Kwesi Mfume (prez of NAACP) does a regular television show called “The Remarkable Journal” on Channel 7 highlighting positive role models in the black community. Note that he doesn’t do a television show called “The Poor Victims Show”. And also note that there isn’t a show that features positive Jewish role models or Asian role models or gay role models, at least featured on a major network. No…because our culture is so racist against blacks that we’re still unable to view them as individuals, rather than “models”. Even black people have internalized this crap.
Racists do not need positive black role models to change their ways. We’ve always had positive black role models in this society, and that didn’t stop anyone from hating blacks. Racists nowadays can look at Oprah Winfrey’s show and be entertained, and then disown their daughter for dating a black guy. Or call their next door neighbor a “nigger” for playing loud music at night while they laugh at the “Chris Rock Show”. Ever seen that movie “Do the Right Thing”? Remember the guy who loved Michael Jordan but hated blacks?
(Do you know how many times I’ve heard, “…but you’re different, monstro.” That’s how racists rationalize “positive role models”.)
Personally, I’m sick of having to be extra good to counteract the behavior of someone who isn’t even related to me. The white folks I know can fulfill just about any stereotype they want (and they do); but the moment I do, I’m not a good role model. Well, shit on that, december. I have enough things to worry about in life than to spend time worrying about how I look in front of a bunch of stick-up-the-ass white people. People, I might add, who don’t worry about how they look to me.
And don’t respond with, “I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying that’s the reality” because I don’t need a wake-up call from you of all people. If you know it’s not right, stop buying into it. If everyone who thought like you do did this, december, then we would be one step closer to having the “colorblind” society that everyone’s always preaching about.
How is not censoring anyone that you find offensive undignified?
Stuffy
Really? Take a look at this quote from monstro:
It seems to me he’s saying “I’m tired of being treated poorly by whites, and the fact that some whites treat me poorly gives me the right to complain about anything that a white person does to offend me.”
How about people stop being so hypersensitive towards the perceived hypersensitivities of other people?
I agree that hypersensitivity is counterproductive. But you can’t decry hypersensitivity in one group without first seriously studying your own responsiveness.
Let’s say you were reading about someone’s experience with perceived racism. Let’s say a woman had experienced an encounter with a clerk that had stalked her in a department store for not looking like the right “type” (read white) and she was griping about it in the pit. Be honest: Is your initial response going to be that the woman is wrong in her perceptions? Will it take an unusual amout of convincing for you to believe that what she speaks of is true and not hyperbole? Will you be quick to justify the clerk’s actions? Will you be hesistant to agree with the woman’s belief that the incident was racially motivated, no matter how many suggestive clues there were? And do you question the appropriateness of the woman’s feelings by saying “she shouldn’t be that upset; if it had happened to me, I would have simply shopped somewhere else and been done with it”.
All too often I see people expending an inordinate amount of energy justifying or downplaying racist behavior–as if the behavior reflects on them some way and so they want to make excuses for it–while at the same time villifying those who are “hypersensitive”. And at no time at all are they aware that
they every bit as hypersensitive as those they whine about. Just in a different way.
I don’t think you understand my point. Monstro’s post implies that based on the actions of some whites, she will be hypersensitive towards perceived slights from all whites. Yes, she identified a specific subset of whites as being hyperignorant, but she didn’t identify any subset of whites regarding hypersensitivity.
You don’t even make sense! I mean, I don’t even know how to explain how nonsensical it is except for to just repeat it and let you face it’s stupidity yourself:
“Monstro’s post implies that based on the actions of some whites, she will be hypersensitive towards perceived slights from all whites.”
First of all, the word “percieved” shouldn’t be there because if she percieves a slight, she wouldn’t be able to say “oh, that was just a percieved slight”, or else she would have never viewed it as a slight. Duh. So now what’s left is:
“Monstro’s post implies that based on the actions of some whites, she will be hypersensitive towards slights from all whites.”
Now “all” is in the wrong place. In the sentence, she’s being hypersensitive towards slights, not whites. Unless all whites are slighting her, of course. So the more improved sentence reads:
“Monstro’s post implies that based on the actions of some whites, she will be hypersensitive towards all slights from whites.”
And what exactly are those actions? Slights? Ok.
“Monstro’s post implies that based on the slights from some whites, she will be hypersensitive towards all slights from whites.”
Yes. That was her point. She’s so tired of the slights that she’s hypersensitive to them now. Isn’t that understandable?
Yes. That was her point. She’s so tired of the slights that she’s hypersensitive to them now. Isn’t that understandable?
NO! Not in the real world where hypersensitivity is a foolish concept that is diametrically opposed to correctly interpreting accurate data from an environment that is real.
Why do you,** Pizzabrat**, find the danity act of understanding a legitimate substitute for truth?
Fine. Just forget my post. It was based on something that was never said anyway. I was just pointing out the the fact that it didn’t even make sense if what it stated was true.
december:I think hypersensitivity does more harm than good in seeking minority advancement.
Then I hope you will take your own words to heart and cease your tiresome and hypocritical whining that anyone who criticizes, e.g., Clarence Thomas is a racist. E.g., in your recent Maureen Dowd thread whose only purpose was to air precisely the same sort of complaints and accusations of the sort that (when black students direct them at College Republicans) you now condemn as “hypersensitivity” and “victim” culture. As I pointed out in that thread,
In 1965, David Blackwell gained fame as the leading black mathematician. Well, he’s still doing mathematics as a Professor Emeritus at Berkeley. He’s still a brilliant researcher and teacher, but his fame has diminished. High achievement isn’t as much in style, today.
Yes yes, Grandfather, we’ve all often heard how sadly society’s moral fiber has deteriorated since your young days. But since this is Great Debates, could you give us a cite for that, please?
For one thing, you appear to be unaware of Mathematics Magazine’s February 2003 article “Dr. David Harold Blackwell, African American Pioneer”. Dr. Blackwell’s fame is still doing just fine, thankyouverymuch.
As for your general gripe that “high achievement isn’t as much in style”, if you bothered to look at popular publications for an African-American audience, I think you’d find it’s rubbish. For example, the current issue of Ebony features stories about multimillionaire Russell Simmons and Young & Rubicam CEO Ann Fudge. And the June issue had a story on top-ranking black high school seniors, and so on and so forth. Looks to me as though high achievement is still very much in style among minorities.
I think my IQ dropped several points after trying to make sense of this post. Too. Many. Propositions.
pizzabrat, just let it go. People will read only what they want to read. They will understand only what they want to understand.
I don’t know. Maybe there’s something wrong with my posting style, but it always seems like there’s a contigent out there who like to misinterpret my posts. They don’t have anything to contribute so they post gahbage. I don’t take these posters seriously anymore. I guess you can say I’m hyposensitive*.
I don’t give about anything anymore. Including fighting ignorance.
I think my IQ dropped several points after trying to make sense of this post. Too. Many. Propositions.
pizzabrat, just let it go. People will read only what they want to read. They will understand only what they want to understand.
I don’t know. Maybe there’s something wrong with my posting style, but it always seems like there’s a contigent out there who like to misinterpret my posts. They don’t have anything to contribute so they post gahbage. I don’t take these posters seriously anymore. I guess you can say I’m hyposensitive*.
I don’t care about anything anymore. Including fighting ignorance.
I, too, read Monstro’s lines the way Ryan did. As if there are only two choices: Hypersensitivity and hyperbigotry.
this implies that people who are not hyper-bigoted are never the targets of hypersensitivity.
If fact, the majority of the targets of both set of people are mostly the people in the middle: the regular people who happen to look different, and the regular people who happen to say something in a different way than you want them to.
After two seasons, Branch Rickey released Robinson from his promise not to respond to any racist statements or treatment. Thereafter, Robinson strongly denounced episodes of racism and physically retaliated against opposing players who dared to mistreat him because of his race.
Um, no. My point is if you want people (not me, dammit, but people in general) to stop being “offended” at every turn, then you need to do something about the idiots who are always pushing those people’s buttons. They make things worse. They aren’t the blame for ALL hypersensitivity, but they don’t help matters at all. They make white people look bad, in other words.
Based on december’s teachings, I have realized that white people need to worry about how they’re represented if they want black people to stop lashing out at them. This makes perfect sense, doesn’t it? I’m not saying this is right. I’m just saying it’s the reality.
I sincerely hope this clears things up. I’m tired of this purposefully-misreading-posts-so-that-I-can-jump-into-the-fray crap.
“precisely the same sort of complaints and accusations”? Not at all.
Dowd called the cuntry’s leading black jurist “barking mad” and “crazy” and ignorantly insulted him in various other ways. Hinkle merely sought to post a notice on a public bulletin board.
Suppose the situations were reversed. Imagine that Dowd had merely recommended an author. Imagine that Hinkle had publicly and inaccurately vilified the four top black students in his school.
I’m sorry that monstro is getting frustrated, but her sarcastic comment actually hit the nail on the head IMHO.
There was a time not so long ago when a black person could be arrested and punished for merely driving in a white neighborhood. That practice may still exist in some areas. This was wrong conduct and it does need to change.
Similarly, it’s wrong for a school to punish a white student for posting a notice near where some black students happen to be sitting.
Why should that be my responsibility? Just as many outstanding black people do not want to be a “model” for their race, I do not want to feel I must single-handedly stomp out racism in order to make “white people look better.”
I should do more than I do, of course, but because it’s the right thing to do, not to stop bigotry on the other side. To draw a blunt analogy, it’s like a government finding itself in a hostage situation. Should the government cave in to the demands of the terrorists? If it doesnt, and the hostages die, is it the government’s fault they died? Of course not, it’s the terrorists fault. In a similar way it’s the bigots fault, on both sides, and the people in the middle just want to live our lives.