There is a difference between acknowledging a country or regions traditions and habits and imputing others either absent in or far from unique to it. There is also a difference between accurately acknowleding a regions habits and expecting them of all its residents, those who descend from them and even anyone superficially RESEMBLING them. It is not racist to say lutefisk and rakfisk are traditional Norwegian food; it is a statement of fact. It IS racist to say all or most Norwegians love fish (and not just because my wife dislikes it.) Just as it is racist to say all blacks love fried chicken and watermelon (most people like those things.)
The issue is not even whether a given habit is good, bad or indifferent: It is prejudging people on looks (in this case, race) rather than beliefs and acts.
A few points on that, first.
A) In language, context is everything. So it is absolutely different when a black person says the "N" word than when a white person does. You know how you can say whatever about your friends and family, but anyone else better watch their mouths? It's similar.
The Hell you say. The word is either derogatory or not, regardless of the speaker or context. Frankly, the context in which rappers use it is not significantly different from that in which white racists use it; proclaiming all blacks thugs and using a racial slur to do so is wrong whether or not the person doing so is black. Beating someone up for calling ones sister a whore does not making calling her a whore oneself any less offensive.
Yeah, pretty much, but her record and response to it left no alternative. Were her record as debatable as defenders claim, or had she unequivocally repudiated rather than rationalized it, the network probably would not have sacrificed her history of profits. If nothing else, they would stand to lose more from sympathizers than they would gain by ending the association. But her record is unambiguous, and addressing its discovery with what amounts to "I am sorry for doing nothing wrong" does not mitigate it. Dumping her will NOT cost them money; it will SAVE money they would have lost to boycotts and sponsorship withdrawal: That is why they did it.
Many of us understand it quite well, but most are in deep denial. To the extent most racists sincerely deny their racism, I agree with your argument. Yet the very act of trying to defend and excuse racism by justifying tacitly concedes wrongdoing in need of excuse, and that is where Paula Deen, like so many others, tipped her hand: If you did nothing wrong, why apologize? Just to defuse the furor over discovery of words and deeds you stand by regardless? Not good enough, not by half.
By that standard, each and every one of us is a Racist, regardless of color, education, or background, and the term has lost all meaning, other than a bogey man.
I think that is a large part of the reason that actions like Paula's actually get defended. So Paula called someone the "N" word. Crap, I've done that, too. So if she's a Racist, then I'm a Racist. I don't want to be a Racist, that's Bad. I actually like some Black People that I know. So I can't be racist. So she isn't, either. We see ourselves in the actions of others and defend their actions in order to exonerate ourselves, which is a perfectly understandable reaction.
I mean, you're just human, right? A product of where you were born, how you were brought up, the society that you moved in. You were bound to slip up, it's not like that makes you a bad person. So you can't be Racist, right? And neither can the rich white person who screwed up this week. Case closed.
Here's the thing. You're not a bad person, most likely. I highly doubt Paula Dean is, either. But both of you, ALL of us, are partly Racist, too. Partly.
I imagine you don't like that part of you very much, would like to do something about it. Well here is the good news. it does not define you. People are more complicated than that... just look at our founding fathers! Washington, who stayed mostly quiet on issues of slavery, but freed his slaves. Jefferson, who worked through political channels to abolish slavery, and yet kept his own. People are complicated, and cannot be simply labeled as Racist or Not.
Actions, however, can be. And I think that is where our attention needs to move. Instead of wasting time debating over whether or not a person is racist (an argument impossible to prove either way, regardless of how many black friends one has) we should focus on whether an action of theirs was racist or not.
I have done racist things in the past. So have you. If I do so again (particularly in a public role, as Pastor of the church) I would hope that those around me would hold me accountable for it. Because if they don't, if instead they remember their own racist actions and withhold comment in order to protect themselves, then it isn't just people being racist. At that point, it is the system being Racist. And that is the most harmful racism of all.
The distinction between beliefs, words and acts is valid (particularly from a pastor,) but there is also a valid distinction between words and deeds that are exceptions to ones beliefs and those forming a pattern of behavior. Each of us is subject to moral lapses, yet none defined by any of them—unless they are habitual; then there is a problem. In Deens case the problem is not a racial slur decades ago with a gun to her head, nor even suggesting a "plantation themed" wedding complete with black servers representing slaves (though that is more telling,) but that the restaurant she co-owns with her brother has segregated employee restrooms. That is not a momentary lapse of reason, but a consistent POLICY. There is your systemic racism, and those identifying with it merit no consideration.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
