Skin Colour, Races and Racism

[Nicktendo]

3 hours ago, Rummy said:

Not gonna pick you apart by arghument Nicktendo but seeing a lot of disingenousness grom you throughout the thread. Lots and lots og wrguments stats etc put out by you and your instant 'nope im out!' at literally two words shows something I see in a lot of people who don't have much interest in *actually* progressing things.

You're obviously intelligent(even if you insist on being foolish ) but many of your arguments are riddled with flaws such as false equivalences or assuming perfect impartiality/exclusivity etc. When these gaping flaws have been pointed out to you you have merely just rambled off a load of other stuff.

Lets for example take the idea of oppurtunity and how any black person(let alone the intersectional issues of a black female) can become president(of US). Or even that a female could become prime minister(of UK).

Why has this throughout ALL the presidents and prime ministers only netted us to date Margaret Thatcher Theresa May and Barack Obama with no black Prime Ministers and no female Presidents so far.

Are you really going to tell me that is all pure chance? Or are black people or women people simply just incapable? You cannot have it both ways. The bias definitely exists - and whilst people post here and articulate themselves to explain why your claims are incorrect you often ignore them and simply ramble some other stuff afterwards; implying because you have lots of stats videos claims etc. that they are therefore objectively more truthful powerful and correct.

 

They are not. Again I won't redo the work of multiple others here but take that as the meta-critique of your work so far. I don't have an issue with your conservative views but it seems to have an impact upon your engagement and certain respect for certain people - and given the whole nature of this topic here and the idea of a blindness contributing to all this in society it's worth considering - even earlier when will' pointed out the racist nature of something you actually typed you took it to read he was saying YOU were a racist - I don't think others here were reading it the same.

This is such a ResetEra response. 

I've explained why it's a waste of time to engage with intersectionalists and this post is a pretty good example of why. Long-winded and says a lot without actually saying anything at all. Attack the character of the person ("disingenuous" - "are black people or women simply incapable?"), attach silly little commentary and labels like "false equivalence". Hence why engaging doesn't really serve any purpose. Tell my why my equivalencies are false. Is it the one where we should ignore some sections of society, like Indians and white working-class, and only focus on the ones which support our argument like Black British communities? Go a few pages back and you'll see my suggestion of how things could be improved in a way that doesn't burn society to the ground. I guess my suggestions are not the right way of progressing things. No interest in BLM's version of progress from me whatsoever, you're right. 

Of the last seven British Prime Ministers, two have been female.
Of the last seven US presidents, one has been black.

Looks like representation is increasing, doesn't it? Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Progress has ONLY netted us much better representation in the last 50 years. But no, it's much better to measure from the beginning of history so it looks better for our cause! It really is all or nothing with the left isn't it? No progress will ever be enough. 

So what have I rambled about? I've offered solutions. Haven't seen anyone else do that so far apart from Will and Animal (sorry, Beast) who actually considered my points and raised their issues with some of them, which I agree with. 

Good job calling me out on using stats and adding videos of people who are better at arguing and making a point than I am. I guess statistics and academia really doesn't matter after all. Might as well do away with it all if we're going to embrace our socialist utopia! Then no-one will be allowed to disagree! I'll remember next time that people on the internet are objectively more truthful than research and respected scientists. I guess your videos are the only ones that should be watched because they back up your objective truth that society is racist. My bad.
 

Edited July 10, 2020 by Nicktendo

[Beast]

1 hour ago, Nicktendo said:

This is such a ResetEra response. 

Tried to look for the definition of this on Google and yet again, couldn't find it. What is that? 

[Nicktendo]

19 minutes ago, Beast said:

Tried to look for the definition of this on Google and yet again, couldn't find it. What is that? 

That facts that don't suit the overriding agenda can be handwaved away and the person presenting them should be called into question for making "false equivalencies", "arguing in bad faith" and yadda yadda yadda . That suggestions for progress that aren't based only on skin colour, gender and sexuality are not suggestions for progress at all. 

That I have been presented with this binary choice:

Quote

Are you really going to tell me that is all pure chance? Or are black people or women people simply just incapable?

It's either chance, or black people and women are incapable. Couldn't possibly be anything else...

Extremely narrow view of the world and people who make opposing arguments. It's like those people who claim to want to listen to the other side of a discussion and then say "So what you're saying is..." before they inevitably put words in your mouth and misrepresent your point of view. 

This is why it's a waste of time to argue with such people. 

[Sheikah]

6 hours ago, Nicktendo said:

This is such a ResetEra response. 

I've explained why it's a waste of time to engage with intersectionalists and this post is a pretty good example of why. Long-winded and says a lot without actually saying anything at all. Attack the character of the person ("disingenuous" - "are black people or women simply incapable?"), attach silly little commentary and labels like "false equivalence". Hence why engaging doesn't really serve any purpose. Tell my why my equivalencies are false. Is it the one where we should ignore some sections of society, like Indians and white working-class, and only focus on the ones which support our argument like Black British communities? Go a few pages back and you'll see my suggestion of how things could be improved in a way that doesn't burn society to the ground. I guess my suggestions are not the right way of progressing things. No interest in BLM's version of progress from me whatsoever, you're right. 

Of the last seven British Prime Ministers, two have been female.
Of the last seven US presidents, one has been black.

Looks like representation is increasing, doesn't it? Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Progress has ONLY netted us much better representation in the last 50 years. But no, it's much better to measure from the beginning of history so it looks better for our cause! It really is all or nothing with the left isn't it? No progress will ever be enough. 

So what have I rambled about? I've offered solutions. Haven't seen anyone else do that so far apart from Will and Animal (sorry, Beast) who actually considered my points and raised their issues with some of them, which I agree with. 

Good job calling me out on using stats and adding videos of people who are better at arguing and making a point than I am. I guess statistics and academia really doesn't matter after all. Might as well do away with it all if we're going to embrace our socialist utopia! Then no-one will be allowed to disagree! I'll remember next time that people on the internet are objectively more truthful than research and respected scientists. I guess your videos are the only ones that should be watched because they back up your objective truth that society is racist. My bad.
 

My problems with your arguments are that you largely seem to ignore the overarching facts and have carefully cherry picked your data to make your points. Like focusing on the top earners and Asians, while ignoring that you're far more likely to be in poverty if you're non white. In these discussions you should always be looking at the bottom (those truly suffering), not the top.

I also mentioned that you're far less likely to become president or prime minister if you're black, but then you responded with what amounted to "but a president has been black", and it felt as though you thought you had reasonably countered my point, when you hadn't. Because the fact that something has happened does not mean that this proves that there is the same chance of a black person getting to that position as a white person. There are many factors (including the poverty statistic, as mentioned) that would decrease the chance of a black person even making it to being in a position of contention. And there are many who would put forward white candidates as they perceive them to have the "right image" that would garner votes more readily than black people. Surely you can see that even if there a lot of Asian high earners, that does not mean that there is no inherent racism in the various political systems? If you're going to bring up Asians, how many Asian presidents and prime ministers have there been relative to the proportion of Asians in those countries?

I also mentioned the point about the House of Lords having a predisposition to retain white people in power (through hereditary peers), to which you didn't properly address either. This is irrefutably institutional racism. The idea that institutional racism is gone is the idea of a fantasist.

[LazyBoy]

Both sides of this debate have spiralled a little, you'd all do well to condense your points, summarise sticking points and list concessions.

Also I'm totally lost so help a guy out.

[Rummy]

On 10/07/2020 at 12:34 PM, Beast said:

Tried to look for the definition of this on Google and yet again, couldn't find it. What is that? 

I think this; given Nicktendo's open im the response to me - highlights exactly the flaws in his approach. Throwing around loosely defined things from a lofty approach.

Not offense @Nicktendo but you try to open a critique against my post suggesting I am arguing ad hominem whilst literally throwing an ad hominmen at me stopped me in my tracks in giving the rest of your post any merit. Is ResetEra some well-recognised and well-defined term here that Beast could not even google a definition? Or are you continuing to try and present yourself in some lofty, holier-than-thou, more-knowledgeable-than-thou position.

 

I explained already it was a meta critique of your argument style thus far. Not something against you. Yet you continue to do so - my motivation in raising it is a variety of reasons;

The attitude overlaps with those denying many of the issues being discussed in this thread.

Whilst typical of the usual style of discussion/argument on the internet it has been noted repeatedly within this thread by more than one poster how despite this being a sensitive topic its had been and continues to be a pretty good discussion - I'm trying to say I think your biases here are bringing something into the thread that hasn't been present so far - ie most people have been discussing back and forth whereas when you have been critiqued you have tended to gloss over and ignore the very valid criticisms being levelled at you by others. Where this has seemingly happened elsewhere in the thread(ie me will beast jonnas all coming from different points of view) we've seemed to display a bit more of engagement with each other that seems to show we are listening.

Just trying to gently explain to you that so far your own engagement with the thread seems otherwise compared to most of the others. You seem quick to dismiss and label or judge(see your comments on intersectionality and this bizarre ResetEra referefence). How can you dismiss intersectionality even?

I won't even make an argument here whwn others can do better I've seen you already utilised Triggernometry as a source so why not take on of their videos and listen to a muslim comedian break down homosexuality within that community and then tell me how much you think things happen the same for homosexuals in non-muslim communities compared?

 

[Rummy]

4 hours ago, LazyBoy said:

Both sides of this debate have spiralled a little, you'd all do well to condense your points, summarise sticking points and list concessions.

Also I'm totally lost so help a guy out.

What point of view are YOU coming from and what are you after? So far most of it imo was people giving their own stories and discussing and reflecting from there. I wanted to avoid this becoming some sort of 'source wars' on the internet. I think it is obvious why; though I will quote a man I actually consider really quite very wise in these matters;

"

You can prove anything you want by coldly logical reason---if you pick the proper postulates.

Isaac Asimov, I, Robot (Robot, #0.1)

Tags: epistemology"

 

Now. This is not JUST a quote for the sake of the current matter but Asimov wrote some very, very, very good stories. Most will know the film I, Robot(based on his works but not a specific) and also Bicentennial Man(starring Robin Williams as an 'robot'/android).

 

His collection of short robot stories are collected into 'The Complete Robot' and I recommend it to anyone who can read with a fine eye - he utilises stories of robots(in varying positions/situations) to highlight the basic prejudices and discriminations in society - almost showing them to be inavoidable. In writing his stories with 'robots'(a term half attributed to him iirc and from the czech for slave?) he often has people judgemental sympathetic empathetic etc towards the robots of the stories and highlights the different interactions and prejudices around 'others'. I believe in doing so he waa able to critique a society that woulf no way have tolerated it at the time had the prejudices been written against other humans - but being stories or robots judging humans some who saw robots as nothing of consequence never saw themselves in the stories as the judgemental ones.

[DOAG]

Racism and any kind of hatred towards anybody is something I can not stand and will not tolerate from anyone!

Like dude there is just no excuse for it!! 

We are all human and need to be loved. 

So let's just love one another and enjoy this one life. 

[Rummy]

10 hours ago, DOAG said:

Racism and any kind of hatred towards anybody is something I can not stand and will not tolerate from anyone!

Like dude there is just no excuse for it!! 

We are all human and need to be loved. 

So let's just love one another and enjoy this one life. 

is that a soag?

[soag]

3 hours ago, Rummy said:

is that a soag?

It was but now I'm back in my real account, so this is now soag 😂 

[Rummy]

On 12/07/2020 at 11:46 AM, soag said:

It was but now I'm back in my real account, so this is now soag 😂 

ohhhh didnt realise it was alting wondered if it was related to changes lol.

On a serious note with that; how do you think you feel offering any personal experiences and views in a bit more depth?

 

Also to check with current regular participants - would anyone mind if I added for now and see how it goes an (and discrimination?) to the topic title. Whilst we've had a bit of a weak debate around the meta idea of 'intersectional issues' over the last couple pages that have buried the actual idea being even recognised or discussed - I think i would say given convos so far and the contributions of various folks its moving more into the generality of how discrimination as a whole macro idea applies and manifests down in these little micro issues? Just my thoughts atm.

[Will]

I think it’s a good call to discuss all discrimination in one topic, so yeah I think that a change to the title to reflect that would be a good idea. It’s a wider problem that we also need to think about in these times.

[Will]

In my new office we have a Diversity & Inclusion Committee. In line with my thoughts that we need to actively try to combat these issues rather than passively agreeing that discrimination is bad I’ve sent in an application to join.

Hopefully I’ll hear back early next week on whether I can join and will report back here on my progress.

[Mr_Odwin]

We have something similar at work and it's resulted in some changes. Whether they're just cosmetic or not we'll find out in time, but it's there at least. We're having a set of gender neutral toilets built. We have some space dedicated for religious/meditative reflection, and recently we had an email where we were told we could include preferred pronouns in our email signatures. The company as a whole has been on it with BLM, and we had a company-wide day off to reflect on it. I know things like that were kinda slated on twitter as not being the point, but it's a big action for a large company.

 

 

[Will]

Bumping this up as after having some really good conversation on these issues we shouldn't let it fade away.

On 7/16/2020 at 7:25 PM, will' said:

In my new office we have a Diversity & Inclusion Committee. In line with my thoughts that we need to actively try to combat these issues rather than passively agreeing that discrimination is bad I’ve sent in an application to join.

I got accepted to this! Not too sure what to expect yet, but looks like I'll get to undergo some diversity training sessions and then be part of the group that enacts policy to ensure we have a positive impact for diversity and inclusion.

On 7/17/2020 at 4:35 PM, Mr_Odwin said:

We have some space dedicated for religious/meditative reflection

Do they have this set up just as a space and whoever wants to go in there can go in and do whatever they want? Religion is a tricky one as I don't think you can explicitly say it's for anything as you risk immediately isolating anyone not mentioned. Companies in Singapore seem to just label them as reflection rooms and never mention anything else.

On 7/17/2020 at 4:35 PM, Mr_Odwin said:

recently we had an email where we were told we could include preferred pronouns in our email signatures

I also find this one quite interesting. I totally get it for people who want to clarify where it might be ambiguous or they have a preference for something in particular. When I see totally normal regular guys putting him/his I'm not sure it's the right approach. It feels to me like saying you have a black friend so can't be racist. Maybe I'm totally out of line on that though.

[Beast]

So a huge thing everybody seems to be talking about is Beyonce's "Black is King". Some are okay with the title but then there are some who say the title is racist. There are those who would say things like "If a white man made a film called White is King, everyone would scream racism". What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree with the title? Do you think she could've changed it? Do you think she should change it? 

Honestly, I see their point. I've not watched the film even though I've gone off Beyonce a little bit but I understand the point of where people are coming from. I know roughly what it's about and to me, it seems like a feature-length music video based on the side-album she released for The Lion King...with the story sounding quite similar to The Lion King as well.

[Will]

2 hours ago, Beast said:

So a huge thing everybody seems to be talking about is Beyonce's "Black is King". Some are okay with the title but then there are some who say the title is racist. There are those who would say things like "If a white man made a film called White is King, everyone would scream racism". What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree with the title? Do you think she could've changed it? Do you think she should change it? 

Honestly, I see their point. I've not watched the film even though I've gone off Beyonce a little bit but I understand the point of where people are coming from. I know roughly what it's about and to me, it seems like a feature-length music video based on the side-album she released for The Lion King...with the story sounding quite similar to The Lion King as well.

I hadn’t heard anything about it and everything I’m going to say I based on 10 minutes of reading up about it.

I think it’s completely fine calling it Black is King. I’m no fan of Beyoncé (nor do I dislike her), but it seems to me as if this is a really genuine production stemming from exploitation of a black artist in the making of the Lion King, which has gained steam culminating in this. 

It absolutely would scream racism if a white person called something White is King without any context, but I don’t think the opposite is true. There is reasoning for the title and it represents something that I think is really a positive thing.

So, my thoughts are that it’s great, I agree with the title, and I don’t think it should even be considered that they change it.

[Cookyman]

So when is White Chicks being banned?

I'm totally shocked with the Wayan brothers putting on "white face" absolutely disgusting!

I'm being sacastic but this cancel culture approach to absolutely everything is getting out of hand.  

I think Mr H sums up it up nicely here.  

 

[Will]

I’ve been looking at that Gina Carano stuff and I can’t even work out what everyone is pissed off about. As far as I can tell they mis-interpreted a post about standing up to oppression as support of Nazis and therefore she doesn’t support BLM which of course you must do or else you’re a racist who should be punished?

Yeah, I think I’d put that one down to idiocy too.

[Ronnie]

I've just read the Gina Carano stuff too. Oh my fucking god, the world is full of absolute morons.

I've also just learned about this ACAB thing  it's times like these I wish social media had never been a thing

[Mr_Odwin]

On 06/08/2020 at 5:46 AM, will' said:

Do they have this set up just as a space and whoever wants to go in there can go in and do whatever they want? Religion is a tricky one as I don't think you can explicitly say it's for anything as you risk immediately isolating anyone not mentioned. Companies in Singapore seem to just label them as reflection rooms and never mention anything else.

Two set aside offices that are described like this:

o   Multi-Faith room now available (4^th floor opposite B----, Sh----- & B----- meeting rooms)

o   Quiet room now available (next to the Multi-Faith room) specifically for those who need a temporary sanctuary for their personal wellbeing.

On 06/08/2020 at 5:46 AM, will' said:

I also find this one quite interesting. I totally get it for people who want to clarify where it might be ambiguous or they have a preference for something in particular. When I see totally normal regular guys putting him/his I'm not sure it's the right approach. It feels to me like saying you have a black friend so can't be racist. Maybe I'm totally out of line on that though.

I'm also not sure how to navigate this (does using it make me more supportive, even though it's not something that ever affects me) but it's optional so I've just held off for now.

[Will]

11 minutes ago, Mr_Odwin said:

I'm also not sure how to navigate this (does using it make me more supportive, even though it's not something that ever affects me) but it's optional so I've just held off for now.

Yeah, I can see why it could be seen as supportive, as you’re showing it’s a legitimate and standard thing to include, so people nervous about it would feel empowered to - I’m really not sure though. Is it a bit “All Lives Matter” ish?

If our members to whom this more appropriately applies feel comfortable sharing I’d love to know their opinion on it.

[Goafer]

Not aimed at anyone here, but it speaks volumes when people are angered more by riots/"cancel culture"/black lives matter etc than they are by the events that lead to it in the first place.

[Ronnie]

I find the pronoun thing pretty tedious. To clarify, by all means include what you want to include in your Twitter bio or whatever, but telling people they have to start using them? 

[Will]

@Ronnie, do you mean you don't want to have to announce your own preferred pronouns or that you don't want to have to use other people's?

I assume you mean the first and if so I agree with you, but I don't think anyone forces you to do it do they?