Support NeoGAF

[DerangedHermit]

Echoing the sentiment from everyone else, OP. That was an excellent read.

Thanks a lot for that post. Even across the pond, on a country/continent where i feel that things are a bit different (note: not better,imo), all your experiences resonate strongly with me!

 

[LiquidSword]

You said that your friend "subtlety" (key word there) changes how he speaks around different people. Everyone does that, you and I included. It's human nature.

"Subtlety" is not the word I would use when someone lays on a thick urban/southern accent when talking to those groups. And yes, I would consider that racism to a degree.

OP said being uncomfortable around strangers is "emotionally racist", when it's a natural reaction everyone has to a certain degree. Same thing with your anxiety. It's natural to not want to offend and be accepted among a group.

I guess I said subtlety because I'm the only one who seems to take notice of it. Need to put down my thoughts and edit them better. The op also did not say strangers. That sentence of his post is bolded. He says a room full of black people, not a roomful of strangers. He's talking about the kind of person who would have no anxiety in a bus full of white people and then put them in a bus full of black people and they are sweating bullets.

 

[rabidbot]

Why is everybody a little racist a thing?

Why would I as a black male be a little racist to any other group?

And to be honest, the statement should read everybody is a little racist to black people.

And to be honest again, I only hear/read on public forums of white people saying this.

It irks me a great deal.

Because everyone harbors racism and bigotry.

 

[Fuchsdh]

You can also test your own implicit biases here:
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

How much research has been done on the efficacy of these sorts of studies? Obviously since I know going into it the stakes I feel like I'm less likely to get a "true" result, but thus far my answers have been entirely contrary to popular opinion (it said I strongly associated women with science, for instance) and I don't feel like I'm that much of a special snowflake.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

Emotional racism is trickier, though. Emotional racism is being a little uncomfortable in a room full of black guys because you feel outnumbered. Emotional racism is walking up to the white teller at the bank instead of the Latino one because you think it’s more likely they’ll speak English. Emotional racism is the monolith built by these tiny, seemingly invisible moments of racial tension. And herein lies the issue.

Like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KctO7S62ZfY

 

[noshten]

Why is everybody a little racist a thing?

Why would I as a black male be a little racist to any other group?

And to be honest, the statement should read everybody is a little racist to black people.

And to be honest again, I only hear/read on public forums of white people saying this.

It irks me a great deal.

It's a by-product of society really, in an ideal world we should only judge people when we understand them. In reality we are constantly judging and stereotyping - we need to fit everyone we meet in a particular mold we have already decided for ourselves.
It's not just a racism issue, it's a social issue - you can predetermined prejudices towards a group of people because that's how they are portrait in the media, by your parents and relatives. Whether it's something like religion, color, class, character, hair color, physical appearance, sex or sexual orientation - there would always be someone that has a prejudice.
If society fails to evolve past these type of prejudices they would always be prevalent in some form. Sadly the only way that would happen is if there is another enemy we can rally around that is outside of our specie so we can direct all the negativity towards.
I'm not optimistic for any other solution. From an simply evolutionary stand point, I strongly believe Homo Sapiens wired to eliminate other rivals. That includes predators, other human species and outsiders to their own group. Thankfully we have moved outside of the caves but that has only given us more ammunition to finally wipe ourselves out.

Usually societies we build exploit this, it's us against them - our country, our religion, our moral compass, our righteousness

 

[Angelus Errare]

Like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KctO7S62ZfY

Could be like my friend. She's black and works in Silicon Valley as a iOS developer at Dropbox. She gets all kinds of liberal racism.

"Wow you're a great example of your people"
"Wow I didn't even know black women knew how to program"
"You must only date white guys living out here"

etc

 

[M0nochromatic]

Of course self awareness and self reflection should be kept in mind. Just picking the left and acting as if the path to enlightenment has been achieved is foolish.

I'm always worried about personal blindspots. I try to better myself, but I might miss something and end up hurting someone because of it.

 

[LosDaddie]

I guess I said subtlety because I'm the only one who seems to take notice of it. Need to put down my thoughts and edit them better. The op also did not say strangers. That sentence of his post is bolded. He says a room full of black people, not a roomful of strangers. He's talking about the kind of person who would have no anxiety in a bus full of white people and then put them in a bus full of black people and they are sweating bullets.

You're right. The OP does say black people, but he also states being outnumbered as well. I'd say my point still stands. Being uncomfortable in a room full of people of a different race than you is a natural reaction that everyone has to a certain degree. The reason I added "strangers" to it was because it wouldn't make sense to be uncomfortable around people you know.

Weird how my mind read the OP's line as "strangers" 😂

 

[Austriacus]

Thanks for the heads up, theres so many books im supposed to be reading I cant guarantee I'll get to it but I'll try.



Lol i didnt look at the name/pic because the content was so good. But I know exactly the quote you mean.



I actually went to a predominantly white school, but also very diverse: black, hispanic, indian etc. Most of my friends were white so most of my life I've been doing it - mainly around their parents. It just...becomes you. I'm split in two honestly - Friendly White people acceptable me and Me.
Eh. Kinda depressing to think about.

Hey man i feel you, i also have to show different faces to people around me and how they expect me to be all the time is tiring. Do you have somebody to vent about this in your life? Creating a false self and having it be such a part of you that you ignore who you really are is exhausting and needs to be something you talk about more often.

Im not gona tell you that you should be yourself and fuck what other people think because thats just not realistic and im also not saying you should go to a therapist to deal with this but just someone you trust you can throw this stuff at him or her without being judged would be great for you.

 

[LiquidSword]

You're right. The OP does say black people, but he also states being outnumbered as well. I'd say my point still stands. Being uncomfortable in a room full of people of a different race than you is a natural reaction that everyone has to a certain degree. The reason I added "strangers" to it was because it wouldn't make sense to be uncomfortable around people you know.

Weird how my mind read the OP's line as "strangers" 😂

Is it a "natural" reaction because of nature or because of society?

Edit: I guess in the end it doesn't matter that much whether it's nature vs nurture because this is the reality we have to deal with. But I just don't think it is human nature but the way society was and is.

 

[theignoramus]

It's more unconscious than explicit. More body language than verbal.

Yeah. And best believe, black people know right the fuck away when someone is uncomfortable being around us, without so much as a word being exchanged. We fine tune that radar through childhood and adolescence.

 

[marrec]

I kind of wanted this to be longer, but I think I'll try to truncate it to facilitate discussion.

Prior to 2013, the idea of police brutality as an issue in America wasn't at the forefront of the white liberal mind. Searching for anything from known progressives magazines like the Huffington Post and DailyKos in this time period pertaining to systemic violence against minorities by our police bears little fruit. We know, however, that the brutality of recent years isn't an anomaly.

The Black Panthers began their organization as a group of black men and women who were tired of the racism and brutality brazenly practiced by Oakland police officers. How did America respond to this? They treated them as a terrorist group, infiltrating their numbers with agent provocateurs and planning complicated and often deadly raids on their meeting places and homes. Now, we have a movement called Black Lives Matter that has organized around the brazen racism and brutality of police in America that's being demonized by the political right, the center, and sometimes even liberal defenders of popular progressive figureheads.

"But wait!" you might be saying "this is 2015, we took the flag down, we voted Obama as President, and we're more aware than ever of racial injustice!" And I'd agree with you, but the uncomfortability of white liberals in discussions of their own racism and systemic injustice has hampered progress to the point where schools are desegregating, housing discrimination is ignored, and it took 9 black people getting slaughtered in church by a self-avowed white supremacist to pull a symbol of racism off store shelves.

The image above shows google trends for four search terms. The blue line is "black on black crime" the red line is "racial inequality" the yellow line is "black racism" and the green line is "police brutality".

As you can see, we've lost control of the narrative. Yes, police brutality has spiked in recent years, but it's falling now, and racial inequality has remained relatively unsearched for compared to the two terms I chose out for being "racist" search terms. (Terms a racist would pop into google). As of September 2015, search terms for "police brutality" are below their levels in 2013. Google trends doesn't tell us who is searching, just the volume of searches. (I tried to choose very specific terms used by conservatives and liberals online to defend and/or attack racial narratives.)

What the graph makes clear is that the baseline interest in racial inequality is laughably low compared to the "flavor of the week" for liberal defenders of justice.

Generally, liberals are very interested in helping minorities remove the shackles of racial and sexual discrimination. It's been a staple of the democratic platform since shortly after The New Deal. But when it comes down to talking about the specifics of race and who holds up the pillars of systemic injustice, we liberals clam up rather quickly. We give aphorisms of patience and forgiveness. How change takes time and how black people should forget the injustices of the past so we can work together toward a bright future.

David Palumbo-Liu put it best in July of this year:

Let me put this bluntly: The obdurate insistence on the part of white liberal race-deniers that things are ultimately for the best, that all it takes is time and patience and a wider appreciation of what makes America great, no matter what mountains of evidence to the contrary you lay before them, has all the aspects of cult behavior. I have the same sense in addressing people who hold these beliefs as I do when I answer my door only to have some literature or another thrust at me that will supposedly save my soul or make me happy.

Here on GAF it's different, for the most part, but race deniers still exist. It was popular a few years ago to claim to "not see race" as if being blind to one's skin color somehow removed any shred of racism. It doesn't, mostly because 100% of the people who "don't see race" are actually acutely aware of it but uncomfortable talking about it. Even people who aren't race-deniers though seem to get defensive when the subject is brought up.

Take, for instance, the row between Taylor Swift and Nicki Minaj. Nicki makes an interesting remark on twitter about racism and feminism in the entertainment industry without targeting anyone specific. Swift immediately responded in a defensive way about how Nicki shouldn't be dividing their efforts and how they need to work together. Why? Because she didn't want to be seen as racist. I don't think Swift is racist, but she shut down discussion on the issue, made it 100% about her, and the white media obliged by demonizing Nicki and making it about a feud between two pop stars, instead of making it about the necessary discussions we all need to have about overt and inherent racism alive and well in America and especially in Liberals.

We all know that conservatives, loud ones on TV especially, tend to have archaic views on race and racism. It's easy to stand up to the Rush Limbaugh's and Sean Hannity's of the world. But to stand up to Jon Stewart? Beyond the pale for some, beyond even discussion. Can Jon Stewart be racist? Of fucking course he can. He'd probably be the first one to admit it. The internet though found the very idea distasteful.

David Palumbo-Liu continued in his piece:

We should remain alert to the fact that even self-professed “progressives” can exhibit some of the same behaviors. For example, the disgraceful performances of Mike O’Malley and Bernie Sanders at last week’s Netroots Nation (#NN15) event in Phoenix:

"Black Alliance for Just Immigration national coordinator Tia Oso, and Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors each briefly occupied the stage to draw attention to critical issues related to structural racism in America. Cullors acknowledged that while she took no pleasure in shutting down the discussion between Vargas and O’Malley, she felt compelled to, because she contended:

We are in a state of emergency. If you do not feel that emergency, then you are not human. I want to hear concrete action plans."

O’Malley’s response was “of course” black lives matter, followed by “all lives matter,” effectively erasing the specific ways black lives in particular are targeted by both structural and informal racist violence in all shapes and forms. Sanders scolded the demonstrators, brusquely made reference to his legacy of civil rights work, and threatened to leave the stage, and then plowed ahead with his prepared remarks.

Sanders is as progressive as they come and yet in July of 2015 he was unprepared and ineloquent when speaking on racial issues in America. If the leaders of our collective movement we call liberalism and progressivism cannot talk about this stuff then we HAVE TO. It's necessary for not only the future of our country (as baby-boomers retire, white population declines) but for the morality of our country.

We're all susceptible to inherent bias (or "emotional racism") and we all need to get better at discussions which may paint us in a negative light. If we as liberals continue to shut down discussions on racism past a certain point (the point where we feel comfortable) then the festering inequality in America is only going to get worse.

Was it racist or important when Nicki Minaj called out the VMAs? We'll never fucking know because white people swooped in very quickly to make the discussion about them. Let's stop doing that.

-------

Sorry for the ramble. Again I wanted to make it longer but that'd be terrible for everyone I think. Here's some reading though that touches on this subject that I suggest everyone checks out:

"Segregation Now" in The Atlantic

How White Liberals Shut Down Conversations About Racism by Nancy Letourneau

10 Ways White Liberals Perpetuate Racism by George Sachs

"The cult of white liberal race-deniers: David Brooks, Sandra Bland and race denying at its worst" by David Palumbo-Liu

TL;DR - White Liberals shut down conversations about race whenever it extends beyond the easy gotcha moments or the conservative racial bias.

 

[Dongs Macabre]

Yeah, there are definitely a lot of supposedly progressive people with some weird reactionary views, like those libertarian atheists you see so often online and those people who complain about PC/SJW/outrage culture ruining everything. These people are only ever progressive when it's socially unacceptable not to be, like when it comes to gay marriage, but when it comes to stuff like BLM or trans people using washrooms, their bigotry comes out.

Even here in Vancouver, which is pretty diverse and liberal, I notice a lot of racism towards Asian people like me and people of other ethnicities. Sometimes it's blatant (for example, one time this white guy yelled at me and my sister and told us to go back to China, which is weird since this was in Richmond), but often it's just casual remarks and jokes from people that are generally liberal. I'm definitely guilty sometime of the kind of racism mentioned in the OP, though, and I try to notice when this happens and try to improve myself.

 

[LiquidSword]

Important words

Wow great post.

 

[Erevador]

"The cult of white liberal race-deniers: David Brooks, Sandra Bland and race denying at its worst" by David Palumbo-Liu

TL;DR - White Liberals shut down conversations about race whenever it extends beyond the easy gotcha moments or the conservative racial bias.

That's a terrible article. David Brooks isn't anywhere close to being a liberal.

 

[marrec]

That's a terrible article. David Brooks isn't anywhere close to being a liberal.

David Brooks is every liberal's favorite conservative because he's secretly a liberal voice. He's hardly the only example we can dig up though.

 

[akira28]

This thread is one of the good ones. Some thought provoking posts in here.

 

[Erevador]

David Brooks is every liberal's favorite conservative because he's secretly a liberal voice. He's hardly the only example we can dig up though.

Brooks was a William F. Buckley protege. He is about as classic of a conservative as we can find. Saying he's "every liberal's favorite conservative" is misleading. Most liberals know him as that guy who shows up on PBS after every presidential debate to declare the Republican the victor. He's not the fringe-right maniacs on FOX news, but that doesn't make him some kind of "secret liberal."

Articles like this undercut their own point by getting their facts wrong.

 

[marrec]

Brooks was a William F. Buckley protege. He is about as classic of a conservative as we can find. Saying he's "every liberal's favorite conservative" is misleading. Most liberals know him as that guy who shows up on PBS after every presidential debate to declare the Republican the victor. He's not the fringe-right maniacs on FOX news, but that doesn't make him some kind of "secret liberal."

Articles like this undercut their own point by getting their facts wrong.

I understand your reticence but I'd suggest reading the article. The author simply uses David Brooks as a jumping off point.

 

[Erevador]

I understand your reticence but I'd suggest reading the article. The author simply uses David Brooks as a jumping off point.

I did read it. It uses Brooks as the main example throughout, which is misleading. I don't think the article is entirely wrong on certain points, but the central conceit is fatally flawed because of the choice of subject matter. Brooks is exactly the kind of nostalgist conservative who we would expect to hold these beliefs.

From the article:

Then it suddenly struck me. Even the best critiques of Brooks make the same mistake I would’ve made. They go too far in treating Brooks as if he were a rational human being, open to reason, evidence, argumentation. I came to realize that nothing can or will dislodge him or others like him from their privilege; they lack the authentic humility to give up one iota of their self-righteousness, for in so doing they would concede an ounce of power. And here I am broadening my focus beyond David Brooks to that sizable portion of the white liberal class who simply don’t and won’t get race in America.

As a young staffer on the National Review, Brooks was wined and dined by William Buckley's inner circle of high class conservatism. They took him on their yachting expeditions. How is any of this surprising from him, or in any way informative about liberal behavior?

 

[Fine Ham Abounds]

Could be like my friend. She's black and works in Silicon Valley as a iOS developer at Dropbox. She gets all kinds of liberal racism.

"Wow you're a great example of your people"
"Wow I didn't even know black women knew how to program"
"You must only date white guys living out here"

etc

I mean, are these old friends who were messing with her, or are these people with so little self awareness they actually thought that would be an acceptable way to introduce themselves?

She shoulda said, "You must only date your hand if that's how you introduce yourself to a woman"

I dunno, those first two are just beyond the pale though

 

[marrec]

I did read it. It uses Brooks as the main example throughout, which is misleading. I don't think the article is entirely wrong on certain points, but the central conceit is fatally flawed because of the choice of subject matter. Brooks is exactly the kind of nostalgist conservative who we would expect to hold these beliefs.

From the article:

As a young writer on the National Review, Brooks was wined and dined by William Buckley's inner circle of high class conservatism. They took him on their yachting expeditions. How is any of this surprising from him, or in any way informative about liberal behavior?

The author himself confesses that he wasn't surprised at Brooks' behavior (we shouldn't be, obviously) but his words mirror many middle American self-professes liberals who would deny racial injustice in America today. The author also focuses on Sanders and O'Malley as an example of true progressive ignorance. And make no mistake, Brooks is certainly not an example of the conservatism popular in the American Right today.

I see your points and agree with some, but I think the article is still an insightful read.

 

[Chie Satonaka]

It depends on how they present themselves. If they are dressed up like gang member or presenting the body language, then yes, whether they be white, black, or Hispanic.

If they looks like a normal person, then no.

We are told to not judge a book by its cover, but that is almost always our first impression. We usually look at someone long before we have any other way to interact or sense (smell, talk, touch) Its human nature to judge and understand our surroundings.

I would get vastly different reactions to people depending on how approach them depending on how I'm dressed and carrying myself. Its why we wear suits to job interviews. We are always being judged by everyone. I'm not saying I like that, but its the truth of human nature.

I take issue with this.

There is no universal "gang member" dress code, similarly to how there's no universally "normal person" dress code. If you find certain styles of dress unappealing, that's your prerogative, But associating specific body language, mannerisms, dress and style, ect to what amounts to stereotypes in glancing at/meeting someone is, at best, shallow as fuck.

No, you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, and no, everybody doesn't size everybody up immediately by the very first way they present themselves. Obviously you don't want to go into a job interview with your gear on and your pants sagging, but a job interview is significantly different than what I'm talking about here, and what this thread at large is about.

 

[MGrant]

That we unconsciously make assessments of people based on their race, gender, ethnicity, nationality, income level, fashion, and so forth is an important fact to understand. Maybe "everyone's a little bit racist" is not the most elegant way of putting it, but if we run away from this fact, we lose the ability to stay conscious of how we are including and excluding people from society.

As OP put it, it's possible for me to simultaneously know that there's no ethical reason to distrust, say, a group of minority teenagers simply because they are members of a minority group, and yet also acknowledge that I just don't feel as comfortable around them as I would members of my own "tribe." I know that I personally tend to subconsciously associate European-descended people more readily with "American," and Latin, African, Asian, and other people of color as "foreign," regardless of where these people are actually from. Same thing with native English speakers who have standard American accents. By being conscious of these biases, I am able to more carefully plan so that I can include more people in my life, or at least avoid excluding people simply because of their heritage.

I currently live in Taiwan, and while this is quite different from growing up as a person of color in the US, I do feel I'm finally gaining an analogous perspective to what foreigners in America must experience. Here, I work constantly to improve my Mandarin, my accent, my ability to function in society, and yet there are still people who will quite literally run away at the sight of me, or immediately announce "A foreigner!" to the other people around (granted, that one is usually just little kids and the elderly). And I've also found myself subscribing to some of the local biases -- Taiwanese people are friendly and nice, Mainland Chinese people are not as trustworthy, white foreign men are promiscuous loudmouths -- which goes to show how little exposure you need to a culture before you start internalizing prejudice. Which blows my mind when I think that young people are growing up with American biases from birth, and will never really have the chance to rationalize them if they can't leave that society.

 

[JustenP88]

As a white liberal, I just want to chime in and say the emotional racism thing, by your definition, is something that affects me occasionally. I've only had a handful of non-white friends throughout my life so, on a personal level, I do have a subconscious problem with relating to different ethnic groups. When I'm alone reading about some bullshit racial injustice on the internet, I've got all sorts of opinions on the matter. However, if I'm being honest with myself, if I was in a room with 10 black people and that subject came up, I would probably want nothing more than to get the fuck out.

 

[APF]

I was simply using that as an example of 'white male liberals' doing things that other people told them were good to do for their own personal benefit.

Who specifically are you talking about? How do you know what their motivations are?

 

[Dio]

Who specifically are you talking about? How do you know what their motivations are?

I know it sounds like a copout to use anecdotal evidence, but one of my close friends did exactly that. He confided in me that he knew this one woman who was really into what he called 'tumblr feminism' and he seriously thought that this woman was going to grant him sex once she realized how sensitive he was and how much he supported women's struggles.

Hey, they're out there. It also muddies the waters when women have to wonder if a guy is sincerely supporting their cause and wants to help them out or if they just have ulterior motives - and it's certainly not only with feminism, it's with all kinds of things outside of that too.

 

[APF]

I know it sounds like a copout to use anecdotal evidence, but one of my close friends did exactly that

So you have an insincere friend, therefore we're suffering a rash of this behavior? I call complete BS.

 

[marrec]

So you have an insincere friend, therefore we're suffering a rash of this behavior? I call complete BS.

It's something that's been talked about a lot especially on Twitter about it happening to vocal feminists. Some even have a term for it "fake ally" and "faux-minist".

 

[APF]

It's something that's been talked about a lot especially on Twitter about it happening to vocal feminists. Some even have a term for it "fake ally" and "faux-minist".

That's actually something different. I believe the derogatory term for the person Dio is describing is "white knight"

 

[Dio]

So you have an insincere friend, therefore we're suffering a rash of this behavior? I call complete BS.

I seriously am not trying to be confrontational here. When I said 'rash of behavior,' I didn't mean it like it was a huge problem, thus the word of the use 'rash' - implying it really wasn't a big deal. If my wording was wrong, I apologize. It seems like you're interpreting what I said as if it's an epidemic that's causing a huge societal problem. Insincerity with dealing with things like racism and feminism has been around for a very, very long time, but in my example I was using the people who jumped on the Gamergate shitstorm for their own benefit as a 'rash of behavior.'

I hope you're not implying that these people don't exist - maybe you've heard of the stereotype of the fedora'd overweight gentleman with jorts and socks under sandals? Not all of them are MRAs, some of them engage in this type of behavior.

That's actually something different. I believe the derogatory term for the person Dio is describing is "white knight"

Thanks to use by Gamergate supporters, "white knight" has become nearly meaningless and basically just means 'a guy who doesn't support Gamergate', but in the traditional sense, you are completely right.

 

[APF]

I seriously am not trying to be confrontational here. When I said 'rash of behavior,' I didn't mean it like it was a huge problem, thus the word of the use 'rash' - implying it really wasn't a big deal. If my wording was wrong, I apologize.

"A rash of [x behavior]" implies a lot (or at least a notable amount) in a short amount of time.

It seems like you're interpreting what I said as if it's an epidemic that's causing a huge societal problem.

I feel you don't do yourself any favors in this regard by posting that comic--it suggests you either know where it's from and are cool with that or you don't but it's in your social circles.

I hope you're not implying that these people don't exist - maybe you've heard of the stereotype of the fedora'd overweight gentleman with jorts and socks under sandals? Not all of them are MRAs, some of them engage in this type of behavior.

I've heard of a lot of stereotypes, that's not really the point (personally I prefer evidence). I read the OP as suggesting white liberals have to come to terms with the fact that, whether or not they know it, there's often a conflict between their stated beliefs and their own emotional reactions & subconscious actions. That's miles different than saying there may be charlatans actively trying to manipulate situations for their own benefit.

 

[Angelus Errare]

I mean, are these old friends who were messing with her, or are these people with so little self awareness they actually thought that would be an acceptable way to introduce themselves?

She shoulda said, "You must only date your hand if that's how you introduce yourself to a woman"

I dunno, those first two are just beyond the pale though

They're coworkers nothing more for the most part. She hasn't been out there long.

 

[Astral Dog]

Dont worry too much about it, op, most people have a little racial discomfort from time to time, for whatever reason, but as long as we understand that we are equal and respect each other, its fine. true racists wont even try to hide that, or mention their deas openly without remorse. its those ideas that are toxic, as long as people are aware of that.

 

[hellmonkey]

You can't have it both ways. Either the west is a melting pot or it's not. And secondly, when it comes to black people and white people in America especially. There is literally no excuse for the huge amounts of segregation other than one group views the other as inferior. Blacks and whites have been together for hundreds of years, gone through the same conditions, same wars, same turmoil, etc. The blacks in America even have white names and very little of their own identity remains from Africa. What makes them a different group? These are people who were purposefully stripped of everything including their names and have been chasing witness for a long time, had a religion that wasn't there's forced upon to the point where they believe more now that the people who gave it to them! If your idea that people prefer to stay within their own groups were true regarding race; then kindly explain to me why black women marry less white men when they've been together longest history wise in America. Why is it that it's asian women and white men?

You know why if you're a 15 year old you'd go hang out with the other 15 year olds instead of the retirees? because you have more in common. Like you just said. And so I'm asking you, what is it that black Americans are lacking in common with white Americans. And why do Asian people have it? Which group is that has names like Thomas, Dave, Tyrone, Damian, Amber, Kaley and last names that Hart, Woods, Clarke, Duncan...but have dark skin?

For urban blacks, there is still a huge culture difference. For suburban/rural, I don't really know. I'm guessing theres still pretty big culture difference, things like music (R&B Jazz vs rap), TV, comedy, ect. I admittedly don't have any personal black friend, just acquaintances at work, so I am far from an expert on black culture.

Even though the two races are probably more similar in culture than any time in history, they are still very different. Hell even whites have hugely different cultures just between north and south (I think very low of the southern side of my family) or rural vs urban. Somehow, we need to learn to live with each other.

 

[Josh5890]

This is one of the best forum posts I've read in a long time anywhere.

Great job OP

 

[Morrigan Stark]

I've seen this image posted re: some of the stuff said on tumblr/twitter. Dismissing black/asian/etc people's opinions regarding certain matters because you assume they're a victim of internalized racism and their perception is clouded or whatever seems to me like the zenith of being patronizing regarding these kinds of struggles.

It also doesn't help that many 'white liberals' use issues like racism and sexism to elevate themselves or for their own benefit in society - you'll notice that there's a recent rash of white males during the Gamergate debacle who started being almost militant feminists because they assumed it would help them to get into women's pants.

[citation needed]

And no, one anecdote of "your friend" doesn't mean shit.

 

[Dio]

[citation needed]

And no, one anecdote of "your friend" doesn't mean shit.

Wording was bad, I deleted the post because it was derailing the thread and this thread is about racism. Shouldn't have said 'many,' because I don't believe it was many, but as was said further up in the thread,

It's something that's been talked about a lot especially on Twitter about it happening to vocal feminists. Some even have a term for it "fake ally" and "faux-minist".

 

[sphagnum]

I tried explaining this concept to a white coworker the other week and he just couldn't process it. He immediately got defensive and reactionary. It's something that affects all of us, particularly those of us who are white and grew up in a privileged bubble, and I'm glad that I am able to at least be self critical. I can't imagine living in 2015 with the same worldview that I did when I was a Republican.

 

[CrushDance]

For urban blacks, there is still a huge culture difference. For suburban/rural, I don't really know. I'm guessing theres still pretty big culture difference, things like music (R&B Jazz vs rap), TV, comedy, ect. I admittedly don't have any personal black friend, just acquaintances at work, so I am far from an expert on black culture.

Even though the two races are probably more similar in culture than any time in history, they are still very different. Hell even whites have hugely different cultures just between north and south (I think very low of the southern side of my family) or rural vs urban. Somehow, we need to learn to live with each other.

I feel like you missed the pint entirely. This "difference" you're talking about is by design, the two are much more similar than not. And you still haven't answered the whole thing with Asians.

 

[Deleted member 125677]

Great write up! Implicit Bias is definitely a thing.

I got a bit hung up in the definition on one of the terms:

intellectual racism is knowing, on a purely academic level, that racism is wrong

This definition doesn't make sense.

I really think the opposition you are describing is: Intellectual anti-racism vs. Unconscious racism ?

 

[Ikael]

"Emotional racism" or "subsconscious racism" is a deeply ingrained instinct in our human brains and it has zero to do with society. Long before we start to socialize or before we even possess lingüistic capacities, we get biased towards people who looks like our parents, and the further other people deviate from that "normal standard", the more unsettling we are going to feel. It is wholly instinctual, and you have as much chance to change that as you are likely to change your sexual orientation.

That being said, I think that it is tremendously good to be aware of one's own thought processes, and that the value of the OP's post lies in being aware that racism arises not trought that instinct per se, but rather from the ad hoc justification that you said towards said said instinct / feeling and your actions upon it.

However, I deviate from his other solutions. The problem is not to "ignore" your racial instincts / inherent bias, it is the solution instead. I think that this is a clear case of "don't think about the white elephant", and there are social studies that points at this direction. Racism arises when you start to overthinking your initially instinctual reactions and start to justify them with your rational mind "well, I am feeling uneasy with these black dudes in the metro... but that's because they're more likely to be criminals! There are even statistics to back it!".

I think that the correct attitude would be to just shrug your instinctual reaction off and pay attention to your first hand experience instead. You might feel uneasy the first time you arrive into the big city and enter into a crowd of people who are not of your own race, but by the 2938th time that you do it and nothing happens to you, you would have grown quite used to it.

It is convivence, "normality" and life experience what overcomes instinct, not rational discourse, me thinks. but then again, western culture has a quite biased view against instinct while it has a too much of a positive bias towards logical thought, but that's an entirely different (and interesting) topic altogether.

 

[Clefargle]

Well he did start off by saying he wsn't talking about all white liberals because they're not a monolith. But what are your thought processes, how are you struggling with racism. What is this unracism thing?

I'm from Alabama, I've become more and more conscious about how my conservative homeschooled fundamentalist Christian upbringing influences my thinking daily. I recently caught myself making pseudo-slurs and stereotyping (jokingly) Hispanic people. I knew that I used to have negative attitudes towards black people, and I think I've made progress on changing my behavior and though processes through working with a lot of black people and hanging out. I think being able to admit your own biases is one of the most "progressive" things a person can do, and it's the first step to consciousness raising. I don't pretend like my racism is behind me because I still struggle with other biases. Racism is no different, but I have been interested in the line between nationalism and casual racism. I like jokes and racial humor which is inherently racist but in a facetious manner. I think I used to conflate the two anytime I would tell "Mexican" jokes. Sure, I wasn't serious about my observations, but so was also acknowledging what I saw as cultural/ethnic stereotypes that I can see as offensive or generalizing. The point is, I don't pat myself on the back about my liberalism because I think it's really hard to not have biases. Everyone does, that's not to say "everyone is racist" but everyone certainly has biases. I think "everyone is racist" is a sort of catch-all excuse for people to sidestep trying to improve themselves. I work in a biology lab, and it's important to try and eliminate biases when performing science. This is difficult and means a lot of self doubt. I've been trying to apply this to my personal life, and When people called me out on my bad jokes I verbally admitted I was still fighting racism. I still am, and when I said "unracist" I meant that I am not one of those liberals OP mentioned that sees themselves as "post racist". I suppose I should have used that term instead. But there you go.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

To me this tension really brings out the "my cause is greater than your cause" reactionary.
As a Latino, we are just relegated to being mentioned in immigration, not bias in employment, or any other forms of discrimination. It brings out the tribalism that may be inherit in us.

White liberal bias is a result of what other posters have pointed out, an echochamber, effect. And BLM, and Black femisnists on Twitter are great positive forces to bring about these conversations.

This was really apparent with last years Academy Awards, many Mexicans were proud of Alfonso Cuaron and what he said. If you look at his film history, he has a bit to say about class and race, Y tu Mama Tabien, and Children of Men(actually even more poignant in the refugee crisis in Europe) as an example. But yet the whole thing was dismissed as a whitewashing affair.

Also, what about the Vietnamese, the Filipinos, Pacific Islanders, etc. They are not part of the "model" Asian immigrants, I would like to see more input from them. They seem just as marginalized.


eh, If I am all over the place, forgive me, I've not had a good day.

 

[zero shift]

Good OP. Personally I don't think I necessarily agree with white liberals favoring intellectual racism over emotional racism. I feel that they often lack both. The topic of racism is often something they can use for their own means, but (from my anecdotal experience) they seem to back down once it is something that potentially harms them. For example, it isn't uncommon to hear many liberals scream how a stronger social safety net is needed or that public schools need more funding. They are more than happy to give the "inner city" as a prime example of a demographic that is suffering from this. However, you will never hear a peep about desegregation. Outside of Seattle, I can't think of any place in the country where you will hear people say things like "they should have schools have a (near) equal amount of white, black, and hispanic kids. And I have never heard something like "we should dismantle the ghettos by strategically placing the poor in those areas to more prosperous places in the city."

Its usually things that benefit them. Of course they want better social safety nets, because they are still young and vulerable to the economy. Of course they want better schools, because they will soon have kids. However they don't benefit from being able to come into more contact with people who could potentially be hoodrats, especially their children. This way of thinking bleeds into other topics as well. Raise the minimum wage? Sure. Look into the racial wage gap? No. Create more "middle class" jobs for the economy? Of course! Fix the racial discrimination in terms of hiring practices? No!

Again, many white liberals see attacking racism as a means to get their ideology passed. However actually fighting off racism entirely isn't something they are particularly interested in. This also isn't a problem limited to white liberals, but black liberals too, who I feel are just as bad as white liberals as they equally want "progress" but only in their terms.

 

[CrushDance]

I'm from Alabama, I've become more and more conscious about how my conservative homeschooled fundamentalist Christian upbringing influences my thinking daily. I recently caught myself making pseudo-slurs and stereotyping (jokingly) Hispanic people. I knew that I used to have negative attitudes towards black people, and I think I've made progress on changing my behavior and though processes through working with a lot of black people and hanging out. I think being able to admit your own biases is one of the most "progressive" things a person can do, and it's the first step to consciousness raising. I don't pretend like my racism is behind me because I still struggle with other biases. Racism is no different, but I have been interested in the line between nationalism and casual racism. I like jokes and racial humor which is inherently racist but in a facetious manner. I think I used to conflate the two anytime I would tell "Mexican" jokes. Sure, I wasn't serious about my observations, but so was also acknowledging what I saw as cultural/ethnic stereotypes that I can see as offensive or generalizing. The point is, I don't pat myself on the back about my liberalism because I think it's really hard to not have biases. Everyone does, that's not to say "everyone is racist" but everyone certainly has biases. I think "everyone is racist" is a sort of catch-all excuse for people to sidestep trying to improve themselves. I work in a biology lab, and it's important to try and eliminate biases when performing science. This is difficult and means a lot of self doubt. I've been trying to apply this to my personal life, and When people called me out on my bad jokes I verbally admitted I was still fighting racism. I still am, and when I said "unracist" I meant that I am not one of those liberals OP mentioned that sees themselves as "post racist". I suppose I should have used that term instead. But there you go.

This is a great post and shows a shocking awareness of the key issues. Good on you, keep it up.

 

[Doc_Drop]

Great OP and some really insightful conversation going on here.

As another white male liberal (although not how I would define myself) I accept that there will inevitably be situations where I have to check my own instincts in decision making and body language. I think for me this comes from growing up in an environment that was dominated by other white people and the role that media has played into that. Fortunately I was raised by hippy-type liberal parents who have been incredible in guiding me to more self-aware and conscious of my own thoughts and prejudices as I matured.

One of the main problems though is segregation as I have grown up. With no people of colour at my primary school, and only a limited amount of diversity in my secondary school, opportunities to share experiences and culture was limited. Thankfully I played a number of sports during that time I felt my experiences change and felt more of a realistic connection with a larger variety of people. Getting into music and gigs in my teens also helped broaden my experiences but getting really into reggae, dub, jungle, DNB etc really expanded my own consciousness. On the other hand that comes with pitfalls in that sometimes you are only getting to know cultures and people in a slightly shallow way which as I got older I understood.

But much like quite a few people in here I know that when odd thoughts and instinctual reactions that don't fit with my overt worldview come into my head I must address and evaluate these thoughts, why I felt a certain way, and how I present myself to help become a better person in the future.

Hope this makes sense

 

[Clefargle]

This is a great post and shows a shocking awareness of the key issues. Good on you, keep it up.

Thanks, it's never easy to self-improve. But the moment I heard myself say "I'm not racist, but..." I realized that I was essentially parroting conservative talking points I've heard over the years. There is something to be said for criticizing someone's culture. Not all cultures are created equal and it's nonsensical to pretend they are all great. But there is a leap in logic from talking vaguely about broad culture norms and then suggesting that an individual of a certain ethnicity is behaving or will behave a certain way because of that culture. It implies that any Latino is as representative of the culture as any other Latino. That is where it is inherently racist unless you actually know the person deeply enough to speculate on how their upbringing affected them. For example, there have been observations that anti-gay attitudes are more prevalent in "black"/urban/ghetto cultures. That observation may be well founded, but to extrapolate that to an individual's attitudes would be a step too far. If I knew this person well enough to hear his opinions and history, then I might be able to make a statement about how I perceive his bias was influenced by his culture. The problem comes when you treat a person of any given demographic as representative of the entire group. This is wrongheaded in multiple ways.

First, cultures are not well enough defined to use this way. It may be unfounded for me to equate the black communities of Compton with those of LA. They may both be predominantly black, but that's the facet I'm trying to make a statement about, so it can't be the only feature we rely upon to group these cultures. It's racist to treat any community as representative of the entire culture because there are more factors at play than just their skin and may be local.

Second, I think that "race" or ethnicity may exist only as a societal construct. But so is currency and it has real world effects. Using these handles as catch-all terms is fine, but making precise statements about groups of people is impossible. Without genetics, each persons bias is used to categorize other people. Some people look white, but they are actually Jewish, Armenian, Latino, ect. Also, some people self identify as one race or the other when they are mixed. And we are almost all mixed anyways. So making statements based upon such flimsy terms is foolish.

Lastly I think that demonizing a "bad" culture is actually counterproductive. When people talk about thug-culture, they don't just mean criminals. They mean predominantly black, drug centric, poor people. This culture was created by the slums created by serger gated housing, drug war, and police policy. These people were born into a world that you probably can't understand unless you did too. Taking a broad brush approach to stamping their culture out only empowers it. If you unequally arrest people wearing baggy pants and backwards caps, you are only galvanizing communities against the police and glorifying "thug-life". Plus, you might make a criminal out of someone that was just minding their own business. Police harassment is a major problem in black communities and this leads to increased negativity towards police. The same could be said for stereotyping "Muslim culture". I used to agree with Sam Harris about how Islam was the most evil of all religions and should be eradicated with predjudice. But the number of violent extremist Muslims are really low compared to the vast majority of them. And their opinions on scripture are as varied as Christians. I would bet that the American "Christian" perspective influenced our bad decisions with Iraq and Afghanistan. These could have potentially been avoided by a more nuanced view. And when Muslims are demonized as terrorists, you invoke more extremism. But how do you change a very negative culture without using force or demonizing? Education, without education, people will repeat the stereotypes their parents instill in them.

 

[Heartfyre]

I wonder if it's even possible to fix emotional racism. I've had the stray thoughts, like everyone else -- walking in a city, after midnight, a black man passes me in the otherwise empty street, and the thought comes unbeckoned: "am I safe?" Of course, they pass me by without incident, or even a word. In fact, I've never had a negative encounter with a person of another race that I can remember. Yet the thoughts will come, instinctually, and I intellectually choose to not act on them. Yet these emotional responses are not confined to race: a man with Down's Syndrome lived near my university and would walk the street listening to music on his iPod, and would then tunelessly bellow out the lyrics. Emotionally, I would feel annoyed at the disturbance to the peace. Intellectually, I know that I shouldn't act at all, and I never did.

I don't think I can change these emotional reactions, and because of that, I don't think I need to apologise or feel shame for them. I don't act on them. What more can be done? I wonder, once institutional racism is erased, what more can be done when we hit into a wall that human psychology presents us with? I find it hard to imagine that there will ever be a time when 100% of people won't have a subconscious racist thought towards black people, just like how there's unlikely to be a time when 100% of black people won't subconsciously inwardly scoff when they hear a white person make a comment about race matters.