Race- Privilege, Relations, Racism, etc.

Rude and impolite can be a legitimate issue, but I find it very hard to believe you're probably coming off as polite as you think you are if that is your constant reaction, especially if you are having these encounters across the nation.

I'm not judging you or trying to make you feel bad, so I apologize if I am coming off that way. But this is a problem I have run into myself and I noticed that I thought I was being nice but I was really coming across "high and mighty" or some other form of superiority. I didn't mean to, but that didn't make it any less of my responsibility.

It may not be anybody's fault, specifically. Cultural differences lead to miscommunication, yo.

Entirely probable. I will admit that after six months of continued misbehavior I rapidly lost tolerance and the ability to maintain my typically silent and polite nature because I find constant and flagrant rule breaking to be intolerable. I am most likely very much at fault, but I have made efforts to live and let live.

Silent politeness is often not the best approach to take when a group of people are acting in a way that offends you.

Mmm, I'd have to say that I'm more on my guard when in rural white communities than anywhere else. Despite the stereotype of remote rural neighborhoods being the great outdoors with miles of open fields to run through, you're more likely to be attacked or killed just walking down the road than you are in any of the more suburban neighborhoods. In my childhood home I learned very early to NEVER go past our property boundary, lest you get shot by a drunkard or have a pack of bear hounds set on you.

Even today, I'm probably less on-edge in the stereotypically "dangerous" locales. In my experience, at least in those, what might lead to an untimely hospital trip (or worse) is a little more obvious.

There is a different between fault and responsibility.

I've noticed that just being aware of your tone and body language is just as much a responsible precaution as making sure you don't say something offensive or walk down the wrong street at the wrong time of day. Especially between different cultures where you can accidentally be offensive or just come off funny because of that cultural gap.

I am horrible at not recognizing my own tone. I have always been.

You can't control everything. All you can do is try to carry yourself to give you the best chance regardless of who you run into.

@Demarq, neither does telling them what I feel about their behavior, nor notifying them that it's incorrect. That they should cease. They have this culture of anti-empathy that makes any probable solution worthless.

edited 15th Sep '14 9:32:51 AM by MousaThe14

There comes a line where the other person needs to not be judgmental, as well, though. Being mindful of your actions is a two-way street, and I'd place more emphasis on not being judgmental than not doing anything that might earn judgment.

I always figured those two actions should be one in the same.

Another police shooting of a young black man, this time in Utah.

(Didn't see anyone mention this one yet; apologies if it was already discussed)

edited 15th Sep '14 2:43:20 PM by Morven

@Mousa: I find the best approach in that situation is to make at least one casual connection within the offending group, someone you could approach privately and ask them what they hell is going on, and what should you do about it (not using those precise words, perhaps, but you get the idea).

Add me to the list of black people who feel no sense of camaraderie with in the group. Why would why when maybe 90% of whatever racial intolerance I faced was from within the so-called group rather than outside it. And I can safely say it's not misinterpreting cultural clues. I grew up in the same crack addicted murder central project block as the rest of them. Went to the same failing underfunded public schools.

It hasn't given me a bias against other blacks, I don't think. It has made me remarkably disdainful to people who insist on categorizations and wary of anyone who over-identifies with the "group", though. I think the net gain was worth it.

My strategy has always been after an initial attempt at civility (which had a very low success rate), to disengage and ignore. When interaction was mandatory, I found a business like professionalism tended to do the trick.

Well regarding the whole Daniele Watts thing: [LISTEN] Daniele Watts’ Boyfriend Throws Her Under the Bus to Police Officer

edited 20th Sep '14 11:14:56 PM by rmctagg09

American Healthcare Is So Bad for Women of Color It May Violate the UN Convention

Cross-posted with the women's issues thread.

And the medical thread.

edited 20th Sep '14 3:13:15 PM by unnoun

So, I found out recently that "Miscegenation" is considered offensive in English.

Is it just me or is Values Dissonance a near constant when I talk about race on the internet?

No, that's true for anyone who discusses race on the internet.

Taking it from another thread, do you consider, in theory, an official policy of helping a race that is behind others racist? Is it possible to have practically non-racist implementation of said policy?

Yes, but it is usually about something in the past.

This however was something in the present.

edited 21st Sep '14 8:00:33 AM by SaintDeltora

Not at all. Racism is about oppression. Acknowledging that another race has a social disadvantage and making compensations for that is not the same thing by a long shot.

edited 21st Sep '14 8:04:34 AM by DrStarky

So, for example, in Africa, if blacks oppressed whites (or even another black tribe), are they being racist? And can minorities be prejudiced towards the majority, and can be different minorities be racist towards each other?^note  My Answer: Of course. It's obvious. I make no distinction between so-called power bases. Racism is Racism. One can even be racist against oneself, if one desires.

edited 21st Sep '14 8:09:01 AM by Greenmantle

I don't see how that question anything to do with what I said.

edited 21st Sep '14 8:28:48 AM by DrStarky

@Saint Deltora- Miscegenation is considered racist online (and everywhere else) because it is. It was specifically coined by some racist guy in America in the 1860's to advocate against interracial relationships (on the "grounds" of blacks being a different species than whites).

I'm guessing you are Spanish or Portuguese? The article on The Other Wiki indicates that there's similar terms in (respectively) Spanish, Portugese, and French- mestizaje, mestiçagem and métissage.

These apparently are a bit more neutral in connotation (although still associated with historical caste systems), but I'd consider them a false cognate with miscegenation- all the words are using some of the same Latin roots, but miscegenation was coined independently and if you use that as the English translation of the Spanish, Portuguese, or French words, you are going to be Mistaken for Racist.

In any event, all of the terms are somewhat racist,because they derive from a purely biological view of race, and "interracial" is preferable, because it isn't, and is value neutral.

edited 21st Sep '14 9:29:30 AM by Hodor

I am Brazillian. It is in my freaking location.

Miscegenação is considered neutral or even positive around here because it is used by Scholars, Student's books, historians and the common people to refer to how every culture and race that came to Brazil was easily crossed with several others, hence why people like me who am descended from African Slaves, Italian Immigrants, Portuguese Colonists, and Native Indigens, are actually the norm, rather then something unusual.

Such practices were actually encouraged by the nobles in the times we where a Monarchy in order to "Strenghten" the country.

Hodor, just because a certain context applied to something makes something offensive to one culture, doesn't means that context will ressonate with every culture out there.

To prove my point... Here◊ are◊ some◊ results from Google Images to "Misgenation".

Contrast◊ and◊ compare◊ to◊ "Miscigenação".

The words might not be perfect translations... but they are the closest thing in the English language.

Heck, they even mean the same thing, the only difference is that one is used negatively while the other one is used positively.

edited 21st Sep '14 9:54:33 AM by SaintDeltora

Yeah, Brazil does have a very different relationship with the concept than a lot if places. It makes sense if you know the country's history, but it's not the first thing that comes to mind of people in the US.

I'm sorry- I always forget that we have location identifiers next to our names. Sorry about that.

I think the French/Portuguese/Brazilian/etc. version is somewhat racist in origin to the extent that it originally described a social caste system wherein (to generalize) a person had more rights/greater social standing based on the more white ancestry they had.

I do understand why history means that the term has a very different connotation in Brazil which is neutral and even sometimes positive. What I'm saying though is because the English version was created with a specific, negative connotation, there's a problem with using the English word to translate the Brazilian one.

edited 21st Sep '14 10:11:27 AM by Hodor