Is It More Shocking When Whites Show Bigotry?

[Two Many Cats]

In this thread about prejudicehttp://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=516036 some examples of inter-non-white predjudice were cited.

Of course, I'd like to think everyone is trying to conquer their own bigotry, (fat chance) but do we have the same ire for say, indian vs asian, black vs latino etc, than we do for say white vs black, or white vs jewish or whatever?

I work with some of the latino persuasion, and once in conversation a co-worker told me "Well you know those Puerto Ricans are known to be trashy people." She was from Chile, but I've heard Mexicans express the same sentiment. I have no idea what the Puerto Ricans think of them.

The thing is, we at large tend to shrug that sort of thing off. Whereas, once a white receptionist at another job once told me with disdain about "ghetto n-words" and I was like . I wasn't like about the Puerto Rican comments. Probably because the person speaking to me was Chilean, although I was put off by it.

Opinions?

[LonesomePolecat]

No, it's not more shocking when whites show racial prejudice. It's just that whites are the only people who are seriously expected not to care about race.

[Marley23]

No, it's not more shocking. What a weird question.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

In this thread about prejudicehttp://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=516036 some examples of inter-non-white predjudice were cited.

Of course, I'd like to think everyone is trying to conquer their own bigotry, (fat chance) but do we have the same ire for say, indian vs asian, black vs latino etc, than we do for say white vs black, or white vs jewish or whatever?

I work with some of the latino persuasion, and once in conversation a co-worker told me "Well you know those Puerto Ricans are known to be trashy people." She was from Chile, but I've heard Mexicans express the same sentiment. I have no idea what the Puerto Ricans think of them.

The thing is, we at large tend to shrug that sort of thing off. Whereas, once a white receptionist at another job once told me with disdain about "ghetto n-words" and I was like . I wasn't like about the Puerto Rican comments. Probably because the person speaking to me was Chilean, although I was put off by it.

Opinions?

It's not any more shocking but I take issue with your example. What if the white receptionist said she finds black people to be trashy and the Chilean told you of the disdain she feels for Puerto Ricans.

Expressing misguided negative views of a particular people is inherently less shocking than expressing outright disdain for them, particularly when accompanied by a racial epithet.

[bup]

It shouldn't be more shocking, but for me it is. Maybe cultural training.

However, there may be a (tiny) justification for it. William Raspberry, wrote a column about twenty years ago where he made the following analogy:

Consider the bumper sticker "My other car is a Rolls Royce."

If you see it on a 1992 Nissan Sentra, it's funny and ridiculous.

If you see it on a 2002 Honda Accord, it seems like harmless wishful dreaming.

If you see it on a 2009 Bentley Arnage, the driver's a total asshole.

Whites have been the unofficial ruling class in the United States from 1776 until now. Now it's starting to change a little bit. Still, it's there, at least for this generation.

A bum can make fun of a CEO. A bum can make fun of an accountant.
An accountant can make fun of a CEO.
A CEO making fun of a bum? Asshole.

[Renob]

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

I have no idea what the Puerto Ricans think of them.

Mexicans and Puerto Ricans have a pretty notable rivalry between themselves. And if you are looking for a group that Puerto Ricans really look down on, it's Dominicans.

At least that's the impression I get from my Puerto Rican father-in-law, who often sounds like a darker-skinned Archie Bunker.

[Two Many Cats]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop

It's not any more shocking but I take issue with your example. What if the white receptionist said she finds black people to be trashy and the Chilean told you of the disdain she feels for Puerto Ricans.

Expressing misguided negative views of a particular people is inherently less shocking than expressing outright disdain for them, particularly when accompanied by a racial epithet.

But you see, the negativity was about the same in both conversations. They were both showing disdain, in fact the receptionist was trying to seem funny.
But I never quite felt the same about talking with the receptionist, while with the Chilean, I wouldn't say it affected my opinion of her in the same way. Granted I liked the Chilean personally more than, oh never mind.

It all gets so complicated, but still white vs whatever prejudice still gets a from me and inter-non-white is more of a reaction. Maybe it's me? I'm prejudiced against whites!

[yorick73]

Most white people are willing to give any minority group a pass if they make a racist comment. I've heard minorities make comments that would make most racist whites blush and they almost never get called on it. Almost as if their view is more rational and legitimate than a white person's views. It seems to me the people who are most shocked by racist comments are the least likely to have ever lived around or interacted much with minority groups and, thus, are more willing to hear out the views of a minority group.

[KarlGrenze]

Originally Posted by Renob

Mexicans and Puerto Ricans have a pretty notable rivalry between themselves. And if you are looking for a group that Puerto Ricans really look down on, it's Dominicans.

At least that's the impression I get from my Puerto Rican father-in-law, who often sounds like a darker-skinned Archie Bunker.

It all goes (in a way) down to cultural pride. In Latin America, every country thinks theirs is the best. And even within countries, some regions are more regionalists than others.

In Puerto Rico, the minority that is look down on is Dominicans. When I'm surrounded by people from Mexico and Central America (I was with them a lot in Baton Rouge), the minority look down on were Hondurans. I have to admit their pop music sucks.

Argentinians have the stereotype of thinking way more of themselves than elsewhere in the continent.

One big difference with Puerto Rico is that there are two different populations. The ones who consider themselves Puerto Rican but have never been to the island, didn't grow up there, just had their whole ancestors and family there. The others are the "islanders", growing up in the island, with the family around, in what is basically a Latin American nation.

The former group, if they came from the first mass migrations, when it was mostly poor people... Well, poor people tend to end up living in the poorer parts of towns (ghettos). The later migrations do not follow that, and the "islanders" come from a much varied background, and a place from where they were certainly not a minority.

What pisses me off really bad is when someone comments that I don't look like a Puerto Rican because "you don't dress/talk/walk like them". No shoot, missy, I'm not from the ghetto, and it disturbs me that you equate my whole dear country with one!

[yorick73]

Originally Posted by KarlGrenze

What pisses me off really bad is when someone comments that I don't look like a Puerto Rican because "you don't dress/talk/walk like them". No shoot, missy, I'm not from the ghetto, and it disturbs me that you equate my whole dear country with one!

No sense in being pissed...this is your opportunity to explain the difference to them. For people who have not been to PR or exposed to many people from there, you can't expect them to know the difference.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

It all gets so complicated, but still white vs whatever prejudice still gets a from me and inter-non-white is more of a reaction. Maybe it's me? I'm prejudiced against whites!

Nailed it!

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop

Nailed it!

No, that's backward. The OP's stance suggests she expects less of minorities than of white people in terms of racism, as if minorities on the whole just don't know any better but white people do. That opinion doesn't make any sense no matter how it's sliced, though. If the white person's comments seemed more shocking, maybe it's because "ghetto niggers" is a harsher epithet than "trashy people."

[Two Many Cats]

Originally Posted by Marley23

No, that's backward. The OP's stance suggests she expects less of minorities than of white people in terms of racism, as if minorities on the whole just don't know any better but white people do. That opinion doesn't make any sense no matter how it's sliced, though. If the white person's comments seemed more shocking, maybe it's because "ghetto niggers" is a harsher epithet than "trashy people."

Yes, see I acknowledge that I have that expectation I guess, and I do think it's wrong (and a form of prejudice) to expect more from whites in terms of racial tolerance. But I do believe I'm not the only one. And I do believe inter-non-white prejudice is just as bad. However, it doesn't hit me as viscerally as white prejudice does. And that's wrong, but it's true all the same.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Marley23

No, that's backward. The OP's stance suggests she expects less of minorities than of white people in terms of racism, as if minorities on the whole just don't know any better but white people do. That opinion doesn't make any sense no matter how it's sliced, though. If the white person's comments seemed more shocking, maybe it's because "ghetto niggers" is a harsher epithet than "trashy people."

Did you see my first reply to Two Many Cats ? I specifically suggested that "ghetto niggers" was simply inherently more shocking than "trashy people". Two Many Cats came back to insist that the hatred and intolerance was equal in both cases, in spite of the way it was written. So I'm not going to argue that what Two Many Cats wrote is more accurate than (s)he says the tone really was.

I'm just saying, whatever the case may be it's Two Many Cats' bias and not anything intrinsically different between whites and non-whites.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop

Did you see my first reply to Two Many Cats ? I specifically suggested that "ghetto niggers" was simply inherently more shocking than "trashy people".

I didn't see that, no.

I'm just saying, whatever the case may be it's Two Many Cats' bias and not anything intrinsically different between whites and non-whites.

I think we agree about this.

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

However, it doesn't hit me as viscerally as white prejudice does. And that's wrong, but it's true all the same.

I'm just explaining it for what it is. As far as the visceral part goes, you're white, right? Maybe you're nervous about someone else assuming you share those views, or fear you share them yourself.

[Two Many Cats]

[/quote]I'm just explaining it for what it is. As far as the visceral part goes, you're white, right? Maybe you're nervous about someone else assuming you share those views, or fear you share them yourself.[/quote]

I wouldn't say I fear being bigoted. I have my prejudices same as anyone. I recognise them as wrong, but I can't help whatever gut reactions I have. And as for the two conversations, the spirit of the terms "trashy people" and "ghetto niggers" were comparable in my view. Both wrong. Perhaps you had to be there. The receptionist was attempting to joke around. The Chilean was not.

P.S. Yes, I am white.

[BrightNShiny]

I don't consider Puerto Ricans and Chileans to be separate races or ethnicities. Obviously, there are cultural differences, but a Chilean insulting a Puerto Rican, to me, is more like a New Mexican insulting a Texan or an American making fun the French. It's not the politest thing in the world, but it's not the same thing as insulting someone explicitly because of their race.

And as always, context matters. YMMV, of course.

[ToeJam]

Originally Posted by BrightNShiny

I don't consider Puerto Ricans and Chileans to be separate races or ethnicities. Obviously, there are cultural differences, but a Chilean insulting a Puerto Rican, to me, is more like a New Mexican insulting a Texan or an American making fun the French.

I guess I just think of different ethnicity when I think of "American" and "French", it's one thing for someone to insult someone's culture but to insult someone's race is a bit... more off putting to me.
A Native American can talk about a black Frenchmen eating their croissants and drinking wine and whatever other stereotypes you want.
The moment they start complaining about their actual skin color or genetic predisposition, that starts to irk me. The cultural one I see more as in good fun just like rooting for your favorite sports teams (though people do get shot and killed over that sort of thing), the racial one... I just don't take that one as well usually- it never really feels as lighthearted.

[Two Many Cats]

Originally Posted by BrightNShiny

I don't consider Puerto Ricans and Chileans to be separate races or ethnicities. Obviously, there are cultural differences, but a Chilean insulting a Puerto Rican, to me, is more like a New Mexican insulting a Texan or an American making fun the French. It's not the politest thing in the world, but it's not the same thing as insulting someone explicitly because of their race.

And as always, context matters. YMMV, of course.

But ethnicity is no more a choice than race. I'm German. If I went around talking about dumb Dagos or whatever I don't think that is better than if I went around saying those stupid Chinks. That doesn't make any sense.

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by Marley23

The OP's stance suggests she expects less of minorities than of white people in terms of racism, as if minorities on the whole just don't know any better but white people do. That opinion doesn't make any sense no matter how it's sliced, though.

True, but I don't think it's all that rare. Look at the reaction to the atrocities of the Nazis, and those of the Imperial Japanese - the Nazis are regarded as iconic of evil, but the Japanese atrocities are almost obscure. In part, I believe that's because we just didn't expect any better of the Japanese, for racial reasons. In other words, I think that racism among non-whites is often ignored due to the assumption ( often subconscious ) that you can't really expect anything better from "those people".

IMHO, another reason is that racism has been pushed as a "whites against everyone else" thing so much that racism by non-whites surprises just because it doesn't fit the stereotype.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

And as for the two conversations, the spirit of the terms "trashy people" and "ghetto niggers" were comparable in my view. Both wrong. Perhaps you had to be there. The receptionist was attempting to joke around. The Chilean was not.

You're not really talking about the spirit though are you? You're talking about visceral reaction to hateful speech. One of the most common incidences of racism in my life is people talking plaintively about blacks and hispanics and their pathetic lives. 'We' build them public housing projects and they just destroy them and live in squalor anyway. 'We' give them extra points on the fireman test but they fail our test anyway. I hear that kind of talk really not very often, but it reminds me of your "trashy people" comment. It's racist and ugly and completely uncomfortable to hear, but not really shocking.

On the other hand, explicitly expressing your disdain for ghetto niggers is outrageous and shocking whether you're joking or not.

So I still think it's more about the manifestation of the racism than whether its coming from whites or non-whites. And more to the point, if it's really about whites and non-whites, it's just your bias. There's no intrinsic difference and I don`t believe most people have that bias either.

[Two Many Cats]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop

So I still think it's more about the manifestation of the racism than whether its coming from whites or non-whites. And more to the point, if it's really about whites and non-whites, it's just your bias. There's no intrinsic difference and I don`t believe most people have that bias either.

I admitted having this bias, but like Der Trihs I don't believe it's a particularly uncommon one. It's just one that isn't discussed by us because it's un-PC. This thread show several examples of folks trying to justify "ethnic" bashing as opposed to race "bashing".

[BrightNShiny]

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

But ethnicity is no more a choice than race. I'm German. If I went around talking about dumb Dagos or whatever I don't think that is better than if I went around saying those stupid Chinks. That doesn't make any sense.

Well, I agree that it's bad to call someone a dumb Dago or a stupid Chink. But your OP says that the Chilean called them "trashy people." To me this is on the level of "cheese-eating surrender monkeys." It's not polite, but I don't think it's as bad as calling someone a dumb Dago or a stupid Chink.

ETA: I guess my point is that Americans make some pretty vicious comments towards the French, and while I don't approve of this, this seems to be an acceptable part of our national discourse. So, I don't really see the difference between that and your Chilean's comments about Puerto Ricans.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by bup

If you see it on a 2009 Bentley Arnage, the driver's a total asshole.

Seriously, anyone who would mar a Bentley with a bumper-sticker is a total douchebag. It's one thing to put it on a Sentra or an Accord, they're not much to look at to begin with.

[mswas]

*










*
Just in case anyone didn't get it. Bup's example basically corrolates as saying white people are not allowed to be racist because they REALLY ARE better and as such should be held to higher expectations and because it's not polite to rub it in the faces of those who are less than you. This topic is ruled by the tyranny of low expectations. Are white people better than black people in the way a Bentley is better than a Nissan Sentra?

[mswas]

Originally Posted by BrightNShiny

I don't consider Puerto Ricans and Chileans to be separate races or ethnicities. Obviously, there are cultural differences, but a Chilean insulting a Puerto Rican, to me, is more like a New Mexican insulting a Texan or an American making fun the French. It's not the politest thing in the world, but it's not the same thing as insulting someone explicitly because of their race.

And as always, context matters. YMMV, of course.

You do realize that Puerto Rico is both more ethnically and and geographically similar to the United than it is to Chile right? Do you see no difference between America and Chile? I mean Puerto Rico is a bit over 100 miles from Florida, while it is a bit over 1000 miles from Chile. Then there is the fact that Puerto Rico is part of the United States.

[BrightNShiny]

Originally Posted by mswas

You do realize that Puerto Rico is both more ethnically and and geographically similar to the United than it is to Chile right? Do you see no difference between America and Chile? I mean Puerto Rico is a bit over 100 miles from Florida, while it is a bit over 1000 miles from Chile. Then there is the fact that Puerto Rico is part of the United States.

Thank you for the geography lesson. Do I see no difference between America and Chile? I'm not going to argue with strawmen.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by BrightNShiny

Thank you for the geography lesson. Do I see no difference between America and Chile? I'm not going to argue with strawmen.

But they ARE ethnically different. That's the point. They have a common language though slightly different dialects, and have some Spanish blood but are descended from completely different native ethnic groups. Taino and Caribe in Puerto Rico, I don't know what in Chile.

[Freudian Slit]

Originally Posted by mswas

Just in case anyone didn't get it. Bup's example basically corrolates as saying white people are not allowed to be racist because they REALLY ARE better and as such should be held to higher expectations and because it's not polite to rub it in the faces of those who are less than you. This topic is ruled by the tyranny of low expectations. Are white people better than black people in the way a Bentley is better than a Nissan Sentra?

I don't know that he's saying that. I think he was saying that typically white people have held more power in this country and that's why we kind of recoil when we hear a white person using the n-word or telling a racist joke, and maybe we don't when we hear a black person making fun of whites.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Freudian Slit

I don't know that he's saying that. I think he was saying that typically white people have held more power in this country and that's why we kind of recoil when we hear a white person using the n-word or telling a racist joke, and maybe we don't when we hear a black person making fun of whites.

Right, but it's always been a very slim minority of white people who have held more power in this nation. There are more poor whites in this country than there are blacks of all economic classes.

[BrightNShiny]

Originally Posted by mswas

But they ARE ethnically different. That's the point. They have a common language though slightly different dialects, and have some Spanish blood but are descended from completely different native ethnic groups. Taino and Caribe in Puerto Rico, I don't know what in Chile.

And the French and Americans are ethnically different if you want to go to that level. The OP said that the insult was aimed at Puerto Ricans. Not Taino, not Caribe, not blacks and not whites.

But if you think that pointing out the physical location of Chile is some useful bit of argument, keep at it.

[Freudian Slit]

Originally Posted by mswas

Right, but it's always been a very slim minority of white people who have held more power in this nation. There are more poor whites in this country than there are blacks of all economic classes.

I don't know that that's true. Not every white person was rich, but poor whites weren't enslaved, treated as subhuman, lynched, etc. After slavery, there weren't Jim Crow laws telling you where you had to eat or sit on a bus if you were a poor white. Poor whites obviously didn't have the same power as rich whites, but in general, black people had much less power than whites back then.

[bup]

Originally Posted by Freudian Slit

I don't know that he's saying that. I think he was saying that typically white people have held more power in this country and that's why we kind of recoil when we hear a white person using the n-word or telling a racist joke, and maybe we don't when we hear a black person making fun of whites.

Yes, thank you. I don't think whites should be held to a better standard because they're actually better, they've just historically held more power, prestige, and advantages. I think whites are watched more closely for racism because in this country they've never been victims of it.

mswas, there may be more poor whites than there are total blacks, but none of a white person's state is because of racial discrimination.

[Two Many Cats]

Originally Posted by bup

Yes, thank you. I don't think whites should be held to a better standard because they're actually better, they've just historically held more power, prestige, and advantages. I think whites are watched more closely for racism because in this country they've never been victims of it.

So in other words, you believe yes, it is made to be a bigger deal when whites show bigotry as opposed to minorities.

[KarlGrenze]

Originally Posted by yorick73

No sense in being pissed...this is your opportunity to explain the difference to them. For people who have not been to PR or exposed to many people from there, you can't expect them to know the difference.

I don't know how well to phrase it, but I can at least expect them not to put a whole freaking nation as "ghetto/trashy/whatever lowest class possible/vulgar/etc." And not to act surprised when they see someone who doesn't fit that mold. And to not tell me that as if it were a compliment. Because it is not.

BrightNShiny, I guess your point is that the comment in the OP is not insulting enough (trashy people)?

Please consider that maybe in that case, the Chilean may have toned it down because he/she was with someone else, and opted for a less strong word.

Chilean and Puerto Ricans are different ethnicities, different nations, different cultures, etc. Many times, like you've typed and I said, the "teasing" and comments are not too deep nor intended to be too deep and prejudiced.

But in other times, oh boy, they are real. And I fail to see what there is light-hearted on dismissing a whole nation of people as vulgar/uncouth/lowest of the low. Just because their actual skin color may vary or doesn't fit in the black to white spectrum, it is not "light bashing".

[BrightNShiny]

Originally Posted by KarlGrenze

I don't know how well to phrase it, but I can at least expect them not to put a whole freaking nation as "ghetto/trashy/whatever lowest class possible/vulgar/etc." And not to act surprised when they see someone who doesn't fit that mold. And to not tell me that as if it were a compliment. Because it is not.

BrightNShiny, I guess your point is that the comment in the OP is not insulting enough (trashy people)?

Ah, ok. I think I see where the confusion is coming in. This may be my local cultural context, but to me, the word trashy is often used in a joking way rather than a malicious way (like "cheese-eating surrender monkeys"). Now, it could well be that the speaker was trying to state that Puerto Ricans are innately trashy, which then, I would agree, that's being malicious. We're looking at this through another person's perception filtered by our own perceptions, so it's hard for me to tell.

Please consider that maybe in that case, the Chilean may have toned it down because he/she was with someone else, and opted for a less strong word.

Chilean and Puerto Ricans are different ethnicities, different nations, different cultures, etc. Many times, like you've typed and I said, the "teasing" and comments are not too deep nor intended to be too deep and prejudiced.

But in other times, oh boy, they are real. And I fail to see what there is light-hearted on dismissing a whole nation of people as vulgar/uncouth/lowest of the low. Just because their actual skin color may vary or doesn't fit in the black to white spectrum, it is not "light bashing".

I've already stated that I don't approve of those type of comments in any case, so I don't appreciate this.

[orcenio]

Originally Posted by yorick73

Most white people are willing to give any minority group a pass if they make a racist comment. I've heard minorities make comments that would make most racist whites blush and they almost never get called on it. Almost as if their view is more rational and legitimate than a white person's views. It seems to me the people who are most shocked by racist comments are the least likely to have ever lived around or interacted much with minority groups and, thus, are more willing to hear out the views of a minority group.

This reminds me of a study I'd read on one of my favourite blogs. It seems that random white people are very likely to give another white guy "a pass" at displaying racism towards a random black guy; but that's not all, other (non-black) minorities were tested to equally give the white guy "a pass" on anti-black racism too. I suspect if this test were preformed on blacks, testing for racism against whites (or whatever), they would probably perform the same.

The kicker is that afterwards, everyone who was tested filled out a form which asked them how they think they would react toward a racist display. Most said that they would react negatively, which was not held true by the testing.

No matter how much everyone publicly and loudly claims that they find racism to be shocking or disgusting, tests have shown that people tend to overestimate their reactions to racism. Ed summed it up best by saying:

people really are terrible at predicting the extent to which racist comments would upset them and whether they would distance themselves from people who said such comments. The two mistakes are probably related - people think that they would reject racism because they overestimate how much it would really affect them.

[orcenio]

I would just like to add something about my own personal opinion. Racism (or sexism, homophobia, general bigotry, etc) is disgusting. It's sad that we (by 'we' I mean society) don't condemn public displays of it until it is accompanied by threats or acts of violence.

I'd like to think that I would stand up against bigotry in all forms whenever I encounter it, but that is not true. I personally know of instances where people have displayed homophobic comments and I had kept my mouth shut; I guess since I'm not gay, myself, I felt I can just ignore the person without getting myself involved...

I am not proud of my actions but we need to be self-aware of our actions if we are to address them. People tend to ignore bigoted acts if they are not the targets.

[bup]

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

So in other words, you believe yes, it is made to be a bigger deal when whites show bigotry as opposed to minorities.

Yeah, I do. I'm still not sure if it's right or not. But I experience it myself - I get more offended by a white person hating on other races than other races hating on each other.

Wow that sounds off. Maybe it's my own white guilt, and being descended from some pretty racist whites.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Freudian Slit

I don't know that that's true. Not every white person was rich, but poor whites weren't enslaved, treated as subhuman, lynched, etc. After slavery, there weren't Jim Crow laws telling you where you had to eat or sit on a bus if you were a poor white. Poor whites obviously didn't have the same power as rich whites, but in general, black people had much less power than whites back then.

Back then, but not now.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by bup

mswas, there may be more poor whites than there are total blacks, but none of a white person's state is because of racial discrimination.

Actually today it is, they are the only impoverished subgroup in America that does not benefit from Affirmative Action. So today poor whites are in that state partially because of racial discriminination.

[Freudian Slit]

Originally Posted by mswas

Back then, but not now.

Well, yeah, but we don't exist in a historical vacuum. Obviously, you're going to have some impressions if a white guy tells a racist joke about blacks than if a black person makes some remark about how lame white guys are because of all the cultural context. It's not like these attitudes just suddenly disappear because we get enlightened all of a sudden.

[yorick73]

Originally Posted by bup

Yeah, I do. I'm still not sure if it's right or not. But I experience it myself - I get more offended by a white person hating on other races than other races hating on each other.

Wow that sounds off. Maybe it's my own white guilt, and being descended from some pretty racist whites.

Sounds more like self hatred. Why would you feel guilty about being descended from racists. Take off the goggles and look around....whites are NOT the only race that has practiced racism or slavery (including present times). There are no noble races so no need to self flagellate

[yorick73]

Originally Posted by Freudian Slit

Well, yeah, but we don't exist in a historical vacuum. Obviously, you're going to have some impressions if a white guy tells a racist joke about blacks than if a black person makes some remark about how lame white guys are because of all the cultural context. It's not like these attitudes just suddenly disappear because we get enlightened all of a sudden.

Are you assuming that the blacks making those comments are not as guilty as the whites? If anything it's more disgusting when a historically oppressed group resorts to racist comments. Seems they should know better because of their past experiences.

That being said, I've always found it amusing to listen to blacks insult asians or hispanics but then get offended by comments that are not necessarily racist. Many blacks have so embraced the victim mentality that they try to find evidence of racism even when none exists.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Freudian Slit

Well, yeah, but we don't exist in a historical vacuum. Obviously, you're going to have some impressions if a white guy tells a racist joke about blacks than if a black person makes some remark about how lame white guys are because of all the cultural context. It's not like these attitudes just suddenly disappear because we get enlightened all of a sudden.

But the expectation is for white people to be enlightened all of a sudden but not blacks. Seems kind of unfair to both sides right? It still assumes that white people are superior.

[Two Many Cats]

Originally Posted by orcenio

This reminds me of a study I'd read on one of my favourite blogs. It seems that random white people are very likely to give another white guy "a pass" at displaying racism towards a random black guy; but that's not all, other (non-black) minorities were tested to equally give the white guy "a pass" on anti-black racism too. I suspect if this test were preformed on blacks, testing for racism against whites (or whatever), they would probably perform the same.

The kicker is that afterwards, everyone who was tested filled out a form which asked them how they think they would react toward a racist display. Most said that they would react negatively, which was not held true by the testing.

No matter how much everyone publicly and loudly claims that they find racism to be shocking or disgusting, tests have shown that people tend to overestimate their reactions to racism. Ed summed it up best by saying:

But I really don't see how you can test for true reactions. If I read the study right, they were trying to gage how a person would react to a racist statement from someone of their own race. They then announced that most of the subjects didn't react with anger to the statement. The thing is in a public setting, I think most people wouldn't act outraged at the statement. Most likely, they would just pass over it. Do you really think the average person would jump to their feet, point at the offender and say, "That is a racist statement, and I insist that you retract it at once!! And I insist you apologize once my minority brother returns to this room, you cowardly swine!" No, of course not. But that doesn't mean they agreed with the racist thought.

[orcenio]

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

But I really don't see how you can test for true reactions. If I read the study right, they were trying to gage how a person would react to a racist statement from someone of their own race. They then announced that most of the subjects didn't react with anger to the statement. The thing is in a public setting, I think most people wouldn't act outraged at the statement. Most likely, they would just pass over it. Do you really think the average person would jump to their feet, point at the offender and say, "That is a racist statement, and I insist that you retract it at once!! And I insist you apologize once my minority brother returns to this room, you cowardly swine!" No, of course not. But that doesn't mean they agreed with the racist thought.

Their reaction to the scene was not gauged by whether or not they said: "That is a racist statement, and I insist that you retract it at once!! And I insist you apologize once my minority brother returns to this room, you cowardly swine!"

It was gauged by them filling out a "survey about their current state of mind" and they were also asked to choose between the racist and the black guy to help them complete a word task.

Expectedly, forecasters said that they would be very upset by either racist slur. In reality, the experiencers were largely indifferent, and those who heard negative remarks were actually no more distressed than those whose partners hadn't said anything at all. Likewise, only about 10-20% of the forecasters said that they would choose the white person as their partner over the black one but a much higher 63% of the experiencers actually did so. If anything, they were more likely to pick their white associate if they made a racist slur than if they said nothing.

[Two Many Cats]

I don't believe someone else's racial slur would ruin someone's whole day enough to note it on a questionaire about one's state of mind. They might even believe that bringing up the subject would be tattling, which is looked down upon in many circles.

About the choosing of task partners, I suppose is slightly more revealing. It's well known people tend to stick to those of their own race. Check out the lunch tables at any intergrated school. Whites tend to eat with whites, blacks tend to eat with blacks. Right now, that's how it is.

But compare that to how it was, when it took state militia to get blacks into white schools. Relations between the races are changing slowly, but changing for the better. Years ago, that test participant would've called that knee bumper "clumsy nigger" to the knee bumper's face. You can bet the test subjects would've been shocked now. Not so much years ago.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Two Many Cats

Check out the lunch tables at any intergrated school. Whites tend to eat with whites, blacks tend to eat with blacks. Right now, that's how it is.

Is that really true or is that one of those things that is just 'understood' to be true? I see kids hanging out with kids of other races regularly these days.

[Two Many Cats]

Originally Posted by mswas

Is that really true or is that one of those things that is just 'understood' to be true? I see kids hanging out with kids of other races regularly these days.

I understood it from a "60 Minutes" piece a few years ago. If the situation is changed now, all the better. I live in a mixed neighborhood. While the different races do interact, groups hanging out together tend to be of the same race. That's just my observation however.