Jump to content

Racism. How Do YOU Define it?


Recommended Posts

Posted
A lot of 'anti-racists' make reference only to 'skin colour'

 

As an aside, is it racist to refer to white people as "pale": as in the (black) culture minister, David Lammy, recently referring to museums and galleries as "pale, male and stale".

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

Tehran - Iran on Saturday accused British leaders of "Islamophobia" for knighting Indian-born author Salman Rushdie, who was issued with a death fatwa by Iran's revolutionary leader 18 years ago.

 

"Knighting one of the most hated figures in the Islamic world is a clear sign of Islamophobia among high-ranking British officials," foreign ministry spokesperson Mohammad Ali Hosseini told reporters.

 

"Honouring a hated apostate will definitely put the British statesmen against the Islamic community and hurts their feeling once again," he said of the novelist, who was knighted by Britain's Queen Elizabeth II on Saturday.

 

"Insulting Islamic religious sanctities is not accidental but organised and is taking place with the support and direction of some Western countries."

 

 

 

And im sure this wont be the last we hear on the subject.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
You make a helpful distinction between physical characteristics and social and psychological ones. A lot of 'anti-racists' make reference only to 'skin colour' and say that it is wrong to adopt attitudes purely with reference to that. However, the other characteristics you refer to put the matter in a slightly different light. "Values and ethics", for example, are very much a political matter and do lead to race being the subject of political debate.

 

Yes, I'd agree with that, values and ethics do have a political side certainly. It might well be a falacy to regard these only as political however. It does not explain away the fact that some particular races historically have had very strong 'values and ethics' where people were not raped and murdered particular to their society without them actually being recognised as such but that it was not inate in their racial makeup. Similarly how today it is being studied as to whether there might be a criminal gene or a violent gene.

 

This was the observation I was making about some races of people who hold the same values as we do in the mainstream of societies around the world today, but may also be a heightened experience of a particular race. This does not infer that only some races have these very high values, or that races where violence is non-existent are superior, but they are more peaceful. Tribes such as these still exist today, where they simply exist that way rather than maintained that way by a set of values or ethics, but what else could I call it?

Posted
As an aside, is it racist to refer to white people as "pale": as in the (black) culture minister, David Lammy, recently referring to museums and galleries as "pale, male and stale".

 

I dont think it is rascist to refer to a white person as pale. Especially as they would do it to themselves.

 

I think possibly the analogy about the museum and the way pale was used is still not quite rascist but more an observation, otherwise the use of male would have to be sexist.

 

If his observation had included 'pasty' referring to white skinned people, just as 'shady' referring to dark skinned people, then this could be considered rascist.

 

I think rascist language or labels has to be derogatory, and the use of pale has never really been used in a derogatory way in my humble opinion.

 

Saying that, it would also depend how it was said as it is possible to use any word in a derogatory way by perhaps saying a particular word with a down tone. The use of the word pale without knowing how it was said does not in itself seem to be intended as a rascist slur.

 

I think it may have been very carefully chosen words rather than white, phallite (if such a word), and trite. well thats the nearest i can get to it with other words. :-)

Posted
I think someone from Pakistan would be offended if I called them black,or, are we just talking about Afro- Carribean people?

 

Similarly if someone appears to be black to someone else it does not mean that the person saying black is being rascist. Black is a colour not a rascist remark initially. If it was said in a derogatory way eg. black b*****d or something that would be rascist. So would white b*****d. How do pakistanis want to be regarded? However it is a fact that 75% of the worlds population is black - this includes across the board non-caucasian peoples. Black does not merely refer to negroid. It includes orientals or any non-white race, but only as a generalisation. Many of these races people not black at all, including the ***** race who have albino, and blonde in their genes. It may be regarded as rascist to not want to be referred to as black by a person who is non-white. As well as it is rascist of white people not wanting to accept that the earliest man was black. Infact the whole world was once Africa, over the millennia the lands have separated and this has resulted in different characteristics of people on a large scale to form the variant races we know today.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.