Gender: Joined: 12 Mar 2006 Posts: 1843 Status: Moderator
Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:20 pm Post subject:
It wasn't racist for DJ to be annoyed by a group of loud people who happened to be black. However, it is racist if he was annoyed because they were black, acting out the prejudicial stereotype of "loud black people in a theatre." Subconsciously, the inclusion of the adjective "black" when describing the offending kids serves to connect their race and their behavior to the stereotype. And DJ's mug analogy pretty much exposes his racial prejudice, since it attempts to pretty much justify it. That kind of mindset isn't very good, but it doesn't make him a monster.
Now, in order to encourage DJ to maybe change his mind about prejudice, it does no good to act like a bunch of holier-than-thou Hollywood liberals and just call him out like, "Hrm. You phrased that in an exceptionally bigoted way. Your parents must be proud." That's only going to make him, or anyone else, go on the defensive. And the truth of the matter is, most everyone, myself included, is conditioned to think along those lines by our racist society.* Some are just not as vocal as other, and some don't hold as much racism.
Open and honest discussions can help us overcome all this dumb stuff. We jeopardize it by castigating DJ.
*Society not only encourages people of races to act out racial stereotype, but sets aside certain behaviors as only acceptable for one race. To act in a way which doesn't apparently suit one's race is a major faux pas. See "wiggers" and "Uncle Toms."
Gender: Joined: 25 Mar 2006 Posts: 374 Status: User
Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 3:46 pm Post subject:
I'm half and half on this one. Part of me says its not necessary to include the race detail of course. He could have just said a loud group of people. The other half says people earn stereotypes. I don't make the rules, I just live by em... Its unfortunate really. Of course not everything/everyone can be classified, but classes do exist.
Gender: Joined: 06 May 2006 Posts: 2136 Status: User
Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:08 pm Post subject:
I think Mike has a very sturdy opinion on this matter, as ususal. However, I have another take on it.
DJ said he lives in a predominantly white area. Mightn't he have included the race detail simply because having black people around is unusual in general, thus bears a slight note?
My hometown (in the wilds of northern Wisconsin) has a black population of a dozen, maximum. Now that I live in mid-Michigan, it's a very different situation. If I dropped my wallet in Rhinelander, and a black person picked it up for me, and I were relating the story to someone from the area, I would probably include the detail that I encountered a black person. Not because it's important to the story, or because it carries any sort of weight, but simply because it's unusual. I don't believe that would make me a racist.
But if I dropped my wallet in Ypsilanti, that sucker would be gone.
Gender: Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 6077 Status: Moderator
Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:13 pm Post subject:
dodger wrote:
DJ said he lives in a predominantly white area. Mightn't he have included the race detail simply because having black people around is unusual in general, thus bears a slight note?
I think the analogy he made speaks for itself _________________ Come into my den let me hear you cluck
You can be my hen and we can f(Bu-GAWK)
A bite to the leg, it's time to play
Baby, let me be your egg that needs to get laid.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
"The Chicken of Lust"
Gender: Joined: 06 May 2006 Posts: 2136 Status: User
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 3:41 am Post subject:
Its_The_Sneak!!! wrote:
I think the analogy he made speaks for itself
Says the man of a thousand dubious statements and political stances. I also think everyone is misinterpreting what he meant to say, and disregarding his earlier statements on the relationship of "self vs. other", which I think are far more telling on why he used a descriptive adjective in the first place... reasoning I basically re-iterated in my last post.
As for the analogy, it's a mishmash that is essentially meaningless. Yet everyone, yourself included, seems to be ignoring that and instead twisting and inflating it to their own ends. Deconstruction, people, learn to love it.
In addition, it is a poorly-thought-out statement by a guy who was, all of a sudden, being branded a racist. When everyone unexpectedly turns on you, and you're forced to defend yourself in a hurry, you'll say stupid things.
Gender: Joined: 12 Mar 2006 Posts: 1226 Status: User Location: A valley full o' Pioneer.
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:23 am Post subject:
Well, I've tried to avoid making any serious posts on here, other than arguing with dodger about Canadian prog rock, ever since about the 5th or 6th time I vowed not to make any serious posts here, but I guess it's time to break that.
dodger wrote:
Its_The_Sneak!!! wrote:
I think the analogy he made speaks for itself
Says the man of a thousand dubious statements and political stances. I also think everyone is misinterpreting what he meant to say, and disregarding his earlier statements on the relationship of "self vs. other", which I think are far more telling on why he used a descriptive adjective in the first place... reasoning I basically re-iterated in my last post.
Of course, he set the relationship between "self" and "other" up as being a relationship between "white" and "other." (I'll resist the temptation to bring up "the other" anymore, I promise.) I don't agree with your take, really. I can see your point, but there's a difference between saying something like, "Oh hey, there was a black guy in line behind me at the bank today. Isn't that unusual?" (which certainly brings up other issues that I'd rather not go into, as they aren't all that important to the point at hand, and no one reads long posts) and saying, "There was this really annoying black family at the movies that laughed at everything." The latter, intentionally or not, is clearly referencing a stereotype about black people. To quote "Scrubs" (I apologize), he went to it "like a bear to honey." Do I think this makes DJ a racist? I guess it depends what you mean by that, but not any more than anyone else. That doesn't mean I think it shouldn't be brought up, or that I don't think there was something to that comment aside from being a general comment about a movie-going experience, but this was probably not a very good way to discuss it.
I'm pretty much in agreement with Mike here (except the statement about "holier-than-thou Hollywood liberals," if only because I think that phrase is a tad problematic when you're essentially telling someone what to do ). Singling DJ out here really isn't fair (it also isn't fair that I singled him out as "classist," but I did it anyway). Realistically, this affects everyone, and, as has been said, the solution is not to single people out and berate them into making weird analogies. Nor is it simply to ignore the issue of race ("Race shouldn't matter," but sadly, it does), which doesn't make any of the underlying problems go away. I, again, tend to agree with Mike. Open and honest discussion (although boring) is a good place to start, along with a critical self-consciousness. I could probably say a lot more about this, but 1) I'm getting tired and 2) this is already long enough that 90% of the people here aren't going to read it. Anyway, apologies for my previous sarcastic remarks in this thread.
Quote:
Deconstruction, people, learn to love it.
I have. Probably more than most people would like. I'm still not entirely sure what you mean in this case, though. _________________ Married to Terri.
Gender: Joined: 12 Mar 2006 Posts: 1836 Status: Administrator Location: Twilite Zone
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 11:13 am Post subject:
Der wrote:
...the solution is not to single people out and berate them into making weird analogies.
I'm contributing nothing to this thread because I don't feel like adding more 'wall of text' posts to this already far too well thought out thread. I just wanted to say that this line made me lol a lot.
Anyway, I think DJ is being picked on a bit much considering people have been racist and sexist and all sort of fun things on this forum with far less consequence in the past. This is just silly, imo. I mean, interesting discussion and all we're having here, but why do you have to make DJ into a bad guy while yer at it? It's not like the statement was -that- bad, when we've all heard much worse ( and at least he tried to cover his ass on it and show that he wasn't being intentionally racist, that has to count fer something, right? ). Anyway, because I feel like it, size=0 ftw. _________________ Homsars Girl n. a bagpipe bent on engulfing the world in a mix of pepper and ketchup.
Our IRC channel is here! :]
Married to DJ the d00d.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
). Singling DJ out here really isn't fair (it also isn't fair that I singled him out as "classist," but I did it anyway). Realistically, this affects everyone, and, as has been said, the solution is not to single people out and berate them into making weird analogies. Nor is it simply to ignore the issue of race ("Race shouldn't matter," but sadly, it does), which doesn't make any of the underlying problems go away. I, again, tend to agree with Mike. Open and honest discussion (although boring) is a good place to start, along with a critical self-consciousness. I could probably say a lot more about this, but 1) I'm getting tired and 2) this is already long enough that 90% of the people here aren't going to read it. Anyway, apologies for my previous sarcastic remarks in this thread.