Well there are very few such people, and even KKK members can be befriended by a black person.
> It sounds like the jokes people are making at your expense are because of a single action that they are mocking, possibly as a callback to a trait you have.
Are traits ok to make fun of? And if I take an action and someone makes fun of it, is it not hurtful? I’m not trying to draw comparisons here, but I’m not sure you can generally invalidate the experiences of others either.
Comedy, and making fun of these things and each other is progress. When we let words make us fragile we give them power that they shouldn’t have. People all over the world are or can be mean because of ignorance. Why give them more power and leverage over you?
> Some people just want to hang out with people where saying an off color joke doesn't ruin your fucking life.
Is this something you feel a need to do? Given your previous mention of political correctness, I'm assuming this means you want to tell jokes about black people or Hispanics, but resent the fact that society no longer smiles on such things.
This is what's commonly known as the ignorance of privilege. It's white people saying, "Why can't I make jokes about black people, when black people can make jokes about me?"
It demonstrates a total ignorance of what it means to be a discriminated against demographic.
>Talk to people. Don't take a few seconds of something that they said and relentlessly mock them, like the guy is doing in that video you sent.
People as individuals of course deserve for us to listen to them. Anybody. But it's OK to mock groups that go into aggregate stupid behavior - which also means mocking their members, but as members, not necessarily as whole human beings.
>Again, there is such thing as aggregate behavior, but break it apart. How much of it is toxic, and how much of it do you just find weird/not quite your taste?
Depends. If you're trying to judge an individual judge them on a case by case basis, despite whatever group(s) they might belong to. After all, their group affiliation doesn't define somebody totally. There can be jerk Democrats and wonderful Republicans for example, and vice versa. In fact, there can be great people that are otherwise (and for their own life-history reasons) bigots, and hideous hypocritical people who are otherwise humanitarians. People are complex.
That said, it's also helpful to judge movements in aggregate, when trying to trace historical contours, affect change, etc.
MLK could simply throw his hands up and say "everybody is different, I can't assume there is racism in the country" and try to access everybody individually -- and that would have gotten nowhere. Or, as he did, he could say there are very strong racist currents in the country, especially in the South, and I need to march there, and do so and so to change those people, as he did.
One has to think at several levels of abstraction, not just individual people.
>It's easy to treat someone like the "other" and project a lot of unfavorable traits onto them, because it's human nature. But it's important to try not to other-ize people.
If anything, I have another problem, I'm heavily contrarian. I see some things as basically correct, but if you push towards -X in a discussion (or if many people do) I will push towards X (even if in another disucssion I will push towards -X if somebody pushes to X) to restore balance. I also tend to pick things I agree with with both sides of a debate, even things they'll never themselves agree with ever. I basically hate group conformity. E.g. I can see the truth in some alt-right points, and I can see hardline leftist points. Not merely from a centrist way though (a compromise between them) but even hardcore tenets of one or the other side.
White people shouldn't call you bro like black people shouldn't call you bro either. I'm black, no one calls me bro or the n word, black or white, it shouldn't be a matter of color but respect. I don't understand why you need to single out whites on that matter.
Likewise it would be stupid to say it's ok for girls to call each other bitch or cunt, but not ok for a man to do that because he is a man.
> Someone please explain to me how labeling the word 'black' as offensive represents some kind of social progress.
It isn't (though recognizing that using the term “black” in ways which actually evoke racial stereotypes is), but both hostile provocateurs (deliberately) and people who don't understand the actual issue but want to try to appear supportive because they see social advantage (out of ignorance) act in ways which associate a more general rejection of the word “black” with what people genuinely concerned about social progress are trying to do.
> it expresses that one group is inferior, and that he is inferior because he belongs to that group.
Does it actually express that? Or is it a term that is being reached for because someone is upset and it's a cheap insult that the insulter thinks will have a large impact?
You are looking at this stuff in very black-and-white terms. How people communicate is a lot more nuanced than you are giving it credit for.
That reminds me of a conversation I had nearly a decade ago with a black (African immigrant) friend. I don't remember the details, but basically he said that he was annoyed that the words "dark" and "black" had negative connotations. I knew him well enough to know that he wasn't trolling, and that this was something that had seriously taken an emotional toll on him.
Ever since then I've been thinking about this -- maybe it does bother a lot of black folks? And, think of very little whose conception of words is primitive, and how they might associate the words together.
I don't really know what I'm getting it. It's very hard to make any sort of conclusion here. I mean, what's the cure -- we make a prescriptive linguistic change that color-based words can't be used anymore? That's not happening.
>Maybe try stopping yourself and/or your colleagues from behaving like animals and thugs for a few months, and do things to earn some respect?
Since you started using expletives: Looking at statistics this applies to the Black community more than anything.
How is the Black community in any way earning respect? All I see is entitlement, aggressiveness, threats and demanding hand-outs for merely existing.
> The belief in this case being that your opinion of their identity, based on the studies you have read, is more relevant to their truth (or anyone's) than their feelings about their identity. As far as some of us are concerned, it isn't.
But why should I take someone's view of their identity without question? Why, and to what extent, am I obliged to uphold and reinforce someone's self-perception? And why on some issues but not their race, height, age, etc.?
Saying it's a "cultural issue" or a "social construct" doesn't help here. "Social construct" does not mean an individual gets to decide unilaterally - quite the opposite in fact! A social constructed category is one which society decides.
Nor does "socially constructed" mean something is arbitrary. Language is socially constructed, but that does not mean we can change anything we want about a given language without consequence.
> Really, the issue at hand is that you feel like you should get to make jokes about people's identity, and others feel like joking about people based on their identity is rude so they call you out on it.
Presuming to know someone else's motives better than they know themselves is not persuasive.
>Seems in some places, it's perfectly (socially) acceptable to pick on others, as long as you're picking on the 'right' group of folks...
This is the US. Here, it's perfectly acceptable to pick on everyone. From blacks, and handicapped people, to bankers, and frat boys. You can discriminate against whoever you like here. At least in the jokes and social situations.
You should hear what they say about blacks, or greedy bankers, or frat boys, or women they call "gold diggers", or jews, or hispanics, or white people, or cops, or etc etc etc.
That's the great thing about America, you can say whatever you like.
Actually, in contrast to what you're saying, words hardly matter at all. What's important is intention of the communication, not necessarily it's form. You can be the nicest-spoken lady/gentelman and have a vicious effect on the well-being of people or whole communities, by being hypocritical, judgemental or manipulative.
For a concrete example, black people are usually OK with being called "niggers", as long as it's by other black people; I assume that's because they assume different intentions than when a white person says that word (which is quite racist, ironically).
> "This term is used to ridicule or demean a certain group of people based on their behaviors."
Isn’t that precisely when it’s ok to ridicule someone? Not based on properties they cannot change (race, height, sex, etc) but indeed based on behavior they choose to engage in (religion, politics, social behavior, life choices, etc.).
If ridiculing people for their behavior is now off limits then what the hell is left? Do we just talk about the weather?
> Call me the n word all you want. But if you threaten my life you should be stopped.
Are you actually black? Because if you were I would think that you of all people would understand that calling someone (let's not mince words here) a nigger is threatening their life. The problem is not so much if I call you a nigger as if I say to my friend bubba, "Hey, what do you think we oughtta do 'bout that uppity nigger over there?"
> It sounds like the jokes people are making at your expense are because of a single action that they are mocking, possibly as a callback to a trait you have.
Are traits ok to make fun of? And if I take an action and someone makes fun of it, is it not hurtful? I’m not trying to draw comparisons here, but I’m not sure you can generally invalidate the experiences of others either.
Comedy, and making fun of these things and each other is progress. When we let words make us fragile we give them power that they shouldn’t have. People all over the world are or can be mean because of ignorance. Why give them more power and leverage over you?
reply