The boy who cried racism.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

The claim: Discussing minor or "borderline" instances of racism diminishes the impact of serious instances of racism. In effect, it is like the boy who cries wolf.

I have heard several people make this claim and I don't think it works for a few reasons which I will outline. First the easy stuff:

1. The story about the little boy who cried wolf was about an individual who lost credibility by claim a threat exists when there was none. But "black people" are not an individual, rather we are talking about a population of millions.The notion that all minorities must "behave" and never be wrong about racism in order for anyone who is a minority to have credibility on the subject is ludicrous.
2.  Even if we are talking about an individual. Say Rev, Sharpton, who has been wrong about racism on a couple of occasions. (But he has been right more often than he has been wrong) It still doesn't justify ignoring an instance of serious racism that he brings to the table. Of course, public opinion can be shaped by such things, but the willful assertion that one "doesn't have listen" indicates a bizarre kind of retribution that really shouldn't have any place in a productive dialogue.Wrong is wrong. Serious racism is no less wrong becuase you find some black person or liberal to be "too focused on race."

Now for the more complex concepts:

1. Racism in pop culture matters too. It doesn't matter as much as a material issue, such as police brutality, and economic inequality, but it still helps us see the ways in which racism permeates culture. It mattered that Disney didn't have any black princess until recently. It matters that so few leads in movies are black women. (black men do better, the numbers for black women even as a percentage of the population are absurdly low.) It matters that TV news tends to show pictures of black offenders more often than whites. It matters that TV news will devote more time to a white child who is kidnapped than a black child. It's worth talking about and thinking about these things since they show the ways that racism continues to thrive. The only way to change any of this is to talk about it.
2. Talking about "soft racism" can help us to explore our prejudices and learn about history. For example, if we talk about the meaning of a white person putting on dark make-up to appear black. (Even if said white person has no racist intentions and doesn't act in a a manner consistent with black stereytypes.) Each person may see this action in a different way. Sharing the ways that we understand these actions can help us to identify gaps in how people with different cultural backgrounds interpret meaning. I think it might surprise some to find out how often many black people have encountered black-face (think of the "ghetto parties" held at some colleges) even in the year 2010. Conversation allows us to daylight these experiences. And if we want to redefine something like black-face it should happen through conversation not some kind of top-down "this is not racism so shut up" command.
3. It's possible to acknowledge the racist implications in something and still enjoy other aspects of it: Merchant of Venice and Othello are great plays--  Racism is not black and white. It is not a matter of a single racist element making something "pure evil." When I am with people who can talk intelligently about the racist aspects of a work it makes it easier to simply enjoy it for what it is since I know that we are laughing for the same reasons.

For example, I remember watching Chris Rock with some white people in college and becoming very uncomfortable since two of them were laughing in a "oh what a funny n-gger!" kind of way rather than a "oh isn't it messed up what racism has done to this country " kind of way. --I realized that there was a gap between what I was seeing and what they were seeing in his comedy.

Or take this adorably ignorant and funny video of Antoine Dodson:

A number of black people feel embarrassed by this guy since he acts in a manner similar to some stereotypes about black people. (And gay people) There are a number of white people who would view this video as an example of "what is wrong with ghetto blacks" rather than just a funny bother losing it on camera since he's so protective of his sister. One need only look at some youtube comments to see that there are people who do this.  When black people are not treated like individuals these fears seem justified.

So, when some pop-culture artifact like this is reinterperted and remixed in to new form of humor it is legitimate to ask "what are we laughing at?" Yes. Is it the most "important" thing to ask -- probably not. But there is nothing wrong with bring it up thinking about it and talking about it. In fact, it's what we need to do to roll back racism in popular culture.

For example: Is the remix made by some white hipster "racist" ? I didn't think so, I thought it was pretty funny. But someone else might not agree. Let's talk about that! It matters.

Is asking if the remix is racist "diminishing legitimate claims of racism?" No, I don't think it is. In fact, making it difficult to talk openly about race in even "light" contexts will slow our progress in unlearning ugly stereotypes.

One last word. After reading this, can you give it at least a chance to sink in? I'm not asking for much here. I'm not talking about government policies, or anything other than how we talk to each other about racism. I don't know ...  can just hear the polished rebuttals coming and I don't mind picking them apart... AGAIN. But, really, I don't know. Give what I'm saying a chance. If you are one of the 10 or so people who always disagrees with me on this topic let's not have an old conversation again. You know? Just a thought.

Comments

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

The serious part of my comment-I fully agree with this.

The not-so-serious:



A little bit of the 'Baggers floundering all over themselves to explain why "Monkey see monkey spend" and "Obama is a Niggar" signs aren't racist is always good to remind me of why much as I bash the Progressives the Right Wing will always be higher on the list.

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

Sorry to get all serious in your macro thread but the first phrase stems from the debate over whether primates such as monkeys exhibit the ability to "learn" or are just mimicking behavior they see. As a child this was a common taunt in the schoolyard for bandwaggoners. And, as we were an evil 97% white school you can't say it was a racist taunt.

The second phrase is of course a misspelling of a racist slur. (I really doubt someone is going to seriously accuse Obama of being niggardly.)

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I don't think the boy who cried wolf. I think about an old white man white-knuckling his way through a disaster while screaming "Everything is fine! Nothing to see here! Move along!"

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

It's the Donald Rumsfeld style of leadership: Deny, destroy, defeat.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

Nice image! LOL!

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

The claim: Discussing minor or "borderline" instances of racism diminishes the impact of serious instances of racism. In effect, it is like the boy who cries wolf.


No, that's not the claim. The claim is that calling something absolutely racism when it's not or when it's likely not diminishes the willingness of people to acknowledge actual racism.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

Even then, "wrong is wrong" still applies.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Your first title sentence is wrong, but I think your second is right. Fact is, a position really can lose meaning if it's used for every little thing. It's like 'unpatriotic', 'communist', 'socialism' etc have become also.

That's the whole reason I feel the need to say something though. Racism is a problem. It disappoints me when people go crazy about some guy said some thing that doesn't really matter and nobody gets helped, yet real issues of racism just fly by because people are off crusading against the one guy who said the one thing. Its used as a social 'in' and 'out' schoolyard clique defining tool as opposed to people actually doing things about it.

1. I generally agree with this. Popular culture has been turning around stereotypes. Homosexuals have been receiving a much more positive view in general too. Personally I think 'Will & Grace' went a long way to that. :P

I think we still need to talk about rap music though. This is a great quote from 'black-face.com' a site that documents the uses of african stereotypes in culture:

"Rap Music

Negative stereotypes of Blacks are a staple of Black music videos that glorify gangsterism. In Rap music and videos, the minstrel-show plantation has been born again as the "hood." While the setting has changed from an idyllic plantation to the mean streets of urban America, the process is the same: a black culture is being marketed for white profit, with black performers portraying racist stereotypes. Performers claim that they represent authentic black America, while critics decry the glorification of ugly caricatures and its effects on Black youth."

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

"Rap music" That is Hip Hop, has become multi-ethnic in the last 8 years or so. It a huge diverse genre of music, fashion, art and dance. There are elements like the ones that you describe and I agree that they are modern day black face... especially when you look at the surprisingly high rate of white consumption. (And how this leads to things like "ghetto parties" where while people dress up like what they imagine "black in the projects" might)

It disappoints me when people go crazy about some guy said some thing that doesn't really matter and nobody gets helped, yet real issues of racism just fly by because people are off crusading against the one guy who said the one thing.

To be honest I find that annoying to. For too many people racism exists ONLY if someone says n-gger. That's racism, everything else is too ambiguous. So we have these 24-hour new cycle driven dramas about Mel Gibson or Imus. I think some people latch on since the case is clear cut and it is often impossible to get the majority of American to think about racism in any other way beyond school yard insults. So, some civil right leaders focus on the simple stuff-- and yeah if thats all that ever come out nothing is getting done.

I swear to god

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

I was thinking, after reading Nietzsche "Beyond Good & Evil", last week this exact thought:

I wonder what Future Bird would have to say about the common arguement that the word racist is thrown around to much.

Nietzsche words weren't related to 'racist' accusations but to culture, race, shared experience.Reminded me of what you had said in the past about experiences & race.

I was going to pose the question directly to you but, I was certain that if I was patient it'd come up in a post.

I'm going to see if the internetz is smart enough to find the Nietzsche quote I want...

Re: I swear to god

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

I'll be very interested to see the Nietzsche quote you are thinking of, if you can find it.

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

I agree with every word of this.

Thank you.

But I think there is some really weird and generally immature psychology at work with otherwise fairly clear headed people whereby they mistake the social self-censureship of simply existing within a society where we give a rat's ass about how we affect others with some kind of terrible imposition upon their rights.

Which is pretty fucking messed up.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

"Sensitivity is for losers" -Ayn Rand

[stephantom.livejournal.com]

I applaud this whole post. Thank you for stating all this so articulately.

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

I think it's a bit odd that you wrote this post saying how important it is to be able to have open and honest discussions about racism without dismissing anyone's opinions, and then end it by asking anyone who disagrees with you not to post. :-/

That having been said, I really don't know if I want to get involved in another serious discussion on racism on this forum. It always seems to end badly.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

I think it's a bit odd that you wrote this post saying how important it is to be able to have open and honest discussions about racism without dismissing anyone's opinions, and then end it by asking anyone who disagrees with you not to post. :-/

My apologies if that's what you took away from the bit at the end. It wasn't my intention to say that people who don't agree should not post. Far from it. I just wanted to head off what I sometimes perceive to be "argument for sport" Not that there is something wrong with nit-picking debates and scoring minor "points" ... I just hoped for a "deeper" conversation objections that are more substantive than what each of us (including myself) have dealt in some of the time.

A species of generalizers

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Wrong is wrong, I couldn't agree more.

The sad truth is that everyone works by generalities. White people do it, black people do it, purple people do it. It's how we operate.

It's tragic and sad and heart-breaking, *but*, since one of my close friends was falsely accused of rape I now question "is this woman lying about being raped?" anytime I hear a rape accusation. I don't *want* to question it, but I feel obligated to do so, since so many who knew my friend didn't question it, and they wrote him off and acted like total dicks to him.

Now, I know full well that woman X lying about rape is no indicator that woman Y is lying about rape. Yet, there's that unfortunate nagging feeling that *maybe* she is. It's possible. And unlike accusations of racism, I have no way of discovering the truth--unless there's some hard evidence at hand.

False accusations of *anything* take away the power of the real accusations. Even when it's not the same person making a false accusation, as I already said, we all work by generalizations. It's an unavoidable aspect of human nature.

And sweet christ I can already see the shitstorm this comment will reveal. But I'm honestly sharing with you my experiences and my thoughts. I don't like questioning these things, but I can no longer blindly accept such accusations either.

*and lastly, I'm curious what your personal view on this is:

I have, in another post awhile back, said I was a victim of racism. Some people in this comm told me I cannot have been a victim of racism because I am white. What do you think of that?

Re: A species of generalizers

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

I have, in another post awhile back, said I was a victim of racism. Some people in this comm told me I cannot have been a victim of racism because I am white. What do you think of that?

I think some academics get a bit too dogmatic about their definitions. Even if they were merely aiming to be "correct" in terms of definitions the perfect can be the enemy of the good suffering is wrong and such a response might seem to say "you didn't suffer" even if that were not the intention of the people who said that you did not face racism.

At the same time, I have noticed that when talking about racism there will often be a white person who brings up a reason why "blacks are bad too" it might be in instance of reverse racism, or it might be asking why black people can call each other n-gger and white people can't call black people by that word without being labeled as racist.

It's the demon that Shirly Sherrod was supposed to be. The mystical black oppressor. The fantasy that, in a nation with gaps in wealth and power and life-span and more --a nation where so many black men are locked up and so many black women are alone paid less for the same work, not looked for when we go missing ... with all of this that NO No NO it's really the black people who are getting one up on whites. Really?

Maybe playing white people by crying racism too often. Maybe using the power of "white guilt" Who knows.

You know, I don't know if your story is something you tell as a part of that reaction or not. Let's assume NOT. It's a story worth telling. Black people were mean to you because of your race. They should not have done that they should have been punished. But it's not really a part of a greater pattern. (except that black youth lashing out at what they think is the enemy only tells how bad the divide has become.)

So I think some people say "that's not racism" to you since they think racism should be part of this bigger pattern. I'm not that picky. If they had power at the time and you suffered for your race it's racism to me. I don't want to diminish you expereinces, I know what it feels like to have people dismiss your experiences and it's not pretty. I won't be a part of that.

Still, if you have habit of bringing this story out as a "response" to white racism. I would polity ask what your motive is? If it's to show that "racism goes both ways" well ok, it goes "both ways" but mostly it goes ONE way which is kind of the whole problem with racism.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

For example: Is the remix made by some white hipster "racist" ? I didn't think so, I thought it was pretty funny. But someone else might not agree. Let's talk about that! It matters.

Is asking if the remix is racist "diminishing legitimate claims of racism?" No, I don't think it is. In fact, making it difficult to talk openly about race in even "light" contexts will slow our progress in unlearning ugly stereotypes.

And here's where you lose me. And lose many other people.

If you're asking if the remix is "racist," you're asking the wrong question. The default assumption - is this racist? - is the problem. One could say that it may be wrong-headed, or offensive, but for it to be racist requires some sort of intent that anyone who thinks about it would never ever find.

That's why, as another noted above, your "boy who cried wolf" analogy is false. When the question as much as arises as to whether an auto-tuned remix of a black person or Robert Downey Jr in Tropic Thunder is racist, it's an indication that we're looking for racism everywhere and, instead of finding it, finding nothing except things we find offensive instead. Root of the white privilege myth, anyone? I think it comes down to this:

In fact, it's what we need to do to roll back racism in popular culture.

The fact that we have to actively go racism hunting should be a pretty strong indicator that racism has been rolled back.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

"White Privilege myth" ?? Wait, you don't believe white privilege exists.
Oh right, for a moment I forgot who I was talking to.

So how do you explain this (http://community.livejournal.com/talk_politics/619361.html)?


And I dunno, I think most people would agree that racism has been rolled back. But pre civil-war South might be the second most evil example of racism the world has ever seen (the first of course being WW2 germany) so rolling that back doesn't mean we've made enough progress that we can wave our hands and act like it's over.

Going from lynching blacks openly to refusing to hire them secretively is progress, but it's still rather fucked up.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Discussing minor or "borderline" instances of racism diminishes the impact of serious instances of racism.

I often assert that friendly religious moderates enable the violent religious extremists by bolstering the fundamental flaw. I argue this about religion.

Its true of racism as well.

Rev, Sharpton, who has been wrong about racism on a couple of occasions. (But he has been right more often than he has been wrong)

Its like poking a man with sharp sticks for years then being appalled when he finally lashes out.

I dunno. I like the comment, 'once you've been described at human, what worse can be said?'.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

I often assert that friendly religious moderates enable the violent religious extremists by bolstering the fundamental flaw. I argue this about religion.

As a religious "moderate*" I'd argue with you about that. But I think you know that. Though to be honest I'm not really "moderate" I'm a very liberal Christian. Is that moderate or is it radical?

[sgiffy.livejournal.com]

Talking about "soft racism" can help us to explore our prejudices and learn about history.

I think the important part here is talk. Where I have issue with people like Sharpton is that they don't really talk. They tell, they yell, they rile people up, but they rarely actually explain where they are coming from to people.

I think the same applies for issues of race as for issues of sex or gender. Whether privileged or not we are all products of our society and have been acculturated into an existing social system. These issue touch our very sense of identity and sense of our place in the world. I think that makes it very easy for people to get very defensive.

I much prefer actual discourse and education to outrage as the later tends to not actually accomplish all that much when we are talking about 'soft racism'.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

Where I have issue with people like Sharpton is that they don't really talk. They tell, they yell, they rile people up, but they rarely actually explain where they are coming from to people.

If you ever met him in person you'd stop thinking this. One of the reason FOX news like to put him on the air so much is that this is how he comes across in the context of a shouting "news" program. He fulfills a certian fantasy about the angry blacks who will never be happy.

I think he's being punked big time.

Over use of racism/bringing race into the equation

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

"You can't vote against health care and call yourself a black man,"
-Jesse Jackson

Really? Race had to be peddled out for the health care bill? You can't be a black man if you disagree with it? Does this bring value to the race discussion? I think not.


[THE NEXT COMMENT IS NOT FROM THE ONION I SWEAR TO WHITE BABY JEBUS!]
County commissioners were discussing problems with the central collections office that is used to process traffic ticket payments and handle other paperwork normally done by the JP Courts.

Commissioner Kenneth Mayfield, who is white, said it seemed that central collections "has become a black hole" because paperwork reportedly has become lost in the office.

Commissioner John Wiley Price, who is black, interrupted him with a loud "Excuse me!" He then corrected his colleague, saying the office has become a "white hole."

That prompted Judge Thomas Jones, who is black, to demand an apology from Mayfield for his racially insensitive analogy.
http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/07/dallas-county-meeting-turns-ra.html

The word "niggardly"
On January 15, 1999, David Howard, a white aide to Anthony A. Williams, the black mayor of Washington, D.C., used the word in reference to a budget. This apparently upset one of his black colleagues (identified by Howard as Marshall Brown), who interpreted it as a racial slur and lodged a complaint. As a result, on January 25 Howard tendered his resignation, and Williams accepted it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_the_word_%22niggardly%22 (more fun stories click the link!)

Only Stupid, Racist People Oppose Obama
- Max Blumenthal

"The tanning tax is racism"
-Doc Thompson


* The Avatar movie was racist
* The New York Times calling the Stimulus monkey racist.


Trite cries of racism hurt the power of that charge. If you go around crying "Racist" to everything people will start ignoring you and the word loses its power. It should be a word that is only used when it is truly meant and it should sting everytime it is used. Lately when I hear a liberal call someone a racist I can't help but roll my eyes. Geezer called me a racist and a homohobe because of my saggy pants comment. I just lul'd

Re: Over use of racism/bringing race into the equation

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

Trite cries of racism hurt the power of that charge.

Only if people are looking for an excuse to ignore more serious racism. And those people would never listen anyway. You can't sit here and expect me to accept that the actions of other black people are going to have an impact on my credibility. Or yours for that matter.

It's a game that no one will win. That one time Jesse Jackson said "You can't vote against health care and call yourself a black man," (which was more about stupid wording than made up racism) INVALIDATES all other conversations about racism for the next 10 years.

The trouble is: I'm not Jesse Jackson and neither are you. We don't deserve to be held accountable for things beyond our control. It's like how Endersgame keeps telling me about things that other black people have said to him that he didn't agree with instead of talking about what I'm saying.

Where is my voice. I'm not Al Sharpton. I'm not the kid from your sociology class.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

I agree with most of what you're saying. Btw sorry with the OT here, but I'm just wondering when you'll disprove those who are criticizing you of being a one-trick-pony (meaning you always speak only on the subject of racism and discrimination). I think someone recently mentioned that you used to write awesome stuff on infrastructure and city planning. I'd be curious to learn some more.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Definitely agree. Futurebird's civic planning posts are awesome.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

If black people want to be treated with the same respect as white people, they're going to have to start committing genocide like white people.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Pretty much.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

I don't have time, now. Maybe later I'll tell you what I think. d:

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

First of all, I can't watch the video right now, so I'm not commenting on that segment. Don't like it? Too bad, write your own damn reply. Lazy git.

I had initially planned on this being a rebuttal to the original post, but the truth is, I agree with a lot of it. So it's just a plain old reply after all. The good news is that without the extras, you get it for the sale price.

I don't think race discussion works in our society. I just don't think it's possible. People on one side are afraid to speak because they might be seen as "crying wolf" (to steal your use of the term), while people on the other side are afraid to speak because they might be seen as racists. It doesn't help that there are a fair share of instances where one side that speaks out actually is crying wolf or being racist, and then, whether fallacious or not, credibility for that side is lost.

Pretty little intro over - let's go to the bullet points.

1) "The notion that all minorities must 'behave' and never be wrong about racism in order for anyone who is a minority to have credibility on the subject is ludicrous."

This is absolutely true. Nobody with something to say should be drowned out by idiocy of others who share or oppose their ideals, yet lack the ability to present them in an intelligent way. We should all be willing to listen and form opinions on our own.

Yet, this sort of thing happens all the time, because it's easier to lump together common opinions with the subset of people who hold those opinions. "The left thinks this" or "the right said that" is the basis of 90% of the posts on this forum. When it's based on skin color, it does take on that ugly racist undertone, but then that leads us to the counter-question: is the concept of "the black community" wrong as well? I get the impression that you're not the type of person who puts much stock in such a notion.

This, then, leads into what seems to be (quite bizarrely so, in my mind) more of a point of contention - the notion that minorities have more credibility in determining what is or isn't racist. I will concede (and rightly so) that the average minority, by virtue of being more exposed to people of other skin colors, is more exposed to racism. I don't agree that such exposure translates to a better understanding and recognition of it. I can see it being just as likely that the additional exposure can lead to one becoming desensitized, or oversensitive.

On top of that, it just pisses me off whenever someone says to me that I can't really recognize racism because I'm white. The hell.

2) "Even if we are talking about an individual. Say Rev, Sharpton, who has been wrong about racism on a couple of occasions. (But he has been right more often than he has been wrong) It still doesn't justify ignoring an instance of serious racism that he brings to the table."

Theoretically true, but in practice, I think poisoning the well is one of those fallacies that comes dangerously close to being worthwhile. People don't tend to shift their ways of thinking and acting very quickly or easily. Once someone has earned a reputation, it isn't easy to shake - if that reputation is for spouting hyperbolic nonsense, then it's particularly worse, because people will eventually tune that person out under the implicit assumption that nothing new or meaningful is being said. It happens everywhere, even here. Hell, steve_potocin could write something deserving of a Nobel Prize - I'd never know.

If we lived in the village with the boy who cried wolf, it's simple to say we would take every claim seriously - but honestly, when we've spent 99 sleepless nights trudging through the darkness with our swords or muskets or whatever the hell they had back then, are we really going to bother getting out of bed on that hundredth night for the same stupid little bastard's imaginary monster? I think I'd rather be eaten in my sleep.

(Continued... )

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

And now to the complex stuff.

1) "Racism in pop culture matters too. It doesn't matter as much as a material issue, such as police brutality, and economic inequality, but it still helps us see the ways in which racism permeates culture."

My girlfriend tried to introduce her 5-year-old niece to anime in a desperate effort to get the girl to leave her the hell alone for a few minutes. The show she put on focused on a female lead with brown hair and brown eyes. This girl, who was practically raised on Disney, had her mind blown at the idea that a show would feature someone who looked like her. And this is anime, for god's sake. Have you ever tried to spot a black person in anime? Exactly, we got shown up by that.

Well, I can't really argue with that, now, can I? Pop culture is a mirror for what we like and dislike as a society. On the individual level, I don't think it's racist to favor particular skin/eye/hair colors - it's a matter of taste. On the societal level, though, while "racist" isn't the word I'd use for it, it's telling to note that people tend to prefer one disproportionately over another.

Is it because of pop culture that these perceptions are formed, or is it merely that the perceptions shape pop culture? Is it both, and we're caught in a vicious loop? And even after noting the distinction, what then? Who is to blame, what is to be done? Tough questions, if you ask me.

2) "Talking about 'soft racism' can help us to explore our prejudices and learn about history. For example, if we talk about the meaning of a white person putting on dark make-up to appear black. (Even if said white person has no racist intentions and doesn't act in a a manner consistent with black stereytypes.) Each person may see this action in a different way. Sharing the ways that we understand these actions can help us to identify gaps in how people with different cultural backgrounds interpret meaning."

Maybe, maybe not.

I think this point has a correlation with #2 above, albeit on a smaller scale. If you raise the conversation on racism when something happens that can be reasonably interpreted as potentially racist, then I think you can get some good discussion going. But oversaturate and you lose interest. It's the difference between "that's an interesting point, though I don't see it that way" and "oh dear god, not this again."

In my opinion, the Obama impressionist (am I correct in assuming that that post prompted this thread?) did nothing to be construed as racist. I don't see the act of applying makeup to one's face, even if it makes you look darker, to directly correspond to blackface. To throw in an anecdote, I'm white as pre-urinated snow, and I was really into theater in high school and college. Every time I took the stage, I wore makeup that darkened my skin so that I would better look like the character that I was supposed to be to the audience. Either I'm racist as shit, or maybe we're being a bit too harsh.

Bottom line of all this ranting is, it's important to be sensible about these things. If you take every possible opportunity to bring up racism, people will stop listening quickly. If you do it when it really seems to fit, your results will be much better.

3) "It's possible to acknowledge the racist implications in something and still enjoy other aspects of it: Merchant of Venice and Othello are great plays-- Racism is not black and white."

That's true. It's also various shades of yellow-brown.

*drum roll*

Seriously, though, I agree - context matters. Historical accuracy? Okay. Underscoring the issue? Sure. Promoting racism, or doing it for the hell of... you know what, this is a really stupid hypothetical. I'm just leaving this one at "I agree."

And on that note, I think I'm done. I could try to tie this into my intro, but I don't even remember what it was anymore. Damn, this was long.

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

The forest and tree metaphor comes to mind. As does getting bogged down in details to the point that you lose track of your goals.

I don't think the advice to pick your battles is a bad one. There are limits to human attention and the reality that after a while a (constant) whine is dismissed to the realm of background noise.

As a manager I've often counseled those who work for me to work out minor difference between themselves. If they bring every little annoyance to my attention the true intractable problems are likely to get lost.

Similarly, as children we (hopefully) learn to work out problems by ourselves rather than constantly seeking an authority figure to pass judgment.

So it would be nice if minor issue could be worked out without the Supreme Court ruling on the matter. :P

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

Well said especially the forest and tree metaphor.

For those that don't know the metaphor is "I can't burn down the forest because the trees get in the way"

[chemchick.livejournal.com]

This is a really great post, futurebird. Thanks for posting it. I'll be back later for a more meat and potatoes comment.

[chemchick.livejournal.com]

Ok back from work and finally with a working internet.

You're absolutely correct on all your points and it's nice to read such a thoughtful commentary about this issue. As I've commented on threads further up-thread racism is prevalent regardless of intent. To pretend to be "color-blind" throws that fact further under the rug and doesn't address it in the way it needs to be. Step one of correcting ones behavior is acknowledgment.

I think it can be hard for some people to realize that the virtue of being born white gives them opportunities that may not otherwise be given to them. They don't know how uncomfortable it is to be the only minority in a room or have that sneaking suspicion that they were pulled over because they were "driving while black". Racism is often times more hurtful the more subversive it is.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

as a white guy, it doesn't hurt me to admit that there is still active racism going on. I don't know why BDJ can't admit it in the threads up there.

I have too much fidelity to the truth.

Oops!

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

The video is no longer available.

What is your impression of the argument that people should not use the word "miscegenation" because it was coined for racist purposes? Certainly, few people are familiar with the origin of the word. Once we are aware of the story of its original use, would it be racist to continue to use it?

Re: Oops!

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

The video is no longer available.

Fixed.