The question of whether or not this club is necessary is irrelevant. Lots of schools clubs aren’t necessary.
As for whether or not the club will accomplish anything positive, why don’t we all stop pretending that we can read this student’s mind and instead wait and see what the club actually does? This club could accomplish something positive, but if we decided that it can’t before the club is even formed then all we’ve done is judge this student based on the colour of her skin. And since when does “context” excuse that?
Well, that comment was inflammatory and completely unnecessary. Why don’t you read Ramanujan’s post again and come back when you notice that he didn’t imply that at all?
Well if you want to go that route, I suppose you could say that kids don’t really need to go to school. Please explain what good will come from this club.
Given the history of the school, it just doesn’t sound like a bright idea. I can see the negatives. What sort of positives are you envisioning?
Like what?
I’m not judging her on the color of her skin, but her complete lack of any good explanation. You don’t seem to have one either.
I didn’t provide an explanation because I thought there were perfectly good ones already given in this thread. To wit:
Good enough reasons for you?
Now, you have a point that the student trying to start this club hasn’t exactly provided any of the above explanations. But absence of data is not data, and is no reason to judge this student prematurely. Give the club a chance to fulfill any of the above ideals and then judge it based on its actions, not on your unsubstantiated guesses about the student’s motivations.
And if I may return to this statement:
You’ve got it completely backwards. Even if I agreed that “kids don’t really need to go to school”, that’s no reason to forbid kids from going to school. Similarly, even if a Caucausian Club is unnecessary, that’s no reason to forbid this student from forming one.
But we don’t have an absence of data, the student was asked directly and her explanation sucked.
If I had any decision making power, I wouldn’t block it. But I have a heavy amount of skepticism about it doing anything good.
I realize that’s your argument. But given that “white pride” has commonly been associated with violence and ignorance, what other reasons are there for it? I know they exist, but the student should be demonstrating some awareness on the front end, because it’s quite obvious that it stirs up people’s fears and gives an unfavorable impression.
Creating a student organization dedicated to race does not encourage “color blindness” a principle I think some people in this thread may be advocating. By forming such a club, the student is acknowledging and affirming the existence of her race. Therefore, she is inviting comparisons based on race and on the state of race relations in the US. The state of those relations are not equal no matter how much quality we assign to individuals in them. Therefore, by acknowledging “whiteness” she should also acknowledge her privilege.
Now I realize there are poor white people, there are even oppressed white people (especially ones that happen to be homosexual or otherwise fall out of societal norms), but if one sees oneself primarily as caucasion, not as a poor person, or an oppressed person, then you are identifying with a group in a privileged position. One of the benefits of that privilege is a culture that is largely omnipresent in most of the US.
So… what’s the frikkin point of having a club to celebrate a culture already celebrated everywhere all the time? Given the lack of an obvious reason, the history of “white pride” groups, and the fact that they are not advocating “color blindness”, I think a good explanation is in order on the front end.
Can’t you imagine their mixers? White bread w/ mayo hors d’oeuvres… Polka and Perry Como tunes… Guys concocting “events” where they have an excuse to wear a kilt in public… Gwyneth Paltrow and Eminem lookalike contests… Pork cuisine in all its forms… Swedes and Finns arguing over who’s “really” white… Lobbying to get Tobacco Road on the Englisa Required Reading list…
Im in university doing Computer Science and, when I bothered to tabulate the data, it turned out that we had less white people doing the course than women. However, there is a Women in Computing support group yet not a Caucasians in Computing.
However, the moment you step out of your little educational ghetto, you will find that IT is dominated by whites. A support group anticipating future problems (and I still know some fairly dumb managers who don’t believe women can code) has more to recommend it than a support group for folks who will simply blend into the workforce.
In terms of the OP, I have no problem with a “Caucasian” club. I think it’s pretty silly, but there is no reason to oppose the organization as long as it does not (later) turn into a source of hatred or oppression.
Sorry for the hit and run, but I was truly moved by this question. I would say that busting this stereotype – by being a non-violent and non-ignorant “white pride” club – is valid enough reason.
And my sincerest apologies for typing “non-ignorant”.
Because as we all know, only white people are racist. Japanese don’t hate Koreans, Koreans don’t hate Japanese, and Black Africans never, never commit genocide. It is just us white honkeys that are racists and us European whites started the whole racist thing, there was no such a think down through history. :rolleyes:
His reply was hyperbole obviously. However, why don’t you read his post and say that it was unwarrented again. Here, I will quote his post for you. (bolding mine)
Obviously more stereotypical racism on the part of the minority. It is ok for them to classify whites as racist, rich, well off and not held down in any way, but minorities are not racist, it is the whites that originated such a thing.
agiantdwarf’s reply was a bit more than hyperbole. It was a deliberate and somewhat vile misrepresentation of Ramanujan’s position for shock effect (“eats black babies”?) which would have been more suited to the Pit than to GD. I stand by my comment.
First of all, how do you even know that Ramanujan isn’t white?
Second, I just can’t make the logical leap from “maybe in the study of white history one can spot the origin of racism” to “whites invented racism”. The first statement just doesn’t imply the second. Maybe in the study of black history, one can spot the origin of racism. Are you now going to accuse me of saying that blacks invented racism?
The other statement you bolded, the one about well-off people at expensive universities, is an error on Ramanujan’s part. The student mentioned in the article is just a high-school student, after all, and Ramanujan has no reason to assume she’s well-off. Now, you could have corrected him, but instead you decided to mis-state his position is a slightly less inflammatory matter than agiantdwarf and then get all hissy with me.
At worst Ramanujan is guilty of assuming that someone who would start a Caucasian Club is probably a well-off university student who’s never been really oppressed. Calling that “racism” does nothing but belittle the term.
Orbifold, I suggest you look up the definition of hyperbole. Unless you are seriously suggesting that agiantdwarf actually thinks that white babies are being eaten at Universities, he was obviously being hyperbolic.
Yes it does. Your problems with reading comprehension non-withstanding.
It always seems odd to me that the same people who claim to not like racism often embrace blatantly racist things. Affirmative action programs, being against a cacausion club but ok with african-american ones. These things are treating people differently based on race. That’s racism, folks.
Oops. That should read “black babies” in the first sentance of my post. Of course, the point is moot since everyone except for Orbifold seems to realize that no babies are actually being eaten, of any color.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Orbifold *
**agiantdwarf’s reply was a bit more than hyperbole. It was a deliberate and somewhat vile misrepresentation of Ramanujan’s position for shock effect (“eats black babies”?) which would have been more suited to the Pit than to GD. I stand by my comment.
**
[quote]
Granted.
I don’t think it matters. Racism is racism.
Well, I am sorry either your logical skills are rusty or you reading comprehension skills need some work, because saying “if you study white history one can spot the origin of racism” IS saying exactly the same as whites originated racism. It is by implication that he states it, whether he/she is being sly or ignorant. (invented is what you changed it to make my statment seem less valid) My statement in my first post stands, racism has no doubt been around since the dawn of time, one cave man finding reasons to hate a different tribe or family because they have bigger noses or darker skin. Whites most obviously did not orginate racism.
Yes, it was an error, I didn’t correct it because it wasn’t an outright racist statement like his other ones. I don’t care if he assumes a girl at a college that is starting a white only club is rich or poor. It his is constant racist undertone that gets me “hissy.” The fact that Ramanujan makes gross generalizations about whites, namely that whites were the origin of racism, that whites hold the black man/hispanic/asian etc, man down, and that whites are rich, well off and have no troubles in life, ad nausem that he is IMPLYING is racism in and of itself. But seeing as Ramanujan is a minority, it is OK for him to be racist.
No, read his post again, he is guilty of stereotyping whites, that is racism. People would be all up in arms if I likewise stated that african-americans all ate watermelon and Fried chicken. Stereotyping, especially negative sterotyping IS racism.
Umm, bullshit. Thinking that all whites are little princes and princesses awaiting the throne (yeah there’s your hyperbole) is racism and does not belittle the term.
