OT: Trick Question which is worse Racism or Reverse Racism ?

[LoopStationZebra]

[leisuremuffin]

Very well, and would you care to explain to me how the "more commonly used slang" has nothing to do with race?

Its difficult to define a lot of slang down to a specific definition as its use changes depending on the situation and the person using it. "ghetto" as a slang word, in the context used in that other conversation, probably means low quality, poor (not saying both are mutually inclusive, as not everybody/thing poor is of low quality). Things and places can be called "ghetto" too ("man that pizza joint is ghetto"). One doesnt have to be a minority to be referred to as ghetto, any low class sleazebucket will do (whether they be white, black, vietnamese, or whatever). Again it depends on the person using it and what its referring to, its slang so its not a static term.

aha. now, keep in mind the actual definition of the word ghetto. How do you think the slang term that you are describing came to be? A word originally defined as a racial term is now an item of derogatory slang that you claim can be used for "any low class sleazebucket." I think it's evident just by that root that the term itself is racist. ----> Even if the slang itself is for any race, as you claim.

What you fail to see is the fact that stereotypes are made by the observer, not the observed. The generalized first impression that is made of someone based on their membership to a race, class, religion, social faction, gender, whatever comes from the person who is having he first impression. There are as many stereotypes as there are people who have them, it is a device used by our nervous system so that we don't expend the energy to evaluate every individual we come across.

That is not something I have failed to observe, of course stereotypes are made by the observer. That is the very nature of a stereotype, or any other quality for that matter. One can ever stereotype themselves by viewing themselves in the third person perspective. For example, someone pointed me to http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/ and I thought to myself "wow that site really nailed me!" The very nature of a "quality" or "characteristic" is a construct invented by the human mind. Because it is a device used by the mind to qualify behavior in others, it is also used to adapt to the people around oneself over time. The mind's plasticity develops a person's characteristics based on their observations of other people's characteristics that person is surrounded by during their lifespan. Its why we have different cultures and subcultures, and why differences are almost always regional based.

ok, so you say, however lets go back to this statement:

thank you
Stereotypes exist for a reason. That reason is that over (at minimum) 50% of the people it targets falls under these stereotypes in one way or another. Its a rare case that a stereotype just popped up out of thin air with no overall cultural pattern to back it up.

you simply cannot assume that 50% or better of a population exhibits a stereotype that you hold. It is absolutely impossible to prove, and that statement IS exactly what i said it was. A misunderstanding of an internalized mental process for objective truth.

I'm not going to argue again how that statement wasn't referring to race at all, but I'll go where you want to go and argue that point.

If you define a "racist" as someone who, through their own observation, categorizes a broad set of shared similarities between race-based groups of people, then yes I am a racist. I think its dishonest to think otherwise. People of the same race have grown up with other members of the same race for generations, therefore they adopt shared characteristics with other members of that culture. I guess its more accurate to say I'm a "culturalist", because there can be distinctly different cultures to the same general "race" of people. For instance, all of the Nigerian americans I have met share absolutely zero characteristics in common with black people "native" to the U.S. (not native but you know, come from a long line of multiple generations living here). However, there are certain characteristics that are shared by the Nigerian americans themselves. Its the same with ANY group of people that grow up or spend significant amounts of time with other members of that particular group. Sometimes that includes race, sometimes it doesnt. Of course individuals stand out as unique but we're talking about broad characteristics of multiple people here, so overall patterns one observes with continued exposure to different members of that group. Everybody's mind works like that, I think if you say your mind doesnt form broad categories of characteristics to particular groups of people one encounters I'd call you a liar.

No, that's not how i define racist. You are absolutely correct that everyone generalizes different groups. However, the problem here is that you and some others are generalizing certain groups as criminals or as you said, "ghetto thugs" who are up to no good. This is simply unfair, and untrue of any group. Also, you are asserting that these generalizations of any type are at least 50% accurate. And guess what, that's wrong regardless of what race or group it is that you are pointing out. But the interesting thing is that when we get down to what you're talking about it all has curious racial overtones. Talking about "ghetto thugs," your distaste for affirmative action, minority scholarships and hate crime legislation. How else do you expect to be perceived?



.lm.

[leisuremuffin]

I'd also like to remind you of the statement that you agreed to:

stereotype's are in place for a good reason. the only people that dont agree that ghetto assholes that wear there jeans below there ass, thinking its still 1993 are shady and need to be deported to guantanamo bay, are people that never come in contact or have never lived by them.
or they are people that are to sissy to admit that, ghetto ass pants wearing shit heads, who listen to shity rap that sounds way the hell out of date but, came out last week, need to be deported to guantanamo bay.

thank you
Stereotypes exist for a reason. That reason is that over (at minimum) 50% of the people it targets falls under these stereotypes in one way or another. Its a rare case that a stereotype just popped up out of thin air with no overall cultural pattern to back it up.

that's the post and your response from the other thread. It's pretty damning evidence in my opinion.

let's see you high school debate team your way out of that now that it's in context, smarty.

.lm.

[Android Bishop]

you simply cannot assume that 50% or better of a population exhibits a stereotype that you hold. It is absolutely impossible to prove, and that statement IS exactly what i said it was. A misunderstanding of an internalized mental process for objective truth.

Dude you are taking that shit wayyy too literally. Of course I just pulled that 50% number out of my ass. It was meant to convey the idea that stereotypes exist in the mind's of the observers because a majority of the people they encounter from a particular group of people share those qualities overall.

No, that's not how i define racist. You are absolutely correct that everyone generalizes different groups. However, the problem here is that you and some others are generalizing certain groups as criminals or as you said, "ghetto thugs" who are up to no good. This is simply unfair, and untrue of any group. Also, you are asserting that these generalizations of any type are at least 50% accurate. And guess what, that's wrong regardless of what race or group it is that you are pointing out. But the interesting thing is that when we get down to what you're talking about it all has curious racial overtones. Talking about "ghetto thugs," your distaste for affirmative action, minority scholarships and hate crime legislation. How else do you expect to be perceived?



.lm.

I dont really care how I am personally perceived, what I care about is the arguments being debated. I think I soundly defended my reasoning as to why affirmative action and minority scholarships are bad. They benefit races differently based on nothing but race alone, all in the name of eliminating racism. Its fucking stupid beyond belief. I also dont appreciate the double standards. If someone started a "white male" scholarship people would lose their shit over how racist and sexist it is, but if you have a minority female scholarship everyone totally supports it and calls the person who wants to get rid of it a sexist racist. Its unbelievably hypocritical and I'm not going to stand for it. hate crime legislation? Can we please have some sound legal consistency in the law? Its NOT illegal to hate anyone, so why add it to a person's sentence after being convicted of an actual crime? Its absolutely preposterous!

Furthermore, in the context of that quote, I categorized GHETTO THUGS as people up to no good. I did NOT categorize any particular group of people as ghetto thugs (the OP did, but I wasnt supporting that point. listening to hip hop does not make one a ghetto thug). The target group was "ghetto thugs", the stereotype was that they're generally "no good". That's it. I think its a fair assessment since I never see ghetto thugs participating in any charity work or working on cancer research, but I have been mugged by them about a half dozen times and five of my friends have been murdered by them (three in front of me). you're right though, I didn't make my position clear so it leaves a lot of holes left for assumption. I apologize for the misunderstanding

[leisuremuffin]

you can't have it both ways, android. You can't claim that you are objective and rational in this debate and pull a statement like that out of your ass.


It doesn't work that way.




here's a question for you. We'll start with your statement:

Furthermore, in the context of that quote, I categorized GHETTO THUGS as people up to no good. I did NOT categorize any particular group of people as ghetto thugs (the OP did, but I wasnt supporting that point. listening to hip hop does not make one a ghetto thug). The target group was "ghetto thugs", the stereotype was that they're generally "no good". That's it. I think its a fair assessment since I never see ghetto thugs participating in any charity work or working on cancer research, but I have been mugged by them about a half dozen times and five of my friends have been murdered by them (three in front of me). you're right though, I didn't make my position clear so it leaves a lot of holes left for assumption

Who exactly do you mean when you say "ghetto thugs?" If there is no correlation to race, what are the attributes that make one a "ghetto thug?"


.lm.

[Android Bishop]

you can't have it both ways, android. You can't claim that you are objective and rational in this debate and pull a statement like that out of your ass.


It doesn't work that way.

You're right, I can't pull numbers out of my ass. But I did, within the context that was meant to imply the idea that a "majority of individuals in a group one encounters". I could have worded it better

Who exactly do you mean when you say "ghetto thugs?" If there is no correlation to race, what are the attributes that make one a "ghetto thug?"

.lm.

A fucking low class thug, jesus what is so difficult to understand about this? You damn well know a ghetto thug when you see one. I've been mugged by ghetto thugs that were white plenty of times, as I also have ones that were black and mexican and even asian. They certainly dont wear suits and speak in a pompous Harvard dialect. I guess typically they wear baggy street clothes, speak with "ghetto" accents, are dumb as rocks, and have a "gangster" mentality. Making a list of characteristics isn't entirely accurate to what is in my head, the point is that when I encounter someone with a bunch of attributes (whether in physical demeanor or attitude) that my brain has grouped TOGETHER to be consistent with its category as a "ghetto thug", it sums up the attributes observed and makes that distinction. Its a "you know it when you see it" thing. If I see a black guy in flip flops and a polo shirt I'm not going to categorize him as a ghetto thug, but if I see a white guy in overly baggy clothes, a sideways hat, a wife beater, walking around with that that dumb "thug" limp and speaking like a gangster I'm going to categorize him as a ghetto thug (or at least a wanna be one depending on the context).

[andydes]

Jesus Christ. You guys should really let this go.

LM: Not sure why you're so intent on outing Android as a racist. You may not agree with his views on AA, but that doesn't make him racist. And the Ghetto thug argument is a bit weak after he's explained he's not talking about skin colour, but how people behave. Time to move on.

If you over analysie what someone says you can come up with any conclusion you want.

[leisuremuffin]

the problem is that the word "ghetto" does have racial overtones. It's absolutely silly to claim otherwise.
as does everything else he's saying.

you have to be willfully ignorant to ignore the racial overtones of what he's saying.


You can say "it has nothing to do with race" as many times as you want, but it doesn't make it true.

It had something to do with race when beats me said that he equates people that listen to hip hop with criminals, and it has something to do with race when android says that "ghetto thugs" are up to no good.


I know plenty of people who wear "baggy street clothes" and speak "with ghetto accents" that are intelligent and non violent people.



It is wrong and inaccurate to judge people on a moral level based on what kind of music they listen to or how they dress, and it certainly has racial overtones when the music, style of dress, and manner of speech you are picking out are all associated (accurately or not) with certain races. I know it, you know it, and android knows it.

If I see a black guy in flip flops and a polo shirt I'm not going to categorize him as a ghetto thug, but if I see a white guy in overly baggy clothes, a sideways hat, a wife beater, walking around with that that dumb "thug" limp and speaking like a gangster I'm going to categorize him as a ghetto thug (or at least a wanna be one depending on the context).

either way you'd be absolutely wrong. And take notice that what you are saying here is easily translatable as "black people who dress and act white are probably OK and white people who dress and act black are probably dangerous. It *is* fucked up, and it *does* have to do with racial perception.



If you want to turn the other way and say this shit is alright, that's fine. I won't, it's wrong, it's racist, and i'm going to say it is.


.lm.

[Android Bishop]

the problem is that the word "ghetto" does have racial overtones. It's absolutely silly to claim otherwise.
as does everything else he's saying.

you have to be willfully ignorant to ignore the racial overtones of what he's saying.


You can say "it has nothing to do with race" as many times as you want, but it doesn't make it true.

It had something to do with race when beats me said that he equates people that listen to hip hop with criminals, and it has something to do with race when android says that "ghetto thugs" are up to no good.


I know plenty of people who wear "baggy street clothes" and speak "with ghetto accents" that are intelligent and non violent people.



It is wrong and inaccurate to judge people on a moral level based on what kind of music they listen to or how they dress, and it certainly has racial overtones when the music, style of dress, and manner of speech you are picking out are all associated (accurately or not) with certain races. I know it, you know it, and android knows it.

If I see a black guy in flip flops and a polo shirt I'm not going to categorize him as a ghetto thug, but if I see a white guy in overly baggy clothes, a sideways hat, a wife beater, walking around with that that dumb "thug" limp and speaking like a gangster I'm going to categorize him as a ghetto thug (or at least a wanna be one depending on the context).

either way you'd be absolutely wrong. And take notice that what you are saying here is easily translatable as "black people who dress and act white are probably OK and white people who dress and act black are probably dangerous. It *is* fucked up, and it *does* have to do with racial perception.



If you want to turn the other way and say this shit is alright, that's fine. I won't, it's wrong, it's racist, and i'm going to say it is.


.lm.

ugh, I'm pretty much done with you but I'm going to counter that you would have to be willfully ignorant or outright DISHONEST to project the idea that there are no general trends shared by groups of people. For instance, listening to hip hop does not make one a thug, but it certainly is one qualification among others that fits into a overall pattern. Its pretty rare to find a "ghetto thug" rocking Bach or the Beach Boys in his car. its also rare to find thugs in flip flops and polo shirts, in the middle of a conversation debating the merits of the British parliamentary system over the U.S.'s. It is, however, far more common to find them rocking baggy clothes, listening to hip hop, and talking about bitches and weed and shit like that. Maybe its just because you're in Maine that you aren't exposed enough to it or something, or you are hell bent on a crusade of self righteous bullshit.

[leisuremuffin]

I lived most of my life in new york city.

staten island, brooklyn, queens, manhattan. only borough i haven't lived in is the bronx, but i've had friends there.

2nd longest place i've lived and worked is Trenton, NJ.





anyway, keep digging a hole, everything you type is complete fucking racist horseshit.



.lm.

[Khazul]

Positive discrimination for one group is always negative discrimination for another.

You want to fix discrimination? You have to fix people's minds, not the systems.
No leglislation is going to do that and this is where every effort so far has and always will fail.

[Android Bishop]

anyway, keep digging a hole, everything you type is complete fucking racist horseshit.



.lm.

You can call it whatever you want, but it isn't horseshit until you prove it otherwise. You have NOT addressed the core of the arguments AT ALL, all you have done is attempt to continually "out" me as a racist in order to fulfill your need to attack me personally as a means of validating your position. Its a low class, dishonest, and rationally invalid tactic that only serves to undermine any point you may be trying to make.

[andydes]

I was halfway though writing a reply to all that, but it's a waste of time.

Android, I'd let it go too.

[Chang]

The facts given by every college on earth are racist?

What the hell does that chart mean? Do you even know what Hispanic means. Tell me the difference between white and Hispanic, genius. Your chart is a crock. Which Asians, the Hans, the Burmese, the friggin' Mongolians? Which Whites--the tards from Appalachia, or the ones from France, Spain.

The graph was sarcastic a joke. Jeeezzzz



Screw color, this has to be one of the most thin skinned forums.

[starving student]

Positive discrimination for one group is always negative discrimination for another.

You want to fix discrimination? You have to fix people's minds, not the systems.
No leglislation is going to do that and this is where every effort so far has and always will fail.

I totally disagree with that, I think it's just the opposite you cannot fix peoples minds or hearts best you can do is Love them inspite of themselves but you sure as hell can use legislation to help stop institutionalized transgressions. that's the whole point of this thread there is no such thing as reverse racism but some people like to act like 'righting an in-equality' is the same thing as the in-equality that is being righted, that's nonsense, when a hospital gives your child the wrong medicine and almost kills them you sue that hospital, when someone commits a crime they answer for that crime, if you're a business or an educational organization and you descriminate against a group of people and you get caught then you have to make ammends simple as that. there are ammendmants made for what happen to the jews, the japanese, and the indians,.....black people are not better than anyone equal is just. the problem Android,and other like minded folk have with affirmative action or any legislation that is meant to right the injustices against minorities and women is that they cannot handle the level and sheer enormity of leveling the so called playing field but in their haste they blame the oppressed instead of the oppressor. unfortunately this country was built on the back of hatred so discrimination and racism permeate every facet of our society which and let me stress this again is fine, you cannot and should not try to legistlate what lives inside a mans heart but once he brings that to work it's another story altogther.
so what android should be upset with is not the fact that there is affirmative action in his school, his anger is misplaced, he should be OUTRAGED at the sheer scape of the size of hatred and discrimination that
has been lodged at minorities on an educational institutionalized level for decades and even since the inception of this country, it's because of the sheer size of this amount of hatred and discrimination that federal laws had to be enacted to counter this discrimination across the board of 52 states in this great union of ours.

the problem has been and is a huge problem and it will take a big stick to beat it but minorities and women are not the enemy and they did not create the huge disportionate size of discrimination in this country. The size of the playing field to be leveled is enormous and the energy that it will take to level it will be at least equal to the amount that it needs to be leveled.