Sorry goboy, but I think my etymology is dead on at least to “blacklisted” (though you may be right on black monday) anyway. Black listing refers to not hiring someone, as in Hollywood during the communism witch hunts and labor organizers. There was no particular need to put black people on such a list becuase they were already self-indentifiable. As for the rest, I have no disagreements.
Yes, the laws have changed: my husband and I can legally fuck now in any state in the US.
No, many things have not changed: LWB [Living While Black] is different from LWW [Living While White] as goboy noted.
Equal respect is what it is all about.
Are you sure about South Carolina?
Derleth:
I’m sure that advertisimg executives would disagree with that. For millions of people, until they choose their own homepage, MSN is their homepage. Every time they connect to the internet, they see a news site controlled by Bill Gates. You really don’t think that Gates’ biases and viewpoint are being reinforced by this?
I never denied that. I’m just saying that some of these people have more influence than others.
Just how much is “that much pull”? You seem to think that I said that anything that the powerful want, they get. I never said this. My point is that while the average person affects somewhere around .0000004% of society, a more powerful person will affect .01%, .1%, or even 1% (and while it may not seem like a lot, 1% is a very large percentage for one person). Even if someone gets only a months in the spotlight, that is a lot more influence than the average person ever has.
Last I heard, he was finsihing a new album and getting ready to tour.
stuffinb:
Can you explain just what you think these examples prove, and why?
goboy:
Racial profiling: shows that people are racist, says nothing about law.
unequal ratio: suggests that peoples are racist, says nothing about laws.
unequal penalties for crack and cocaine: suggests that the law is racist
Do you have cites for these? are you telling me that if I were to move into a dangerous part of town, I would have no trouble getting a mortgage or a pizza?
Well, if I may step in. ahem. Pushes all the newcomers out of the way. 2sense, you did start this. I give all credit to you. Libertarian, that post made me shoot milk through my nose. Really funny. But, I talked to society’s boyfriend, and he stated society was just shining you on.
Ok. First I’d like to make an assertation. I’d think most people would agree with it.
“We live in a Capitalist society” There I’ve said it. I’ve admitted it. That doesn’t mean that everyone is pro-capitalism, or that everyone accepts it. It means that Capitalism influences nearly every aspect of our society. If you replace Capitalist with Racist, you get the gist of what my argument is. That’s how I mean we live in a racist society.
Let the debate begin…
I actually would argue against you narrowing it down. Why? Because, I think that except for 1 or 2 major exceptions laws are not inherently racist. It’s the way they are applied. There is nothing racist about “The Death Penalty” the way it’s applied is racist.
So, I’m going to go back and read through the comments posted and post some of my arguments in a little bit.
To The Ryan
I think the choices of phrases we use such as “black listed” and others indicates a general bias against those not white. Or at least a general insensitivity to others. Our languange is swimming in such metaphors.
I have to disagree with you. I’m pretty fucking PC, and I don’t even think that blacklisted is offensive to African Americans. I don’t think you’ll find many who do.
The terms Gyp and Indian Giver are still quite common though, and quite offensive.
Many people find paddy wagon offensive too.
Racial profiling shows that the enforcers of the law are biased.
The death penalty ratio shows that the legal system is biased and sentences are passed more severely for black felons.
Absolutely
The Domino’s case was in the Washington Post a few weeks back. I don’t have the article handy.
Actually the neighborhood in question was not, based on police stats quoted in the article, all that dangerous. It is, however, 100% black.
Check out TV again. Most of the roles for black men are pimps, thieves, or gang members. If you see a black doctor or lawyer, it’s going to be in a gritty urban drama. You don’t see too many Black folks, or Latinos or Asians on Friends, Frasier, or Will and Grace.
Don’t misundertand me Oldscratch, Im not saying I find it offensive, just that it’s etymology (btw, didn’t Cecil cover this a few years back) is related to an ethnic group (for the record I am black). But as you pointed out with gyp and ig, there are plently of those phrases in our society, and they in themselves are proof to me that the society at whole is racist.
well, according to Merriam-Webster blacklist has been around since 1619. Maybe this is a topic for GQ, feel free to post. But, my inclination is that it isn’t racist. Like Niggardly, it sounds bad, but isn’t.
Racial profiling is usually abused by racist cops, when it is abused. At other times, it is merely responding to statistics. Imost drug runners on a highway turn out to be black, well then, it makes some sense to stop blacks who fit the profile.Besides, if they are innocent, there is no problem.
As for unequal representation in jail, isn’t it just possible that more blacks commit crimes? They don’t let white defendents off just because they are black and they don’t go around arresting people simply because they are black. Let’s not forget that the blacks that are convicted are guilty. And the crack thing was like the assault weapon ban: media hype and panic among the people.
This is not proof of racist society, it is wild conjecture.
Rubbish. If you are a shady looking white guy, you get followed around. And lots of white folks live in poor areas that get red lined. This is a matter of income, not race.
Bullshit. This happened to me in Denver. It is a matter of where you live. If it is a crime ridden neighborhood, they wont deliver.
there are pending lawsuits against my company that bear this out.
Hi oldscratch,
I would like to thank all the little people.
Particularly, as I said matt mcl.
I’d like to see you run with it. I will check when I get back from the weekend. So far it’s looking interesting.
On white TV: it is easy to confuse whites being the majority with whites being racist. TV producers and hollywood are notoriously liberal. They are not sitting in boardrooms trying to exclude ethnics. Instead they are trying to figure out what the most people will watch. And most people, like it or not, happen to be white.
When they air a show with a lot of blacks or latinos, the shows tend to be about being black or latino, not about people who just hapen to be black or latino (with the exception of the Cosby show.) I sense that these shows are also targeted at a white audience.
Heck, If they could air real life gladiator games or hangings and get great ratings, they would do that.
Is that your final answer?
I’m sorry, but that sort of thing happens all the time.
[ul]
If you live in certain neighborhoods in Washington, DC, Domino’s will deliver a pizza – but not to your door. You’ll have to go out to the curb to the deliveryman’s car, pay him and then take your pizza. In reponse to this practice, Jim and Wesley Bell – and several of their neighbors – recently filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against Domino’s charging racial discrimination.
[/ul]
Crime, Racism and Pizza Delivery (from an article which asserts that this is perfectly O.K. because blacks are dangerous)
The problem of this policy is that it is based on the “perception” of crime in a neighborhood, whether or not it is true. Meaning even if a neighborhood turns around crimewise it may remain blacklisted. It takes a lot of complaints, calls, or even the threat of litigation to end sanctions.
I should know, my grandparents lived in a neighborhood that had terrible crime in the 80s. Yet even though there aren’t any more gangs there and it has become safe, “Little Caesars” refused to deliver there.
The perception can be warrented or not!
Sterling, not delivering to a neighborhood is different than not delivering to blacks. The policy at dominoes was not “don’t deliver to blacks” it was “don’t deliver to dangerous areas.”
Honestly, even if a neighborhood is perceived to be dangerous to the driver, do you think he is going to want to risk life and limb for measley wages? Would you drive into some of those neighborhoods in DC with $100 buck on you?
BTW, as part of the settlement, Dominoes agreed that they will only use this policy in neighborhoods with statistics that show high crime.
Hell, when I was in college they wouldn’t deliver to my all white dorm either. Seems they felt that a) college kids didn’t tip and b) they got hit with water balloons once in a while.
Looking back at you Dominos Pizza post, I misread you on that one (I thought you were denying that it happened when it was the exact opposite). However I still stand by the perception comment.
But…
I cleaned up the quote a bit.
What you’re asking here is to grade a wine by eating a grape seed. You can’t ask to study the institution of society without looking at how the people themselves apply the law. If you could do that, communism would be a great economic system. You cam say all you want how the justice system is designed to be colorblind but taht will be of no comfort to the black man serving 20 for a crime a white guy got sentenced to only 10. You have to look at the people in positions of power in a society. You have to see if they have been given the opportunity.
Some asides:
If you stop more people of a particular race, then you obviously are going to begin to skew the results against that race. Any I have to disagree with the innocence/no problem remark. When you’re profiled, is there any probabale cause in the search? (Beside the “black Lexis drivers could be drug-runners.”) It’s incredibly humiliating and demeaning to be stopped like that because the police can’t trust your race.
If your a black guy, well dressed or not, shady or not, you may get followed around too. Or offered more help by customer service. I’m recalling a case where a security guard accused two black youths of stealing the clothes they were wearing that day from an Eddie Bauer in Prince George’s County. It happens that the kids baught the clothes from that store a few days ago.
I’ll get back to you later with some thoughts. (really, I will).
For the purpose of argument MR.Z. Do you feel that the United States could have been defined as a racist society at one time. In other words, were we at one time a racist society and we are no longer, or has the US never been a racist society.
Also, I think that the fact the there are more blacks in poverty has quite a bit to do with the argument that we live in a racist society. Because of past racism they have been denied the careers and jobs that would lift them out of poverty. The same could be said for the condition of the Irish around the middle of last century. Racism kept them out of many good paying jobs, this lead to poverty, poverty leads to crime, more were locked up, the cycle continues.
I can’t deny that decisions like Dred Scott and slavery were institutions. C’mon, I’m that nutty. And yes, I would say that we tipped the balance back into place (the balance of opportunity, not outcome) in the 80’s or 90’s.
Indeed, they started off with a tough row to hoe (or is that “ho”?) But the fact that more blacks are currently in poverty does not necesarily lead to the conclusion that they are there, right now solely because of racism. Nor does it show that racism exists right now. There are a myriad of other factors that may cause them to be poor. Let me ask you this: If blacks can’t succeed solely because of their skin color, why do blacks from other countries do so much better?
I know, because the US blacks had their culture wrecked by the civil war. But this proves my point. Whatever the cause, their culture got wrecked a long time ago and they haven’t fixed it. It is their culture that is to blame, not a racisti society. Poor performance by US blacks is not proof of racism.
I have said it before and I will say it again, black people can’t be CEO one day if never apply for a job. And they are not. They can’t graduate if they don’t go to school.
[Mr.Z, preparing to be lambasted…]
**
Excellent this gives a great place to start debating. Did the US stop being racist in the 80’s or 90’s. I’m going to be gone for the weekend but I will address this monday.
**
Now, I didn’t say that it lead to that conclusion. Simply that it needs to be taken into consideration. I agree that it doesn’t prove that racism exists, but combined with other factors that 'll bring up later, it should help prove my point.
As to why do blacks from other countries do better. It’s pretty simple. While there are some exceptions, it mostly has to do with income. Many of the blacks coming in come from middle class backgrounds. It’s the same with Asians. It Californai there are two conflicting stereotypes of Asians. The hard working student, and the gang banger. What they fall into has quite a bit to do with the families background. For the same reason, you see in Japan, Korean’s suffering many of the same problems that Blacks do here. Why? Because the Japanese Korean population is largely poor immigrants.
I would also argue that our society i more biased towards poverty than towards race. Of course many minorities are poor.
“If blacks can’t succeed solely because of their skin color, why do blacks from other countries do so much better? I now, because the US blacks had their culture wrecked by the civil war. But this proves my point. Whatever the cause, their culture got wrecked a long time ago and they haven’t fixed it. It is their culture that is to blame, not a racisti society. Poor performance by US blacks is not proof of racism.” Mr. Zambezi
I guess I should read the FAQ about quotes.....
Mr. Zambezi: Please re-read this quote from your previous posting. On honest reflection and afterthought, do you still stand behind this statement? I need some clarity in your thoughts and arguments.