I'm not racist... but... [Archive]

Sidla

16-03-2004, 16:15

Originally posted by Foxxx
Its just ridiculus these days, you can't say anything without being called racist. In fact it's gone so far, that it actually makes people racist.

I agree with what you say, there is just as much racisim black on white as white on black. The problem I have now is there are so many PC things and equal opportunites around now to 'stop' racism that it is worst to be white. I'd say a single, young white male has it bad these days. Where's his protection? If you're from another race everyone will tip toe round you and give you special allowances, be careful what they say etc etc.

An example, maybe a silly one the MOBO awards, fine, nothing against that, but if there was a MOWO awards could you imagine the outcry?? Also the saying "I'm proud to be black" fine, nothing wrong with that, but if a white person stood there and said he/she was proud to be white, that would be wrong and racist.
Where is the logic in all that?
I'm not suprised people become racist to be honest. Our society is making it that way.
I kinda agree with what you're saying. However consider this; if you said "I'm proud to be white", would you be saying that you're glad you're white otherwise you'd be inferior in some way? Or that you're proud that your race once imported black people for use as slaves?

However, I suppose "I'm proud to be black" could be considered racist because it's somehow making white people look inferior. Or, consider this, maybe the person using this statement is saying it to show support for all the black people before them that had to endure suffering so that they could have their freedom.

t020

16-03-2004, 17:05

Originally posted by elf
Yep I agree with Foxxx, the MOBO awards are daft anyway because isn't all music of black origin anyway?

What makes people think this? I'm sure not ALL forms of music are of black origin.

Mike

16-03-2004, 17:07

Originally posted by Foxxx
Its just ridiculus these days, you can't say anything without being called racist. In fact it's gone so far, that it actually makes people racist.
So what sort of things can't you say without being branded a racist?
The idea that striving for racial equality makes people racist is ludicrous.

Originally posted by Foxxx
there is just as much racisim black on white as white on black.
Is there really? What are you basing that on? I can say that as a white man, I have *never* been subject to any form of racial abuse whatsoever, but every non-white person I have ever spoken to has been subject to racism in one form or another, often on a regular day to day basis. I'm not excusing people who are racist towards white people; that's as bad as any other form of racism, but the magnitude of the problem is tiny in comparison.

Originally posted by Foxxx
The problem I have now is there are so many PC things and equal opportunites around now to 'stop' racism that it is worst to be white. I'd say a single, young white male has it bad these days. Where's his protection?
Protection from what? All that racial abuse that he is subject to every day? Pull the other one please.

Originally posted by Foxxx
Also the saying "I'm proud to be black" fine, nothing wrong with that, but if a white person stood there and said he/she was proud to be white, that would be wrong and racist.
Eh? No it wouldn't - if a white person stands there and says "I'm better because I'm white" then that is being racist. There's nothing wrong of a person from anywhere in the world being proud of who they are, and where they come from.

t020

16-03-2004, 17:25

Originally posted by Mike

The idea that striving for racial equality makes people racist is ludicrous.

Forgive me but, are quotas on employment promoting equality? e.g. companies/ political parties with targets of employing X% of their workforce from ethnic minorities/ genders. Surely jobs should be given on merit and not as a means of making up the numbers and thereby discriminating against the white male who may have been better qualified for the job?

t020

16-03-2004, 17:30

Originally posted by Mike

Is there really? What are you basing that on? I can say that as a white man, I have *never* been subject to any form of racial abuse whatsoever, but every non-white person I have ever spoken to has been subject to racism in one form or another, often on a regular day to day basis. I'm not excusing people who are racist towards white people; that's as bad as any other form of racism, but the magnitude of the problem is tiny in comparison.

I have been on the receiving end of black to white racist insults in Meadowhall a few years ago. The difference is, if I'd have gone to the police crying racial abuse I'd have been laughed all the way out of the station, whereas had it been the other way around, I'd receive a formal warning at the very least.

Also, as discussed in other threads (e.g. caprices boyfriend being beaten up), when a group of white males attacks a black/asian, the offence is automatically classed as racially motivated and therefore the offenders receive much harsher punishment. The other way round however there seems to be a reluctance that a group of blacks/asians would have racial motives for beating up a white.

I am all for equality. Its this *selective equality* that annoys me.

Funky Dave

16-03-2004, 17:32

I agree with t020!!!

Surely a black person would feel greater achievement if they'd achieved something on their merit, rather than knowing that all the white people he/she was in competition with had been excluded from attaining that achievement?

Positive discrimination is still discrmination.

t020

16-03-2004, 17:36

Originally posted by Funky Dave

Positive discrimination is still discrmination.

And it's also negative discrimination to the ethnic majority on the receiving end....

Mike

16-03-2004, 17:39

I think those quotas are trying to achieve a level of balance in the workplace so that those from ethnic minorities are fairly represented proportionately to their population.

As far as I know these are guidelines and not legal requirements, and so the situation of somebody less capable being employed purely on the basis of belonging to an ethnic minority shouldn't arise.

t020

16-03-2004, 17:46

Originally posted by Mike
I think those quotas are trying to achieve a level of balance in the workplace so that those from ethnic minorities are fairly represented proportionately to their population.

As far as I know these are guidelines and not legal requirements, and so the situation of somebody less capable being employed purely on the basis of belonging to an ethnic minority shouldn't arise.

Quotas may be there to try to impose some kind of artificial proportionality to population percentages, but in the real world those from ethnic minorities are less qualified in many professions. This is because University/ college percentages aren't in line with population proportions either. I'm not suggesting people from ethnic backgrounds are any less able, but they do underachieve at the moment, possibly due to a higher representation in deprived, inner city areas. Furthermore, in some professions, e.g. doctors, ethnic minorities could be said to be over representing their proportion of society, but I am yet to hear of imposed quotas to force more white people into their jobs. Guidelines or not, quotas that implicitly give precedence to background/colour/gender as opposed to merit are simply ridiculous and serve only to discriminate themselves.

Funky Dave

16-03-2004, 17:47

I've also been on the receiving end of anti-white racism in Sheffield, though to be fair it's only happened once, and I've suffered far worse at the hands of white yobs. I get the impression that this sort of thing is on the increase though, and that surely can't be a good thing can it?

Mike

16-03-2004, 17:57

Originally posted by t020
Quotas may be there to try to impose some kind of artificial proportionality to population percentages, but in the real world those from ethnic minorities are less qualified in many professions. This is because University/ college percentages aren't in line with population proportions either. I'm not suggesting people from ethnic backgrounds are any less able, but they do underachieve at the moment, possibly due to a higher representation in deprived, inner city areas. Furthermore, in some professions, e.g. doctors, ethnic minorities could be said to be over representing their proportion of society, but I am yet to hear of imposed quotas to force more white people into their jobs. Guidelines or not, quotas that implicitly give precedence to background/colour/gender as opposed to merit are simply ridiculous and serve only to discriminate themselves.
There's a desperate shortage of doctors at the moment, so I think the profession would do well to take whomever they can get, regardless of ethnicity.

To tell you the truth, I don't know enough about how such quotas are implemented to argue the point. I've yet to hear of somebody unqualified for a job being employed just because of their background though.

max

16-03-2004, 18:47

Originally posted by t020
Surely jobs should be given on merit and not as a means of making up the numbers and thereby discriminating against the white male who may have been better qualified for the job?

I'm sorry to bring this up in a forum discussing racism but isn't this sexism? Surely even you, t020, should have spotted that. Or do you truly believe that men are better than women?

halevan

16-03-2004, 19:03

Originally posted by Tony
Sorry Halevan, I don't see any excuse for generalised racism, however it is dressed up.

Sorry Tony,
I don't have to explain my opinions to you or to apologise for them, but I can say that you are way off the mark in thinking I am predjudiced.
I am against terrorists, criminals, theives, muggers, whether they are Black, White, Brown or yellow, tall, small, fat, or thin, and if you are prepared to side with people like that, then I question your motives.!!!

Tony

16-03-2004, 19:07

Originally posted by halevan
Sorry Tony,
I don't have to explain my opinions to you or to apologise for them, but I can say that you are way off the mark in thinking I am predjudiced.
I am against terrorists, criminals, theives, muggers, whether they are Black, White, Brown or yellow, tall, small, fat, or thin, and if you are prepared to side with people like that, then I question your motives.!!!
No need to apoligise Helevan... I agree with your comments there!:thumbsup:

Mike

16-03-2004, 19:12

Originally posted by halevan
but I can say that you are way off the mark in thinking I am predjudiced.
Ha! In the past you've stated that you think that blacks should never be allowed in the British government.

t020

16-03-2004, 19:19

Originally posted by max
I'm sorry to bring this up in a forum discussing racism but isn't this sexism? Surely even you, t020, should have spotted that. Or do you truly believe that men are better than women?

Had you not quoted out of context you'd see that the white MALE example was used to also show that these quotas are in place on grounds of gender too. Do I think sexism = racism? Don't be silly. The 2 issues are however linked under the umbrella of discrimination. Quotas on employment try to force women into under-represented jobs as well as ethnic minorites - this was my point. Quote the whole post in future or you're bound to quote out of context - a bit like those tabloid papers you like so much.

garrence

16-03-2004, 19:23

Dangle a hook, get a bite. Played for and got.

Max, you troll :twisted:

Sidla

16-03-2004, 19:36

Originally posted by t020
I have been on the receiving end of black to white racist insults in Meadowhall a few years ago. The difference is, if I'd have gone to the police crying racial abuse I'd have been laughed all the way out of the station, whereas had it been the other way around, I'd receive a formal warning at the very least.

I find it hard to believe a black person could ever say anything towards a white person that could be considered racist. What did they call you, a "poncey white boy" or something? They probably noticed you looking down your nose at them.

I agree with you about the job quotas thing by the way. I can't for the life of me see how it can be legal, and I have to admit it does seem like politically correctness gone mad.

t020

16-03-2004, 19:54

Originally posted by Sidla
I find it hard to believe a black person could ever say anything towards a white person that could be considered racist. What did they call you, a "poncey white boy" or something?

Unbelievable double standards! Can you not see the hypocrisy here????? Of all the stupid posts I've seen, this is right up there.

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 20:04

Originally posted by t020
Unbelievable double standards! Can you not see the hypocrisy here????? Of all the stupid posts I've seen, this is right up there.

The issue of racism is a bit more subtle and complex than you're making out T020. It's a question of power.

Imagine 9 white guys and one black guy in a room. Does a racist insult from the black guy to the whites have the same power as vice versa? You will say yes, I say no.

The issue is of positive discrimination is a difficult one. I haven't really decided exactly where I stand on it, but I recognise that it is a laudable attempt to redress an imbalance.

We are not starting from a position of equality (in which case positive discrimination would be a nonsense), we are starting from a position in which minorities (eg ethnic) or those who historically have held less power in society (eg women) are at a disadvantage through no fault of their own and where their merits are passed over because of something other than their abilities.

Think about it a bit harder.

Sidla

16-03-2004, 20:31

Originally posted by t020
Unbelievable double standards! Can you not see the hypocrisy here????? Of all the stupid posts I've seen, this is right up there.
Why is that double standards? I've banged my head against the wall 200 times and I still don't see it.

t020

16-03-2004, 21:00

Originally posted by Sidla
Why is that double standards? I've banged my head against the wall 200 times and I still don't see it.

Because you said, and I quote: "I find it hard to believe a black person could ever say anything towards a white person that could be considered racist." So basically you're saying a black person could call a white person a "white ba****" or something on those lines and it would not be racist, but the other way round it would be... you really can't see double standards there? Are you blind???

Sidla

16-03-2004, 21:06

Originally posted by t020
So basically you're saying a black person could call a white person a "white ba****" or something on those lines and it would not be racist, but the other way round it would be...
It would be insulting to the white person, but I don't see how it could be considered racist. Since when has it been racist to call someone white?

bellis

16-03-2004, 21:08

Originally posted by Sidla
It would be insulting to the white person, but I don't see how it could be considered racist. Since when has it been racist to call someone white? so if i called someone a black bas wouldnt that be racist:loopy:

DaBouncer

16-03-2004, 21:09

Gotta side with t020 on this Sidla.

If it's racist to call someone a black b****** surely it's the same in reverse. It's not racist to call someone black nor is it racist to call someone white.

However if you call someone a white b****** it's just as racist as if it were the other way round!

Sidla

16-03-2004, 21:26

Of course it would be racist to call someone a black b******!! You just don't get it do you? Why would you need to bring the persons skin colour into it? Will the word alone not suffice? It's almost as if the 'black' is added in an effort to make the insult carry more weight, therefore it is racist.

On the other hand, if a black person called someone a white b****** then how is that racist? Black people have never had a history of discrimination against white people in this country, so I don't see how 'white' could ever be used as an insult in this example.

I know this doesn't seem fair, but then white people's history of treating black people as lesser life forms isn't fair either. It can't be taken back, and white people should be ashamed of what they've done. I know most white people alive have had nothing to do with it, but it happened and can't be changed.

And before you say it, yes there may be black people who take advantage of this fact. However that is for a court of law to decide, not people like you making rash generalisations.

MI-5

16-03-2004, 21:26

Interesting reading, and you lot called me a racist.

Check this thread out Sheffco.

DaBouncer

16-03-2004, 21:34

Originally posted by Sidla
Of course it would be racist to call someone a black b******!! You just don't get it do you? Why would you need to bring the persons skin colour into it? Will the word alone not suffice? It's almost as if the 'black' is added in an effort to make the insult carry more weight, therefore it is racist.

On the other hand, if a black person called someone a white b****** then how is that racist? Black people have never had a history of discrimination against white people in this country, so I don't see how 'white' could ever be used as an insult in this example.

I know this doesn't seem fair, but then white people's history of treating black people as lesser life forms isn't fair either. It can't be taken back, and white people should be ashamed of what they've done. I know most white people alive have had nothing to do with it, but it happened and can't be changed.

And before you say it, yes there may be black people who take advantage of this fact. However that is for a court of law to decide, not people like you making rash generalisations.
Please clarify who this is addressed to Sidla.

What you are stating may be fact and the white people may have subjected black people to racism for many years. However this does not change the fact. Racist is racist is racist. Whether its white calling black, or black calling white (or even yellow calling brown and green calling blue) whatever.

Just because certain members of society were subject to discrimination doesn't make it right whatsoever for the reverse to be accepted in today's society. If you want to accept it...fine, I wont. And I should and nor should you because acceptance of this breeds resentment and resentment keeps racism alive.
It doesn't matter where the racism is coming from or to whom, it's still racism and still wrong. To think otherwise is just ignorance and stupidity.

saxon51

16-03-2004, 21:38

Originally posted by Sidla

Or, consider this, maybe the person using this statement is saying it to show support for all the black people before them that had to endure suffering so that they could have their freedom.

And all the white people who gave their lives for black people's freedom in the American Civil War?

And all the white people who gave their lives for the freedom of Oriental people in South East Asia?

I'm ashamed of my forefathers if they were involved in slavery, BUT I am very proud to be white based on the history of the majority of my English forefothers.

Being called WHITE TRASH would be as insulting for me as being called BLACK B****** would be to a black person.

As I had nothing to do with slavery, apartheid or Nazis, no person has the right to call me racist names just because some other white has.

Sidla

16-03-2004, 21:39

I'm saying that 'white' cannot be levied as an insult in the way that 'black' can. I don't understand why you don't see that.

Originally posted by markham
And all the white people who gave their lives for black people's freedom in the American Civil War?
I don't see what relavence that has. I'm not saying all white people are racist.

saxon51

16-03-2004, 21:55

Originally posted by Sidla
I'm saying that 'white' cannot be levied as an insult in the way that 'black' can. I don't understand why you don't see that.

.

Sorry Sidla, but I can't see what you are getting at here.
Why is someone calling ME a white b****** any better than me calling someone a black b******? Aren't both insults about race so therefore racist?

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 22:00

Refer to my post above.

Is a short person calling a basketball player a "lanky *******" the same thing as a basketball player calling a short person a "****ing midget"?

Sidla

16-03-2004, 22:04

White is not racist because it never has been. To call someone "black" in this sence would of course be racist, because it's tagged onto the beginning of another insult, as though to give the insult more weight. I don't see how white cold be used in this way, maybe it could be if white people were in a minority, but they aren't.

saxon51

16-03-2004, 22:07

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
Refer to my post above.

Is a short person calling a basketball player a "lanky *******" the same thing as a basketball player calling a short person a "****ing midget"?

There's no difference at all in my eyes and they are both insults.
Same as if a skinny person calls a fat person Lard Arse,
or a fat person calls a skinny person Stick Insect.

t020

16-03-2004, 22:08

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
Refer to my post above.

Is a short person calling a basketball player a "lanky *******" the same thing as a basketball player calling a short person a "****ing midget"?

So what you're saying is that you see white as being the superior quality over being black in the same way as being tall is seen better than being short? Surely that makes *you* the racist one?

Sidla - no offence but you're talking crap. If someone throws an insult that involves race and the person throwing the insult is of a different race, an act of racism is taking place.

rac·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rszm)
n.
The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Can't see any smallprint there that says 'only applies to blacks', can you?

t020

16-03-2004, 22:11

Originally posted by Sidla
White is not racist because it never has been. To call someone "black" in this sence would of course be racist, because it's tagged onto the beginning of another insult, as though to give the insult more weight. I don't see how white cold be used in this way, maybe it could be if white people were in a minority, but they aren't.

Utter rubbish. "White ba****" is as racist as "black ba****". Being in the majority makes no odds at all. If I flew out to Jamaica and got called a "white bas****" would that then qualify as racism in your eyes? Also, since I'd be in the minority could I go around calling people "black ba****" without fear of being called racist? Never heard so much crap in my life.

saxon51

16-03-2004, 22:11

Ecclesall and Longley, at last we agree on something.

One day if I am refered to as a white ********* I may just report it to the police and demand justice.:confused:

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 22:16

saxon51

16-03-2004, 22:22

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
So you're saying that tall people are superior to short ones?

Gotcha :thumbsup:

No, just luckier. They can reach the dirty books:thumbsup:

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 22:25

Originally posted by t020
If I flew out to Jamaica and got called a "white bas****" would that then qualify as racism in your eyes?

In my opinion, yes, in the context of the local or national community.

Originally posted by t020
Also, since I'd be in the minority could I go around calling people "black ba****" without fear of being called racist?

In my opinon, no you couldn't, because most of the richest people in Jamaica are still white - a qustion of power and subjugation, you see. Think of Jamaica in the context of European Imperialism.

Besides, you would be probably be disposed in about 4 minutes. Murder capital of the world, Kingston, you know!

t020

16-03-2004, 22:26

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
So you're saying that tall people are superior to short ones?

Gotcha :thumbsup:

I said... "is *seen* better", as in the general public perception. So you see white as being superior to black do you?

Gotcha :thumbsup:

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 22:32

Originally posted by t020
So what you're saying is that you see white as being the superior quality over being black in the same way as being tall is seen better than being short? Surely that makes *you* the racist one?

The problem here T020 is that you're trying to have your cake and eat it.

In the first half of your statement you say "as being superior", while in the second half you say "is seen [as] better", so, of course the two aren't the same thing, and your question is meaningless.

Either you were trying to pull the wool, or you've made a Freudian slip.

Gotcha :thumbsup:

Sidla

16-03-2004, 22:32

Originally posted by t020
Being in the majority makes no odds at all.
Of course it does!!!! I really don't understand why you don't seem to think it matters? Are you trying to tell me that you would feel racially insulted by someone trying to make an issue about the colour of your skin in a country where the majority of people who live in the country are the same colour as you?

If I flew out to Jamaica and got called a "white bas****" would that then qualify as racism in your eyes?
Yes.

Also, since I'd be in the minority could I go around calling people "black ba****" without fear of being called racist? Never heard so much crap in my life.
You could, but if you might get your face smashed in a few times.

Smiler

16-03-2004, 22:32

My mother is Irish and she experienced quite a lot of racism when she was first here in the 50s. I never understand how she can justify some of her comments about Asian people. She doesnt get it when I tell her she is doing what was done to her.

t020

16-03-2004, 22:35

Originally posted by Sidla
Of course it does!!!! I really don't understand why you don't seem to think it matters? Are you trying to tell me that you would feel racially insulted by someone trying to make an issue about the colour of your skin in a country where the majority of people who live in the country are the same colour as you?

Census figures on which race is the majority/ minority make absolutely no difference at all to racism on an individual level. I find it very insulting to be called a "white ba****" and it is indeed racist.

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 22:35

Besides...I never said I saw white as being superior to black. That would run somewhat contrary to my previous agruments.

t020

16-03-2004, 22:36

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
The problem here T020 is that you're trying to have your cake and eat it.

In the first half of your statement you say "as being superior", while in the second half you say "is seen [as] better", so, of course the two aren't the same thing, and your question is meaningless.

Either you were trying to pull the wool, or you've made a Freudian slip.

Gotcha :thumbsup:

No I think you will find before the "as being superior" part I stated that "you *see*", therefore its a fair comparison between your individual perception of race and a broader social perception of height.

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 22:40

Originally posted by t020
Census figures on which race is the majority/ minority make absolutely no difference at all to racism on an individual level. I find it very insulting to be called a "white ba****" and it is indeed racist.

t020: an exercise in empathy...

Think of a minority which to you belong to (I dunno... chess freak, transvestite, whatever), then imagine the entire football team chanting it at you in front of the whole school.

Next, imagine yourself calling the football team "sad footballing ********".

Which is likely to cause the most offence?

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 22:41

Originally posted by t020
No I think you will find before the "as being superior" part I stated that "you *see*", therefore its a fair comparison between your individual perception of race and a broader social perception of height.

I said, I don't see that, so it's a pretty moot point.

saxon51

16-03-2004, 22:44

Unless of course the geek waits until one of those footballers is on his own, and it happens to be the footballer who wasn't calling him a geek.....That would be an insult.

t020

16-03-2004, 22:54

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
t020: an exercise in empathy...

Think of a minority which to you belong to (I dunno... chess freak, transvestite, whatever), then imagine the entire football team chanting it at you in front of the whole school.

Next, imagine yourself calling the football team "sad footballing ********".

Which is likely to cause the most offence?

The fact of whites being the majority race in the UK is of no significance. How would it be significant that census stats show whites are in the vast majority if a white guy was being racially abused by 1 or more black guys? How would that NOT be racist????

MichaelTravis

16-03-2004, 23:00

Originally posted by t020
The fact of whites being the majority race in the UK is of no significance. How would it be significant that census stats show whites are in the vast majority if a white guy was being racially abused by 1 or more black guys? How would that NOT be racist????

Try to think less in terms of 2+2=5 and more along the lines of E=mc2.

t020

16-03-2004, 23:34

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
Try to think less in terms of 2+2=5 and more along the lines of E=mc2.

:lol: Try thinking less in terms of national level racism and more in terms of individual level racism. Try to use less clichéd formulae too.

mojoworking

17-03-2004, 03:11

Another good indication that someone is about to say something racist/inflammatory/uninformed/stupid is when they begin a sentence with "Don't get me wrong...."

(unless they happen to be Chrissie Hynde, that is)

steelblade

17-03-2004, 08:20

I do think it is just as racist for someone to be called a white b****** as it is black b****** but if someone called me a white whatever then I wouldn't be offended because I am proud to be white and I'm not afriad to say it.

Tony

17-03-2004, 09:04

Originally posted by Sidla
It would be insulting to the white person, but I don't see how it could be considered racist. Since when has it been racist to call someone white?

Can't agree with you Sidla - it's equality though...

Equally racist. Equally uneccesary. Equally bigoted.

Tony

17-03-2004, 09:06

Tony

17-03-2004, 09:11

I think that a lot of you are missing the point. Racism, sexism, et al isn’t' about a set of rules, it's about attitude, and personal ones at that.

Bigotry exists only inside peoples heads. Some of us do it, some of us don't. I think myself lucky (and yes, maybe a little superior)that I don't.

When you try to rationalise it and put it into a category you are creating yet another form of bigotry and intolerance. It isn't about labels and rules ... it's just the opposite!

Open your eyes., and decide for yourself which is the best opinion.

dilwise

17-03-2004, 09:22

I once read somewhere that if you look at someone who is black and your first thought is that this person is black then you are racist.
We all look at people and see short, tall, dark, blonde, thin, fat, etc., so we are all judgemental in some way. I see black people or whatever first I suppose because that is the way vision works and it registers but the way you treat people speaks more about you than anything else.

Everyone is entitled to respect and courtesy. There are good and bad in all societies. We cant change our parents and grandparents but the young (I'm 52) see people as people and that is good.

DaBouncer

17-03-2004, 10:07

Sidla we're trying to educate you here but you're having none of it. Racism is racism no matter who it is directed at and no matter who the majority of the race belongs to in the country it is said.

Imagine you lived in China and a Black man called you a white b******. Is it racist? The Majority are not black, nor white.

Of course it is, because it's making a derogitory comment about a single race directed from another race. Which ever race holds the majority is irrelevant.

If I were in Scotland and I called a welshman a Welsh b****** would I be being racist? Of course I would. He may still be white (maybe not but lets say he's a white welshman), but I'm being racist against the welsh. When was that outcry about Ann Robinson being called a racist because she said the country of Wales belonged in room 101. Why was she called racist? She's white? She said it in England where the majority I'm afraid to say are English.

If you still dont understand that no matter where/when and to whom it is said it is all still racist then I'm afraid there is no helping you.

Chris_Sleeps

17-03-2004, 11:00

Originally posted by Sidla
It can't be taken back, and white people should be ashamed of what they've done.
You've gone mad.

Chris.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 11:06

Originally posted by DaBouncer
Of course it is, because it's making a derogitory comment about a single race directed from another race. Which ever race holds the majority is irrelevant.
I wholeheartedly agree, but what I'm trying to say is that a black person calling a white person a 'white b******' is unlikely to occur as long as black people are in a minority. And even if it did occur I doubt very much wether it would be used as a racist judgement, and it would be unlikely to be considered as one in the eyes of the law.

To put it simply, it's unlikely that any black person living in this country could be racist, because if they were then why would they live here?

And of course racism's about attitude. That's what any "-ism" is about. It's about making judgements, and putting people into a category because of the colour of their skin/sex/hair colour etc. etc.

I think the people who are disagreeing with me are either missing the point I'm trying to make, or just carrying on about it to deliberately p*** me off. :mad:

steelblade

17-03-2004, 11:12

Originally posted by Sidla
To put it simply, it's unlikely that any black person living in this country could be racist, because if they were then why would they live here?

Sorry but that is the biggest load of crap I've heard in ages.

I have been racially abused on a number of occasions by both asians and blacks.

I have been in a pub when black people have been shouting at the landlord because the only music on the jukebox was "white mans music".

You really need to get out more!

Chris_Sleeps

17-03-2004, 11:13

Originally posted by Sidla
I wholeheartedly agree, but what I'm trying to say is that a black person calling a white person a 'white b******' is unlikely to occur as long as black people are in a minority.
I've been chased through Meadowhall by some asian kids calling me a "white *******". I'm sure i'm not the only one.

Chris.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 11:14

I think it's more to do with kids being kids rather than any sort of racism.

steelblade

17-03-2004, 11:16

Originally posted by Sidla
I think it's more to do with kids being kids rather than any sort of racism.

The people who racially abused me were fully grown men.

The people in the pub were fully grown men and women.

Chris_Sleeps

17-03-2004, 11:16

Originally posted by Sidla
I think it's more to do with kids being kids rather than any sort of racism.
I agree.

http://www.hermes-press.com/hitler_youth2.jpg

Chris.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 11:19

So you're comparing children brought up in Nazi Germany with black British youths? That's exactly the sort of generalisation I'm talking about.

DaBouncer

17-03-2004, 11:19

Originally posted by Sidla
To put it simply, it's unlikely that any black person living in this country could be racist, because if they were then why would they live here?
To be honest you've lost the plot here Sidla.
Of course there are black racists in this country. A lot of which are born here. How can you say 'why would they live here'.... it's there country of originin. I personally have experience of black racism towards whites and others. If you haven't seen it then fine, but it's real, it happens and it's still very much racist.

I think the people who are disagreeing with me are either missing the point I'm trying to make, or just carrying on about it to deliberately p*** me off. :mad:
I think you are missing the point on this Sidla. The people disagreeing with you are ones speaking rationally and with correct perception. If it p***** you off because people are not agreeing with you and arguing the point then I'm afraid to say you have a very narrow mind. It seems that you dont want to accept that racism is swings in all directions. You can argue with it until you're blue in the face, but the 'fact' remains is that it is just as racist no matter which direction it comes from.

Chris_Sleeps

17-03-2004, 11:23

Originally posted by Sidla
So you're comparing children brought up in Nazi Germany with black British youths? That's exactly the sort of generalisation I'm talking about.
How am i doing that? I'm just pointing "kids being kids" is still racism. I'm sure if you told an asian shop keeper who'd been abused by white youths all night it was "kids being kids" he'd disgaree with you aswell. My use of The Hitler Youth photo with just crass imagery.

Chris.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 11:29

Originally posted by DaBouncer
To be honest you've lost the plot here Sidla.
Of course there are black racists in this country. A lot of which are born here. How can you say 'why would they live here'.... it's there country of originin. I personally have experience of black racism towards whites and others. If you haven't seen it then fine, but it's real, it happens and it's still very much racist.
I'm not saying it doesn't exist, that would be deluded. I'm saying that it's a lot less likely that anyone of any ethnic minority will have a racist attitude. I really don't understand why people can't see why this must be true?? :confused:

It's this sort of attitude that's really getting to me. Are you trying to say that it's ok to be racist, because they can be racist back?

I think you are missing the point on this Sidla. The people disagreeing with you are ones speaking rationally and with correct perception.
I'm the one that's trying to make the point. What is the point you're trying to make? If you're trying to make a point, then you're correct, I'm missing it.

is just as racist no matter which direction it comes from.
What I'm trying to say is that it's only racist if there is racist motivation. I don't believe in the majority of situations that arise in this country, that ethnic minoritys have a racist attitute. If you think they do, then you are clearly deluded.

DaBouncer

17-03-2004, 11:43

Originally posted by Sidla
I'm not saying it doesn't exist, that would be deluded. I'm saying that it's a lot less likely that anyone of any ethnic minority will have a racist attitude. I really don't understand why people can't see why this must be true?? :confused:
No it's not a lot less likely at all. In fact it is JUST as likely as it is for a White person to be racist.

It's this sort of attitude that's really getting to me. Are you trying to say that it's ok to be racist, because they can be racist back?
Where did I say that? Where did you even suspect that:loopy:
However if you require clarification... NO it is not ok to be racist. It's not ok whether it's black against white or white against black.

I'm the one that's trying to make the point. What is the point you're trying to make? If you're trying to make a point, then you're correct, I'm missing it.
The point you are trying to make is that it's not racist for a black person to call someone a White B****** but it IS racist if a white person was to call someone a Black B******. You're wrong.
The point I'm making and everyone else (which you are clearly missing) is that both examples are racist.

What I'm trying to say is that it's only racist if there is racist motivation. I don't believe in the majority of situations that arise in this country, that ethnic minoritys have a racist attitute. If you think they do, then you are clearly deluded.
Of course it is only racist if it racist motivation I have never contended that fact. The majority of situations that arise in this country are probably not racially motivated (be it black or white). However the media, police and public tend to cry racist (people like you sidla) when it happens if it's from people who happen to be white. However if it happens from someone who is black... 'we cannot be sure if it's racially motivated'.

You are the one deluding yourself if you think that it's one sided the majority of the time.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 11:43

Originally posted by Chris_Sleeps
How am i doing that? I'm just pointing "kids being kids" is still racism.
Yeah, but they'll grow out of it.

Tony

17-03-2004, 11:47

Tony

17-03-2004, 11:50

Originally posted by Sidla
Yeah, but they'll grow out of it.
That takes the biscuit! Maybe they will, but that make it ok until they are past the age of majority? You wouldn't have the same attitude if it was white kids on black kids as you have already said.

If they give the fat kid a kicking just because they're the fat kid is that ok because they will "grow out of it"?

Sidla

17-03-2004, 11:55

Originally posted by DaBouncer

No it's not a lot less likely at all. In fact it is JUST as likely as it is for a White person to be racist.[/b]
Is this a fact or matter of opinion. Whichever it is I don't believe it's accurate.

Where did I say that? Where did you even suspect that:loopy:
However if you require clarification... NO it is not ok to be racist. It's not ok whether it's black against white or white against black.
That just seems to be the attitude that you're putting accross. You seem to be trying to justify racism by saying that it can be 2 sided, which of course it can be, but it's no justification.

The point you are trying to make is that it's not racist for a black person to call someone a White B****** but it IS racist if a white person was to call someone a Black B******. You're wrong.
I think if a white person said that to a black person then the white person would always be racist, where as if a black person said it to a white person then it's not necessarily a racist opinion.

The point I'm making and everyone else (which you are clearly missing) is that both examples are racist.
Maybe, but the point I'm making is that the "white b******" example is:
a. Not as likely to occur
b. Not as likely to be a matter of race
c. Unlikely to be seen as racist by a court of law.

Of course it is only racist if it racist motivation I have never contended that fact.
Glad we agree on that.

However the media, police and public tend to cry racist (people like you sidla) when it happens if it's from people who happen to be white.
That's because it is normally racist when the person happens to be white.

You are the one deluding yourself if you think that it's one sided the majority of the time. Grow up!
You're the one who seems to be delusioned.

Tony

17-03-2004, 11:58

Originally posted by Sidla
I think if a white person said that to a black person then the white person would always be racist, where as if a black person said it to a white person then it's not necessarily a racist opinion.

Rubbish.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 11:58

Originally posted by Tony
No, Sidla, it is you I’m afraid. You are making the assumption that racism is a predominantly white thing. Racism knows no such rules.
That's because it is a predominantly white thing. Why do you think so many white people get sent down for racism, yet hardly anyone from minority races do?

I think that you are trying so hard to defend what you see as “ethnic minorities” that you are actively being racist yourself. You actually see the colour. You think in a way that specifies “ethnic minorities”. :loopy:

Sidla

17-03-2004, 12:00

Originally posted by Tony
Rubbish.
Of course it's not rubbish!!! Why would you call someone a "black b******" unless you were trying to be racist?

Zamo

17-03-2004, 12:01

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
t020: an exercise in empathy...

Think of a minority which to you belong to (I dunno... chess freak, transvestite, whatever), then imagine the entire football team chanting it at you in front of the whole school.

Next, imagine yourself calling the football team "sad footballing ********".

Which is likely to cause the most offence?
I don't agree that the test of whether a statement is racist or not is the amount of offence it causes. Let's apply your analogy...

A skinhead runs into a crowded Mosque and shouts "You Pak1 b*stards". He is but one person against many and, as it happens, there was nobody of Pakistani origin there. Therefore, according to you, his comment and actions are not racist. Umm?!?

Sidla

17-03-2004, 12:02

Originally posted by Tony
That takes the biscuit! Maybe they will, but that make it ok until they are past the age of majority? You wouldn't have the same attitude if it was white kids on black kids as you have already said.

If they give the fat kid a kicking just because they're the fat kid is that ok because they will "grow out of it"?
No of course it doesn't and I never said it does. Just that when people grow up their opinions tend to change.

DaBouncer

17-03-2004, 12:06

Originally posted by Sidla
Is this a fact or matter of opinion. Whichever it is I don't believe it's accurate.
Wow... it's difficult to get through to some poeple. Believe what you like, as you obviously have some problems understanding the whole racist issues in any case.

That just seems to be the attitude that you're putting accross. You seem to be trying to justify racism by saying that it can be 2 sided, which of course it can be, but it's no justification.
I'd like to you to 'quote' where I have 'come across' that I justify racism. I have said time and time again that it's racist from both sides. You seem to be seeing what yoiu want to see rather than what people are trying to tell you.

I think if a white person said that to a black person then the white person would always be racist, where as if a black person said it to a white person then it's not necessarily a racist opinion.
Of course it's racist if a black person said it to a white person. There is no way on this earth you can justify otherwise:loopy:

Maybe, but the point I'm making is that the "white b******" example is:
a. Not as likely to occur
b. Not as likely to be a matter of race
c. Unlikely to be seen as racist by a court of law.

My head hurts now cos it's like hitting it against a brick wall eductaing you Sidla. It does occur, having witnessed it I know it does. And it was racist in the same way as it is coming from someone white towards someone black.

You're the one who seems to be delusioned. I think I and everyone else really can see who is the one deluding themselves and who isn't. Let me give you a hint... it aint me:thumbsup:

Tony

17-03-2004, 12:07

Originally posted by Sidla
Of course it's not rubbish!!! Why would you call someone a "black b******" unless you were trying to be racist?
Of course it's rubbish. Can you find anyone to agree with you?

Whatever term you use it's still a derogatory comment formed using the individuals colour as the basis of the insult. Simple racism. Come on Sidla, you're bright... you know it makes sense.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 12:18

Originally posted by Tony
Whatever term you use it's still a derogatory comment formed using the individuals colour as the basis of the insult. Simple racism. Come on Sidla, you're bright... you know it makes sense.
Huh??? Is that not what I've been saying?

Originally posted by DaBouncer
I'd like to you to 'quote' where I have 'come across' that I justify racism. I have said time and time again that it's racist from both sides. You seem to be seeing what yoiu want to see rather than what people are trying to tell you.
Now you're putting words in my mouth. You never said that, and I never said you did. What I did say was:

That just seems to be the attitude that you're putting accross. You seem to be trying to justify racism by saying that it can be 2 sided, which of course it can be, but it's no justification.

Of course racism isn't right wherever it comes from. However you seem to be argueing that the percentage of racist ethnic minorities is on a par with the percentage of British white people who are racist. In reality the percentage of white people who have been convicted of racism is very much higher.

My head hurts now cos it's like hitting it against a brick wall eductaing you Sidla. It does occur, having witnessed it I know it does. And it was racist in the same way as it is coming from someone white towards someone black.
I have never ever ever ever said that it doesn't. Again you're putting words in my mouth. Of course racism works the other way, but it isn't as common. I really can't see how I'm deluding myself. You're the one who doesn't seem to be looking at the stats.

Tony

17-03-2004, 12:29

Sidla, you have lost me. I am under the impression that you;

A. believe that black on white racism isn’t as bad as white on black.
B. believe that black on white racism can be more easily justified.

Is this not the case?

DaBouncer

17-03-2004, 12:36

Originally posted by Sidla
Huh??? Is that not what I've been saying?
No??? What you said was and I quote:
Originally posted by Sidla here (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=86364#post86364)
Originally posted by t020
So basically you're saying a black person could call a white person a "white ba****" or something on those lines and it would not be racist, but the other way round it would be...[/i]
It would be insulting to the white person, but I don't see how it could be considered racist. Since when has it been racist to call someone white?
Which is what we have all been contending... the fact that it IS racist!!! :loopy:

Originally posted by Sidla
Now you're putting words in my mouth.
True, but you were incinuating that I was saying it was ok to be racist because others can be racist back which is not true. So I was making you aware of how your words can be seen incorrectly!

Originally posted by Sidla
Originally posted by DaBouncer
And it was racist in the same way as it is coming from someone white towards someone black.
I have never ever ever ever said that it doesn't. Again you're putting words in my mouth.
Yes you did... see above.
Maybe there is more people in prison (not for saying racist things but for doing racist acts) that are White than there is black.
However is that any justification to say that this due to the fact black people are less racist than white? Maybe that's the judicial system trying not to see the problem. If we compaired percentage to percentage of racism within races they would be more equal than you appear to accept.

Foxxx

17-03-2004, 12:47

Originally posted by Mike
So what sort of things can't you say without being branded a racist?
The idea that striving for racial equality makes people racist is ludicrous.

Is there really? What are you basing that on? I can say that as a white man, I have *never* been subject to any form of racial abuse whatsoever, but every non-white person I have ever spoken to has been subject to racism in one form or another, often on a regular day to day basis. I'm not excusing people who are racist towards white people; that's as bad as any other form of racism, but the magnitude of the problem is tiny in comparison.

Protection from what? All that racial abuse that he is subject to every day? Pull the other one please.

Eh? No it wouldn't - if a white person stands there and says "I'm better because I'm white" then that is being racist. There's nothing wrong of a person from anywhere in the world being proud of who they are, and where they come from.

Blimey! That all kicked off, anyway I'm going to continue from where I got to which was Mike replying to my post all that way back on page 3!

Ok, Mike, I think you totally missed the point of my post.

"What things can't we say without being branded racist"
...well just about everything...assuming we are both white here, we have to be careful what we say so not to offend anyone and be called racist e.g. is is black, half-cast, coloured, of mixed race, etc etc this week? Which one can we say without thinking about it before saying it? So yes, we do have to be careful what we say. If we say the wrong one, we offend someone and are being racist even though there was no intention of it.

"The idea that striving for racial equality makes people racist is ludicrous"
No, it's not, as mentioned in some of the posts after your's, it has made many people angry. By having all this equality around it just brings racism to the forefront. The idea of jobs being taken by someone not of whiye origin angers many people. These laws all mean well to try and make races mix and live together, but in actual fact it doesn't really work. People just become more racist. Also many people are getting fed up with having to watch what they say or who they fight with etc etc. One white girl hits another white girl, and? nothing. White girl hits black girl and it's racially motivated e.g Cheryl tweedy from Girls aloud. At the end of the day, she might of whacked whoever it was regardless of colour. Now the outcome of such cases is to fuel racism because white people are feeling like the minority.

"Protection from what? All that racial abuse that he is subject to every day? Pull the other one please. "
Again you missed my point. Although racism against white people does go on, I was talking about a young white boy not having any protection from the police etc. If he gets arrested the police can do what they like. If that boy is black, the police have to watch exactly what they do for fear of being accused of being racist. Where are white people's protection?? A black person came claim racial motives for anything these days, for losing a job, for being hit in a club, for being told off at school etc etc. Where is the white persons protection?? Brings me back to my point of the idea that striving for racial equality makes people racist.

"Is there really? What are you basing that on? I can say that as a white man, I have *never* been subject to any form of racial abuse whatsoever, but every non-white person I have ever spoken to has been subject to racism in one form or another, often on a regular day to day basis. I'm not excusing people who are racist towards white people; that's as bad as any other form of racism, but the magnitude of the problem is tiny in comparison"

Show's how niave you are. For a start I am white and from Jewish decendant. Many of my white family were killed in the wars. There has been a huge amount of racism towards people who are white over the years. Also, have you ever tried living in certain areas of this country?? Areas of London where as a white person you are the minority and get racial discrimination from the other races living there. Also, you don't get to hear about it much at all. Briefly mentioned in the news last night the 15 yr old boy murdered by what is believed to be 5 asian men. The police haven't said whether it was racially motivated yet and are probably too scared to if it was. Other way round e.g. Steven Lawrence and it's all over the papers. Racial attack etc etc. It went on and on for a long time. White people are killed by black people all the time, yet the papers ignore it, because if they dared say it was a racially motivated murder, the black community/asian community whatever, would jump on it saying the police were being racist for blaming the motive on racism! I ask you again, where is the white persons protection???

"Eh? No it wouldn't - if a white person stands there and says "I'm better because I'm white" then that is being racist. There's nothing wrong of a person from anywhere in the world being proud of who they are, and where they come from"

I agree of course we should be proud of where we come from, however, lets take an example here Tony Blair in a speach says "I'm proud to be White, I'm English born and breed". Would that be ok? In theory, it should be ok, but it wouldn't be would it. The outcry at such a racial comment would be unbelievable.
Now if all the above is not racially discriminationg against the white person, please explain why not.

My original post was just trying to point out that it has all gone too far the other way now.

mikey

17-03-2004, 12:50

If I said "who's rattled your cage" to black work colleague - Is that racist?

If it was said to a white person it would not be. IMHO

But I was accused of being racist, for making a simple remark about the mood he was in.

:loopy:

Foxxx

17-03-2004, 12:56

Originally posted by mikey
If I said "who's rattled your cage" to black work colleague - Is that racist?

If it was said to a white person it would not be. IMHO

But I was accused of being racist, for making a simple remark about the mood he was in.

:loopy:

Well this is exactly the point I'm trying to make in response to Mike's reply to my post.

There are so many things you have to be careful of saying otherwise you are branded as racist. It's stupid.

This is why racism is getting ridiculus. It starts with a black person complaining about something that you would say to anyone. An innocent comment. The black person crys racism, annoys the white person, then the white person retorts with the "if you don't like it, go back to your own country" and it escalates from there.
No racial hatred was meant by yours or other peoples simples remarks, but it gets out of hand.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 13:21

Originally posted by DaBouncer
here
Originally posted by Sidla

Originally posted by t020
So basically you're saying a black person could call a white person a "white ba****" or something on those lines and it would not be racist, but the other way round it would be...

It would be insulting to the white person, but I don't see how it could be considered racist. Since when has it been racist to call someone white?

Which is what we have all been contending... the fact that it IS racist!!!
In most situations I don't think it would be.

Let me try it from a different angle.

Assuming the insult is issued purely because of the colour of the persons skin. IMO this situation is rare, but if it did occur then the person who issued the insult would indeed be racist, what ever colour or creed they are.

However, most people don't go around spouting off insults to people just because of their race. So lets assume there was another reason that the person felt they should issue an insult (like the "looking down nose" example I used in the first place which started this whole argument). In this situation if a white person said to a black person "you black b******" then IMO it would be racist. There was no need to bring the persons race into the insult and it was only used as if to add more weight. White people should know better than to say this.

In this situation, if a black person said "you white b******" then no, I don't think it is racist. Being white is not insulting and it never has been (see history as already discussed), so I don't see how it could be considered racist.

DaBouncer

17-03-2004, 13:26

Originally posted by Sidla
However, most people don't go around spouting off insults to people just because of their race. So lets assume there was another reason that the person felt they should issue an insult (like the "looking down nose" example I used in the first place which started this whole argument). In this situation if a white person said to a black person "you black b******" then IMO it would be racist. There was no need to bring the persons race into the insult and it was only used as if to add more weight. White people should know better than to say this.

In this situation, if a black person said "you white b******" then no, I don't think it is racist. Being white is not insulting and it never has been (see history as already discussed), so I don't see how it could be considered racist.
Then you are a fool for thinking that it is not.
I can't argue any more than what I have said other than going over and over and over the same ground.

It's racist... pure and simple!

Sidla

17-03-2004, 13:29

Originally posted by DaBouncer
Then you are a fool for thinking that it is not.
I can't argue any more than what I have said other than going over and over and over the same ground.

It's racist... pure and simple!
I don't see why you think that. How can you be offended by the colour of your skin if you're white?

DaBouncer

17-03-2004, 13:33

The same can be said how can you be offended by the colour of your skin if you're black???

It's racist because of the context it has been stated no matter which way you slice it FFS. You haven't got a clue!

If someone says you black b****** it is racist
If someone says you white b****** it is racist
If somneone says you asian b****** it is racist
If someone says you Irish b****** it is racist

Get it? Nope dint think so!

Zamo

17-03-2004, 13:40

Originally posted by Sidla
Assuming the insult is issued purely because of the colour of the persons skin. IMO this situation is rare, but if it did occur then the person who issued the insult would indeed be racist, what ever colour or creed they are.

However, most people don't go around spouting off insults to people just because of their race. So lets assume there was another reason that the person felt they should issue an insult (like the "looking down nose" example I used in the first place which started this whole argument). In this situation if a white person said to a black person "you black b******" then IMO it would be racist. There was no need to bring the persons race into the insult and it was only used as if to add more weight. White people should know better than to say this.
You could get away with saying a grown up should know better than a child but saying white people should know better than ??? implies that ??? can be forgiven because they are not as clever/knowledgable/wise.

Originally posted by Sidla
In this situation, if a black person said "you white b******" then no, I don't think it is racist. Being white is not insulting and it never has been (see history as already discussed), so I don't see how it could be considered racist. [/B]
So being black is insulting?!? Now that is insulting! :loopy:

Sidla

17-03-2004, 13:41

Originally posted by DaBouncer
The same can be said how can you be offended by the colour of your skin if you're black???
Because of the history of racial hatred towards black people from white people.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

It all comes down to the context which the word is used. That's my opinion anyway.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 13:42

Originally posted by Zamo
You could get away with saying a grown up should know better than a child but saying white people should know better than ??? implies that ??? can be forgiven because they are not as clever/knowledgable/wise.
If there's a reason why you didn't know better I'm sure the court would love to hear about it. I'm not saying people of other race don't know better, I'm saying that being white is not an issue to them in the way that being black was once an issue to us.
Originally posted by Zamo
So being black is insulting?!? Now that is insulting! :loopy:
Does anyone else want to put words in my mouth?

Tony

17-03-2004, 15:00

Originally posted by Sidla
Because of the history of racial hatred towards black people from white people.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

It all comes down to the context which the word is used. That's my opinion anyway.

Maybe I have been lucky, but I have NEVER had any of the problems that you talk about. I know loads of people of all sorts of colours and races and religions and NEVER EVER has anyone said that I have offended them. I don't even think about behaving differently with people, period!

As for "Who's rattled your cage" - I had to read that one three times before I understood why it was being put forward as potentially racist. Perhaps that's it... I JUST DON'T GET racism, therefore I don't do it, therefore I don't have any problems with anyone. Do I give off different vibes or something?

Sidla

17-03-2004, 15:16

I think you're misunderstanding me somewhere along the line, and I really can't understand why. What problems do I talk of? Just like you say, I have never offended anyone either. Were you getting the impression I had for some reason?

As I said it's all about context. As long as you don't mean to offend people, 99% of the time you won't.

thenewborn

17-03-2004, 15:47

Originally posted by Funky Dave
I've also been on the receiving end of anti-white racism in Sheffield, though to be fair it's only happened once, and I've suffered far worse at the hands of white yobs. I get the impression that this sort of thing is on the increase though, and that surely can't be a good thing can it?

i was on the recieving end of racism in london, when i was bricked by a group of black males. i dontr ealy know if this was racism, but i know for crtain that if it was a group of whites on a black person t would be "racist"

Sidla

17-03-2004, 16:07

Originally posted by thenewborn
i was on the recieving end of racism in london, when i was bricked by a group of black males. i dontr ealy know if this was racism, but i know for crtain that if it was a group of whites on a black person t would be "racist"
It depends on the motivation really. If the motivation behind it wasn't racist, I really don't see how they could be guilty of racism.

qazitory

17-03-2004, 16:16

I went to a mainly Muslim school (Earl Marshall), in which there was only me and two other girls in my class that were white. We were the ethnic minority!! Even the teachers could have been seen as racist! Regularly some of the teachers used to switch to speaking their own language, so we wouldn't know what they were saying!

I have personally been experienced racism because if being white, so no one can say it doesn't exist!! Even at primary school it was as petty as vanilla ice cream!!!!

Mike

17-03-2004, 16:27

Originally posted by Foxxx
Ok, Mike, I think you totally missed the point of my post.
Yes, it looks like I did - I thought you meant that people would start on a path of race-hate, rather than as you meant being labelled as racist.

Originally posted by Foxxx
No, it's not, as mentioned in some of the posts after your's, it has made many people angry. By having all this equality around it just brings racism to the forefront.
That's a good thing in my book - if people are angered by it then they should question their motives.

Originally posted by Foxxx
The idea of jobs being taken by someone not of whiye origin angers many people.
That's their problem - the jobs "being taken" (which is a bit of a myth anyway) are generally ones that the people doing the complaining would never stoop to doing themselves.

Originally posted by Foxxx
These laws all mean well to try and make races mix and live together, but in actual fact it doesn't really work. People just become more racist.
Maybe I didn't miss the point of your post after all - if people become so embittered by attempts at racial equality that they themselves "become" racist, then I suggest that they are already racist and are using it as an excuse to express their beliefs.

Originally posted by Foxxx
Cheryl tweedy from Girls aloud. At the end of the day, she might of whacked whoever it was regardless of colour. Now the outcome of such cases is to fuel racism because white people are feeling like the minority.
So why did Ms Tweedy call the woman a "black bitch" before hitting her, if it wasn't racially motivated?

Originally posted by Foxxx
If that boy is black, the police have to watch exactly what they do for fear of being accused of being racist.
Not true at all - Black people die disproportionately in police custody. Remember the findings of the Lawrence Report?

Originally posted by Foxxx
Show's how niave you are.
No it doesn't, I was relating my personal experience - just because I've never been racially abused doesn't make me naiive.

Originally posted by Foxxx
Also, have you ever tried living in certain areas of this country?? Areas of London where as a white person you are the minority and get racial discrimination from the other races living there.
I never said that there is no racism directed at white people, did I? I said that the magnitude of the problem is tiny in comparison.

Originally posted by Foxxx
Briefly mentioned in the news last night the 15 yr old boy murdered by what is believed to be 5 asian men. The police haven't said whether it was racially motivated yet and are probably too scared to if it was.
The police are more scared that far-right organisations use it as propaganda.

Originally posted by Foxxx
White people are killed by black people all the time, yet the papers ignore it
So how do you know about all these tons of murders then, when the rest of us don't?

Originally posted by Foxxx
My original post was just trying to point out that it has all gone too far the other way now.
I disagree - judging by the consistent displays of prejudice just on this forum alone, I would say things have got a long long way to go.

The people whom it makes uncomfortable are the people who need to examine their own beliefs.

qazitory

17-03-2004, 16:33

The police are more scared that far-right organisations use it a propaganda.

No I disagree. As even if it is found to be racial, I think the police are gonna keep it quiet.

I think it has got to the point now that the police are almost afraid of arresting anyone who isn't white, as they could turn around and call it 'racist'.

Mike

17-03-2004, 16:35

Well, don't take if from me - read it for yourself:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3520276.stm

Sidla

17-03-2004, 16:35

Originally posted by qazitory
Regularly some of the teachers used to switch to speaking their own language, so we wouldn't know what they were saying!
I don't see how this is racism. How do you know the motivation behind it was because of your skin colour? Are you sure the teachers were not trying to communicate better with other pupils whos English wasn't so good?

qazitory

17-03-2004, 16:42

Originally posted by Sidla
I don't see how this is racism. How do you know the motivation behind it was because of your skin colour? Are you sure the teachers were not trying to communicate better with other pupils whos English wasn't so good?

Er no, the teacher was doing it on purpose!! Even the people in the class who could understand him told him off!! Yeah if someone didn't understand something because of the language, he would explain to them in private.

Yeah it is racism as he KNEW we couldn't speak that language, and he could.

But the point I was trying to make is that yeah kids will be kids, but its not just kids.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 16:46

Why didn't you report it as racial discrimination then?

qazitory

17-03-2004, 16:55

Because the other teachers didn't want to know, as it was a failing school already. They didn't want complaints from the students about the teachers, as it would make the situation worse. The inspectors were just putting all the blame on the pupils, where it wasn't! In the end we just changed lessons to solve arguing.

Sidla

17-03-2004, 17:03

Originally posted by qazitory
Because the other teachers didn't want to know, as it was a failing school already. They didn't want complaints from the students about the teachers, as it would make the situation worse. The inspectors were just putting all the blame on the pupils, where it wasn't! In the end we just changed lessons to solve arguing.
Then go to the police? The situation's not likely to get any better if problems like this go unreported.

MichaelTravis

17-03-2004, 17:09

Originally posted by Zamo
I don't agree that the test of whether a statement is racist or not is the amount of offence it causes. Let's apply your analogy...

A skinhead runs into a crowded Mosque and shouts "You Pak1 b*stards". He is but one person against many and, as it happens, there was nobody of Pakistani origin there. Therefore, according to you, his comment and actions are not racist. Umm?!?

It wasn't supposed to be a direct analogy to racism, it was an exercise in empathy.

Insults carry more weight when the insulted person is in the minority. I agree with Sidla more or less, because, living in England, someone calling me a "white *******" simply wouldn't offend me racially (although I obviously would prefer not to be insulted full stop).

I can accept that it might be different for a white person living in a totally black area and being called a "white *******", but even then it's not the same as the reverse. There has never been a culture in this country of white people being systematically put down, disadvantaged and abused because of the colour of their skin. Therefore how could a racial insult have the same resonance for a white person as for a black person?

I can't really argue with the point of view of most of you that an insult regarding the colour of a person's skin is always racist whether black, white or whatever, but I think that is being wilfully simplistic.

You have to imagine how people are actually made to feel by this kind of racist behaviour.

qazitory

17-03-2004, 17:12

We just ignored him in the end lol I know he left in the end though, not sure why.

But with regards to the other pupils shouting insults at me and my friends, does that seems racist to you? Coz it does/did to me. We were singled out because we had different coloured skin.

Fletch

17-03-2004, 17:30

i think the third post is totally true

it all depends on how you express your feelings, whether you keep them to yourself or express them to others.

you could be the most racist person in the world, but keep your comments to yourself
and yet you could only be racist around others you know are racist. or you could be totally not racist but only act it when around other racists.

it all depends on who you are with and in what state of mind you are in!

t020

17-03-2004, 23:16

Originally posted by Sidla
I don't see why you think that. How can you be offended by the colour of your skin if you're white?

By saying this, you are implying that being white is superior and therefore can never be an insult and will always be some kind of compliment. THAT is the racist attitude. You've lost the plot on this one sidla, well and truly.

Furthermore, you're saying a black person should be offended because of the colour of their skin, as though being black in itself is an insult. THIS is a racist attitude.

Your argument is very muddled, sidla. You keep changing what you say from "ethnic minorities can never be racist" to "ethnic minorities commit racist offences less" to "ethnic minorities can sometimes be racist but whites will always be racist" etc etc. It isn't surprising that you're so deluded with this topic, really. As Tony (I think it was him anyway) points out, you have become so 'unracist' you have gone full circle and become racist - insinuating that being black is an insult and being white is a compliment.

Tony

18-03-2004, 08:25

Originally posted by t020
you have become so 'unracist' you have gone full circle and become racist

I think that pretty much sums it up :( Irony isn't dead!

Zamo

18-03-2004, 08:39

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
I can accept that it might be different for a white person living in a totally black area and being called a "white *******", but even then it's not the same as the reverse. There has never been a culture in this country of white people being systematically put down, disadvantaged and abused because of the colour of their skin. Therefore how could a racial insult have the same resonance for a white person as for a black person?
So it's OK to be racially abusive to white people because there hasn't been a "history" of it? This doesn't make sense! :loopy:

Either it is wrong to racially abuse people or it isn't. Isn't it?!?

MT, you clearly don't like so answer me this. Do you think it helps to build better race relations and create more tolerance if you tell white people that it is wrong to racially abuse others but it is OK (or less important) if others racially abuse them? Do you think this serves to quell or stir the racist beast within? Think about it.

SusieP

18-03-2004, 14:37

Originally posted by Fletch
i think the third post is totally true

it all depends on how you express your feelings, whether you keep them to yourself or express them to others.

you could be the most racist person in the world, but keep your comments to yourself
and yet you could only be racist around others you know are racist. or you could be totally not racist but only act it when around other racists.

it all depends on who you are with and in what state of mind you are in!

That's ridiculous. A person with racist thoughts who doesn't express them is still a racist. If they are in charge of hiring people, they may still be racist in their hiring decision. Keeping something in your head doesn't change anything with regard to your actions!

Sue.

Belle

18-03-2004, 16:24

Originally posted by steelblade
The people who racially abused me were fully grown men.

The people in the pub were fully grown men and women.

You sure it was racist abuse and not just general "Can't stand her" type of abuse?

Belle

18-03-2004, 16:31

Originally posted by qazitory
We just ignored him in the end lol I know he left in the end though, not sure why.

But with regards to the other pupils shouting insults at me and my friends, does that seems racist to you? Coz it does/did to me. We were singled out because we had different coloured skin.

How do you know they didnt just not like you anyway?

Belle

18-03-2004, 16:49

There are lots of peopel in this thread I object to, and they are all white, does that make me a racist?

Okay, that was tongue in cheek

The reason you dont see me much on here any more is because I dont any longer choose to spend my quality time with such a bunch of neanderthal knee-jerk bigots.....in case you were wondering (and I know some were at least)

What Foxxx and T020 entirely fail to get, perhaps because they are so busy decrying almost everyone else in the country but themselves that they dont pay proper attention, is that a thing is only racist if it is meant to be racist.

If you say "coloured" and then someone says to you "I would rather you didnt use that word, it makes me feel uncomfortable about myself..." or whatever, and you say "Oh, I didnt know, I shant say it again" that is NOT racist.

If you go on saying it, not bothering to re-educate yourself, even after you have been told, even knowing it causes offence, then you are being racist

If someone says "dont call me a cripple, I prefer to be described as someone with disabilities" and you dont learn your lesson then you are some other -ism

Nothing is racist without intent

Your continual whining and moaning and whinging about political correctness in so many threads so often, both of you, and others too if I could only be bothered to search for them, is just a pathetic excuse at wanting to go on being rude, obnoxious, cruel, hurtful and whatever, without having to curb your behaviour or put yourself out any.

You think you should be free to be as insulting as you like, about anyone that takes your fancy, and if they dont like it they can get stuffed. Many contributors have tried to make you see that you just cant go on like that. Not without expecting to get into bother for it anyway.

Political correctness, if we must use that term, is about making sure that once you know a term is hurtful or inappropriate, you get rid of it from your vocabulary. How hard can it be to be careful not to hurt other people?

In general terms re the rest of the debate, racism is wrong, as are all isms. We are all individuals. Generalisation at the cost of individuality is always wrong

Black on white violence, if racially motivated, is wrong, as is black on white violence if not racially motivated. And yes of course I know it goes on. Not as much as the other way mind. However, the fact that it does go on, does not make it okay for everyone to throw all restraint aside and enter a free for all - which is another implication of what is said here in some of these threads.

"It is okay for me to be widely critical and condemnatory of a whole nation of people, threaten them however I like, in anyway I want (like those coppers on that TV documentary) because an asian guy once jumped my mate outside a club."

Not good enough

Bad behaviour is wrong, whoever commits it.

Surely people dont still bother to say "I'm not racist but..." .

They either are not racist and dont feel the need to say anything or they are racist and proud

What a horrible world we live in

Now you know why I dont come on here much any more....if that is what I think, right?

MichaelTravis

18-03-2004, 17:02

Originally posted by Zamo
So it's OK to be racially abusive to white people because there hasn't been a "history" of it? This doesn't make sense! :loopy:

Either it is wrong to racially abuse people or it isn't. Isn't it?!?

MT, you clearly don't like so answer me this. Do you think it helps to build better race relations and create more tolerance if you tell white people that it is wrong to racially abuse others but it is OK (or less important) if others racially abuse them? Do you think this serves to quell or stir the racist beast within? Think about it.

Clearly don't like what?

I think people abusing each other is always wrong.

The fact that I think black on white racial abuse in this country is not of the same order (ie it's not quite the same thing, but still wrong) as white on black racial abuse does not mean that I would tell people it's okay for blacks to abuse whites. Because it clearly isn't.

In the early part of the 20th century when the Suffragettes were campaigning for the vote for women, which do you see as "worse":

A) A man claiming that all women are weak and inferior and not entitled to the same rights as men.

B) A woman claiming that all men are brutish, arrogant, insensitive and not fit to hold power.

Both are clearly incorrect generalisations, but in that particular circumstance, I would say (A) is the more dangerous and negative viewpoint.

If you say the two are the same, then I think you are being too simplistic.

I'm bowing out of this argument now - I've said all I want to. Thanks.

t020

18-03-2004, 17:06

Don't see the problem here Belle - you have pretty much agreed with what I (and many others) were saying in that racism, either way round, is wrong. Can't quite see what your problem is? :loopy:

SusieP

18-03-2004, 17:09

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
Clearly don't like what?

I think people abusing each other is always wrong.

The fact that I think black on white racial abuse in this country is not of the same order (ie it's not quite the same thing, but still wrong) as white on black racial abuse does not mean that I would tell people it's okay for blacks to abuse whites. Because it clearly isn't.

In the early part of the 20th century when the Suffragettes were campaigning for the vote for women, which do you see as "worse":

A) A man claiming that all women are weak and inferior and not entitled to the same rights as men.

B) A woman claiming that all men are brutish, arrogant, insensitive and not fit to hold power.

Both are clearly incorrect generalisations, but in that particular circumstance, I would say (A) is the more dangerous and negative viewpoint.

If you say the two are the same, then I think you are being too simplistic.

I'm bowing out of this argument now - I've said all I want to. Thanks.

That's great - make some inflamatory statements and then back out of the discussion. Good game.

"X are not entitled to the same rights as Y" and "Y should not hold power (implying X should)" are equally damaging statements. Your statement that comparing the two is too "simplistic" is asinine.

But feel free to bow out.

t020

18-03-2004, 17:09

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
Clearly don't like what?

I think people abusing each other is always wrong.

The fact that I think black on white racial abuse in this country is not of the same order (ie it's not quite the same thing, but still wrong) as white on black racial abuse does not mean that I would tell people it's okay for blacks to abuse whites. Because it clearly isn't.

In the early part of the 20th century when the Suffragettes were campaigning for the vote for women, which do you see as "worse":

A) A man claiming that all women are weak and inferior and not entitled to the same rights as men.

B) A woman claiming that all men are brutish, arrogant, insensitive and not fit to hold power.

Both are clearly incorrect generalisations, but in that particular circumstance, I would say (A) is the more dangerous and negative viewpoint.

If you say the two are the same, then I think you are being too simplistic.

I'm bowing out of this argument now - I've said all I want to. Thanks.

That example is a bad example as it is bringing in physical attributes and nothing will change the fact that men are generally stronger than women, so of course A is the more dangerous viewpoint. In terms of race though, one race isn't 'weaker' but you are making it out to be like blacks/asians are a weaker race who need protecting. That in itself is racist.

MichaelTravis

18-03-2004, 17:36

Originally posted by t020
That example is a bad example as it is bringing in physical attributes and nothing will change the fact that men are generally stronger than women, so of course A is the more dangerous viewpoint. In terms of race though, one race isn't 'weaker' but you are making it out to be like blacks/asians are a weaker race who need protecting. That in itself is racist.

As hard as you try, you're not going to make me look racist (by the way, are you saying women are inferior?).

It's nothing to do with weaker/stronger, superior/inferior. The point is that one group holds the power and the other doesn't.

MichaelTravis

18-03-2004, 17:44

Originally posted by Call_Me_Sue
That's great - make some inflamatory statements and then back out of the discussion. Good game.

"X are not entitled to the same rights as Y" and "Y should not hold power (implying X should)" are equally damaging statements. Your statement that comparing the two is too "simplistic" is asinine.

But feel free to bow out.

I guess I've bowed back in for now.

I didn't intend to make "inflamatory statements" at all - I thought it was a worthwhile analogy.

My statement that comparing the two is "too simplistic" is not unreasonable, in my opinion. Feel free to disagree, as you obviously have.

As for "backing out of the discussion", I'm not taking my ball and going home, I just haven't got much else to say, and it's all getting a bit boring.

SusieP

18-03-2004, 18:32

Fair enough :)

Sue

t020

18-03-2004, 19:06

Originally posted by MichaelTravis
As hard as you try, you're not going to make me look racist (by the way, are you saying women are inferior?).

It's nothing to do with weaker/stronger, superior/inferior. The point is that one group holds the power and the other doesn't.

Physically inferior in terms of strength yes, which is what you used in your analogy which makes it a bad comparison. Answer me this.... who would 'hold' the power if a group of 12 blacks ganged up on 1 white man in an insolated area of a predominantly ethnic area and started hurling racial abuse at him? Tell me how the fact that some of the black persons ancestors MIGHT have been used as slaves hundreds of years ago is relevant? Tell me how the fact that, nationwide, blacks are an ethnic minority is relevant?

DaBouncer

18-03-2004, 19:41

Originally posted by t020
Originally posted by MichaelTravis
As hard as you try, you're not going to make me look racist (by the way, are you saying women are inferior?).

It's nothing to do with weaker/stronger, superior/inferior. The point is that one group holds the power and the other doesn't.
Physically inferior in terms of strength yes
I know a fair few of my female door supervisor colleagues that would out power you in terms of physical strength t020 i can promise you that!

t020

18-03-2004, 19:48

Originally posted by DaBouncer
Physically inferior in terms of strength yes
I know a fair few of my female door supervisor colleagues that would out power you in terms of physical strength t020 i can promise you that!

Hence why I stated 'generally'. Simple genetic processes ensure that on average, males are bigger and stronger than females. Its not important, its just a bad example to use by MichaelTravis.

MichaelTravis

18-03-2004, 21:30

Hence why I stated 'generally'. Simple genetic processes ensure that on average, males are bigger and stronger than females. Its not important, its just a bad example to use by MichaelTravis.

I really think the physically inferior thing is a red herring. I didn't wasn't even particularly thinking about the physical side. Before women had the vote, they were considered mentally inferior to men and, by some men, not quite human at all.

Hence, the woman's aggression in resistance to these attitudes (statement B) is more justified, in my mind, than the aggression which maintains the unjust status quo (statement A).

That, in a nutshell, is my whole argument. I know you all disagree, and I can appreciate why. So be it, let's diagree.

t020

18-03-2004, 21:37

OK, lets agree to disagree.

PS. RPG - no, *I* didn't break my quote tags. I just pressed quote on DB's thread, wrote below it and posted. More to do with the system being unable to quote nested quotes properly, me thinks. Try quoting that post yourself and see.

DaBouncer

19-03-2004, 07:09

Originally posted by t020
OK, lets agree to disagree.

PS. RPG - no, *I* didn't break my quote tags. I just pressed quote on DB's thread, wrote below it and posted. More to do with the system being unable to quote nested quotes properly, me thinks. Try quoting that post yourself and see.
Mine worked and yours is still wrong!!!! :P

qazitory

19-03-2004, 17:10

Originally posted by Belle
How do you know they didnt just not like you anyway?

Because its a bit funny the only people he was funny with were white....

t020

19-03-2004, 21:47

Originally posted by DaBouncer
Mine worked and yours is still wrong!!!! :P

No, DB, if you quote the post of yours that I quoted and don't bother editing the quote tags, you will find the code contains 1 open quote tag and 2 closed ones. This is a fault in the system, simple as.

Below is the code brought up by using the quote button to quote your post (apostrophes entered to avoid the code becoming active):

['QUOTE]['i]Originally posted by DaBouncer ['/i]
['B]['B]Physically inferior in terms of strength yes['/B]['/QUOTE]
I know a fair few of my female door supervisor colleagues that would out power you in terms of physical strength t020 i can promise you that! ['/B]['/QUOTE]

As you can see, 1 open quote, 2 closed quotes, hence the code doesn't quote properly. This is obviously a problem for Geoff to address so perhaps one of the mods could mention it to him? (doubt he'd take much notice of me).

Pauly

19-03-2004, 22:14

Can everyone forget their obsession for being 'right' and just get back on topic! :mad:

DaBouncer

20-03-2004, 02:02

Originally posted by t020
No, DB, if you quote the post of yours that I quoted and don't bother editing the quote tags, you will find the code contains 1 open quote tag and 2 closed ones. This is a fault in the system, simple as.

Below is the code brought up by using the quote button to quote your post (apostrophes entered to avoid the code becoming active):

['QUOTE]['i]Originally posted by DaBouncer ['/i]
['B]['B]Physically inferior in terms of strength yes['/B]['/QUOTE]
I know a fair few of my female door supervisor colleagues that would out power you in terms of physical strength t020 i can promise you that! ['/B]['/QUOTE]

As you can see, 1 open quote, 2 closed quotes, hence the code doesn't quote properly. This is obviously a problem for Geoff to address so perhaps one of the mods could mention it to him? (doubt he'd take much notice of me).
Like I say t020 mine worked fine for me!

You're right he wouln't take any notice of you... you wanna know why? Well I guess you already know!

igli

20-03-2004, 09:09

Hi,

I'm a noobie, and maybe you've all moved past this post, so fair play.. Blimey what a row tho!

Reminds me of arguments in the 70s (yes I'm a child of the ILEA much reviled by Thatcher et al. and personally it was a much better education than I see most kids getting nowadays) where the distinction was made between raciAList and racist.

All the examples given are racialist; the point is that when it comes down to it, black (ie non-white=>politically black- we can argue that one later ;) people are simply not in a position of power. If you think twelve youths is harsh, think how we feel when we sh*t is pushed thru our doors, followed by petrol bombs and a beating for not keeping our heads bowed, followed by the police arresting us if we don't meekly accept it.

This happens- there's loads of cases documented, and those are the tip of the iceberg. No, of course that doesn't excuse any badness; sh*te is sh*te whether you're black or white. I just find it ironic that people on this board feel so threatened by a bit of talk. Is your identity that insecure that someone telling you how bad they're being treated is just too much for you, that you'd "end up being racist"? Sounds to me like you already have that in the back of your head.

And how would you react if your family was harrassed, spat on and victimised in their own home? Would you be ready for reconciliation? Imagine then that you're told not to harp on cos you're boring/ alienating people..

So what if someone's a bit touchy? Why can't a black person be touchy? I'm not excusing anyone; it's just that most of you have no experience of truly being in the minority. After all, you just go to the next village and you fit in. Yet you're so up in arms about how victimised you are when for one brief moment you're not the dominant force.

So having peeped out from your relatively sheltered position, you don't like the harshness, and you can't see why someone else lumps you in with your people (can't think!) so you do the same, it's how you were thinking anyway. Only now you can reassure yourself that it's all down to those crazy black folks, lefties etc..

You say that you're just speaking normally, and I'm sure you are. Maybe that guy was having a hard time, maybe his life was going crap and on top of evrything else he reacted badly. So what? Have you never done that? How about not just banging on about how you feel, but maybe giving that guy a bit of time and attention? Oh, sorry, we can only give understanding to people who look like us, anyone else has to have their actions dissected and be told how they've acted badly.

Get real. We're all just people, and in any given situation power could be in any hands. That doesn't change the fact that overall (using a generalisation) white people `own' the resources, control the power structures etc. In /general/ white people are better-fed, housed and educated. Equality doesn't come into it.

I hope it's getting better, and I believe it will, mainly thru the kids who've grown up hearing the right messages, even if their parents are gritting their teeth. That doesn't always last, as it's easier just to blame someone else, not to question your own when the outside world is so harsh.

I understand not wanting to hear all about it etc. I just think that, no offense, we hear all about WASP lives, we have the culture stuffed down our throats - how far do you have to go to get away from American films? Sure, I can turn away (often do) but it'd be nice to feel that other issues beyond just who's shafting who (in whatever fashion ;) could be discussed. And sorry, but if we're discussing serious issues, for a lot of non-white people that includes racism, as well as all the other stuff that goes on in life.

Personally, I think of it more as a cultural thing; there are real problems with the bland one-size-fits all approach. As Public Enemy said: "NO we're not the same, cos we don't know the game."

Now it's become more a thing of rich and poor. If you can't afford to buy this car, it's because you're inferior. Great culture, what a history, all down the drain. When the money's gone, and the spending ends..

God, I'm wittering! Sorry, wanted to get some stuff off my chest. (After reading the last 10 pages ;)

My 2p: differences are negative when they come between us, positive when seen as something to celebrate.

(If everybody looked the same..)

Later,
Igli.

BrainThrust

20-03-2004, 11:05

Y'know igli,

thanks for bringing this topic back on track, some very intelligent comments on this issue too, and i think that you have hit at the heart of the matter.

People of any colour when they see difference as negative things are partly to blame. We should all try to see diversity as one of the best things about cultures mixing.

Wilf

t020

20-03-2004, 11:14

Originally posted by DaBouncer
Like I say t020 mine worked fine for me!

You're right he wouln't take any notice of you... you wanna know why? Well I guess you already know!

Lucky you, but it doesn't work properly on mine when the quote button is used on that ONE particular post you made, as shown by the code I posted, and RPG accepts this is the case too:

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=87712#post87712

igli

20-03-2004, 11:45

Originally posted by BrainThrust
People of any colour when they see difference as negative things are partly to blame. We should all try to see diversity as one of the best things about cultures mixing.

Definitely- there's strength in diversity. Sides, we're all individuals, that's why we need to look after minorities- we're all a minority of one..

PS to t020: I don't know you, so forgive me if I'm being a bit forward, but I don't think many people are interested in you proving some techie point about the quote system, not in the forum. Well all right, I'm not, then.. ;)

Sheesh, can't we keep it a little more civil?

oxbeast

20-03-2004, 12:54

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1174042,00.html

have a lookat this. One of Blunkett's advisors says it is OK for firms to only hire white people 'if they believe that their customers are racists'
What with public servants refering to the public as 'customers' these days, it would seem to apply to him as well.

DaBouncer

20-03-2004, 15:27

Originally posted by igli
Definitely- there's strength in diversity. Sides, we're all individuals, that's why we need to look after minorities- we're all a minority of one..

PS to t020: I don't know you, so forgive me if I'm being a bit forward, but I don't think many people are interested in you proving some techie point about the quote system, not in the forum. Well all right, I'm not, then.. ;)

Sheesh, can't we keep it a little more civil?
Hit the nail on the head there mate. Although if you just expanded that to ''I don't think many people are interested in any point you make'', it would have been closer!

kittykat

20-03-2004, 16:57

Originally posted by DaBouncer
Hit the nail on the head there mate. Although if you just expanded that to ''I don't think many people are interested in any point you make'', it would have been closer!

If thats the case why does every1 reply to him/ her so much?

DaBouncer

20-03-2004, 17:30

Must be one of the great mysteries of life Kittykat!:thumbsup:

Jamie

20-03-2004, 17:54

Originally posted by igli
My 2p: differences are negative when they come between us, positive when seen as something to celebrate.

Very well said ... all people are different ... and in many different ways (not just race) ... that just makes the world richer and more diverse ... a good thing ... vive la difference !!!

I guess human nature is just a little on the clique sure.

t020

21-03-2004, 13:34

An example of how 'quota' ideas can be dangerous:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/03/21/npol21.xml

Mike

21-03-2004, 16:19

Good - at last the police will maybe stop abusing their stop and search powers, which they've been doing for years.

t020

21-03-2004, 17:08

Originally posted by Mike
Good - at last the police will maybe stop abusing their stop and search powers, which they've been doing for years.

Perhaps, heaven forbid, blacks may actually represent a higher proportion of crime than they represent the proportion of the population. This is the point - things can't be seen in terms of percentages/ proportionalities.

Foxxx

22-03-2004, 16:13

Originally posted by Belle

What Foxxx and T020 entirely fail to get, perhaps because they are so busy decrying almost everyone else in the country but themselves that they dont pay proper attention, is that a thing is only racist if it is meant to be racist.

If you say "coloured" and then someone says to you "I would rather you didnt use that word, it makes me feel uncomfortable about myself..." or whatever, and you say "Oh, I didnt know, I shant say it again" that is NOT racist.

If you go on saying it, not bothering to re-educate yourself, even after you have been told, even knowing it causes offence, then you are being racist

If someone says "dont call me a cripple, I prefer to be described as someone with disabilities" and you dont learn your lesson then you are some other -ism

Nothing is racist without intent

Your continual whining and moaning and whinging about political correctness in so many threads so often, both of you, and others too if I could only be bothered to search for them, is just a pathetic excuse at wanting to go on being rude, obnoxious, cruel, hurtful and whatever, without having to curb your behaviour or put yourself out any.

You think you should be free to be as insulting as you like, about anyone that takes your fancy, and if they dont like it they can get stuffed. Many contributors have tried to make you see that you just cant go on like that. Not without expecting to get into bother for it anyway.

Political correctness, if we must use that term, is about making sure that once you know a term is hurtful or inappropriate, you get rid of it from your vocabulary. How hard can it be to be careful not to hurt other people?

In general terms re the rest of the debate, racism is wrong, as are all isms. We are all individuals. Generalisation at the cost of individuality is always wrong

Black on white violence, if racially motivated, is wrong, as is black on white violence if not racially motivated. And yes of course I know it goes on. Not as much as the other way mind. However, the fact that it does go on, does not make it okay for everyone to throw all restraint aside and enter a free for all - which is another implication of what is said here in some of these threads.

"It is okay for me to be widely critical and condemnatory of a whole nation of people, threaten them however I like, in anyway I want (like those coppers on that TV documentary) because an asian guy once jumped my mate outside a club."

Not good enough

Bad behaviour is wrong, whoever commits it.

Surely people dont still bother to say "I'm not racist but..." .

They either are not racist and dont feel the need to say anything or they are racist and proud

What a horrible world we live in

Now you know why I dont come on here much any more....if that is what I think, right?

Belle, I don't know why you are having a personal dig at me and T020.
We have been expressing opinions and both of us don't like racism.
I like to think that I am understanding and in general I am not racist. I have opinions on ways in which some people are but that is not related to the colour of their skin or to their religion or to how their bodies work. I was making a point that white people can find it hard to not be classed as racist when so many 'innocent' things they say are taken the wrong way and they are accused of being racist. That is my opinion and one shared by many. My argument is that it has gone so far the other way now i.e. that you can't have things that are purely white and I used that MOBO awards as an example, maybe a silly one, but a true one, that it actually gets to the point where white people get fed up of watching what they have to say and do that it can make them racist. The thread is 'I'm not racist but...' and in response I have brought up a point of view that many people share. If you have a problem with that, then I can't help it, I and others are not going to stop having opinions and posting on here because you or others don't like it. This is a place for debate. If you don't agree with what I or T020 say, then pull the arguments apart. I don't have a problem with people disagreeing with me and I like to hear what people have to say. My opinions can change by listening to others and they have. I can sometimes challenges people in order to make them justify their point more and I might actually agree with them. Its a debate and its good to consider other angles. I have not said any racist comments in this thread and I try my best not to say racist comments. I disagree with people being racist, but I still think that one way or another we all are to an extent. It is natural to be, because we are a species that is designed to survive (survival of the fittest) and look after our own. My point is, in trying to mix races, which I have no problem with, there will always be problems because different races often have different ways of living. Yes, people need to be more tolerant, but sadly that does not happen. It probably never will. At no point did I say I had a problem with other races.
I do pay attention and just because you don't like what I say, does not make me stupid and mean that I don't pay attention. I am not some rich snob who thinks I am above everyone else which is what you are implying. I take offense to your comments.
I have not continually whinged and moaned about polictical correctness. Only in a couple of circumstances where I have felt it appropriate. Often with PC statements, the public aren't even made aware that something is no longer PC and it gets very frustrating. You can't even say disabled toilets now, or brainstorming. Brainstorming has been banned as it 'might' offend an epiletic person. I'm sorry but that is getting ridiculus imo. Has an epilatic person ever said they are offended by the term brainstroming in a training session? It's now 'thought showering' that you should say. In making an expression non PC it can sometimes just highlight peoples races or disabilities (not sure what the substitute for disabled is now so I apologise if that offends anyone).
You accuse of "is just a pathetic excuse at wanting to go on being rude, obnoxious, cruel, hurtful and whatever, without having to curb your behaviour or put yourself out any".
I am not rude, obnoxious, cruel or hurtful and I find that offense to be accused of that and a deformation to my character.

22-03-2004, 16:28

Foxxx well said you speak much sense in your last post.

I have given up trying to defend myself as being a non-racist person. I know in my heart that I'm not and I don't care any more whether people want to attach a label.

I too will still voice my opinions whether thay are appreciated or not. I think that the PC brigade on here must be very out of touch with the views of Joe Public ( I suppose it comes from mixing within the closed circles of the Labour Party and students in general)

evildrneil

22-03-2004, 16:40

I have to admit I actually think that Political Correctness is one of the most dangerous political movements of recent times - what it seems to be trying to do is to homogonise people and linguistically remove any differences which obviously do exist and should be acknowledged and cellebrated. Variety is the spice of both life and civilisation :)

Mike

22-03-2004, 18:16

Originally posted by t020
Perhaps, heaven forbid, blacks may actually represent a higher proportion of crime than they represent the proportion of the population. This is the point - things can't be seen in terms of percentages/ proportionalities.

People from ethnic minorities are five times more likely to be stoped and searched than others.

Perhaps you actually believe that there are five times as many crimes committed by people from ethnic minorities, making this a fair and just policy, but I think you'll find that's not actually the case.

Anyway, interesting link here about stop and search, showing points of view from both sides of the equation http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/566413.stm

Jamie

22-03-2004, 19:35

That makes a lot of sense ... everything you just said there Foxxx.

The PC thing has defo gone too far IMO and it also inhibits naturalness.

I often feel on edge and uncomfortable in the company of people from ethnic minorities ...

This is precisely because I have to be extra careful that anything I say or do is not misconstrued ...... and I am in fear of being branded a racist.

Personally I don't have any problem with anyone from an ethnic minority (at least not on grounds of their ethnicity) ...

I think it's great that people come from different backgrounds and cultures ... and it adds 'colour' to life (oh s**t ... can I say that !?).

I think the more we try and force people to treat everyone as an equal ... the more f****d up it gets ... treating other people with care and respect should be spontanious and come natural to us.

When it is something we have to do because of legislation or 'PC-ness' ... we somewhat lose that natural care and respect.

Another point that Foxxx made that struck a chord in me is about people being naturally tribal ... that's just part of human nature.

Sidla

22-03-2004, 20:14

Originally posted by t020
By saying this, you are implying that being white is superior and therefore can never be an insult and will always be some kind of compliment. THAT is the racist attitude.[b]
Being white once was considered to be superiour. Are you trying to contend this or something? It isn't a belief of mine, but it is a belief of racist people. How that makes my attitude racist is beyond me.

Furthermore, you're saying a black person should be offended because of the colour of their skin, as though being black in itself is an insult. THIS is a racist attitude.
I'm not exactly saying that, but you're nearly there. I'm saying that the person who issues the comment believes this, which is why it would be racist.

It isn't surprising that you're so deluded with this topic, really. As Tony (I think it was him anyway) points out, you have become so 'unracist' you have gone full circle and become racist - insinuating that being black is an insult and being white is a compliment.
How am I deluding myself? And I can't see how I've gone a full circle. I don't believe any race is superiour to another. In fact I'm almost ashamed to be white.

Originally posted by Foxxx
that it actually gets to the point where white people get fed up of watching what they have to say and do that it can make them racist.
But if you're not a racist person, then what have you got to worry about? I never ever have to watch what I'm saying around black or asian people and they've not once been offended by anything I've ever said to them. That is because I'm not a racist person so I rarely bring anyone's race into conversation.

The whole point of this topic is the phrase "I'm not racist... but... " is ironic, because anyone who isn't racist would not use that phrase. That irony seems to have been lost.

As Belle said, it's the intent that matters. I find it hard to believe that anyone would be charged with racism if there was no intent to be racist.

t020

22-03-2004, 20:18

Originally posted by Mike

Perhaps you actually believe that there are five times as many crimes committed by people from ethnic minorities, making this a fair and just policy, but I think you'll find that's not actually the case.

I'd say those from ethnic minorities were more likely to commit crime. This isn't anything to do with the colour of their skin, just the fact that there are higher concentrations in the more deprived areas of the country where crime is common place.

t020

22-03-2004, 20:21

Originally posted by Sidla

I'm not exactly saying that, but you're nearly there. I'm saying that the person who issues the comment believes this, which is why it would be racist.

And likewise if a black person believed a white person was an insult. It works both ways, that's all I'm saying. If you can't see that then yes, IMO, you are deluding yourself.

Sidla

22-03-2004, 20:27

Originally posted by t020
And likewise if a black person believed a white person was an insult. It works both ways, that's all I'm saying. If you can't see that then yes, IMO, you are deluding yourself.
Yep, that is what I'm saying. I just don't think it occurs as often as you seem to think it does.

t020

22-03-2004, 20:29

Originally posted by Sidla
Yep, that is what I'm saying. I just don't think it occurs as often as you seem to think it does.

I'm not saying it occurs any more or less frequently than white on black racism, just that they're equally as bad. e.g. The Salon is on C4 more frequently throughout the year than Big Brother, but they're both equally as appalling. ;)

dinp

22-03-2004, 21:02

Speaking purely about manners here, I find that, when working in a shop serving cutomers, asian and eastern-european customers tend to be more abrupt, less content (with their purchases) and don't often say please or thankyou.

That's not to say other cultures can't be equally as rude, because then i'd be lying. Its just a general trend i've found over the last 3 years.

E-Man Groovin

22-03-2004, 21:07

Recipe for a long inconclusive thread:

1. Kick off a thread to do with race
2. Add some extreme views on either side
3. Stir in a pinch of utter garbage from people who aren't too bright.

Watch the replies eat up the megabytes on the server.

What I'm trying to say is: "Yawn"

Zeddy.

Andy78

22-03-2004, 21:14

Originally posted by E-Man Groovin
Recipe for a long inconclusive thread:

1. Kick off a thread to do with race
2. Add some extreme views on either side
3. Stir in a pinch of utter garbage from people who aren't too bright.

Watch the replies eat up the megabytes on the server.

What I'm trying to say is: "Yawn"

Zeddy.

:clap:

haha, That is remarkably true. I am trying to avoid such threads, but still can't help posting from time to time. I should know that anything that is to do with culture/race/religion/asylum/food/shopping/bananas/insects....well just about anything really will end up being just the same as the last thread on a similar topic

dinp

22-03-2004, 21:45

If you have no view on the matter, why waste the time posting?

E-Man Groovin

22-03-2004, 22:15

I do have a view. And it was expressed ;-)

Andy78

22-03-2004, 22:23

As i said i am trying to give up posting on such topics. And i do have a view thats been expressed many times. Just gets a bit repetative sometimes. Just seems like we're all going round in circles. It may just save time, next time a similar thread is started, to just refer back to the previous thread.

spook

23-03-2004, 08:14

Originally posted by dinp
Speaking purely about manners here, I find that, when working in a shop serving cutomers, asian and eastern-european customers tend to be more abrupt, less content (with their purchases) and don't often say please or thankyou.

That's not to say other cultures can't be equally as rude, because then i'd be lying. Its just a general trend i've found over the last 3 years.

I remember doing a race relations course at work and we watched a video about this - the upshot of it was was that is how some cultures are, so as to explain that someone from a particular region may speak to you a lot more abruptly than nice old Doris from no 42, but that doesn't mean to say they're being rude or disrespectful - it's just the 'norm' from their culture.
Quite enlightening really.

igli

30-03-2004, 19:58

Originally posted by t020
I'd say those from ethnic minorities were more likely to commit crime. This isn't anything to do with the colour of their skin, just the fact that there are higher concentrations in the more deprived areas of the country where crime is common place.

I'm sorry but I find that attitude racist. Do you have any statistics to back up what you're saying, ie that people from are ethnic minorities are more likely to commit crime?

Trust me, there's plenty of deprived white people in this country, and plenty of white criminals. They're more likely to be treated leniently or be turned a blind eye to, perhaps for cultural reasons (eg not getting each other as the posts about the shop show) as well as racism. And isn't that what insitutionalised racism is? A failure to see past differences, including perceived rude bahaviour/ surliness/ uppitiness, call it what you like, to understand the human being with whom you are supposed to be dealing professionally. (Which precludes any whinging about not being treated in exactly the way you expect..)

In any event, I know loads of poor people, of all colours, who don't go out and commit crime, even though their daily lives are testament to the crimes of their so-called betters. They have pride in themselves, dignity and self-respect.

So in fact to do many immigrant communities, who embody the work ethic far more than Thatcher's children could ever understand.

Immigrants are skilled, motivated and resourceful. This country's workforce is rapidly diminishing and aging.. frankly we /need/ immigrants and the way we treat them, and refugees, makes me ashamed to be British.

bellis

30-03-2004, 20:03

Immigrants are skilled, motivated and resourceful. This country's workforce is rapidly diminishing and aging.. frankly we /need/ immigrants and the way we treat them, and refugees, makes me ashamed to be British.

not all are skilled what about the illegals:loopy:

Killian

30-03-2004, 20:24

We have a Polish chap in our factory, name of Jan. lovely bloke, works his butt off and worth ten of any of the English workers. he carries a little thing like a calculator around with him and every time he hears a new word (including swear words!) he punches it into his little machine and it gives him the Polish translation. his English is coming along in leaps and bounds. if all immigrants aspired to be like Jan, then i expect there would be less to complain about.

dinp

31-03-2004, 00:15

Originally posted by Killian
We have a Polish chap in our factory, name of Jan. lovely bloke, works his butt off and worth ten of any of the English workers. he carries a little thing like a calculator around with him and every time he hears a new word (including swear words!) he punches it into his little machine and it gives him the Polish translation. his English is coming along in leaps and bounds. if all immigrants aspired to be like Jan, then i expect there would be less to complain about.

Truely heartwarming - I wish more people, both british and otherwise, were like him.

Chris_Sleeps

31-03-2004, 14:48

Originally posted by igli
Immigrants are skilled, motivated and resourceful.
Thats a very big generalisation to make.

Chris.

Belle

31-03-2004, 16:16

As would be the converse, Chris

Tony

31-03-2004, 16:18

Originally posted by Killian
We have a Polish chap in our factory, name of Jan. lovely bloke, works his butt off and worth ten of any of the English workers.

Not as much as the above is a stereotype! :)

Perhaps this is an arument for more immigrants!?!

Killian

31-03-2004, 16:25

Originally posted by Tony
Not as much as the above is a stereotype! :)

Perhaps this is an arument for more immigrants!?!

i think your negativity is sad. just to let everyone else on the forum know, i have pm'd you with our factory's phone number and details so you can check the above out for yourself.

Tony

31-03-2004, 16:38

Can you post my response to your PM in the Forum? Just for the sake of clarity you understand.

Killian

31-03-2004, 16:45

Originally posted by Tony
Can you post my response to your PM in the Forum? Just for the sake of clarity you understand.

here it is then

Nothing to apologise for Killian. I was merely making the point that there is a stereotype that foreigners are worth 10 of ours!

Please don't think that I was having a go at you - I really wasn't.

this is me then - dont know about stereotypes but this immigrant certainly is (dont take my word for it - you have them means of ascertaining the all-important facts). amazing, i have gone from being a near racist on the BM thread to an advocate for more immigrants. what next, i wonder.

Tony

31-03-2004, 16:50

Cheers Killian. You see, you and I will end up the best of pals ;) We're just misunderstood you 'n me! :D

Jon

05-04-2004, 23:44

:confused: Anyone else think we will get race riots in this country soon?

Tony

06-04-2004, 07:06

I can't see it. On what grounds?

Cyclone

06-04-2004, 10:28

came back to this a bit late.

Racism towards White People
Any insult that refers to someones ethnic origin is a racists insult. There white trash is just as racist as black trash.

Quotas
There are no quotas. If you look at application forms for jobs, the section asking about ethnic background is firstly voluntary. And secondly it's used to monitor the levels, not to try to artificially enforce them. A few areas of positive discrimination do exists, but fortunately recruitment is not one of them!

t020

06-04-2004, 17:04

Originally posted by Cyclone

Quotas
There are no quotas. If you look at application forms for jobs, the section asking about ethnic background is firstly voluntary. And secondly it's used to monitor the levels, not to try to artificially enforce them. A few areas of positive discrimination do exists, but fortunately recruitment is not one of them!

Rubbish. Names on CVs are often enough to disclose a persons ethnic background, and then if that isn't enough theres the face to face meeting at the actual interview. Formal quotas aren't used as far as I know (yet), but when a boss/university tutor has been 'gently' urged to recruit "equally", there will always be a distinct advantage to the person from the ethnic minority in the form of positive discrimination. This can apply to gender and social class as well.

genesiscouch

06-04-2004, 17:54

As Mr. Faulkner once wrote and Jason said...

"No offense," I says. "I give every man his due, regardless of religion or anything else. I have nothing against jews as an individual," I says. "It's just the race. (...)" Sound and the Fury, pg. 237.

This kind of hypocrisy has been around a long time and the rationale is certainly not something new.

Personally, coming from Canada, the common and everyday racist and classist attitudes displayed by many people in the UK is shocking. I know the socio-economical situation is a lot different as well as the history but if a person is willing to cling to the idea that society can move forward and improve itself the UK is 40 years behind Canada.

max

06-04-2004, 18:41

Any of you I'm not a racist ... people who want to get involved in the battle against racism by giving up a couple of hours now and then PM me.

mojoworking

07-04-2004, 04:52

Originally posted by genesiscouch
Personally, coming from Canada, the common and everyday racist and classist attitudes displayed by many people in the UK is shocking. I know the socio-economical situation is a lot different as well as the history but if a person is willing to cling to the idea that society can move forward and improve itself the UK is 40 years behind Canada.

Tell us how well you treat your native american indians in Canada.

Ned Ludd

07-04-2004, 15:48

I suspect that the answer is: a lot better than the Native Americans in the US!

"I'm not racist... but... " interesting how the thread has developed.
I think this comment is much like "to cut a long story short" as is frequently to be heard from persons of the female gender!
ie there is some doubt about the accuracy of the statement.

How do you get these bl***y icons in the text?

genesiscouch

07-04-2004, 16:53

Originally posted by mojoworking
Tell us how well you treat your native american indians in Canada.

I didn't say Canada is a utopian society did I? I just noted that racism was much less prevelant and acceptable in Canada as compared to the UK.

As for your statement it betrays an immediate prejudice simply in the way it is stated. If you would like to discuss problems in the native american communities I would be happy to.

Cyclone

07-04-2004, 17:10

You said that there was a quota system. There is not. QED.
It is also a legal requirement to keep all documentation generated through recruitment so that any challenge of discrimination on any grounds can be properly examined by a tribunal.
This sort of challenge would quite clearly show up any positive discrimination, unless the interviewer made notes with duplicity in mind from the start.

Originally posted by t020
Rubbish. Names on CVs are often enough to disclose a persons ethnic background, and then if that isn't enough theres the face to face meeting at the actual interview. Formal quotas aren't used as far as I know (yet), but when a boss/university tutor has been 'gently' urged to recruit "equally", there will always be a distinct advantage to the person from the ethnic minority in the form of positive discrimination. This can apply to gender and social class as well.

Re: Canada, are there not racial tensions between the french and english speaking candians?

genesiscouch

07-04-2004, 17:19

Re: Canada, are there not racial tensions between the french and english speaking candians?

Being half French Canadian and half English I suppose I could blame any stress on that :D

There really isn't much tension between French and English (whoever they are) Canadians. If there is, the source of most of that tension would be political rather than racial.

mojoworking

07-04-2004, 23:14

Originally posted by genesiscouch
I didn't say Canada is a utopian society did I? I just noted that racism was much less prevelant and acceptable in Canada as compared to the UK.

As for your statement it betrays an immediate prejudice simply in the way it is stated. If you would like to discuss problems in the native american communities I would be happy to.

I'm glad that you can read so much into a simple question. Where, exactly, is the prejudice?

I simply thought it was ironic that you accuse the UK people of racism, when the indigenous North Americans and traditional owners of the land are not exactly top of the socio-economic pile in their own country.

The situation is not as bad as in Australia perhaps, but I'd like to see the relative income/unemployment figures for native Americans versus the rest of the population

Cyclone

08-04-2004, 12:43

are there many native american indians in canada?

genesiscouch

08-04-2004, 13:09

Originally posted by mojoworking
I'm glad that you can read so much into a simple question. Where, exactly, is the prejudice?

I simply thought it was ironic that you accuse the UK people of racism, when the indigenous North Americans and traditional owners of the land are not exactly top of the socio-economic pile in their own country.

The situation is not as bad as in Australia perhaps, but I'd like to see the relative income/unemployment figures for native Americans versus the rest of the population

Hey mojo let's get this out of the way once again...I am not denying there is a socio-economic disparity between native americans and so-called english canadians, I am not denying that there exists racist attitudes towards native americans (or many other minority groups). Understand?

I think it would be terribly naive to assume that racism doesn't exist in any certain place. However, the fact that racism does exist in Canada does not exclude me from commenting on the fact that the level and acceptance of racism is much higher in Britain than in Canada. I will stand by that. Actually I should adjust that to England as I don't have much experience with the other countries.

When I made the statement earlier I used the measuring stick of years as it is easily understood. I stated that measuring in years presumes that we are moving forward as people/societies...obviously measuring in years is a flawed stick because of that very presumption, however it gets the point across quickly. Also, the point is simply personal...I don't know which facts I could use to back that up.

Here's the point again if you missed it...England has a greater acceptance and level of racism than Canada.

Anyways, as for the native americans yes there is economic disparity. This depends on where you go in Canada and which tribes you are talking about. Some are very wealthy tribes due to casinos and/or good management of their money, some are extremely impoverished due to corruption, social factors, lack of economic influx etc., and some, particularly when you move into the far north are still existing in a fairly traditional lifestyle. Then you have the natives that have moved off the reserves into the cities, these natives would almost always be living at a lower economic level than average due to lack of education, opportunities etc. There is a higher level of alcholism, drug abuse, suicide, family violence on the reserves than the Canadian average.

Like I said though it depends which tribes you look at as some are doing well. They have no taxes, free education (to any level), subsidies, grants, a fair degree of autonomy and self-governance (i.e. their own police force). So the people and tribes that take advantage of these opportunities can do quite well. However, the average native american is at a disadvantage simply because of social factors like poor family life, isolation, drug abuse, family violence, _racism_, etc.

fuzbuz

08-04-2004, 15:08

my friend works in a nursery and they have banned baa baa black sheep because its "racist".
Then people wonder why people are so bitter towards other races.

Also in the song "miss polly had a dolly" you have to cut out the bit where it says "ill be back in the morning with the bill bill bill" as it "discriminates" againsed the children whos parents are on benifits
Makes me wonder why children whose parents are on benifits still get free/reduced dinners, doesnt this discriminate them also but no one complaines then!! Its a load of bull and ****** me off so much!!!!!!!!!!

mojoworking

08-04-2004, 15:15

Originally posted by genesiscouch
Hey mojo let's get this out of the way once again...I am not denying there is a socio-economic disparity between native americans and so-called english canadians, I am not denying that there exists racist attitudes towards native americans (or many other minority groups). Understand?

I think it would be terribly naive to assume that racism doesn't exist in any certain place. However, the fact that racism does exist in Canada does not exclude me from commenting on the fact that the level and acceptance of racism is much higher in Britain than in Canada. I will stand by that. Actually I should adjust that to England as I don't have much experience with the other countries.

When I made the statement earlier I used the measuring stick of years as it is easily understood. I stated that measuring in years presumes that we are moving forward as people/societies...obviously measuring in years is a flawed stick because of that very presumption, however it gets the point across quickly. Also, the point is simply personal...I don't know which facts I could use to back that up.

Here's the point again if you missed it...England has a greater acceptance and level of racism than Canada.

Anyways, as for the native americans yes there is economic disparity. This depends on where you go in Canada and which tribes you are talking about. Some are very wealthy tribes due to casinos and/or good management of their money, some are extremely impoverished due to corruption, social factors, lack of economic influx etc., and some, particularly when you move into the far north are still existing in a fairly traditional lifestyle. Then you have the natives that have moved off the reserves into the cities, these natives would almost always be living at a lower economic level than average due to lack of education, opportunities etc. There is a higher level of alcholism, drug abuse, suicide, family violence on the reserves than the Canadian average.

Like I said though it depends which tribes you look at as some are doing well. They have no taxes, free education (to any level), subsidies, grants, a fair degree of autonomy and self-governance (i.e. their own police force). So the people and tribes that take advantage of these opportunities can do quite well. However, the average native american is at a disadvantage simply because of social factors like poor family life, isolation, drug abuse, family violence, _racism_, etc.

So we're agreed that racism exists equally in all countries and at all levels of society?

The difference is, in countries with an indigenous population (Australia, Canada etc) the racism is institutionalised and directed towards the dispossessed traditional owners of the land.

MissEllie

08-04-2004, 15:21

my friend works in a nursery and they have banned baa baa black sheep because its "racist".

Not quite racist, but in a similar vein a school over here in the U.S. (where else) aren't having their traditional Easter Egg Hunt.

They are having an "oval" hunt instead.:loopy:

Off to eat a Cadbury's creme oval..............:D

genesiscouch

08-04-2004, 15:27

Originally posted by mojoworking
So we're agreed that racism exists equally in all countries and at all levels of society?

The difference is, in countries with an indigenous population (Australia, Canada etc) the racism is institutionalised and directed towards the dispossessed traditional owners of the land.

No we're not agreed. Whether racism exists equally in all countries and all levels of society would be a philosophical question. I couldn't tell you that from observation. What I can tell you...and what I have repeated three times now...is that observable racism is more common and acceptable in Britain as compared to Canada.

mojoworking

08-04-2004, 15:58

Originally posted by genesiscouch
No we're not agreed. Whether racism exists equally in all countries and all levels of society would be a philosophical question. I couldn't tell you that from observation. What I can tell you...and what I have repeated three times now...is that observable racism is more common and acceptable in Britain as compared to Canada.

Just because you keep repeating it, that doesn't necessarily make it a fact.

Canada has a small population with limited immigration. A country where not much ever happens is bound to give the impression of being less racist than a cosmopolitan, overcrowded island like Britain.

But I would contend that the racism is still there.

genesiscouch

08-04-2004, 16:32

Originally posted by mojoworking
Just because you keep repeating it, that doesn't necessarily make it a fact.

Canada has a small population with limited immigration. A country where not much ever happens is bound to give the impression of being less racist than a cosmopolitan, overcrowded island like Britain.

But I would contend that the racism is still there.

It was an opinion from the start not a fact.

Canada has a small population? I may be off on my figures for England but isn't it around 50 million? Or is that Britain? Canada has around 30 million people. Sure it's not many, but it looks smaller because it's spread out in the 2nd largest country in the world.

Limited immigration? Is that a joke? Have you forgot that Canada is a land of immigrants? If you go back 4 generations that's doing pretty good. I hate playing the stats game but current immigration in Canada is around 200-250 000 a year whereas England is somewhere under 100 000 a year.

Cosmopolitan? I think Canada is arguably much more cosmopolitan than England.

A country where not much ever happens? Ok you got me there ;)

Anyways so what is your point? I thought for a bit you were making the valuable point that racism exists everywhere. But as I reread your posts it almost seems that you are looking for excuses for racism in England. So racism exists in Canada, that doesn't make it ok for England. So more "happens" in England than Canada, that isn't an excuse. So you are overcrowded, again maybe it's a contributing factor but not a reason.

If your argument is solely on the basis of "why do you see the plank in our eye and ignore the sliver in your own" (yes I know it's reversed) then you are right. However, it is a foolish person who says only that and continues to ignore their plank.