But if you are white, male and straight, how do you know they are ludicrous or beyond reason when it comes to racism et. al.? Don’t the women, blacks or gays know better than you about that?
MAYBE you made a mistake? They know more about this than you do, right, so how can it possibly not be your mistake?
Okay, I think I’ve made my point.
And what if two of them disagree?
They probably do, on average, but that doesn’t mean always.
You’ve made your point about missing all the times when I said “in general”, and other not-always qualifiers. 
Sooo…is the player going to be in a snit all year long? Because that was the whole thing about the shirts - they were celebrating the Year of the Monkey in the Chinese zodiac calendar.
It has been my experience, reconfirmed every day, that the first person who makes an issue of skin color is usually quite bigoted. Skin color is meaningless unless you are giving a physical description of someone.
Of course white people already knew how they treated other people. Of course they knew that they didn’t have racist intent when they treated her the same as they treated other white people.
I’m not sure it’s less significant. In the case I described, white people knew vastly more. When it comes to what white people think or their intent, they know everything and a black person knows less - and when you take that to the individual level, only a given person can know what he/she is thinking and nobody can read their mind or discern their intent.
Of course. But the analogy doesn’t work because this isn’t just about one side. Racism involves both a victim and a racist (or an alleged victim and alleged racist). Both have knowledge that matters. Intent matters.
And that’s perfectly reasonable. Just don’t extend that too far.
And there you go - sometimes accusations of racism involve what white people think, or say in private. Pretty much all of them do, in fact. So I’m glad you agree that it’s okay to share your own experiences freely. One such experience might be “white people don’t consider X to be racist at all so it’s not reasonable to claim it has racist intent or that they should be responsible for your feelings.”
No, I’ve drawn out the qualifiers. I see them quite well.
They talk about it - without a presumption that one side is automatically right.
Not in relation to her expectations.
I don’t think anyone can know with certainty whether they “have racist intent” or not. Most “racist intent” is probably subconscious. I don’t believe anyone can know with certainty whether they’re treating people “the same” or not – they can only know what they’re trying.
I strive not to be racist, and to treat people equally, but I’ll never be able to know with certainty that I’m always succeeding.
White people in the US have a history of not considering things to be racist that are racist – our track record is really, really bad at this stuff. In light of this, I would refrain from disputing it in such a way, and look much more for solutions (like “maybe this isn’t the right time or place for that symbol on the T-shirt” or “maybe we can present it in a different way so that it won’t be perceived like this”) then snap to the defense. Considering the use of racist imagery in American history, it’s entirely reasonable for someone to be worried that a monkey symbol might be meant as a racist symbol (or just might be perceived as so), and advocate for presenting the idea in a different way.
Forgot to respond to this earlier – here is my response.
Her expectations were not the point. They were wrong. White people were right about what white people think, and she didn’t understand that and misinterpreted it as racism.
No, I would say racist intent is not subconcious. Intent is a concsious act. Now, you can argue that people may act contrary to their intent, subconciously, and that’s a legitimate discussion, but it’s not the same thing at all. The point is that it isn’t DELIBERATE. Sure, a black person may still have reason to complain, but the implications of subconscious racism are very different. They require further discussion. A racist pig who hates blacks and knows he hates blacks is just a racist pig.
Agreed. But that certainly doesn’t mean that a black person (or anyone) knows your subconcious better than you do.
That’s the heart of the question - IS something racist if a white person doesn’t think it is? Maybe, maybe not. And as my example shows, sometimes percieved racism isn’t.
I couldn’t agree more.
But the contrary is also required - blacks should not snap to the offense and declare every slight “racist!” before that discussion can occur.
I agree. My point is that it requires further discussion - it is not automatically racist. And you seem to agree.
Her expectations were reasonable, and it’s not reasonable to expect that she just take the word of her colleagues – if they were treating her differently, I seriously doubt that they would admit it, or even know it.
I think the vast majority of racism, especially now, is like this – people don’t know they’re doing it, and don’t know that they’re treating people differently. Such suspicion is entirely warranted, and it’s not reasonable that they should take the word of the people they are suspicious of.
Considering the possibility of deception (and self-deception), I think it’s more reasonable to expect black people to follow their instincts and expectations, than take the word of newly-introduced white people.
Absolutely – discussion is good. But like monstro says, a knee-jerk negative reaction to another reaction (i.e. ‘you’re just flinging shit if you call that racist!’ or ‘why do you always assume everything is racist’) is still unwarranted, and still as negative as any other knee-jerk, unthinking reaction.
This almost never occurs, in my experience. It’s much more likely to start with something like “Hey, I’m troubled by this and concerned that it might be racist”, and then after that someone says “quit flinging shit and calling everything racist!” or “that’s reverse-racist!” or some other dreck. It seems to me that this thread has gone that way too – the initial concerns were presented pretty reasonably, it seems to me, and responded to (by some) with knee-jerk accusations.
Yep, but how these things are approached matters, in my view. I think it’s (usually) best to assume that someone has good reason for their concern about something, especially when it’s about something that they necessarily have way more personal experience with than you, and approach it from that angle. Ask questions and learn, rather than presume to explain and teach, in such a case (usually and in general and not always!).
What does this mean? You think I mean “always” when I say “in general”?
Would you characterise him as … uppity?
I don’t think you get the situation.
They were simply going about their business. She thought it was racist. It wasn’t. She found out it wasn’t. What more is there to say? Her knowledge of racism was mistaken in this case.
But in the scenario I described, they were NOT treating people differently. That’s the point. She didn’t just hear them say so, she observed it.
Can’t blacks be deceived or self-decieved too?
Yes - knee-jerk reactions or presumptions are unwarranted.
Perhaps it doesn’t occur personally to you, but it happens ALL THE TIME out in the real world. Maybe your are sheltered by living in a mostly white community though.
I think it’s best to assume nothing. Respecting someone’s opinion and feelings doesn’t require you to presume they are right until proven wrong. But yes, ask questions, discuss, respect. And also expect that from others.
If he says no, will you accept that and move on, or will you try new bait?
Right – she learned in the only reasonable way, by experience. That’s what should have happened, and it’s what did happen. Her “knowledge of racism” wasn’t mistaken – her analysis of her new experiences may have been, but more experience helped solve this.
Sure, but when it comes to anti-black racism in America, black people have a remarkably good track record (in general) of being honest and accurate, and white people have a remarkably poor track record, in general.
I’ve heard others say this, but when I’ve read further about the incidents in question, it usually turns out to be much closer to “reasonable concerns expressed” and “those reasonable concerns responded to with knee-jerk accusations of reverse-racism or the like” then “knee-jerk accusation of anti-black racism” that’s responded to with reasonable questions, by my understanding. It’s not just about what happens to me, but what I’ve read about (including on this board) and learned from talking to others.
You don’t have to presume they are right, but I recommend (in such a scenario) that you do not presume that you are right and they are wrong, and try to explain this to them in that way.
I’d say it’s fair to say that her knowledge of racism was mistaken and her new experiences perfected that knowledge. But that’s semantics. The point is that blacks aren’t always right about perceived racism because they aren’t always in a position to know it best.
Track records are irrelevant to whether a given, particular claim is honest or accurate.
I have seen that too. However, I have also seen outrageous, ridiculous accusations of racism.
I’m glad we agree.
Hi. White, middle-aged, often ashamed, speaking.
Racism is such an odd thing. It is a hydra of a disease, omnipresent, but never manifesting in exactly the same way twice. There are white people who championed civil rights for Black Americans, some risking their social standing, financial stability, and even their lives to do so, who lived and died never really believing in the intellectual and moral equality of the other race. Then there are the poker players, who have declared racism over after 400 years, and now that they have all the chips, pull out a fresh deck and say “NOW let’s play fair, because to give my opponent any kind of advantage would just be WRONG!” Then are the White people who actually grew up with Black people and believe in inherent equality because commercial and government interests accidentally treated them equally (i.e., badly), but were filled with racial resentment at antipoverty programs that seemed to be targeted at Black Americans, even though their neighbors didn’t seem to be any better off. And poor and middle-class Whites who did not get to know Black people, but learned the idealized version of American history, and were gung-ho for equality, who were hopeful but were suddenly disillusioned by an encounter with a Black person who didn’t live up to their expectations. Don’t know which I am, but do know I am not free of racism and that all the tropes of fairness I’ve been taught don’t matter.
If I am confronted with a man bearing 350 years’ worth of wounds that I, my father and grandfather and great-grandfather inflicted I don’t poke him with a stick, however gently, and tell him he shouldn’t be so sensitive. Similarly, my experience does not inform me that a man who complains that I’m stepping on his foot is really stepping on mine: that’s just stupid reflexive self-righteousness.
Not always, just most of the time.
I think they’re relevant to how we should examine and treat individual claims.
I’m sure those exist, and I’ve probably seen them, but in my experience they’re a lot more rare than actual reasonable concerns and suspicions (even if some of those may have been mistaken). Would you agree that the concerns of the black singer in your story were reasonable, even if they may not have been true?