Race- Privilege, Relations, Racism, etc.

Or shovel your driveway while black, or open your front door while black, or ask for a telephone while black, or make a purchase at a convenience store while black, or walk through a white neighborhood while black...

In short, the general assumption is that if you're black, you clearly did something. After all, if you really have nothing to hide, then why would you be black?

edited 29th Apr '14 11:59:48 AM by TobiasDrake

Slut-shaming Helen of Troy: If we blame her for the Trojan War, what does it say about us?

A thoughtful piece about Helen of Troy in the lefty British newsmag New Statesman, which I can recommend if you ever need to while away a long train journey on his scepter'd isle.

Well you can't accuse them of being overtly topical at least.

Hark! A Vagrant on Ida Wells, who tried the Rosa Parks thing back in Victorian times, among other actions... http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=356

I wrote one post, but had to start over upon reading a summary of the Trojan war again. haven't opened my copy in awhile.

Long story short, Helen either abandoned her husband and daughter(and sons?), or got raped and was kidnapped, Depending on the Writer, Though most of the old greeks ones went with "abandoned her family". So it's not really slut shamming if you go with the first, while it is if you go with the second. I've always heard it the first way though, so I'm going with "Paris didn't help, but that chick left her husband, kingdom, and kid(s)".

She was the bribery reward from a goddess; I'd classify that as Mind Rape at the very least, since I don't recall there being enough interest from her towards Paris before he picked Aphrodite in the contest.

Just figured out another possible reason for the backlash against Avril Lavigne's new Hello Kitty video. Turns out the point of contention is the fact that the Japanese background dancers have a purely expressionless look on their faces, and people think it's this part that makes it come off as racially insensitive.

Ground breaking technique offers DNA 'Sat Nav' direct to your ancestor's home 1,000 years ago

I thought this was the best thread for it.

Huh. Fascinatin'

Race double standards meet "both sides do it" politics in America.

That seems to be a dispute over some things that Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi said about certain other public figures, including Mitch Mc Connell, Clarence Thomas, and Obamacare critics, whom he called "racist" for opposing the President (presumably because he's black). In general, I dont think that accusing someone of racism is itself racist, although it might be wrong (which in this case, Thompson is probably over-generalizing quite a bit).

"Hint for Andrew: If a white guy had made the remarks, it would be racist, just like the way it would be if a black guy said those things about white guys. But when you're criticizing people who are the same race as you, it's actually not shocking, nor is it racist."

Is he (the author of the article, not Thompson) claiming that there is no such thing as black-on-black racism (or white-on-white, for that matter)? If so, he couldn't be more wrong...

edited 1st May '14 10:36:02 AM by demarquis

Josh Olin, the community manager for Evolve, Turtle Rock's upcoming game, has been fired for his comments regarding the former LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling and his racist remarks. Namely, he said that Sterling was a victim because he was expressing his remarks in the safety of his own home, not out in the public, and the fact that he was taped and said tape managed to be leaked out into the wild makes it an invasion of privacy. In other words, he wasn't supporting Sterling's racist comments at all, but instead he was supporting his right to privacy and condemning sensational media. It seems, in his mind, that Turtle Rock took it the wrong way and was too hasty in firing him rather than talking about it in private.

Here's Sterling's remarks caught on tape (scroll down to find it. They're the last three posted video links):

http://deadspin.com/donald-sterling-still-a-vicious-racist-according-to-tm-1567966769

Here's Olin's tweet that got him fired:

https://twitter.com/JD_2020/status/461613922370351104

After he was fired, Olin gave this statement to the press:

It should be noted that Sterling either hired someone or simply told his girlfriend to record him saying his things, he wasn't recorded against his will. Also, Sterling was trying to force his views onto someone else in that recording of his.

It should also be noted that Olin posted his tweet on his personal Twitter account, not an official company account (though considering he was working with the company, anything he says, even in his personal account, could still be interpreted as the company condoning his views).

What do you guys think? Does Olin have a point? Should someone still have the right to privacy even if what he's saying comes off as racist/sexist/whatever? Is sensationalist media really that harmful to society (I know, obvious question)? And is the "freedom of speech" defense a valid defense for what Sterling or Olin said?

edited 2nd May '14 12:35:48 PM by Nettacki

I must confess, the fact that opinions said in private are now reason to fire someone concerns me.

I was already concerend with the Mozilla CEO thing, because it meant being fired over political opinions. But people said that he publicly supported policies with money that harmed homosexuals and that that wasn't the same thing as merely offering an opinion. But here it was just that. An opinion uttered in privacy.

And now holding an opinion on speech, not racism, is a reason to be fired.

But we're still allowed to have thoughts without getting fired, right?

I don't know, if he willfully recorded himself, than he really doesn't have anyone else but himself to blame for what happened.

The thing is, in the US an employer is not allowed to fire you for reasons that pertain to your demographic community- they cant practice discrimination in their personnel practices. But they can fire you for no reason, iow, they dont have to give a reason in order to get rid of you. So as long as they are smart enough not to tell you "We dont like your kind" but just give you the boot without giving an explanation, then they are legally covered.

edited 2nd May '14 1:06:14 PM by demarquis

That's disturbing. Than the problem is simply that employers have to much power in the US.

As already pointed out, this creep has said a lot of horrible things both in public and private.

This was enough.

And he was trying to force his views on another person in that tape. And he expressly said that black people aren't allowed in NBA games, which makes it even more damning, especially for a guy who *owned* a basketball team with predominantly black people in it.

Also he's been sued before for housing discrimination, so it's not like he's been Mr. Civil Rights in his professional life. Personally I wouldn't be shocked if this was the straw that broke the camel's back, i.e. they'd been trying to find a reason to get rid of Sterling for a while and this was a good justification.

Poor little multimillionare bigot...

Yeah. Like he is hurting.

My objection is about the principle. I couldn't care less about that bigotted douchebag of a creep.

You cannot have a working democracy if people have to be afraid of losing their jobs because of what they're saying in private.

Part of me is like "Eh, fuck it. I want bigots to lose their jobs."

But then part of me has to agree with this stuff

Well, I have some bad news then, Antiteilchen...

If he was a cashier or something it might be different, but you can't be a major representative of an organization, start making racist comments, and expect the organization to stand by your bigotry.

edited 2nd May '14 6:53:35 PM by TobiasDrake