Active Users:434 Time:15/11/2024 10:54:23 AM
I had to think about this for a few days, but I've now worked out my answer. Tim Send a noteboard - 16/01/2010 01:59:25 PM
I define racism, sexism, etc as an irrational and strong bias against a given group, I do not believe individual issues can be defined that way, even if it many of the people who might be advantaged or disadvantaged by the result happen to be members of a specific group, and many of the people who hate them happen to be on one side of the issue.


It seems as though you see racism or non-racism as a binary category: you're either 100% racist, or you aren't at all. Like being married or not, alive or dead, male or female*. I think, however, that what racism really is consists of views. If you say someone is racist, what that actually means is that they hold racist views.

Now, I think one of the main problems with the media today, especially in the US, is that they don't like to admit nuanced viewpoints. You're either a conservative, through-and-through, or you're a liberal, through-and-through. They have trouble with people who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal, even though they are quite a lot of those. It's as though anyone who is against big government must also be against abortion and gay marriage.

So, if a person holds one racist view and four non-racist views, it's fair to say that their view on that issue is a racist view without it meaning that the person is good recruiting material for the KKK. In my earlier posts, all I was doing was claiming that "AAE is bad English and people shouldn't speak it" is a racist view. I wasn't claiming that all who hold such a view are 100% racist, or trying to slap a label saying "This person is a racist" on such people. However, to someone who thinks of racism in all-or-nothing terms, it would appear that I was making that far more radical claim.

*Yes, there are a very few hermaphrodites, XY females etc, but you know what I'm getting at :P.

By your logic, many people having decided that abortion is a women's issue, all pro-lifers are sexist on that issue, which is likely to really surprise a lot of women who are pro-life. Ditto, anyone who thinks we need to really lock down our borders against illegal immigrants is not automatically a racist, just because most people who dislike hispanics happen to agree with them. To raise an absurd case, because I always feel they clarify things so well, I think it's hard to accuse people of sexism for not thinking the NFL should let women on to teams. You're not a bigot if you're view is not irrational. You have to be totally living in Fantasia to think there are an equal number of women as men who can compete at pro football.


To pick holes in your particular examples:

1. There's nothing necessarily sexist about being pro-life. The fact that abortion affects women and not men isn't our fault – it's biology's fault. I think most pro-lifers (and definitely the pro-life women you mention) would agree that the issue isn't really about women, nor indeed men – it's about babies.

2. It's not racist to be in favour of stricter immigration policies, unless you think people of certain races should be able to get in more easily than others. A "tighten our borders" view could arise from valid concerns about overpopulation. A "keep those dirty Hispanics out" view is very different.

Your either racist, sexist, etc or you aren't. If Hitler said 'well, I think jews and germans tend to be equally good carpenters' I can't see there being any logic to saying 'Hitler isn't racist on that issue' nor would I think someone was racist on that issue if it turned out that pieces of woodworking from germany typically went for higher prices than Israel.


If Hitler honestly said that, then he wouldn't be racist on that issue. The reason your example is absurd is not because racism is an all-or-nothing status like being married or not – it's because ability at carpentry isn't a very important issue in comparison with the many other issues on which Hitler was racist.

I think long before you label people who dislike AAE as racist, even if 'just on that issue', you might want to consider that they might be dumb, snobbish, or wrong - especially since being labeled 'racist' the days is about as bad as being labeled 'rapist', dumb, snobbish, or incorrect are basically socially acceptable foibles. I know a lot of black people in my own area, the rural midwest, who sneer at AAE, and I'm sure their reason is the obvious one, us rural midwesterners know our version of english is simply the superior one. I'm pretty sure blacks in rural ohio who dislike ebonics probably deserve to be titled as snobbish, regiocentric (if that's a word?), or maybe dumb before we call them racist, even if it's just 'racist on that issue'


As I said above, what you suggest is exactly what I intended. I think such people hold one racist view due to their ignorance about language in general and AAE in particular, even though all their other views may be non-racist. I apologise if I wasn't clear enough – I hope, however, that this discussion has cleared up any misunderstanding based on different underlying assumptions which I didn't realise we were making.

I hope we see a bit more eye-to-eye now.
Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt.

—Nous disons en allemand : le guerre, le mort, le lune, alors que 'soleil' et 'amour' sont du sexe féminin : la soleil, la amour. La vie est neutre.

—La vie ? Neutre ? C'est très joli, et surtout très logique.
Reply to message
So what EXACTLY is the problem with Reid's comments? - 12/01/2010 04:11:56 AM 882 Views
it wasn't just that he commented on the lack of "dialect" - 12/01/2010 04:16:27 AM 595 Views
Regardless of that, I don't see the ability to use dialect as a racist statement. - 12/01/2010 04:32:07 AM 545 Views
I agree - 12/01/2010 04:36:23 AM 565 Views
That's what I was thinking... - 12/01/2010 08:52:32 AM 573 Views
when was the last time you heard a white person speaking ebonics? - 12/01/2010 01:41:24 PM 555 Views
A week or so ago. - 12/01/2010 08:09:09 PM 492 Views
About a day for me. - 12/01/2010 10:33:40 PM 567 Views
Yeah, I'm back in Boston now, so... - 13/01/2010 03:33:38 AM 461 Views
Isn't that the definition of a wigger? A white person who speaks/acts like a black person? - 12/01/2010 09:49:34 PM 524 Views
So black person = N****r? Reid's looking better and better. *NM* - 12/01/2010 10:34:37 PM 250 Views
You know Tim isn't saying that. - 12/01/2010 10:43:43 PM 516 Views
Um, what? - 13/01/2010 06:55:21 AM 516 Views
And the fact that Wigger = White N****r isn't racist at all! *NM* - 12/01/2010 10:33:04 PM 284 Views
I wasn't using the term seriously 9_9 - 13/01/2010 04:26:20 AM 487 Views
The problem is he's a politician - 12/01/2010 04:35:51 AM 585 Views
because that would solve our problems. *NM* - 12/01/2010 04:37:18 AM 243 Views
You know, what IS a good term for black people these days? - 12/01/2010 04:36:33 AM 593 Views
technically... - 12/01/2010 04:39:51 AM 563 Views
i know, right? *NM* - 12/01/2010 06:11:33 AM 257 Views
I just use "black" - 12/01/2010 02:27:16 PM 491 Views
yah, that's what i typically do... - 12/01/2010 02:28:39 PM 566 Views
I agree. Say what you mean. - 12/01/2010 10:03:37 PM 536 Views
How many "black" people do you know that are truely black? - 13/01/2010 05:10:44 AM 511 Views
how many white people do you know are WHITE? *NM* - 13/01/2010 05:26:36 AM 231 Views
Why is it OK to discriminate on the grounds of language but not race? - 12/01/2010 08:23:21 AM 647 Views
Please tell me you were joking... *NM* - 12/01/2010 01:29:37 PM 221 Views
Not in the least. I thought you knew me better than that. - 12/01/2010 09:44:59 PM 487 Views
Ah! You were looking for an active rebuttal - 13/01/2010 01:48:20 PM 457 Views
It is okay to discriminate based on language... - 12/01/2010 01:40:18 PM 565 Views
Your AAE is a language the way that Pig Latin is a language. - 12/01/2010 06:38:35 PM 524 Views
I don't even know where to begin. - 12/01/2010 09:43:21 PM 596 Views
That third point is going a bit far. - 12/01/2010 10:06:08 PM 554 Views
You're right, I was conflating two separate points. - 12/01/2010 10:14:48 PM 498 Views
Well, it still only applies... - 12/01/2010 10:24:08 PM 641 Views
You ascribe too much intelligence to the average American racist . - 12/01/2010 10:30:39 PM 716 Views
You're guessing at people's motives and making what appear to be broad, unsupported assertions - 12/01/2010 11:04:47 PM 547 Views
I don't mean they're racist in all respects. - 13/01/2010 06:52:20 AM 461 Views
Your defintion of racism and sexism seems to massively differ from mine - 13/01/2010 03:37:46 PM 605 Views
I had to think about this for a few days, but I've now worked out my answer. - 16/01/2010 01:59:25 PM 565 Views
First off, thanks for giving a detailed answer... - 16/01/2010 03:53:32 PM 678 Views
That it was a stupid thing to say? - 12/01/2010 09:49:05 AM 581 Views
this. *NM* - 12/01/2010 01:07:46 PM 253 Views
Who seriously uses the term "Negro dialect" anymore? - 13/01/2010 02:00:15 AM 486 Views
the subject is race. and party lines. - 13/01/2010 05:27:39 AM 478 Views
Powell, Rice and Steele. Just food for thought. *NM* - 13/01/2010 08:12:18 PM 307 Views

Reply to Message