Don Imus - Another One Bites The Dust by ShinyEd

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
It's hard to come up with a short answer to your posts, and I'm still at work posting between analyses. So I've been keeping my posts short.

back later

I know... my posts get pretty long and it's hard to give a short answer. Sorry bout that. I'm actually giving the short version when I post. I could probably write novels of crap nobody would ever read. My bud Jeff is always telling me he's waiting for my Manifesto.

I didn't ask you a question other than, "what do you think about my answers to your previous questions." They were regarding attitudes towards rape and slutty clothing today and the fact that no matter what rung of the social laddar you are on, life is never easy and it has it's own set of complications.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 6:30 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"slutty clothing"

I abhor it on anyone younger than 18. I mean, WTF ?? Even 18 is too young as far as I'm concerned but I guess that's my age speaking. But that's due to pervasive aggressive advertising and the lowest common denominator. What are the few things that shills can reliably tap into? Food, sex and sex. And maybe sex&power (the car thing). As a society we've gotten so twisted thinking that anything that makes a buck MUST be good that we've given up our right to decide how we, as a group, want to live together. And handed it over megacorp and their minions. I loathe it all.

"rape and slutty clothing' Now here is where we probably part company. I don't care if a woman is wearing silk veils and feathered fans. It's not 'asking for it'. Especially when you think about fashion and the history of same. Women wear things because they’re sold to them as fashion and I'll tell you some things that are supposed to be fashion are hideous. And think of other fashions that have come and gone - foot-binding, corsets, powdered wigs. Fashion today is sold to be hyper-sexual (lowest common denominator) but that isn't necessarily a sexual statement on the woman's part, just a fashion one.

"no matter what rung of the social ladder you are on, life is never easy"
I'd rather have the rich persons problems than my own - how to care for a disabled family member after I'm dead and gone for example. Id rather worry about who didn't invite me to their party in Aruba or some such. Oh, and all the studies show that rich people are, on the whole happier. (I'll have to look that reference up.)

Anyway, I gotta sign off.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 7:04 PM

I can't really find to many arguments with all of that, but the fact of the matter is, if women were getting raped all of the time and were really concerned about it, the fashion trends we're seeing today would not exist simply because they are designed to promote sexual thoughts. I don't care wheather or not somebody thinks something women wear mean they're "asking for it" or not, the fact of the matter is, men get aroused when they see women dressing provocatively (which is the intent of wearing said clothes in the first place) all around them. If this were the middle of the 1800s they would most likely have been raped for wearing those clothes if they weren't readily giving it up. It says quite a lot about civilized society that women can even dress the way they do today and they're not being raped for it.

I'm not trying to argue with you over what should and shouldn't be, I'm just saying like it is. If men weren't so busy masturbating all day and curbing those desires to porn or Maxim magazine, they may have a harder time dealing with women wearing thongs and racy outfits all around them. Is it wrong? Sure it is. Not arguing you there. Just saying that that's the way it is.

As for the riches problems, my thinking is that I'd rather have a rich person's problems rather than my own as well. I couldn't say for sure though. I've become so accostumed to the problems that I have every day that they're part of my comfort zone now. I don't know what I'd bitch about without them. I just think the grass is always greener on the other side though. If I were to wake up one day and be a wealthy man of promonance, I'm thinking that after the novelty wore off I would find myself thrust in many more situations and much more responsibility and lime light than I'm comfortable with.

Look at Imus. Rich and promonant. Scapegoat.

Ain't nobody going to come to me tomorrow and tell me I'm fired for my views on Fireflyfans.net.

Goodnight Rue.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 7:07 PM

FREMDFIRMA

There's battle lines bein' drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speakin' their minds
Gettin' so much resistance from behind

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 8:22 PM

Paranoia strikes deep.
Into your life it will creep.
It starts when you're always afraid.
Step out of line, the men come and take you away

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 8:33 PM

THOLO

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"Why stay some place you hate so much?

Thats all I am trying to say. Whats wrong with that?"

What makes you think I or anyone else here hate it so much? Just 'cause we disagree with you doesn't mean we hate the country.

no , dissagree, but it just seems lately there seems to be a lot of America bashing, and i dont like that.

Keep Flying!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 8:39 PM

That's because the people running Her are destroying everything She stands for. I probably sound like I bash America quite often, but I make a very sharp distinction between America and our corrupt and self-serving government.

Patriotism is not "right or wrong, my country", as they brainwashed many people to believe.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 8:49 PM

Damnit. It's going to take me an hour just to catch up on what went on in this thread in the last day. This will be all over the map.

Rue: In just scanning quickly through the thread you make many points that I would have tried to make. I nodded my head a lot while reading through what you wrote. I've gone, over the past few days, from thinking, "Eh. No big deal." to, "Actually, when you unpack all the layers, this is a big deal and could serve as an educational moment to bring some of these buried issues to the surface." I don't have much hope. It's amazingly hard to convince someone of something that goes against their own best interest.

6ixStringJack: I don't buy that men can't resist seeing a woman dressed provocatively and therefore have to rape her. There are plenty of women who are raped while not dressed provocatively. Why someone is raped has little to do with the victim and everything to do with the rapist. It's about control, not sexual gratification.

In terms of intent, I think that Imus' statements were not intentionally designed to hurt or degrade. Bernard, now there's someone who knew what was going on. Imus, however, is like the not-so-bright kid who never comes up with the scheme but always gets caught. And what Imus said, taken only on face value, is nothing compared to some of the stuff that gets broadcast. However, when you look at the deeper implications of a white man making disparaging comments about black women, well that's where the egregiousness comes in. Should he have lost his job over the comments? Well, that's a business decision. If I was in charge I probably would have strongly suggested that he do a number of shows on the long history of white men raping black women and why any white man calling a black woman a whore is just not cool. There's a reason they wrote the laws so that a person's slave/free status was inherited from their mother and not their father.

Causal: White men are the only group left you can safely denigrate? Really? Even if I bought that for a minute, for how many years were white men able to denigrate whomever they chose from the highest seats of power? Um, at least a couple hundred years just on this continent. So get back to me in two hundred years.

Fletch2: I posed the question earlier in a longer form: would you rather be denigrated or discriminated against? If someone who benefits from discrimination is complaining about denigration then I really don't have any sympathy for them.

* more a global comment *
Part of the problem is that we have gone for so long as a country with only one viewpoint legitimized that any attempt to legitimize more than one viewpoint will be met with hostility.

Veteran: Agreed that minorities are racist as well. And that's a problem. But which is more problematic, someone in a position of power making decisions based on racist beliefs or someone who has no power making decisions based on racist beliefs?

That's it for now, just one more thing...

BigDamnNobody, I've got the world's smallest violin for you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 8:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
6ixStringJack: I don't buy that men can't resist seeing a woman dressed provocatively and therefore have to rape her. There are plenty of women who are raped while not dressed provocatively. Why someone is raped has little to do with the victim and everything to do with the rapist. It's about control, not sexual gratification.

Wow man. I realize that you have a lot to catch up on, but seriously, that's all you got out of my posts today? Geez....

That's not even what I said.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 8:59 PM

Hell, that was your post from last night.

That's how far behind I am.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 9:09 PM

LOL....

I know that some of what I said may have sounded somewhat along those lines, but I surely wasn't trying to imply that every man who sees a beautiful woman would rape her. I've got a ton to do at work all the sudden so that should give you some time to catch up.

I shall return......

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 9:59 PM

Okay, as I'm catching up, I just wanted to pull out quotes that I thought were particularly noteworty.

"To get a real gage, just go out and see how many women walk alone at night v how many men, especially in the kinds of neighborhoods you and I live in (ie not gated with ultra-wealthy folk inside). And of the women walking alone at night, how many are out there b/c they have to be - going to and from a job for example." - rue

My mom, who is a white woman, gets nervous if she sees more than one man together at night. She used to ask me to drive her to the post office when she wanted to mail something after hours (or for me to run it down the hill). And that was just to use the drive-up mail box. Maybe it's a generational thing. She's lived in Los Angeles her whole life. Worked downtown until my brother was born. But she doesn't feel safe by herself after dark.

"If you REALLY want to complain, why don’t you complain about what we ALL here have in common - that your life is being run by rich white folk who don't give a crap about you OR us. And get a clue that just b/c you're on top of a dung heap doesn't make the dung heap smell any nicer - instead of defending your right to be there." - rue

Yep. The vast majority of us Americans are fighting over scraps while the powerful minority is running this country into the ground. We are more productive now than we have ever been in the history of this country and yet wages for those who are doing the actual work haven't really changed in decades. The best way to move into the middle class was to work in an organized manufacturing job. We need to try to get back to that.

"Basically, the world used to be relatively calm taking things as they were. Now, in the US, /everything/ has to be dealt with as if someone punched a blind cripple in the face." - Sigmanunki

If that's what it takes to get a discussion going about institutional racism then I'm cool with that. I'm tired of having one small group dominate everything.

"White males have no monopoly on racial slurs or bigotry. Some of the worst bigots I know are minorities themselves." - Veteran

One of my friends growing up thought he was a white supremacist. Went through the whole white-power phase. Used to brag about how the first black family to live in his neighborhood was driven out after a few months. We all just rolled our eyes because, hello, his circle of friends looked like a United Colors of Benetton ad. I found it quite amusing that he was appalled at how racist some of the parents of our friends (who had immigrated from the Phillipines) were. He was like, "Damn. They hate black people."

And, Veteran, the article I linked to by Constance Rice expresses much of the same sentiment as the article you quoted. Misogyny is rampant through rap music. So what to do? How to shift the market?

"I mean, what's worse, calling some tough up and coming basketball players names, or sending poor folk of all colors off to fight and die in Iraq, and for what ?" - Fremdfirma

Excellent point. But are we ready as a country to talk about that problem? Look what happened to John Kerry when he unintentionally made that very same point. It pretty much ruined his future career wrt the Presidency. Not that that was a bad thing. The Democratic Party could do so much better.

This is one part of Dr. King's message that has been hugely glossed over (although, I'm half convinced that Dr. King was legitimized because nobody wanted to legitimize the more dangerous Malcolm X's message. In the end they both had to be killed but the establishment could warp King's message where Malcolm X's message just scared the pants off of them. As the saying goes, you can either talk to Martin or deal with Malcolm).

"It's the machine that I hate, not the individual people. He had a lot, and he lost it all. The more you have, the bigger target you are. When you're no longer useful and you take a fall..... well, the machine just keeps chugging along without you. Imus is figuring that out right about now. He's just a scapegoat... a side show... another bullshit story to keep the proles mind off this horrible war we're waging on the world. He's just the next in a long succession of Michael Jackson court cases to keep our mind off real issues. Do you think anybody is going to make Kaneman frontpage news on every paper because of things he's said here? Of course not. Like me and you, he is nobody. Like all of the RWEDers his opinions don't mean squat in the big picture. Imus is only a target because he has a large circle of influence. I feel sorry for him. Personally, I wouldn't trade my virtual anyonimity for all the money in the world." - 6ixStringJack

I'm with you on this. I think where we diverge is that I think having a national discussion about just what was uncool about what Imus said has potential to improve things. There's not as much bang for our buck there as having a national discussion about the Iraq War. Absolutely. And I wish we would. I just don't see how that happens when so many people and organizations with influence have so much invested in continuing this war. So I'll take my fights where I can get them. Maybe that's a cop out.

"What I was talking about is the way girls dress at school or at parties when they're in their element. Women do it too. Go to downtown Chicago and see how the professional women dress. If they were whisked away and dropped off in the middle of a prison, they would be raped, end of story, but that's not what we're talking about here. Society has changed and the everyday woman in the everyday situation is not worried about being raped every second of the day unless she has severe mental problems, which most likely would be due to being molested as a child." - 6ixStringJack

Does what an individual woman wears increase the probability of someone attempting to rape them? I'm not sure I buy that (ignoring the whole argument about the yeas and nays of dressing provocatively). What I do buy is that rapists choose to rape irrespective of the clothing choices of their victims. I agree that our culture encourages men to look at women as objects rather than people which does, in my mind, potentially lower the decision threshhold for an on-the-cusp rapist.

Oh well. I hope that helps a bit. I think I've run out of steam for the night and now I have to get back to working. Most of the time flexible working hours is a good thing. I'm just not feeling that love tonight...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
I'm with you on this. I think where we diverge is that I think having a national discussion about just what was uncool about what Imus said has potential to improve things. There's not as much bang for our buck there as having a national discussion about the Iraq War. Absolutely. And I wish we would. I just don't see how that happens when so many people and organizations with influence have so much invested in continuing this war. So I'll take my fights where I can get them. Maybe that's a cop out.

The problem here is this is nothing new. I don't go around saying shit like this, and neither do most people I know that graduated high school. This guy is paid to say that type of shit and that's why he's been on the radio for 40 years. It was a slow news week and somebody made a stink about Imus. I'm sure he's said MUCH more offensive things over the years. Why now? Shit like this just happens to make me feel bad about being white and I think it's all bullshit. Throw Jesse "The Racist" Jackson in the mix and now this is just a huge cluster fuck of race crap that's just putting more strain on the races. Like I said earlier, I had much less, if any, inclinations towards being racist when I was a kid and I wasn't exposed to the news all that much. I don't care how tolerant you are... seeing that asshole on TV marching is enough to boil anybodies blood. Doesn't he have a wife to cheat on with all that money he made of the backs of hard working African Americans?

Quote:
Does what an individual woman wears increase the probability of someone attempting to rape them? I'm not sure I buy that (ignoring the whole argument about the yeas and nays of dressing provocatively). What I do buy is that rapists choose to rape irrespective of the clothing choices of their victims. I agree that our culture encourages men to look at women as objects rather than people which does, in my mind, potentially lower the decision threshhold for an on-the-cusp rapist.

What I don't think you're considering here is the fact that the way men viewed women in the 1800's or even in the 1900's before women's sufferage is pretty malignant compared to today. Women were nothing more than objects. They were possessions, pure and simple. In Salem they'd probably burn the 13 year old witch who tempted townsfolk with the word "Tasty" on her shorts which showed her thong sticking out over the top and the bottom of her ass cheeks. To see where I'm coming from, you have to consider that women weren't held in high regard then at all. I would think that the fact that you didn't consider any of this when reading my posts just speaks to how far women have come in the last 100 or so years.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
What I don't think you're considering here is the fact that the way men viewed women in the 1800's or even in the 1900's before women's sufferage is pretty malignant compared to today. Women were nothing more than objects. They were possessions, pure and simple. In Salem they'd probably burn the 13 year old witch who tempted townsfolk with the word "Tasty" on her shorts which showed her thong sticking out over the top and the bottom of her ass cheeks. To see where I'm coming from, you have to consider that women weren't held in high regard then at all. I would think that the fact that you didn't consider any of this when reading my posts just speaks to how far women have come in the last 100 or so years.

I get the continuum thing. As the Virginia Slims ads used to say, "We've come a long way, baby." But I think we've still got a long way to go. Should I give out gold stars because someone has an attitude that is more progressive than one from a hundred years ago? Or should I point out that that same attitutude is still regressive in terms of the overall goal, equality? I guess the difference between conservative and liberal is that a conservative will say, "Things are good enough now." and a liberal will say, "We can make things better." Not to apply either of those labels to you, more to apply the label of liberal to myself. Always onward and upward, never stopping.

* edited to add:

"This guy is paid to say that type of shit and that's why he's been on the radio for 40 years."

And maybe now we're ready, as a country, to agree that it is not acceptable to pay someone to say that type of shit on our public airwaves. It's different from a free speech issue. It's what is acceptable paid speech for a company that makes its living off of our taxpayer funded infrastructure. We're getting close to the point where it will be bad business to hire and foster and promote ignorance. Which, to me, is a good thing. If someone wants to spread ignorance, let them do it on their own dime. Not mine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:50 PM

Quote:
I get the continuum thing. As the Virginia Slims ads used to say, "We've come a long way, baby." But I think we've still got a long way to go. Should I give out gold stars because someone has an attitude that is more progressive than one from a hundred years ago? Or should I point out that that same attitutude is still regressive in terms of the overall goal, equality? I guess the difference between conservative and liberal is that a conservative will say, "Things are good enough now." and a liberal will say, "We can make things better." Not to apply either of those labels to you, more to apply the label of liberal to myself. Always onward and upward, never stopping.

Not only do I think that things are "okay" for women today, but I think they have it better then men do. If you don't agree, that's fine, but that's the way that I see it.

This is besides the point. It's not even what I'm trying to get at here, and I feel we've already segwayed way too much because people misinterpret what I'm saying. My original point is that your average women today (In America, at least) does not worry about being raped, unless she is in a situation where your average man would be equally as worried about being mugged or killed. (ex: Shady dark alleyways or prison). I simply brought up the differences in how women are treated today verses 100 years ago as a way of explaining that in our civilized culture, rape isn't really on the radar of most sane women anymore thruought their everyday lives.

Quote:
And maybe now we're ready, as a country, to agree that it is not acceptable to pay someone to say that type of shit on our public airwaves. It's different from a free speech issue. It's what is acceptable paid speech for a company that makes its living off of our taxpayer funded infrastructure. We're getting close to the point where it will be bad business to hire and foster and promote ignorance. Which, to me, is a good thing. If someone wants to spread ignorance, let them do it on their own dime. Not mine.

Sure thing there buddy. Right after they ban and censor all of the rap artists out there first. I'm sure "nappy headed ho" wasn't even a part of Imus's vocabulary before Yo! MTV Raps. The very earliest Imus picked that up would have been from Easy E or Ice Cube WAAAAAY back in the day. If you don't like it, don't listen to him.

Personally, I can't stand Imus or Howard Stern and I would have never heard this event if the media didn't make it this huge race/sex issue. It's absolutely rediculous. People have a right to freedom of speech in this country and they have the right to turn off the channel. I can appreciate your point of view, but I sure as shit am not going to be limited on my speech, listening habits, or viewing habits by the government or by Jesse "The Racist" Jackson. Sorry... I cannot ever agree with that point of view.

EDIT: Thanks for not applying either of those labels to me. I think both sides are a bunch of assholes and no sane, free thinking individual should even associate themselves with either label. My father says that I'm like an extremist on both sides....

Then he turns on The Family Guy.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 1:05 AM

HARDWARE

Just a general comment on a related news article from this week.

Latino groups are up in arms over an upcoming Ken Burns documentary to run on PBS about World War 2. It seems Burns followed 40 servicemen, both black and white, through personal interviews, letters, pictures and film through their experiences in the war. Latino groups are upset that none of the GIs in the documentary are hispanic.

Burns spokesman defencs the filmmaker stating that it is hard to determine exactly who is a latino due to the fact that there is no data collected on race except for black and white.

So, considering our government now collects data on whether or not you are black, white, hispanic, native american, pacific islander, asian, and or other can someone please explain exactly how this is progress? Wouldn't real progress have been to remove race as a question at all from the forms?

@Rue;
Rue, I can't give you any documentation. You asked for an example, I gave you one. I went into the test knowing it was stacked, giving extra weight to people who had advantages I did not have in the scoring section. I still did well enough on the test to be placed in the first round of hiring only to have the rug pulled out from under me.

I'm over it and have moved on to greener pastures.

Among other things this helped get me into information technology. Here, either you've got the chops or you don't. I don't care what your skin color or gender is, you don't get the job unless you can do the job. In my currenct job we have poor performers, but by and large they perform poorly not based on their knowledge. Everyone in my department knows their stuff. Performance issues tend to be personality based or work habits. And while IT as a whole is dominated by white males, this is the most balanced department I've ever worked for in the field.

And you know what? Society at large still refers to us as "geeks" or "nerds", even the white males. The jokes and sneering still go on, I've heard them all my life. But now business needs us and our skills. The jokes and sneering also acknowledge that we pull down bank for those skills. Social division may be a way of life with humans and skin color, gender and an interest in science fiction may be handy handles to try to establish the pecking order with.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 1:22 AM

I don't think I've ever seen you around here before tonight Hardware. I like your posts.

Big fan of this quote: "Wouldn't real progress have been to remove race as a question at all from the forms?"

I myself grew up being called nerd... yeah I had glasses by second grade and braces by sixth. I took the SAT in 6th grade. By highschool the braces were off and I got contacts and I kicked a lot of ass on the wrestling team so I kinda grew out of that phase. Unfortunately, I think I grew out of that IT/brain surgeon/rocket scientist moneytrain that I was bound for as an unfortunate side effect. Now I just babysit computers and am bored out of my skull all night long. I got my 10 year reunion this year and I'm kinda disappointed that I'm not going to be the guy making more money than everyone else like I was sure I would be 10 years ago.

And ya know... if the latinos are going to get mad about something like that, then I'm going to get mad that there's a black history month and no white history month. And don't nobody give me any shit about the other 11 months belonging to white people the last melinium either. We all know that the Jews own the other 11 months and they only associate themselves with the rest of us white folk when it suits their current agenda.

Ask Borat. I know he has my back on this.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 1:30 AM

JONGSSTRAW

Funny how all these "minorities" eagerly point fingers of accusation about what they think amounts to racism everywhere, but are quite happy & expectant to receive preferential treatment based on race such as affirmative action in job hirings and college entrance. Oh, the out of control hypocricy!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 2:24 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

...and what about Idaho? They should be forced to change their name, and to apologize to all women named Ida. Don't even get me started on Santa Claus. "Ho, ho, ho"?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 2:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Causal

"What? My point was that they're the only group left one can safely denigrate."

How much real discrimination have you faced in your life on account of being a white male compared to the rest of us? ie were you ever denied a place to rent? a loan? a job? schooling? utilities? and so on. You are whining about what my friend used to call 'Cadillac complaints'. My Cadillac is just not the exact shade I want, it doesn't have leather seats, I wanted vanity windows ... and so on. In other words, all these little things you complain about are just so much fluff.

If you REALLY want to complain, why don’t you complain about what we ALL here have in common - that your life is being run by rich white folk who don't give a crap about you OR us. And get a clue that just b/c you're on top of a dung heap doesn't make the dung heap smell any nicer - instead of defending your right to be there.

OK, so now you apparently know all about me and my life. Sorry you're such a pitiful creature, Rue. Sorry your life has been so tough. Must be all my fault. When I skipped meals and dug for gas money between couch cushions I must really have been oppressing you. Oh, but I forgot--you don't know the first thing about me and my life. So where do all these assumptions come from? I mean, I thought it was wrong to make stereotypes of a whole group of people and then apply them to individuals in that group. Isn't that the thing that Don Imus did wrong in the first place?

You seem to have completely missed my intentions with my original post. I'm not excusing Imus for his ridiculous remarks. I'm glad he did get fired: he richly deserved it. I was making an ironic point, namely, that it's still safe to call a whole class of people an ugly name, as long as that class is white males.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 2:49 AM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 2:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Causal

"What? My point was that they're the only group left one can safely denigrate."

How much real discrimination have you faced in your life on account of being a white male compared to the rest of us? ie were you ever denied a place to rent? a loan? a job? schooling? utilities? and so on. You are whining about what my friend used to call 'Cadillac complaints'. My Cadillac is just not the exact shade I want, it doesn't have leather seats, I wanted vanity windows ... and so on. In other words, all these little things you complain about are just so much fluff.

If you REALLY want to complain, why don’t you complain about what we ALL here have in common - that your life is being run by rich white folk who don't give a crap about you OR us. And get a clue that just b/c you're on top of a dung heap doesn't make the dung heap smell any nicer - instead of defending your right to be there.

And another thing. I may be a white male, but I'm also a college student who made $8,000 dollars last year. That must make me all kinds of comfortable. So much for your theory that I'm living in luxury. And that was exactly the point of my comment: white males are truly the last group left that can be safely stereotyped and insulted. You just made all kinds of really ugly negative comments about me based on my gender and skin tone, and somehow it's different to do it to me than for someone else who has a different target. Wrong is wrong--if it's wrong to stereotype women based on their sex and race (and clearly it is) then it's wrong for you to stereotype me based on my gender and race. And if you think that I don't know what it's like to have other people in charge of my life, remember that I was in the military for 10 years, and that I deployed to Iraq. I know all about having people make decisions about my life. But thank you for proving that one can safely be a sexist and a racist, so long as the target is a white male.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 2:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
But white male non-wealthy heteros are so consumed with their place in the pecking order they don't realize that being on the top of the dung heap is still being on the dung heap. Instead of trying to figure out how you can get away with being politically incorrect as a way to feel superior, mebee you should look at the real folk doing you harm - the rich ones sending jobs oversees, busting unions, pitting one against the other and paying everyone only a small fraction of what the work is worth.

Stereotyping.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 3:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Causal: White men are the only group left you can safely denigrate? Really? Even if I bought that for a minute, for how many years were white men able to denigrate whomever they chose from the highest seats of power? Um, at least a couple hundred years just on this continent. So get back to me in two hundred years.

OK, you (and Rue) still seem not to get the point, so let me make another go at this. I'm caucasian. I'm male. And according to a lot that I've been seeing in this thread, that means that I'm rich and run the whole show, or that I'm trying to get rich because I think I deserve to run the whole show, I'm a racist, I'm a sexist, I've never experienced real hardship, poverty, or discrimination, and I hate women and minorities. Now, as it happens, none of that is true of me. Not rich, nor powerful, and I don't particularly want to be either. I don't hate people because of their sexual apparatus nor their skin tone. But an entire group of people that I belong to can still be insulted with impunity. I understand why that might be: a lot of the people who make life less than pleasant belong to that group. But therein lies the fallacy: it's not the group-as-such, its the people in it. But because of our current climate it's possible to make the sort of sweeping, stereotyping statements about white males that it's no longer possible to make about other groups. The fact that many of the people belonging to that group hold power doesn't make the stereotyping any less ugly. And to claim that it's OK for Rue to stereotyp me on the basis of my skin color and gender (which she's already done) is just hypocrisy of the worst type. Claiming that it's not wrong because "they're in power" is just asinine--clearly every white male in this country isn't in a powerful position. I'm certainly not. So how is it OK to lump me into a group based on my skin color and gender?

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 3:44 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
...and what about Idaho? They should be forced to change their name, and to apologize to all women named Ida. Don't even get me started on Santa Claus. "Ho, ho, ho"?

Farmers use ho's all the time.

I drove by a construction site once to check out the back ho...

I remember growing up in West Virginia and everybody going to a ho down at the local church of all places.

In Vietnam there was this one ho's trail that serviced thousands of people.

Main Entry: ho
Pronunciation: 'hO
Function: interjection
Etymology: Middle English
-- used especially to attract attention to something specified

Main Entry: Ho
Function: symbol
holmium

I once stayed at a Ho-tel.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 3:50 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
Not rich, nor powerful, and I don't particularly want to be either. I don't hate people because of their sexual apparatus nor their skin tone.

How can you not want to be rich and powerful? Thats crazytalk.

I hate people for their choice of television and when they drive too slow when I have places to be. Its the soft bigotry of reality tv and elderly drivers. I'm also not fond of Malagasy transvestites. And anyone who appreciates lemurs...everybody has their own measure of bias, hate, and irrational fear.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 4:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
BigDamnNobody, I've got the world's smallest violin for you.

Why am I not surprised Soup. You seem to lack the courage of your convictions.

Posting to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 5:52 AM

DAYVE

There is no doubt in my mind that CBS and MSNBC did the correct thing in firing Don Imus. There is also no doubt in my mind that the decision to cancel his talk show was based in large measure on financial concerns. No sponsors, no money, no show.
You can’t convince me that either corporation has such high standards that they ended the show simply because of his insensitive remarks. As most everyone here has stated, there have been plenty things spoken over the air waves that were at least, or much more offensive than N.H.H.’s…….

If this incident opens a national dialog about race relations in America, then that’s a good thing - we’re certainly not the great melting pot of diverse ethnicities spreading the milk of human kindness as America is often portrayed.

I’m going to say, one more time, what I’ve said many times before to people who get so angry over something that some shock jock said on his or her own show…. Hey, see that knob, button, plug….. TURN IT OFF..! No one is making you listen to this shit – do what I do and turn it off, or more precisely, don’t turn it on in the first place.

I have exercised that option more than once right here in RWED….
Some folks expose themselves to way too much unnecessary stress. Life is too short.

If each of us worked on a personal level to eradicate racism, hatred and injustice not just in this country but also around the world, we wouldn’t need to rage against guys like Imus – indeed they might not exist at all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 7:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
OK, you (and Rue) still seem not to get the point, so let me make another go at this. I'm caucasian. I'm male. And according to a lot that I've been seeing in this thread, that means that I'm rich and run the whole show, or that I'm trying to get rich because I think I deserve to run the whole show, I'm a racist, I'm a sexist, I've never experienced real hardship, poverty, or discrimination, and I hate women and minorities. Now, as it happens, none of that is true of me. Not rich, nor powerful, and I don't particularly want to be either. I don't hate people because of their sexual apparatus nor their skin tone. But an entire group of people that I belong to can still be insulted with impunity. I understand why that might be: a lot of the people who make life less than pleasant belong to that group. But therein lies the fallacy: it's not the group-as-such, its the people in it. But because of our current climate it's possible to make the sort of sweeping, stereotyping statements about white males that it's no longer possible to make about other groups. The fact that many of the people belonging to that group hold power doesn't make the stereotyping any less ugly. And to claim that it's OK for Rue to stereotyp me on the basis of my skin color and gender (which she's already done) is just hypocrisy of the worst type. Claiming that it's not wrong because "they're in power" is just asinine--clearly every white male in this country isn't in a powerful position. I'm certainly not. So how is it OK to lump me into a group based on my skin color and gender?

We can go back and forth on who doesn't get which point. I read the above quote and I'm thinking that you still don't get it. And we've had this conversation in other threads before.

"And according to a lot that I've been seeing in this thread, that means that I'm rich and run the whole show, or that I'm trying to get rich because I think I deserve to run the whole show, I'm a racist, I'm a sexist, I've never experienced real hardship, poverty, or discrimination, and I hate women and minorities."

In order: No, no, good odds on yes*, good odds on yes*, no, no, no, no and no. Class, race, gender and sexuality. The big four of institutional inequity and privilege. You're three out of four on the, "unknowingly taking advantage of biases built into the system."

"Now, as it happens, none of that is true of me."

I might disagree with this (depends on the asterisks above). I'd say it's a safe bet that you, like pretty much every single American male, learned misogyny and how to be a sexist from the moment you were aware. Can you honestly tell me that what guys talk about when no women are around is not hateful of women? Whether or not you believe what you were taught, that I don't know. In terms of racism and sexism in this country, I see it as planting a seed in rich soil in a greenhouse and watering the soil and waiting to see if the seed grows. The racism and sexism might not take, but all the ingredients necessary to teach that hate are present in pretty much every case.

"But an entire group of people that I belong to can still be insulted with impunity."

I'm still not buying it. What it smacks to me of is a group that has had all the access to the public discourse seeing some of that discourse taken away and crying foul.

"I understand why that might be: a lot of the people who make life less than pleasant belong to that group. But therein lies the fallacy: it's not the group-as-such, its the people in it."

You benefit simply by being born a male. And simply by being born white. Every single man in America benefits. It's through no decision of yours. It's through no effort of yours. That's what privilege is. That's the part where we're not communicating: you personally benefit from the inequities that are making other people's lives less than pleasant.

"But because of our current climate it's possible to make the sort of sweeping, stereotyping statements about white males that it's no longer possible to make about other groups."

If I'm discussing sweeping inequities that all members benefit from than I'm going to use sweeping statements. This is one of those cases.

"The fact that many of the people belonging to that group hold power doesn't make the stereotyping any less ugly."

Is it stereotyping to say that all men benefit from unearned privilege? I don't think so. Is it stereotyping to say that all caucasians benefit from unearned privilege? I don't think so. Is it stereotyping to say that all heterosexuals benefit from unearned privilege? I don't think so. Is it stereotyping to say that all people born into wealth benefit from unearned privilege? I don't think so.

Why is it easiest for people to see the inequities that they're on the other side of and so hard to see the inequities they benefit from? I've had no disagreements whatsoever about the rich part of the class, race, gender and sexuality breakdown. Because it sounds like we've all been on the other side of that.

"And to claim that it's OK for Rue to stereotyp me on the basis of my skin color and gender (which she's already done) is just hypocrisy of the worst type. Claiming that it's not wrong because "they're in power" is just asinine--clearly every white male in this country isn't in a powerful position. I'm certainly not. So how is it OK to lump me into a group based on my skin color and gender?"

You just don't get it.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Why am I not surprised Soup. You seem to lack the courage of your convictions.

Whether or not that is true, what is readily apparent is that you lack the courage to even put your convictions out for others to see. You instead choose to ankle-bite from the sidelines, popping into a thread to point out what you see as the hypocrisy in others, and then retreat to the shadows to wait for another chance to snipe. It is only through who you choose to attack that one can get a feeling for what your own opinions are. You're one of the few posters on RWED who I can honestly say I've learned not one worthwhile thing from.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Class, race, gender and sexuality. The big four of institutional inequity and privilege. You're three out of four on the, "unknowingly taking advantage of biases built into the system."

So how do you propose to lessen or abolish these built in inequalities that you perceive in America? Being born white is not an option, you either are or are not.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
I'd say it's a safe bet that you, like pretty much every single American male, learned misogyny and how to be a sexist from the moment you were aware.

Are we talking about every single American male or just the white ones?

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Can you honestly tell me that what guys talk about when no women are around is not hateful of women? Whether or not you believe what you were taught, that I don't know.

What exactly is your reasoning behind this statement? If this is from personal experience than perhaps you need to associate with a different crowd.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
In terms of racism and sexism in this country, I see it as planting a seed in rich soil in a greenhouse and watering the soil and waiting to see if the seed grows. The racism and sexism might not take, but all the ingredients necessary to teach that hate are present in pretty much every case.

Thanks for the analogy but I'm a little confused. Who is planting the seed of racism and sexism? Is the planter of the seed also doing the watering? If the soil is so rich, why might the seed not take?

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
What it smacks to me of is a group that has had all the access to the public discourse seeing some of that discourse taken away and crying foul.

If you think posters are defending what Imus said than it is you who are mistaken. IMHO, this thread has largely been about why Imus in particular and why now. But kudos for trying to forward your own agenda.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
You benefit simply by being born a male. And simply by being born white. Every single man in America benefits. It's through no decision of yours. It's through no effort of yours. That's what privilege is. That's the part where we're not communicating: you personally benefit from the inequities that are making other people's lives less than pleasant.

Once again I ask you for possible solutions. Do you think all white males born in America should have to spend their formative years in a country like Zimbabwe? Perhaps the Constitution should be amended to read life, liberty, and the pursuit of happines unless you are a white, heterosexual male.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
If I'm discussing sweeping inequities that all members benefit from than I'm going to use sweeping statements. This is one of those cases.

Sweeping inequalities, sweeping statements, sweeping generalizations.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Is it stereotyping to say that all men benefit from unearned privilege? I don't think so. Is it stereotyping to say that all caucasians benefit from unearned privilege? I don't think so. Is it stereotyping to say that all heterosexuals benefit from unearned privilege? I don't think so. Is it stereotyping to say that all people born into wealth benefit from unearned privilege? I don't think so.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Why is it easiest for people to see the inequities that they're on the other side of and so hard to see the inequities they benefit from? I've had no disagreements whatsoever about the rich part of the class, race, gender and sexuality breakdown. Because it sounds like we've all been on the other side of that.
You just don't get it.

No I get it, I'm supposed to feel guilty for being born white. I'm supposed to be doing more to abolish racism and sexism as a white male than everyone else. If I'm offered a job based on merit, I should turn it down because I really only got the job because I'm white. If I pass a cop and he doesn't pull me over I should circle around and ram him/her until they do.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
...what is readily apparent is that you lack the courage to even put your convictions out for others to see. You instead choose to ankle-bite from the sidelines, popping into a thread to point out what you see as the hypocrisy in others, and then retreat to the shadows to wait for another chance to snipe. It is only through who you choose to attack that one can get a feeling for what your own opinions are.

You mean I'm not like you,don't post like you, therefore I am different and scary. Perhaps you do not like what you see in the mirror I'm holding.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
You're one of the few posters on RWED who I can honestly say I've learned not one worthwhile thing from.

I think that speaks more to you than to me.

Posting to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 11:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
You just don't get it.

Here's what I don't get: how can it be OK for Rue (or anyone else for that matter) to make assumptions about me based on nothing more than my gender and race, and then make ugly comments based on those assumptions? Is that not what constitutes prejudice? Is it not the case that that amounts to forming a stereotype of an entire group, then applying that stereotype to a member of the group without any actual knowledge about the person? Tell me what I'm not getting about that.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 12:05 PM

"So how do you propose to lessen or abolish these built in inequalities that you perceive in America? Being born white is not an option, you either are or are not."

The first step is to convince enough of the country that this is a problem that needs to be addressed (and here I'm lumping together all four of the types of inequities). It's a tough sell. It is not in our best interests to admit that we're benefitting while others are being screwed. And any attempt to lessen that benefit feels like we're getting screwed. Because, from a short sighted view, we are. We're losing some of that unearned privilege. It's like being used to have ninety-five cents out of every dollar and then all of a sudden that gets bumped down to ninety cents. What the hell? You've taken away five cents. Damnit.

"Are we talking about every single American male or just the white ones?"

All of us.

"What exactly is your reasoning behind this statement? If this is from personal experience than perhaps you need to associate with a different crowd."

Are we going to debate that we talk about women as if they were pieces of meat when we think we can get away with it? Maybe you're right. Maybe it was just the high school locker rooms I was in. Maybe I just happened to grow up with a bunch of misogynists.

"Thanks for the analogy but I'm a little confused. Who is planting the seed of racism and sexism? Is the planter of the seed also doing the watering? If the soil is so rich, why might the seed not take?"

Analogy in progress... Hundreds of years of inculcating racism. Thousands of years of inculcating sexism. Soil. A narrative that reinforces the dominant culture. Sun. Parents who pass along racist and sexist beliefs that they were raised with. Water. The potential for making decisions based on racist or sexist beliefs. Seed.

Eh. I think you got the main point of my analogy. Attempting to dissect it further than is useful is kind of spinning wheels.

"If you think posters are defending what Imus said than it is you who are mistaken. IMHO, this thread has largely been about why Imus in particular and why now. But kudos for trying to forward your own agenda."

I don't think I've ever claimed that posters were defending what Imus said. That's your red herring. I've been off on white privilege since Causal opened the door. You say forwarding my own agenda as if that was a bad thing.

"Once again I ask you for possible solutions. Do you think all white males born in America should have to spend their formative years in a country like Zimbabwe? Perhaps the Constitution should be amended to read life, liberty, and the pursuit of happines unless you are a white, heterosexual male."

I'll rephrase my first statement, step one is to convince more Americans that inequities are a problem when it is against their own self interest to acknowledge that benefitting from inequities is a bad thing. Until there is enough popular support for minimizing some of these inequities, any attempt to change the system will be seen as discrimination against those benefitting from the inequities.

Quick question: Do you agree or disagree that rich white male heterosexual Americans are at the top of the pyramid with respect to potential for success?

Sidenote: I thought life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness line was from the Declaration of Independence.

"Sweeping inequalities, sweeping statements, sweeping generalizations."

Isn't that exactly what I said?

"No I get it, I'm supposed to feel guilty for being born white. I'm supposed to be doing more to abolish racism and sexism as a white male than everyone else. If I'm offered a job based on merit, I should turn it down because I really only got the job because I'm white. If I pass a cop and he doesn't pull me over I should circle around and ram him/her until they do."

No, you don't get it. I don't care whether or not you feel guilty. I don't care whether or not you're working to lessen racism and sexism. I just want people to acknowledge where things are skewed in their favor and not complain that it's unfair that that skewing is being lessened.

Turn your questions around. Have you ever been pulled over by a cop because of the color of your skin. What are the probabilities that someone pulled over by a cop for the color of their skin was white versus black? There's a long history of DWB in this country. Have you ever not got a job because of the color of your skin. What are the probabilities that someone who didn't get a job was not hired because they were white versus black? There's a long history of entire industries closed to blacks. Hardware provided a good example of the reverse case.

"You mean I'm not like you,don't post like you, therefore I am different and scary. Perhaps you do not like what you see in the mirror I'm holding."

Perhaps. Perhaps not.

"I think that speaks more to you than to me."

Which is probably why I used the first person pronoun.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 12:10 PM

@ Soupcatcher:

I agree in principle with much of what you said in the above post. You're right, the majority enjoys privilege because they are in the majority. I'm not disagreeing with that. I wish you could be around me and my male friends when we discuss women, though; I can deny being a woman-hater until I'm blue in the face, but I suspect the only way that you'd believe me is if you could actually hear what I say. But you can't, so you're going to have to take my word for the fact that I don't hate women. My life is very much improved by the women in it, and I'm very aware of--and appreciative of--that fact. I also probably can't convince you that I'm not out to get rich and dominate society. I can only say that if that was my aim, I'd be in the business department, not the philosophy department.

But you're right--people should be more aware of the privilege they benefit from as a member of the majority, and they should be sensitive to the fact that minorities don't enjoy the same privilege.

But what I want to see if you can hear is me saying that any instance of stereotyping is wrong, regardless of who the target is. Rue genuinely hurt my feelings by making unwarranted assumptions about me and my motives--is that OK? I think that if we are going to be intellectually and morally honest people, we're going to have to say that all stereotyping is wrong and that all prejudice is wrong. To do otherwise is hypocritical. I'm not disagreeing about past instances of racism, injustice, discrimination. What I am saying is that to have the courage of your convictions, since that seems to be a point of honor with you, you're going to have to take a stand against any instance of stereotyping and prejudice, and not just those against certain targets or perpetrated by certain people.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 12:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
Here's what I don't get: how can it be OK for Rue (or anyone else for that matter) to make assumptions about me based on nothing more than my gender and race, and then make ugly comments based on those assumptions? Is that not what constitutes prejudice? Is it not the case that that amounts to forming a stereotype of an entire group, then applying that stereotype to a member of the group without any actual knowledge about the person? Tell me what I'm not getting about that.

Do you personally benefit from the inequities that are making other people's lives less than pleasant simply because of the color of your skin?

Do you personally benefit from the inequities that are making other people's lives less than pleasant simply because of your gender?

* edited to add *

Cross posted with your last message. I'll respond to your latest after I get back from getting my truck smog checked.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 12:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
Here's what I don't get: how can it be OK for Rue (or anyone else for that matter) to make assumptions about me based on nothing more than my gender and race, and then make ugly comments based on those assumptions? Is that not what constitutes prejudice? Is it not the case that that amounts to forming a stereotype of an entire group, then applying that stereotype to a member of the group without any actual knowledge about the person? Tell me what I'm not getting about that.

Do you personally benefit from the inequities that are making other people's lives less than pleasant simply because of the color of your skin?

Do you personally benefit from the inequities that are making other people's lives less than pleasant simply because of your gender?

We have been talking past each other this whole time. You have been talking about the privilege attendant to being in the majority, and I have been talking about the moral status of stereotyping. But we're using enough common terminology to actually sound like we're arguing the same thing. When you ask if I benefit from the privilege attendant to being in the majority, you are actually not doing the thing that I am talking about. You're describing the way our society is set up--and I want to be perfectly clear on this point--I'm not disagreeing with you. Our society is set up on foundations that benefit some groups more than others, no mistake. But this isn't what I'm disputing about.

Allow me to illustrate what I am talking about. A number of years ago, during my Naval service, I overheard two young sailors talking during a work assignment. One was white, the other black. The black sailor began to rag on the white one, telling him that he should go back to the trailer park, saying that his mother didn't really know who his father was (since she was a trailer park floozy), telling him that his whole family probably only had a single full set of teeth among them, asking him if he'd actually gotten beyond the 8th grade. All of this was occasioned by the other sailor saying he'd lived in a trailer once. Now, I personally think that's pretty offensive. I think that making disparaging remarks about a person's intelligence, background, family, and moral character based on nothing other than where that person grew up is wrong. I also think that had the situation been reversed--had the white sailor made corresponding comments about where the black sailor had grown up--there would have been an accusation of racism. And I see this as blatantly hypocritical. If stereotyping and prejuding is wrong, then it's wrong across the board. Wrong for everyone. No matter who the target is, it's wrong. And I want to know if you agree that stereotyping and prejudging is wrong categorically.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 1:12 PM

HKCAVALIER

Hey everyone,

I have a couple things to add to the mix here.

One: a lot of folks are asking "Why Imus?" and "Why now?" These kind of "why" questions presuppose a level of order or even perfection in the system which simply does not exist. "Why does God let little children die?" is only a meaningful question if one posits an All-loving, All-benevolent, All-powerful party responsible.

The court of public oppinion is none of these things.

Imus getting fired strikes me as a simple case of the chickens coming home to roost. The guy's been asking for trouble since day one. The folks who admire him do so, in no small part, because of this risk taking behavior. So he's made a career of taking risks and this is just one of the likeliest outcomes of such a career. Yes?

Two: Funny how it seems in this context folks over on the rightish side of the political spectrum are largely the one's making the claim that before Imus should get in trouble for his racist and sexist posturing, a lot of other people should be dealt with first. Funny, that's exactly what a lot of lefties said when the right proposed going to war with Iraq--no one said Saddam wasn't a bad guy, but he sure as hell wasn't the world-wide public enemy #1! Of course the analogy isn't perfect because the court of public oppinion is a chaos making machine and the Government of the United States is supposed to make...sense.

Oh, and speaking as a predominantly white, predominantly male human being, I don't find any of Soupcatcher's or Rue's comments remotely offensive or denigrating.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 1:21 PM

KHYRON

Nice to see you back, HKCavalier.

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 1:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
The first step is to convince enough of the country that this is a problem that needs to be addressed (and here I'm lumping together all four of the types of inequities). It's a tough sell. It is not in our best interests to admit that we're benefitting while others are being screwed. And any attempt to lessen that benefit feels like we're getting screwed. Because, from a short sighted view, we are. We're losing some of that unearned privilege. It's like being used to have ninety-five cents out of every dollar and then all of a sudden that gets bumped down to ninety cents. What the hell? You've taken away five cents. Damnit.

But how is this to be accomplished? How do we abolish unearned privilege? How do you even prove unearned privilege? Who do we give our five cents to? As a white, heterosexual male should I not accept a job offered unless and until I have made sure the potential employer has exhausted all other options? As a white, heterosexual male should I drive in a country where I am in the minority so perhaps I can be stopped for no reason?

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
I don't think I've ever claimed that posters were defending what Imus said. That's your red herring. I've been off on white privilege since Causal opened the door.

I guess this quote had me confused.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
I'm still not buying it. What it smacks to me of is a group that has had all the access to the public discourse seeing some of that discourse taken away and crying foul.

----------------------------------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Quick question: Do you agree or disagree that rich white male heterosexual Americans are at the top of the pyramid with respect to potential for success?

Agree.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Sidenote: I thought life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness line was from the Declaration of Independence.

Thanks for the correction, being Canadian I should have checked before posting.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
"Sweeping inequalities, sweeping statements, sweeping generalizations."

Isn't that exactly what I said?

You were lamenting sweeping inequalities by making sweeping statements. I added the sweeping generalizations part.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
No, you don't get it. I don't care whether or not you feel guilty. I don't care whether or not you're working to lessen racism and sexism. I just want people to acknowledge where things are skewed in their favor and not complain that it's unfair that that skewing is being lessened.

So my inherent privilege as a white, heterosexual male has somehow been lessened with the firing of Imus? One of us (Imus) got taken down a peg and it should be a lesson to us all?

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Turn your questions around. Have you ever been pulled over by a cop because of the color of your skin.

No, just for speeding.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Have you ever not got a job because of the color of your skin.

Couldn't say.

Should all that I have done or will do in this life be questioned or somwhow mean less because of my race and gender?

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
"I think that speaks more to you than to me."

Which is probably why I used the first person pronoun.

So saying that you have learned nothing from me compared to ALL other posters in RWED was not meant as a slight? If not than I apologize.

Posting to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 1:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Two: Funny how it seems in this context folks over on the rightish side of the political spectrum are largely the one's making the claim that before Imus should get in trouble for his racist and sexist posturing, a lot of other people should be dealt with first. Funny, that's exactly what a lot of lefties said when the right proposed going to war with Iraq--no one said Saddam wasn't a bad guy, but he sure as hell wasn't the world-wide public enemy #1! Of course the analogy isn't perfect because the court of public oppinion is a chaos making machine and the Government of the United States is supposed to make...sense.

That was the mother of all reaching analogies, and a nice shift of the goal posts, congratulations.

Posting to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 2:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Two: Funny how it seems in this context folks over on the rightish side of the political spectrum are largely the one's making the claim that before Imus should get in trouble for his racist and sexist posturing, a lot of other people should be dealt with first. Funny, that's exactly what a lot of lefties said when the right proposed going to war with Iraq--no one said Saddam wasn't a bad guy, but he sure as hell wasn't the world-wide public enemy #1! Of course the analogy isn't perfect because the court of public oppinion is a chaos making machine and the Government of the United States is supposed to make...sense.

I'm just upset that people still think that I'm making excuses for Imus, or that "other people should be dealt with first." Once again: I'm saying neither. Maybe if I was actually listened to, instead of just just reacted to, you'd understand that what I'm saying has nothing to do with Mr Imus.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 3:42 PM

Quote:
Two: Funny how it seems in this context folks over on the rightish side of the political spectrum are largely the one's making the claim that before Imus should get in trouble for his racist and sexist posturing, a lot of other people should be dealt with first. Funny, that's exactly what a lot of lefties said when the right proposed going to war with Iraq--no one said Saddam wasn't a bad guy, but he sure as hell wasn't the world-wide public enemy #1! Of course the analogy isn't perfect because the court of public oppinion is a chaos making machine and the Government of the United States is supposed to make...sense.

Whatever man.... If I have any potential of what could be considered racist tendancies it would be exibited in my fear and loathing of Repuglicans, which is matched only by my fear and loating of Demoncrats. You're all a bunch of assholes. Why you, or anyone, would associate themselves with either side anymore is an enigma to me. But I've said that a million times in here already.....

The "court of public opinion" is bullshit too. There is no such thing. There is what the media tells us, and what the people believe. You will never know what "public opinion" is from a rigged poll (using demographics that will give them the results they're looking for) of 1,500 people that the media uses to tell you how to feel about an issue.

I just find it ironic that Jesse "The Racist" Jackson comes out of hiding to shit talk Imus about shit talking women and minorities when his own people have been shit talking women and white people since long before rap was even born through their music. Yeah... Let's ask Jesse how he feels about women really. Maybe we should ask his baby's momma, or his wife even? Yeah I'm pointing that out.... sue me. Why is it okay for everyone else to be a hypocrite except for the white male? Please answer this question, somebody, without blowing a bunch of smoke or giving me any rhetoric about how evil white males are.

And let me be the first to say that I really enjoy rap music. Not the MTV neutered shit you hear now, but real shit from the early 90's. It was edgy, it was about change, it was about outrage. Fuck tha Police! Damn straight. This new wave rap/hip-hop shit is nothing but degrading women and using sex and women in videos to push saless... pimpin ho's and slammin do's. I'm not saying the old stuff wasn't immune to objectifying women, but largly it was real music with a real message. Rap today is just American Idol for BET.... it's pop culture shit. Fuck tha sellouts is more like it.

Hip-Hop is marketed as an insult to women, but women, instead of being insulted are playing the part. Look at how they dress at clubs and just in general today. They've glamorized the gangsta pimp scene so much that girls (black and white) are actually striving to play the part of the ho. (Of course not all women. I'm not trying to make sweeping racist/sexist statements here, but it happens. Just look around you)

You don't have to turn on Imus to hear racisism and sexism. Just turn on any pop radio station or watch MTV and you'll see and hear 10 more offensive things to women in the first half hour than what Imus said. This whole deal is bad and Imus is getting fucked in a system rigging itself against white males. I don't want to hear any shit about how good we've had it before either and now this is payback. I'm only 27. My family owned no slaves. I was raised by a single mother. My life has been shit much more often than it was good. I'm not asking for sympathy because I wouldn't give you any. I'm just pointing out what a fallacy the diarrhea of the mouth coming out of your mouths is. Being white hasn't done anything for me. Neither has being male. Save your sweeping generalizations for somebody who gives a shit. Racists....

And you Soup. I know we have good conversations even though we don't always see eye to eye, but your comments today while I was gone have really pissed me off. You are either a racist minority yourself, posing as a white person to stir shit up, or you are a white person who has bought all of this media driven bullshit and you've become so self hating and guilty about events completely out of your control that you've become a racist against people with your own skin color. Either way, you sound like nothing more than a racist to me. It's like listening to Jesse whine..... I'm thouroughly disgusted now and sick to my stomach.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 4:01 PM

Okay. Passed. Good for another two years

.

Causal: I'm glad to hear that you've outgrown the misogyny that you were exposed to growing up. The misogyny that all of us were exposed to growing up as American males. Or, maybe you were never exposed to the objectification of women that is considered the norm in our society. I certainly was. That's what I'm getting at. I'm making the claim that all of us have been exposed to misogyny. That misogynism seems more normal than abnormal. That if we behave simply as we have been taught, by history by society and maybe by our families, we are more than likely to make sexist remarks.

Now you can interpret that as me saying that you hate women. I don't. I think that we're talking about two separate things.

It seems to me that you're looking for me to make the statement that all stereotyping and all prejudice is wrong. And to actively attack any form of stereotyping or prejudice. Which seems a completely reasonable goal. So why haven't I? The short version has to do with addressing systemic inequities. The only way I can foresee to adress systemic inequities is to start lessening the bias. And this can be perceived, by the group who is enjoying the bias, as prejudicial treatment against them. That's the sticking point. If you've been unknowingly enjoying the fruits of prejudice, than any attempt to reverse that prejudice will look to you as prejudice. That's why it's so important for me to keep bringing up the unearned benefit that is privilege. We're talking hundreds of years of built in privilege (in the case of gender, thousands of years).

To do nothing is to allow unearned privilege to continue. To do something will be viewed as prejudicial against those groups who enjoy that unearned privilege. Who among us is willing to advocate for a lessening of privilege? So, no, I'm not going to blanketly say that prejudice is wrong because what you may consider prejudice I consider a move towards equality.

In regards to the two seamen. What the black sailor said was fucked up. I completely agree with you. And he needed to be made aware of just why what he said crossed a line. And his racism was toothless. It was kicking up, as I've referred to it before. Kicking up is different than kicking down. They're both kicking and, as I'm using it, kicking is not cool. And one carries more weight than the other.

I'm interested in sending the message that businesses should not associate their brand with kicking down. There's a long history of precisely that happening. There is no corresponding long history of business associating their brand with kicking up.

A last note, I don't think I've made the claim that you're making excuses for Imus. I took one comment you made earlier and used it to expand the discussion to white privilege. To me, this is a completely different discussion only tangentially related to the original thread topic.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 4:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Oh, and speaking as a predominantly white, predominantly male human being, I don't find any of Soupcatcher's or Rue's comments remotely offensive or denigrating.

Thanks, HKCavalier. I don't feel like I'm doing a good job on communicating what exactly privilege is and why it's a problem for a healthy society. Asynchronous communication appears to be a particularly poor format for this as there is huge potential for misunderstanding that can quickly spiral.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 4:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
And you Soup. I know we have good conversations even though we don't always see eye to eye, but your comments today while I was gone have really pissed me off. You are either a racist minority yourself, posing as a white person to stir shit up, or you are a white person who has bought all of this media driven bullshit and you've become so self hating and guilty about events completely out of your control that you've become a racist against people with your own skin color. Either way, you sound like nothing more than a racist to me. It's like listening to Jesse whine..... I'm thouroughly disgusted now and sick to my stomach.

As I've mentioned previously, I'm mixed race. My mother is white and my father is brown. I grew up in Los Angeles where I was pretty much oblivious to the fact that I wasn't a member of the majority. It wasn't until I went away to college, in a small rural area that was predominantly white, that I was confronted with overt racism directed at me personally. This opened my eyes to the subversive racism that I was subjected to and had participated in while growing up. My own position has been deeply influenced by that awakening. Make of that what you will.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 4:27 PM

Of course.... Choice C. I knew that already. My apologies soup.

Still doesn't change the way I feel about your posts. But continue to say whatever white-male-hating stuff you want to. That's freedom, ain't it?

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 4:40 PM

BigDamnNobody:
My recent post to Causal touches on many of the topics you raised. I'll just flesh out some additional.

"No, just for speeding."

I found a statement made by Loewen in Sundown Towns fascinating. It was that police pulling over black drivers simply for being black actually represented good policework in some areas. In a twisted sort of way. That one of the jobs of local police is to determine the intention of outsiders (and I'm still not sure I buy that). That, in sundown towns, blacks were clearly outsiders since no blacks lived in sundown towns by design. So the police were able to use the racial politics of the towns to help them in their policework. Now, if the driver was white, there was no conclusion that could be drawn.

"Should all that I have done or will do in this life be questioned or somwhow mean less because of my race and gender?"

Each of us earns our achievements. However, we each start in different places and have different probabilities for a successful outcome based on how well we map to the cultural norm. Take class, for example.

"So saying that you have learned nothing from me compared to ALL other posters in RWED was not meant as a slight? If not than I apologize."

Don't forget the equating of your comments with ankle-biting and sniping.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 4:41 PM

"Still doesn't change the way I feel about your posts. But continue to say whatever white-male-hating stuff you want to. That's freedom, ain't it?"

I make the same response to people making ethnic slurs as I do to people making slurs against whites, "I'm half offended by your comments."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 13, 2007 4:50 PM