's First Rule.

Something to think about. I'm not trying to berate anyone. I am first among fools.

that is an excellent post. thank you. i do recognize i have prejudices, fyi. i have many faults and i do my best to better myself. my posts were not holier than though accusations of racism.

in no way was i calling him a racist with the belief i am pure at heart. i was basically calling him ill mannered for calling the President a mulatto and negroid.

i feel my post were more about manners and behaving like a woman and gentleman in public. no one with class purposely uses an outdated term that is known to be hurtful. even if you feel the word is not offensive to you. it is to others and there are perfectly good phrases that are just as accurate and inoffensive. its not like he called someone a mailman instead of letter carrier. he called the President a mulatto and a negroid. he is rude and i felt it was appropriate to call him out on it.

(edited some grammer)

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[rehmwa 2]

davjohns

My first reaction to people who are different from me is usually negative.

I guess you mean 'different' in a cosmetic sense. Why wouldn't you have a negative reaction to someone that is different in values or acts in a despicable manner right in front of you.

so are you making a conscious effort to be equally negative to people different and similar (cosmetically) to you?

anyway - I've met a few people that truly are unfairly and cosmetically biased. It's a very small percentage and unusual and obvious. I didn't need much time to decide I didn't like these individuals based on the character they showed. That's not ethnocentrism.... that's recognizing a jerk - judgment of a single individual based on their actions - not pre-judgment based on what they looked like. Others are jerks for other reasons, usually not politico/socio hot topics either, they are just jerks.

(what is distressing to me, is that typically the people that seem to cry racism the most loudly and fanatically have such incredibly horrible biases of their own in their actions and words - which indicates it's not a desire to improve the species, it's just their 'ethnocentrism' in battle with the other. their prejudice against people from certain states, religions, etc are just wallowing of the same flavor)

everyone is different - we are all individuals - start with that and at least you level the playing field. Some people don't have to make a conscious decision about taking each person one at a time (or worse - apply equal biases to everyone they meet - negative, positive, cautious, or otherwise). I don't think they are "failing to recognize the problem within themselves".

I'd rather say that first impressions come from many things - posture, initial actions, attitude, smell, hygiene, friendliness, etc (not eye color, not skin color, etc etc etc, but actions and choices)- one needs to be ready to start with the little info they have about the individual and then let interaction go from there and be ready to change opinion until they get a clear picture of the full person. Seriously - leaning on the broad stereotypes is just lazy when the person is right there in front of you.

I agree it's in there, but is it hardwired? - look at little kids - examples - little girls ostracise other little girls because the 'group' wears glasses and the 'outsider' doesn't - and they are MEAN. But also look at REALLY little kids - they don't care - they will play with any other kid as long as they are nice, will play with them too, don't smell funny and shares..... When did the switch get flipped? Was it learned? Clicky groups at the DZ - another example.

As a species - maybe we're growing out of it. no matter how much both sides of the extremes want to perpetuate it. The exceptions will be the true jerks and the race baiters and hypersensitives. Both will likely reduce and reduce over time, the hypers might just delay the maturing process an extra generation or two though (I believe this, that the spotlight is making it worse, not better).

the only real solution is just to take people one at a time and personal - good examples will spread



edit: above is the long version. short version is "ethnocentrism and related attitudes is general, not just race - the cure to group/mob mentality is individualism"

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[winsor 192]

weekender

i do recognize i have prejudices, fyi. i have many faults and i do my best to better myself. my posts were not holier than though accusations of racism.

in no way was i calling him a racist with the belief i am pure at heart. i was basically calling him ill mannered for calling the President a mulatto and negroid.

i feel my post were more about manners and behaving like a woman and gentleman in public. no one with class purposely uses an outdated term that is known to be hurtful. even if you feel the word is not offensive to you. it is to others and there are perfectly good phrases that are just as accurate and inoffensive. its not like he called someone a mailman instead of letter carrier. he called the President a mulatto and a negroid. he is rude and i felt it was appropriate to call him out on it.

(edited some grammer)

Yo' mama.

[davjohns 1]

rehmwa

***My first reaction to people who are different from me is usually negative.

I guess you mean 'different' in a cosmetic sense. Why wouldn't you have a negative reaction to someone that is different in values or acts in a despicable manner right in front of you.


As I said, there are many groups one can divide into. I don't think the majority of the divisions I cited were cosmetic. Personally, I can't tell what football team someone is for or where they work by looking at them.

I feel negative reactions to lots of things that are 'different' from me. Pants falling off the rear, stinky Europeans, men in skinny jeans, etc. I actually tend to react by befriending people I felt the negative emotional reaction to in order to push past that thought process. I've met some really great people that way.

My reactions to aberant social behavior in public can be very negative. I don't consider that ethnocentristic. Some people just need an ass-whooping. I abhor violence. I just happen to be very good at it.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[regulator 0]

winsor

***i do recognize i have prejudices, fyi. i have many faults and i do my best to better myself. my posts were not holier than though accusations of racism.

in no way was i calling him a racist with the belief i am pure at heart. i was basically calling him ill mannered for calling the President a mulatto and negroid.

i feel my post were more about manners and behaving like a woman and gentleman in public. no one with class purposely uses an outdated term that is known to be hurtful. even if you feel the word is not offensive to you. it is to others and there are perfectly good phrases that are just as accurate and inoffensive. its not like he called someone a mailman instead of letter carrier. he called the President a mulatto and a negroid. he is rude and i felt it was appropriate to call him out on it.

(edited some grammer)

Yo' mama.[/quote/]


If the worst name the president is called is a 'mulatto' then I could say rhe rest of his day must be pretty damn uneventful.

[winsor 192]

regulator

If the worst name the president is called is a 'mulatto' then I could say the rest of his day must be pretty damn uneventful.

I'm reminded of an episode of South Park where Kyle says he's a Jew, Cartman tells him not to be so hard on himself, Kyle says that he really is a Jew, Cartman says it's okay, he's not that bad, and so forth.

When I'm in the North, I flinch when I see such things as "Yankee Candle" and the like. There are parts of the country where being called a Yankee is a SERIOUS insult, but to some folks it is apparently no big deal. I gather there is even a sports team of some kind that goes by that name.

When I lived in Switzerland, some of the Italian guys with whom I worked were investors in a joint named the "Dago Bar," and they had no problem with it at all.

I refuse to mince words about race or to resort to epithets. If I like someone it has nothing to do with their familial origins, same thing for those I can't stand.

Having spent infinitely more time on the African continent than the vast majority of those who fancy themselves "African-Americans," most of whom don't know the difference between Mali and Botswana, I refuse to use the term as a descriptor.

In any event, if someone gets their uterus in a knot over the use of terms that are right out of Websters, and were the norm for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., then that's just too bad.


BSBD,

Winsor

[wmw999 2,179]

I see calling someone by what they prefer as being just respectful, in the way that I'd rather treat everyone.

Not that I respect everything about everyone, but there's a certain basic human respect that I automatically give. It costs me far less than it gives me in terms of self-respect and response.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)