The difference of isms.

[chikusho]

You missed the point completely. Skin colour is only one visual cue used to identify race.

Incorrect. Skin color is only one visual cue used to identify skin color.

I never said "specific". I merely pointed out there are visual traits other than skin colour, common amongst race.

Yes. Traits. Traits which appear singular or in combination with people of any background across the planet.

What? Are you saying it's because of racism that no genetic anomaly exists that creates an abundance of Melanin [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanosis]?

Sorry, wrong link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Laing

I know, but it's what I was talking about. This whole side discussion, while not only off-topic, is completely irrelevant to anything I've actually been discussing.

But it's not irrelevant to you saying that it's naive to think skin color is the only difference between a black and a white person.

 

[wulf3n]

Yes. Traits. Traits which appear singular or in combination with people of any background across the planet.

And are you also saying that those traits can't be used to help identify a persons ancestry?

Sorry, wrong link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Laing

So how does this not work the other way around?

 

[The-Traveling-Bard]

Strength of character is a choice one makes internally at some point in their lives. It is not something that is beaten into you by abuse. (Bullying)

Abused individuals often suffer, and become weak, afraid, cowardly, etc. It's a side effect of the evil inflicted on them.

Your lack of compassion shown in this thread on the first page (OP), shows me just how weak your character is. You demand, and expect a great deal from others (bravery, courage, "thick skin" in the face of provocation (bullying)) but yet you display a myriad of extremely weak character flaws.

Good men do not provoke, neither do they become provoked. Nor are we quick to anger and violence. We don't wear pride around our necks and we don't associate ourselves with fools who would provoke us to begin with. Wisdom is a tool to prevent pain and suffering of all kinds.

Real or not, these things should not be said. 'ist' or not, they should not be said. You should not have such a filthy tongue that you need to even joke about belittling women. You talk a lot about growing up... atleast on the first page (about all I could stand to read) but you seem still very much steeped in the mindset of a teenage male.

You are totally right "-isms" have become a hysterical cult with their acolytes so convinced of their own moral and intellectual superiority they feel they can ban, prohibit and bully on a whim.

I am deeply worried about the aggressive imposition of extreme left wing morality, "because it's right", on society, so much more so that any the far right does these day, they are fairly useless all told. The extreme left wing is insidious.

You only have to look at some of the ridiculous naval gazing on here to see how utterly self-absorbed, sanctimonious and generally censorious many of these proponents of "-isms" become.

You just have to ignore it because they are ironically almost fascist in their self belief.

^ That all I am going to say because that poster said it better than I.

Really? Fucking really? I just have to ask, are you serious? Absolutely serious? You're incapable of acting like a decent human being because the '-isms have become a hysterical cult'? You believe you're bullied because PEOPLE ARE TELLING YOU TO NOT BE A DICK TO PEOPLE? That somehow, all the people asking you to show some common fucking decency are 'insidious agents of the Left Wing Morality'?

I...I just... there are no words. There are no words to describe this. A man with intimate knowledge of every language that has ever existed, ever will exist and even those that don't exist will look at this and go 'Fuck that, I've got nothing'. That is how impossible it is to describe this... travesty.

I kinda knew you would take this approach to that statement. Weither you want to admit it, or not. It's still true.

Also. I am telling people not to be so damn sensietive all the damn fucking time.
The statement "grow a thick skin" is completely and reasonable statement.

Why?

Because people like YOU who can't get over the fact that people are going to make cruel jokes.

You know what people like you do?
You censor shit.
You censor, censor, and censor anything remotely offensive for the sake of acting like some superior being.
And any opposing opinions is attacked and treated has lesser because. Well. You want to be so morally right.

Should I bring up the countless people who been black listed?
The countless books that have been banned?
The countless artist that have been attacked and blamed for horrible things for like school shootings?
Seriously.. some artist says/does some offensive things and then gets blamed for school shootings.

Books that have been around for *hundreds of years* and are tied into deep history accurately are being banned just because someone is offensive?

Is this right?

So yeah, It's a damn cult of people that just can not shake their own Christ Armor and laugh at themselves once and awhile.

Edit:

Since you're gaming forum. I assume you play violent video games.

This is one the thing I hate about the society of America.
It seems to have no problem with no extreme forms of violence what so ever.
Things like Saw movies, Chivalry, War of the Roses, Metal Gear Solid rising.

All of things are perfectly okay and not offensive to a wide range of people on this site.

So when... did a joke get more offensive than hacking off someones limbs?

Why is extremes forms of violence consider to be less offensive than a joke?

 

[chikusho]

And are you also saying that those traits can't be used to help identify a persons ancestry?

Nope, I'm saying that ancestry is irrelevant since there is no such thing as "race" in humanity.

So how does this not work the other way around?

Because even though she was a genetically white girl with white parents in a white community, she still got treated as a black person. Because of racism.
On the other hand, a black person born white is still considered a black person. Because people believe there's such a thing as "race".

*edit*

I kinda knew you would take this approach to that statement. Weither you want to admit it, or not. It's still true.

No, it's not.

Also. I am telling people not to be so damn sensietive all the damn fucking time.
The statement "grow a thick skin" is completely and reasonable statement.

Why?

Because people like YOU who can't get over the fact that people are going to make cruel jokes.

Yet, somehow you haven't grown a thicker skin and are currently whining on the internet about people calling you out on being an asshole. Oh, the irony.

You know what people like you do?
You censor shit.
You censor, censor, and censor anything remotely offensive for the sake of acting like some superior being.
And any opposing opinions is attacked and treated has lesser because. Well. You want to be so morally right.

You know what people like you do?
You get defensive.
You get defensive, defensive, and deflect anything remotely reminiscent of criticism because you can't face the fact that you are an asshole.
And any opposing opinions are attacked and treated as lesser because. Well. You want to continue being an asshole, yet can't self-identify as one.

Should I bring up the countless people who been black listed?
The countless books that have been banned?
The countless artist that have been attacked and blamed for horrible things for like school shootings?
Seriously.. some artist says/does some offensive things and then gets blamed for school shootings.

Books that have been around for *hundreds of years* and are tied into deep history accurately are being banned just because someone is offensive?

Is this right?

So yeah, It's a damn cult of people that just can not shake their own Christ Armor and laugh at themselves once and awhile.

Nice straw man.

 

[Malty Milk Whistle]

I make racist jokes to my black friend.
She makes racist jokes towards me.
We are friends.
Does that make us horrible, evil people?

 

[wulf3n]

Nope, I'm saying that ancestry is irrelevant since there is no such thing as "race" in humanity.

You keep getting hung up on "race" as if that's the issue at hand. What's being discussed is the idea that you can make a reasonable deduction of ancestry a.k.a. race based on more than just skin colour.

Just go back and replace every instance of race with ancestry, because as far as I'm concerned it's effectively the same thing.

Because even though she was a genetically white girl with white parents in a white community, she still got treated as a black person. Because of racism.
On the other hand, a black person born white is still considered a black person. Because people believe there's such a thing as "race".

I disagree, distinction of common genetic differences resulting from geographical location doesn't cause discrimination. Trying to ignore differences that exist may solve the problem, but it's a case of treating the symptoms not treating the cause.

 

[The-Traveling-Bard]

I make racist jokes to my black friend.
She makes racist jokes towards me.
We are friends.
Does that make us horrible, evil people?

No of course not!
You both know each other!
Therefor it's okay!

/sarcasm.

But that's generally the response you're going to get.

 

[Rod Medrano]

I kinda knew you would take this approach to that statement. Weither you want to admit it, or not. It's still true.

Also. I am telling people not to be so damn sensietive all the damn fucking time.
The statement "grow a thick skin" is completely and reasonable statement.

Why?

Because people like YOU who can't get over the fact that people are going to make cruel jokes.

You know what people like you do?
You censor shit.
You censor, censor, and censor anything remotely offensive for the sake of acting like some superior being.
And any opposing opinions is attacked and treated has lesser because. Well. You want to be so morally right.

Should I bring up the countless people who been black listed?
The countless books that have been banned?
The countless artist that have been attacked and blamed for horrible things for like school shootings?
Seriously.. some artist says/does some offensive things and then gets blamed for school shootings.

Books that have been around for *hundreds of years* and are tied into deep history accurately are being banned just because someone is offensive?

Is this right?

So yeah, It's a damn cult of people that just can not shake their own Christ Armor and laugh at themselves once and awhile.

Edit:

Since you're gaming forum. I assume you play violent video games.

This is one the thing I hate about the society of America.
It seems to have no problem with no extreme forms of violence what so ever.
Things like Saw movies, Chivalry, War of the Roses, Metal Gear Solid rising.

All of things are perfectly okay and not offensive to a wide range of people on this site.

So when... did a joke get more offensive than hacking off someones limbs?

Why is extremes forms of violence consider to be less offensive than a joke?

Stop posting forever.

 

[chikusho]

Just go back and replace every instance of race with ancestry, because as far as I'm concerned it's effectively the same thing.

Aaaaand, ancestry is completely irrelevant, _especially_ in the case of making assumptions about people.

I disagree, distinction of common genetic differences resulting from geographical location doesn't cause discrimination. Trying to ignore differences that exist may solve the problem, but it's a case of treating the symptoms not treating the cause.

What are you saying the "symptoms" and "cause" are here exactly?

It's a matter of ignoring irrelevant information, because these supposed differences are _only superficial_, and not may not even necessarily be indicative of ancestry.

 

[wulf3n]

Aaaaand, ancestry is completely irrelevant, _especially_ in the case of making assumptions about people.

Finally we're on to assumptions

Which aren't inherently evil, and quite a useful tool when it comes to having limited information.

What are you saying the "symptoms" and "cause" are here exactly?

The symptom is "race" as a reason for discrimination, the cause... well that's purely speculation but I believe deep down most if not all people need to feel better than others.

It's a matter of ignoring irrelevant information, because these supposed differences _only superficial_, and not may not even necessarily be indicative of ancestry.

ignoring? I don't think so, unknown yes.

And while these superficial differences may not be indicative of ancestry, they're a good place to start, and if you're wrong you get corrected, no harm done.

 

[Realitycrash]

To whatever moderator is watching this unfold: If you move this thread to the R&P instead of closing it down, I will pray to Crom for your swift demise.
(After which Crom will laugh at me, but to hell with him then).

OT: I'm not going to bother to reply to the OP anymore, because I explained my stance pretty clearly in the first page.
However, there seems to be some bickering about what constitutes a 'race' or not.
Which I find hilariously misguided.
Guys, it's not what what makes a 'race' and what does not. It's about what's ethically relevant. Fungi-people from Yuggoth aren't even our species, but if they become members of our society then whatever difference in anatomy is irrelevant when it comes to ethics.
So fine, you wanna quibble over specifics? Go ahead. Just don't pretend to be doing it for the sake of discussing 'racism'.

 

[chikusho]

Finally we're on to assumptions

Which aren't inherently evil, and quite a useful tool when it comes to having limited information.

And making assumptions based solely on ones "race" (or, in this case, ancestry) is what we call racism.

ignoring? I don't think so, unknown yes.

And while these superficial differences may not be indicative of ancestry, they're a good place to start, and if you're wrong you get corrected, no harm done.

I'd argue there's a lot of harm done.
The problem lies with putting ancestry and superficial differences as valuable information, and they are an awful place to start. Especially for the people who constantly have to correct you, knowing every day what is incorrectly assumed about them by everyone.

 

[wulf3n]

Which I find hilariously misguided.
Guys, it's not what what makes a 'race' and what does not. It's about what's ethically relevant. Fungi-people from Yuggoth aren't even our species, but if they become members of our society then whatever difference in anatomy is irrelevant when it comes to ethics.
So fine, you wanna quibble over specifics? Go ahead. Just don't pretend to be doing it for the sake of discussing 'racism'.

:O someone putting forward their opinion of a situation they didn't bother looking into. A rare specimen indeed.

And making assumptions based solely on ones "race" (or, in this case, ancestry) is what we call racism.

Call it what you will. Everyone makes assumptions, why is an assumption about race any worse than any other assumption.

I'd argue there's a lot of harm done.
The problem lies with putting ancestry and superficial differences as valuable information, and they are an awful place to start. Especially for the people who constantly have to correct you, knowing every day what is incorrectly assumed about them by everyone.

Valuable information? I wouldn't go that far. But it's information none the less. And when left with no other, we have to work with what we have.

I had a friend who had to constantly correct people about the pronunciation of his surname, wasn't that big of an issue. They had to say his name, they used the understanding of the English language they had. It was wrong, he corrected them, issue solved.

 

[Realitycrash]

Which I find hilariously misguided.
Guys, it's not what what makes a 'race' and what does not. It's about what's ethically relevant. Fungi-people from Yuggoth aren't even our species, but if they become members of our society then whatever difference in anatomy is irrelevant when it comes to ethics.
So fine, you wanna quibble over specifics? Go ahead. Just don't pretend to be doing it for the sake of discussing 'racism'.

:O someone putting forward their opinion of a situation they didn't bother looking into. A rare specimen indeed.

Mate, don't be rude. I made a summary statement about the question of race and ethics. I never put words in anyone's mouth. So either be polite and summarize your statement, or don't respond at all.

 

[wulf3n]

Mate, don't be rude. I made a summary statement about the question of race and ethics. I never put words in anyone's mouth. So either be polite and summarize your statement, or don't respond at all.

You talk of politeness, yet insult you insult others without any provocation.

"Hilariously Misguided" hardly a benign statement.

What's worse is that what you felt was hilariously misguided wasn't what was even being discussed.

Perhaps you should look inward, before lashing out.

edit:

Hence I reiterate my initial objection.

If you're going to insult someone. At least have the courtesy of understanding what you're actually insulting them for.

 

[Realitycrash]

Mate, don't be rude. I made a summary statement about the question of race and ethics. I never put words in anyone's mouth. So either be polite and summarize your statement, or don't respond at all.

You talk of politeness, yet insult you insult others without any provocation.

"Hilariously Misguided" hardly a benign statement.

What's worse is that what you felt was hilariously misguided wasn't what was even being discussed.

Perhaps you should look inward, before lashing out.

edit:

Hence I reiterate my initial objection.

If you're going to insult someone. At least have the courtesy of understanding what you're actually insulting them for.

I wasn't insulting you, I was insulting the notion that there is any interesting and relevant discussion to 'what makes a race?' when it comes to discussing ethics. From what I gathered, you both appeared to be on the wrong track, i.e discussing something that wasn't very relevant (in my mind) at all. Sort of like discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
But I apologize, I did not aim to insult. I'm sure I misunderstood it all. Why don't you enlighten me?

 

[runic knight]

Are people saying things are racist or sexist or whatever too often? Ok, I'll agree with that general idea. People can and will be assholes, and it doesn't matter the sex or skin color of the person they are being an asshole to if they are being an asshole to them in the same way they would be to anyone else. Or, to put it another way, if the way you insult someone is the same regardless, it isn't racist or sexist, it is just being an asshole.

Do insults based relying on reference to race or sex result in racism or sexism? Well, that is harder to explore. On one hand, it is a custom tailored insult based on race or gender, so in that regard, while it isn't discrimination because of race or gender, it is negativity that applies race or gender. On the other, it is using an aspect of the person in reference or in whole as a means of an insult, and comes off as no more powerful then mentions of height, weight, glasses, whatever else. To say a mention of gender in an insult is sexist is to support the idea that a mention of height is heightest. Once you apply the logic to anything but race or gender or sexual orientation, this particular outlook just seems to be silly. In this regard, I think it falls on the intent of the insult, and the framing of it. Is the insult done because you represent a larger group or is it merely applying your participation as part of that group as part of the insult. Call someone a black jackass, is it a statement about race and the place of them in relation to your own or is it merely making use of an aspect of the insulted to narrow the insult to them as an individual? If the latter, I can't see that as racism, as it is treating them as an individual person comprised on many facets, an individual that they don't like and then insulting them. There is also the cultural and social terms, word depreciation and colloquialisms to note, and how different people have different definition of the same words, terms and phrases. An interesting debate, though for this part, I still have to side that no, it isn't a racist, just still being an asshole.

Now any insult based on gender or race or whatever done because of said gender or race or whatever, or done in a manner that expresses negativity for being that race/gender rather then negativity for being an individual who was part of that (basically, you bad because you are black, not you are bad because you are a jackass who is black). Intent again seems to pop up here strongly.

 

[Schadrach]

If someone says something racist, they are being racist. It's not a leap to assume that this isn't the only time they are racist.

It doesn't mean they are very racist, but it means they are being at least somewhat racist.

I could theoretically be quoted as having said: "I never understood historically black universities until I saw black people." Does that mean I'm racist, or merely that I was playing Cards Against Humanity and had one of those white card pairs practically designed for that black card? (Hint: It was the latter.)

Speaking of CAH, by your logic essentially anyone who has every played CAH is racist, sexist, a pedophile, into some truly bizarre fetishes, or some combination of the above.