Is that racist?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Is that racist?

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

1st row: wouldn't, wouldn't, would wouldn't, would, would

Tiny Brontosaurus posted:

"Sure, I'll grudgingly admit a problem exists, but god help you if you point out any symptoms of that problem."

Cultural mixing is not symptomatic of dehumanization, in fact it's an expression of its inverse. Do you think the people more likely to harm/discriminate against minorities think it's a good idea for white people to rap/wear dreadlocks/whatever?

Neither white people nor black people (nor any ethnicity) are monolithic others, they are each composed of subgroups that are trying to gain power.

# ? Dec 3, 2015 05:24

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 26, 2024 20:02

falcon2424: May 2, 2005

Darko posted:

There's a big difference between Eminem (who writes his own stuff and is a reflection of where he, in particular grew up, while being praised for extraordinary talent) and Iggy Azalea. And it is a hosed-up thing that needs to be addressed.

I agree there's a problem. But how is it an "Eminem appropriation" thing?

Eminem does his thing. He does it well. Critics praise it for him. That sounds like a healthy dynamic.

In contrast, Iggy Azalea does her thing. She does a good job. But music critics / fans / djs whoever, poo poo on her because racism.

I agree that's hosed up. But the problem is that music critics are being racist. And the call-to-action is that music critics should stop being racist.

Eminem's rapping seems irrelevant, except maybe as a reference point for how people should be treating Iggy.

# ? Dec 3, 2015 05:31

Phyzzle: Jan 26, 2008

rudatron posted:

Getting a quality local school is not morally equivalent is not the same as demanding that your tax dollars only go to your schools - we live in a society, no one is an island. The loving school funding inequities in the US are the #1 cause of wealth and racial inequality in the US. If you knowingly support those policies, you are enriching yourself at the expense of society as a whole, and in particular, at the expense of minority groups. All the reasonable nations do not have such an absurd funding model, which is why their students do better than those in the US.

Getting a quality local school is in fact the same as demanding that your tax dollars only go to your schools. Indeed, this is the only reason people would bother making such a demand. But yes, it's a selfish move. And even though the policy's support may not come from an intentional PTA conspiracy to screw over minorities, its still a racist policy because of its effects.

rudatron posted:

Look, you're not being clever, I can see what you're doing. It doesn't work because all your little 'twists' are making the same error, ignoring the actual conflicts involved. The transit workers are striking against the capital owners, that's their target. School funding people are attacking schools that are already underfunded, in desperate need of even the basic necessities. They aren't comparable, the presence of other parties and other power inequalities undermines whatever 'gotcha' point you're trying to make. Things that entrench existing power inequalities are bad, and when those power inequalities are racial they become racist.

I cannot grasp what the error is. You say the key difference between the two situations fact that transit workers are striking against the capital owners . . . What "capital owners"? The City of Boston? And whether or not we call Boston a capital owner, you bring up the fact that a strike targets Boston as an important factor on whether it is racist. But surely the intentions are not a deciding factor?

# ? Dec 3, 2015 06:27

Whorelord: May 1, 2013; Jump into the well...

falcon2424 posted:

In contrast, Iggy Azalea does her thing. She does a good job.

hahahahaha

# ? Dec 3, 2015 19:00

Effectronica: May 31, 2011; Fallen Rib

rudatron posted:

1st row: wouldn't, wouldn't, would wouldn't, would, would

Cultural mixing is not symptomatic of dehumanization, in fact it's an expression of its inverse. Do you think the people more likely to harm/discriminate against minorities think it's a good idea for white people to rap/wear dreadlocks/whatever?

Neither white people nor black people (nor any ethnicity) are monolithic others, they are each composed of subgroups that are trying to gain power.

So how much of the civil rights movement can be pinned on Bill Haley and His Comets?

# ? Dec 3, 2015 19:02

icantfindaname: Jul 1, 2008

falcon2424 posted:

I agree there's a problem. But how is it an "Eminem appropriation" thing?

Eminem does his thing. He does it well. Critics praise it for him. That sounds like a healthy dynamic.

In contrast, Iggy Azalea does her thing. She does a good job. But music critics / fans / djs whoever, poo poo on her because racism.

I agree that's hosed up. But the problem is that music critics are being racist. And the call-to-action is that music critics should stop being racist.

Eminem's rapping seems irrelevant, except maybe as a reference point for how people should be treating Iggy.

iggy azalea is garbage and also a racist. eminem's not. it's very simple

# ? Dec 4, 2015 00:19

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Phyzzle posted:

Demanding a quality education is different to denying that same education to others. If the US wanted the best education system, they'd adopt the same model as countries that's perform better than them, none of which fund their schools in the same way. Importantly, none of them deny education resources to undesirables.

This is not equivalent to striking workers, not because of intentions (though they're not irrelevant), but because of other power inequalities. Namely, the power inequality between worker and employer. The fact that an employer may be a civic body does not change it's obligation to respect worker's rights.

You're trying very hard to push a square peg into a round hole, and it's not working.

Effectronica posted:

No individual can claim credit for mass movements, they always depend on previous conditions. You'd be better off arguing over the role of the French revolution on the civil rights movement, and that's already tenuous & vague.

# ? Dec 4, 2015 01:32

The Insect Court: Nov 22, 2012; by FactsAreUseless

Cat Mattress posted:

When the white people started disguising themselves as Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks

I disguise myself as Martin Luther King all the time, it helps to get a table faster in restaurants, the maitre'd never seems to catch on.

Cat Mattress posted:

When the white people started wearing dreadlocks, I didn't complain because, it's just a hair style, you know?

"It's inappropriate for white people to adopt the dress or hairstyles commonly worn by black people" - A thing a white supremacist would say. To be fair, you could say the same about every other pronouncement about cultural appropriation.

Cat Mattress posted:

When the white people started wearing blackface again, it was too late to complain

This may come as a shock to you, but black people are not all wearing blackface. They look like that all the time. Please don't approach a black person and attempt to rub off their makeup to verify this. Thus the idea that wearing blackface is an authentic expression of African-American culture is approximately as stupid as insisting that being gassed to death is an exclusive cultural practice of Ashkenazi Jews, making the use of the gas chamber in capital punishment a shameful act of cultural appropriation.

# ? Dec 4, 2015 10:49

Cat Mattress: Jul 14, 2012; by Cyrano4747

lol

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Dec 4, 2015 13:04

Twerkteam Pizza: Sep 26, 2015; Grimey Drawer

rudatron posted:

Honestly it's weird that Oriental has picked up a negative connotation, because it has an actual inverse, but one without any connotation at all - Occidental.
Blaming transit workers for striking as racist is just absurd. Just because strikes inconvenience you as a consumer, does not mean that they are necessarily a bad thing. Unions are the ones on the front lines , protecting workers and fighting for stuff like a higher minimum wage, they deserve respect. The only possible exception are police unions, because they tend not to fight stuff like higher minimum wages, just protect officers from litigation (even when the officer has clearly done something wrong).

You cannot conflate rate increases that target captured groups (that enrich the owners at the expense of the minorities) vs. workers fighting for their rights - they aren't the same. Getting a fair wage is not morally equivalent to price gouging. How do you tell the difference? Use your brain. Come on, you already know the rules by now.

There's a really good jacobin article on why police unions are so unique, and since it's Jacobin it's also about why they should be abolished

# ? Dec 4, 2015 19:02

Phyzzle: Jan 26, 2008

rudatron posted:

Demanding a quality education is different to denying that same education to others. If the US wanted the best education system, they'd adopt the same model as countries that's perform better than them, none of which fund their schools in the same way. Importantly, none of them deny education resources to undesirables.

It's not true that all of the U.S. education system is harmed by inequality: As I understand it, no country's students can outperform American students in standardized tests . . . as long as you limit the results to white American students. It seems that achieving a selfish demand for a better education does, in fact, result in better education. (That is, the reason to oppose inequality is purely a moral one, not because wealthy school districts are engaging in some sort of self-sabotage.)

rudatron posted:

This is not equivalent to striking workers, not because of intentions (though they're not irrelevant), but because of other power inequalities. Namely, the power inequality between worker and employer. The fact that an employer may be a civic body does not change it's obligation to respect worker's rights.

You're trying very hard to push a square peg into a round hole, and it's not working.

Okay, I was looking for some more explicit meanings for (institutional) racism that you can't get by reading Wikipedia, and it looks like one would be "a policy/decision which has the effect of perpetuating a disadvantage in a minority group and is not strongly targeted against some other unjust power inequality.

I've heard similar thoughts before, but then contradictory goals like that often devolve into bunch of "Oppression Olympics". For example, if a black laborer has a hard time finding a job (as often happens), he might oppose any pathway to citizenship for immigrant laborers . He might want to adopt a Trump plan and bus them all out of the country. Of course, normalizing the status of immigrants and driving up the cost of labor are two goals that are clearly aimed at power inequalities. So, while you would say that his position may be wrong or based on faulty information, you would not call his position racist?

# ? Dec 4, 2015 19:15

Armani: Jun 22, 2008; Now it's been 17 summers since I've seen my mother

But every night I see her smile inside my dreams

It's actually really easy to be called racist and instead of getting stupid defensive you rip the band aid off, accept it, and then grow as a person

Have a tip for free: If you have people constantly calling you racist when you express racist poo poo, you should stop saying you're not racist and just accept it so the conversation can go on. It's literally impossible to defend or be devoid of so why claim constantly otherwise you're some kind of golden child outlier?

It's not going to kill you or your posting career (unless you keep doubling down like a loving moron) I promise.

Just swallow it, don't wallow in your own human waste and awfulness of yourself like a depressed mudskipper, accept that your brain, environment, and biases have done nothing to serve others, only you, and accept that part of you so the conversation can actually go somewhere that can actually help people.

that's the loving point

E: like, ya'll are way loving smarter than me but this seems like the loving step to getting anyone to absorb huge heavy lifting like institutional racism if they can't stop getting mad at the simple poo poo like being called out for not participating in basic social contracts with the people they share air with.

Armani fucked around with this message at 23:41 on Dec 4, 2015

# ? Dec 4, 2015 23:34

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

If you are being constantly being called racist, then being racist is probably part of your identity and "just stop being racist, dude" won't influence you in a positive way.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 01:47

Pomplamoose: Jun 28, 2008

Instead of calling people racist, I think it would be more productive to use people-first language. 'Racist' becomes 'person with racist beliefs'.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 02:53

Mia Wasikowska: Oct 7, 2006

Man remember Combination Pizza Hut/Taco Bell? We've come a long way

# ? Dec 6, 2015 03:00

Smudgie Buggler: Feb 27, 2005; SET PHASERS TO "GRINDING TEDIUM"

Armani posted:

Have a tip for free: If you have people constantly calling you racist when you express racist poo poo, you should stop saying you're not racist and just accept it so the conversation can go on. It's literally impossible to defend or be devoid of so why claim constantly otherwise you're some kind of golden child outlier?

You know perfectly well what the answer to this is, though. People get defensive because most accusations of racism, especially online, do not come with bundled with an implicit acknowledgement of virtually everybody on Earth being some degree of racist. They're most often used as a discrediting tactic. When you accuse a poster of being racist, their choice isn't simply between getting super defensive and looking like an idiot and accepting the label and having the conversation proceed as if it's no big deal. You know that.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 05:56

blackguy32: Oct 1, 2005; Say, do you know how to do the walk?

Smudgie Buggler posted:

You know perfectly well what the answer to this is, though. People get defensive because most accusations of racism, especially online, do not come with bundled with an implicit acknowledgement of virtually everybody on Earth being some degree of racist. They're most often used as a discrediting tactic. When you accuse a poster of being racist, their choice isn't simply between getting super defensive and looking like an idiot and accepting the label and having the conversation proceed as if it's no big deal. You know that.

Or simply asking what is racist about your post and actually thinking about it open minded. Most people lock up and get defensive. I mean I've been called out on my poo poo with women before, and it never hurts to take a step back and self assess.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 06:39

Phyzzle: Jan 26, 2008

Sebadoh Gigante posted:

Instead of calling people racist, I think it would be more productive to use people-first language. 'Racist' becomes 'person with racist beliefs'.

Nah some of my best friends are racists, and if they can use the word with each other, then there shouldn't be any problem if I use it.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 08:19

Smudgie Buggler: Feb 27, 2005; SET PHASERS TO "GRINDING TEDIUM"

blackguy32 posted:

Or simply asking what is racist about your post and actually thinking about it open minded. Most people lock up and get defensive. I mean I've been called out on my poo poo with women before, and it never hurts to take a step back and self assess.

Of course. That's what everybody should be doing anyway. But it's not really what we're talking about, is it? People in online debates are constantly throwing accusations of prejudice and malice at each other as a deliberate tactic to discredit others. The idea that simply accepting an accusation of racism (or any other prejudice) is what you should always do because then it allows you to carry on with the conversation is incredibly naive at best and appallingly disingenuous at worst. I think it's worthwhile to be very wary of an argument that suggests applying less scrutiny to the labels people try to apply to each other.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 08:20

blackguy32: Oct 1, 2005; Say, do you know how to do the walk?

Smudgie Buggler posted:

Of course. That's what everybody should be doing anyway. But it's not really what we're talking about, is it? People in online debates are constantly throwing accusations of prejudice and malice at each other as a deliberate tactic to discredit others. The idea that simply accepting an accusation of racism (or any other prejudice) is what you should always do because then it allows you to carry on with the conversation is incredibly naive at best and appallingly disingenuous at worst. I think it's worthwhile to be very wary of an argument that suggests applying less scrutiny to the labels people try to apply to each other.

I never said you should always accept it but I think people are being racist more often than not. I generally don't think it should be a discussion ender but rather the start of a whole new conversation.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 09:47

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Phyzzle posted:

It's not true that all of the U.S. education system is harmed by inequality: As I understand it, no country's students can outperform American students in standardized tests . . . as long as you limit the results to white American students. It seems that achieving a selfish demand for a better education does, in fact, result in better education. (That is, the reason to oppose inequality is purely a moral one, not because wealthy school districts are engaging in some sort of self-sabotage.)

And if you exclude the welfare of the slaves, you'll find that slavery is a boon to the welfare of the nation, how marvelous

# ? Dec 6, 2015 09:50

30.5 Days: Nov 19, 2006

Come on dude, just accept that the correct response to accusations of racism is to assume bad faith on the part of the accuser.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 09:50

30.5 Days: Nov 19, 2006

Obviously I should only accept accusations of racism when I think they're appropriate, and since I would never be racist, I'll never think they're appropriate, so

# ? Dec 6, 2015 09:50

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Phyzzle posted:

So if you limit the metric to only the best performing students, the US students perform better than the average of other countries? Wow, how insightful. Look mate, there's a difference between 'demanding a quality education' and being selfish. That and you're assuming that providing students with 2x the funding gets 2x the results - it doesn't, you get marginal returns on...just about everything. Remember, the US spends more per student in total than other OECD countries, but performs worse because the money is unevenly distributed! It's not being invested where it needs to go. So actually, equality is economically more efficient, the economy as a whole will do better. Wowzers, guess you have no good reasons to argue against equal education for all, unless you're a selfish prick!

I also don't think it's that absurd to say that everyone can be racist, including black people. Him being poor doesn't really excuse it because, again, it's not the migrants making people poor. It's the system that pays migrants less than natives, in conjunction with, the poo poo country they come from where those wages are a step up. You force companies to pay the same wage, suddenly you won't have migrant workers. Blaming the migrants is pointless, and it's not as if they're not exploited - there are serious problems with working conditions & hours than just get ignored. SO yeah, if the black guy is blaming migrants, he's blaming people who don't really have any power, based on nothing but their race. The problem is and always has been internal, the role that employment and the threat of unemployment plays out for employers as a kind of weapon to mould society to respect their interests, over and above society as a whole.

blackguy32 posted:

I never said you should always accept it but I think people are being racist more often than not. I generally don't think it should be a discussion ender but rather the start of a whole new conversation.

You know very well that's not how it plays out in practice, nor should it. Racism is pseudoscience, it should effectively be the end of the conversation. Trouble is, when people (like you) oversaturate the term, it loses its effectiveness as a tool of socialization. If everyone is racist, then racism is no longer exceptional, but instead the norm. And guess what? People want to be normal, otherwise peer pressure wouldn't be a thing. So kindly gently caress off with your redefining of terms. Racism is a discrete concept, it is a choice and it's fundamentally irrational. If that's not true for you, then use another word instead - Spare us your bullshit sophistry that no one, not least yourself, actually believes.

rudatron fucked around with this message at 10:33 on Dec 6, 2015

# ? Dec 6, 2015 10:18

Effectronica: May 31, 2011; Fallen Rib

Smudgie Buggler posted:

Of course. That's what everybody should be doing anyway. But it's not really what we're talking about, is it? People in online debates are constantly throwing accusations of prejudice and malice at each other as a deliberate tactic to discredit others. The idea that simply accepting an accusation of racism (or any other prejudice) is what you should always do because then it allows you to carry on with the conversation is incredibly naive at best and appallingly disingenuous at worst. I think it's worthwhile to be very wary of an argument that suggests applying less scrutiny to the labels people try to apply to each other.

Actually, I think that most people are completely sincere when they make that accusation. Probably it's because you use "accusations of prejudice and malice" tactically that you assume other people do so.

rudatron posted:

You know very well that's not how it plays out in practice, nor should it. Racism is pseudoscience, it should effectively be the end of the conversation. Trouble is, when people (like you) oversaturate the term, it loses its effectiveness as a tool of socialization. If everyone is racist, then racism is no longer exceptional, but instead the norm. And guess what? People want to be normal, otherwise peer pressure wouldn't be a thing. So kindly gently caress off with your redefining of terms. Racism is a discrete concept, it is a choice and it's fundamentally irrational. If that's not true for you, then use another word instead - Spare us your bullshit sophistry that no one, not least yourself, actually believes.

This is probably one of the stupider things I've ever read. Racism does not consist of beliefs, it's a "choice", a "discrete concept", and that means that even if you have implicit associations of blackness with being violent or stupid or a criminal, you still have nothing racist about you so long as you profess the proper creed. What nonsense. What bullshit.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 16:16

Smudgie Buggler: Feb 27, 2005; SET PHASERS TO "GRINDING TEDIUM"

Oh look it's Effectronica with a facile drive-by consisting of a tu quoque and a sneering dismissal betraying a complete lack of comprehension of the argument under attack.

How refreshing and new.

VitalSigns posted:

And if you exclude the welfare of the slaves, you'll find that slavery is a boon to the welfare of the nation, how marvelous

Yeah, read the post you quoted again. I'm pretty sure they agree with you. They're just making the point that ameliorating inequality is a purely moral issue for many; it wouldn't actually be to everybody's practical benefit (as some claim).

Smudgie Buggler fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Dec 6, 2015

# ? Dec 6, 2015 17:45

Effectronica: May 31, 2011; Fallen Rib

Smudgie Buggler posted:

Oh look it's Effectronica with a facile drive-by consisting of a tu quoque and a sneering dismissal betraying a complete lack of comprehension of the argument under attack.

How refreshing and new.

I'm sorry. I can only reply to the actual words you said, which were that accusations of maliciousness, or racism, are generally tactical in nature. This, to put it simply, is paranoia. The argument built on that house of cards you've so lovingly constructed is itself predicated on people's inability to discern good faith from bad faith, which is faulty, because I can tell that you and rudatron are being sincere in your arguments, and I can tell that The Insect Court is not being entirely sincere in his arguments. Now, since I am of such a low standing in your ever-keen eyes, if I can do it, most people can do it. So your argument fails even if we accept its inane premises.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 17:57

MaxxBot: Oct 6, 2003; you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!

Does anything literally think white people twerking is unacceptable cultural appropriation or is that just a straw man being thrown out?

# ? Dec 6, 2015 18:08

blackguy32: Oct 1, 2005; Say, do you know how to do the walk?

MaxxBot posted:

Does anything literally think white people twerking is unacceptable cultural appropriation or is that just a straw man being thrown out?

Unacceptable? No. But is it wrong to use something like that while denigrating the very people who came up with it? Yes.

I honestly get sick of white people trying to prove their edginess by adopting black culture while discarding the very people that they are getting their popularity from which is where the critique of Miley Cyrus came from and of her using black people as props in her videos.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 18:21

Baron Porkface: Jan 22, 2007

Who knew that Scott Walker could've saved a lot of trouble by simply calling public sector unions racist.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 18:25

Smudgie Buggler: Feb 27, 2005; SET PHASERS TO "GRINDING TEDIUM"

Effectronica posted:

Now, since I am of such a low standing in your ever-keen eyes, if I can do it, most people can do it. So your argument fails even if we accept its inane premises.

Haha you're of 'low standing' in my eyes because you're a disingenuous and perennially nasty arsehole, not because I think you're stupid. It's actually very difficult for most people to distinguish between good faith and bad faith. Besides, this forum is a space where that's of least concern.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 18:48

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

blackguy32 posted:

Or simply asking what is racist about your post and actually thinking about it open minded. Most people lock up and get defensive. I mean I've been called out on my poo poo with women before, and it never hurts to take a step back and self assess.

While this never hurts, thinking someone is wrong and taking a step back, self assessing, and still thinking someone is wrong is externally indistinguishable, so I don't see how we can ever reasonably give this advice except to some directly saying they refuse to self assess.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 18:55

blackguy32: Oct 1, 2005; Say, do you know how to do the walk?

twodot posted:

While this never hurts, thinking someone is wrong and taking a step back, self assessing, and still thinking someone is wrong is externally indistinguishable, so I don't see how we can ever reasonably give this advice except to some directly saying they refuse to self assess.

Why does it have to be externally distingushable? This is more for the person than the accuser and you get out of it wgat you put into it.

I mean you can probably rationalize anything now when it comes to race but I really think people do need to take a step back and look at how they sound. I will use the Bernie supporters as an example. Pretty liberal candidate with supporters that are equally if not more liberal, yet many of them are paternalistic fuckwits when it comes to black people and most will tell you that they aren't racist at all.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 19:16

Phyzzle: Jan 26, 2008

rudatron posted:

So if you limit the metric to only the best performing students, the US students perform better than the average of other countries? Wow, how insightful.

Thanks.

rudatron posted:

Look mate, there's a difference between 'demanding a quality education' and being selfish.

No, there isn't any difference. Demanding a quality education for yourself or your children is exactly the same as being selfish.

rudatron posted:

That and you're assuming that providing students with 2x the funding gets 2x the results

No, I'm not. Some people who fight for more local funding of their schools might have that peculiar one-to-one idea, but not necessarily most of them.

rudatron posted:

I also don't think it's that absurd to say that everyone can be racist, including black people. Him being poor doesn't really excuse it because, again, it's not the migrants making people poor. It's the system that pays migrants less than natives, in conjunction with, the poo poo country they come from where those wages are a step up. You force companies to pay the same wage, suddenly you won't have migrant workers. Blaming the migrants is pointless, and it's not as if they're not exploited - there are serious problems with working conditions & hours than just get ignored. SO yeah, if the black guy is blaming migrants, he's blaming people who don't really have any power, based on nothing but their race.

And if he's not blaming migrants? It's pretty common to blame the government for allowing our borders to be too open (specifically because businesses want the cheap labor). It's not blaming the migrants, it's advocating for a policy (like some sort of mass deportation) that happens to harm migrants. But since that policy is intentionally targeted entirely against the existing power imbalance between legally employed workers and employers in America, that should make it non-racist?

# ? Dec 6, 2015 19:25

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

blackguy32 posted:

Why does it have to be externally distingushable? This is more for the person than the accuser and you get out of it wgat you put into it.

I mean you can probably rationalize anything now when it comes to race but I really think people do need to take a step back and look at how they sound. I will use the Bernie supporters as an example. Pretty liberal candidate with supporters that are equally if not more liberal, yet many of them are paternalistic fuckwits when it comes to black people and most will tell you that they aren't racist at all.

Through what mechanism are you concluding that they haven't already taken a step back (or would change their mind if they haven't)? It looks to me like you just think they are wrong, and that people who disagree with you by default must not have fully thought out their actions.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 19:41

Rush Limbo: Sep 5, 2005; its with a full house

Phyzzle posted:

No, there isn't any difference. Demanding a quality education for yourself or your children is exactly the same as being selfish.

I'm guessing you're one of those kids who got left behind when some other kids' parents pushed that little bit harder to make your school terrible because god drat.

It's only considered selfish in a system where being selfish is rewarded with better schools, as opposed to other, more sane systems, where schools are good regardless of how much pressure is put on the district.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 20:20

Frosted Flake: Sep 13, 2011; Semper Shitpost Ubique

So Duke Ellington was not appropriate for playing Classical Music, and adding Jazz influences, but Elvis is for playing Rock n' Roll by adding to R&B?

# ? Dec 6, 2015 20:26

NigelsPoppet: Jul 22, 2015

Are there a lot of other black people on this forum besides me?

Seems a little pale in here if you catch my drift

# ? Dec 6, 2015 21:05

Effectronica: May 31, 2011; Fallen Rib

NigelsPoppet posted:

Are there a lot of other black people on this forum besides me?

Seems a little pale in here if you catch my drift

It's a lot like Villanova University most days, if you catch my drift.

# ? Dec 6, 2015 23:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 26, 2024 20:02

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Frosted Flake posted:

So Duke Ellington was not appropriate for playing Classical Music, and adding Jazz influences, but Elvis is for playing Rock n' Roll by adding to R&B?

Elvis influences were mainly white guitar players like Carl Perkins, hth

Anyway, I suppose the fact that Ellington's contribution to the big band and swing genres are overshadowed by Goodman and Miller may be problematic... Except there were white big band jazz ensembles prior to Ellington...

# ? Dec 7, 2015 00:29

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Is that racist?

«‹›33 »