Fine, I’ll be the one to say it: Don’t name your black kid Kieran, white people. Regardless of the meaning.
Kieran is also a somewhat common Hindi name. It means sun or sunlight.
Can I name my white kid “Blanche?”
Do you actually want to name your white kid Blanche or are you just arging me (my precious daughter’s term for “arguing with me”?).
c) I was making a joke.
(Your daughter sounds cute. Is her name Hazel or Violet or Scarlet or Sienna by any chance?)
My daughter is just the cutest and her name is Tierra 
My sweet precious niece is named Hazel :). Violet and Scarlet and Sienna were all names I suggested to my sister! Now I’m waiting for my little sweetheart nephew named Henry due in February.
Nice names! Some classic, some new.
Congrats on the pending nephew. I’m old enough to remember when you didn’t know the sex, and therefore the name, of your unborn child.
Thank you! We haven’t had a boy born in our family in at least 60 years! We can’t wait for our little Henry.
Awesome! Okay, let me start by telling you where I’m coming from in this arguement. I’m a Millennial, though one of the oldest ones. I’m a white woman born and raised in metro Detroit, which is a highly segregated metro area. My family is blue collar and largely politically/socially conservative (so I have aunts, uncles and cousins who always vote D because of being in trade unions but they’re still racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.). Both sides of my family are Catholic and I went to Catholic schools K-12, but they were very much oriented towards a Jesuit philosophy and strongly influenced by liberation theology, so I actually received an education that wasn’t only academically rigorous but was also pretty damned progressive. I’ll leave it at that to start with, since I can always give more info later on if it’ll be useful.
So! Here are some questions I wanted to start with:
-
Are you white?
-
Could you give me a super brief background like I provided (no need to give potentially identifying information, of course)?
-
From your posts, I gather that you are strongly opposed to racism. Is this correct?
-
Colorblindness is essentially an ideology in which all people are to/should be judged as individual human beings without regard to race or ethnicity. It sees it as important to de-emphasize group distinctions, so we see people as individuals instead of just a part of a specific group (race, ethnicity, etc.). Going by what I wrote, what do you think of colorblindness? Do you agree/disagree? Support or not?
Good to hear from you.
Yes.
White man, 40s, grew up in the south, but with non-southern, progressive parents.
Well, yeah, but that’s a dicey question because I’ll bet some of the people busy defending racism on this thread would answer “yes” too.
Pretty much. Also, I define racism as the absence of colorblindness.
A followup question for you - do you have an academic background in this issue?
As long as we’re asking questions, lance, would you happen to be a British MP?
They make me laugh every evening. 
Romney said, “The folks at MSNBC…” not “she” or “Perry” or “the lady in question”.
I believe MHP’s apology was sincere. She knew she screwed up. Afterwards. I believe she has been unduly influenced by the usual cadre of hate-mongers and racists that seem to haunt MSNBC. MSNBC lets one go and then hires another. She’s surrounded by people who’s standards are less than what hers used to be. It was bound to happen.
But he did say “her”, if not “she”, referring to Melissa Harris-Parry.
Huh?
According to Ann Coulter,MHP is a token black.
Member of Parliament.
lance, just wanted to post quickly to thank you for answering my questions, and I’m composing an actual reply as we speak. Since I unexpectedly wasn’t able to reply yesterday, I wanted to just let you know ASAP that I haven’t vanished. 
Okay, here I am! With substance! I actually decided to split this into two posts to make it a bit easier to read. First is related to your question.
That’s why I wanted to assure you there wasn’t any “gotcha” to my questions. I was just asking generally (which you understood).
Nope. I’m assuming that “academic background” means something like having an undergraduate or graduate degree in Ethnic Studies, African American Studies, or Sociology (focusing on race issues). I’m currently finishing up grad school, where some of my classes have touched on these subjects but haven’t focused specifically on them.
I’m in grad school for Historic Preservation, where there is an incredible range of topics you can specialize/focus on. I’ve ended up focusing on a blend of what’s in Museum Studies/Curatorship and American Studies/Culture and the combination of them. For a few examples, Museum Challenges (which discussed ethical or controversial issues that museums face) and Intro to Material Culture covered topics relevant to our discussion. Some examples:
[ul]
[li]NAGPRA and how many museums have collections items that fall under this act.[/li][li]How American Indians have been portrayed in museum exhibits and how many of these exhibits have been changed or removed.[/li][li]Southern plantations that have been turned into historic sites/museums and how they talk about the site’s history of slavery … or how they pretend it never existed.[/li][li]Social History (“history from the bottom up”) and its important role of valuing and studying those who have traditionally been ignored as unimportant in history (women, minorities, the poor, etc.).[/li][/ul]
These classes, though, have basically just supplemented what I’ve studied (voluntarily :p) in my free time about topics relating to race, gender and sexuality. This serves as a decent segue into the actual topic!
This post is actually going to be a lot of background information that may seem tangental or off-topic to the specific discussion about racism in this thread. But I promise you, it is very much related. I also promise that it really is background info and unless I specifically say so, none of it is in response to earlier posts. Also, lance (and anyone interested in this), there are some specific points where I think it’s really easy to feel WTF and angry and defensive. The links I’ve put down in numbered footnotes are articles or posts that go into more detail about these points. Please read them and then spend time mulling them over (perhaps even read again after that) instead of dismissing them right away.
The first thing I want to do is to define a few things. Discussions about racism (or sexism or other similar areas) are going to be rooted in the social sciences. When people are discussing these topics, they are using the definition of “minority” or “minority group” as used in the social sciences. This is incredibly important to know. A sociological minority is defined as
You might notice that this definition seems a bit different than the layman’s definition (for example, most people would say that the very word “minority” means that a minority group’s size will be smaller than the majority). When you are discussing these issues, though, you need to accept the definition used by that field of study. This is analagous to the difference between “theory” as used in science and “theory” as used in everyday language. So, someone who - for example - refuses to listen or consider an arguement about sexism because women are actually 51% of the US population is doing the same thing that a Creationist does when s/he says that evolution is “just a theory”.
So, when you’re part of a majority group (in this thread, that’d be white people; in other threads, it could be men or straight people or whatever), it is really freaking easy to feel defensive or take things personally. This is especially true if you’re against the discrimination that the minority group faces. When a Person of Color describes discrimination/shitty treatment s/he’s experienced from white people, or a woman describes descrimination/shitty treatment she’s experienced from men, or an LGBQ person describes descrimination/shitty treatment s/he’s experienced from straight people … if you’re white, or you’re a man, or you’re straight, your reaction might be, “but we’re not all like that!”[sup]1[/sup]
Don’t post that. They know that. If you really want to understand why they made that statement and their other arguements, you need to “shut up and listen”[sup]2 - SERIOUSLY READ THIS LINK BEFORE GETTING OFFENDED AT “SHUT UP AND LISTEN”[/sup].
To stop this post from being novel-length, I’ll stop there and ask if that all makes sense? Are there points (like the two footnote links) where you might not feel totally comfortable with the idea/arguement, but you can at least kinda see where it’s coming from?
[sup]1[/sup] - http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/12/13/the-perils-and-potential-of-n-a-l-t-not-all-like-that/
[sup]2[/sup] - Shut Up and Listen | Whatever
I know what an MP is, I just didn’t understand your post.