Chezzymann
Member
From what I heard you can't be racist against white people because racism is the oppression of a group by society (intention or not) and white people aren't being oppressed.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
"Super racist" pool safety poster prompts Red Cross apology
- Thread starter Guevara
- Start date
- Status
From what I heard you can't be racist against white people because racism is the oppression of a group by society (intention or not) and white people aren't being oppressed.
TimeEffect
Member
The kid in the middle is blocking the diver.
Okay, that's bullshit and we know it. They came out with the poster, it obviously got cleared by some bureaucratic chain. Removing it is entirely about damage control and says nothing about what they think. They aren't going to dig their heels in about something like this.
I've specifically had clients ask for these kinds of changes when choosing stock footage. "We need more minorities, but make sure the one for the obese lady is white."
CornBurrito
Member
Gotta make sure to be super focused on skin color so that the "cools" and "uncools" on a swimming etiquette poster are equally distributed?
HawksWinStanley
Member
I'd be curious to see how they changed the poster.
Chezzymann
Member
If you change just one kid its an even 3 3 for the uncool kids (right now its 2 light skinned and 4 dark skinned)
HawksWinStanley
Member
I was told earlier in this thread that those light-skinned kids aren't actually white,
As I said on the previous page, we really need to get over this aversion to the word Racism, as a society.
It's been said before, but it's almost as if people are more afraid of being called a racist than they are of actually being racist.
OnionPowder
Member
Could be worse
He is pouring acid into the pool
omg, my wife and I were literally about to stay at that hotel soon. It's now a Hilton.
You aren't oppressed in any form that is solely tied to your race. you are very free to do what ever you please. meanwhile I have to act a certain way or risk being judged for just how "ethnic" i act or whatever for fear of being labeled.
White is the default actor and can be anything in media good bad indifferent. Other people of color are silo'd into certain roles and tropes. There is a lot to unpack and I hope you would just get off of your high horse for a sec and stop being so defensive about this.
Gentleman Jack
Member
Imposing your implied level of standard before something could be identified as 'racism' would require mind-reading and gives carte blanche for racists to smokescreen their behavior "It wasn't me it's the statistical bias!"
Folks need to not overreact to the dreaded r-word as if it paints them as a cross-burning member of the KKK. Is the artist about to incur damages as a result of one person writing a letter? Or someone on GAF thinking hey maybe this is racist? No? Then you're blowing this way out of proportion.
A bit chicken and egg aren't we?
I mean, if you're supposition is that the Red Cross only changed the poster because people would be offended by it's supposed racism... then isn't that worth changing the poster over?
What person is being called racist? Point me to the person who we are calling racist. What insidious activity is which organization being accused of in this horrifying hypothetical of potential disaster and doom directed at innocents?
Because as far as I can tell, everyone is talking about a poster. Only a handful of people have even bothered to discuss the artist, and most of that has been people who feel compelled to defend them against attacks that simply are not happening. Any comments made about the Red Cross have been complimentary.
Do you understand that racism is not just something a person is or does, but also something another person can experience? Why does the focus of the conversation have to revolve around clearing the name of someone nobody is interested in talking about? You are assuming that a person feels that they are being called racist -- again, who, by whom -- and that they might experience discomfort from this and that is somehow more concerning than the fact that a poster with these clear racial biases exists.
Why is the language used to point out a mistake always so much more of a concern than the mistake itself? Why are we so concerned with the experience of the person who made a mistake and protecting and defending them instead of the person who experienced that mistake?
Why does every conversation about racism have to be about how scary some people think the word is? You're literally saying that words have power while at the same time suggesting that this set of images couldn't possibly have enough impact or power to merit the word being directed at the images which do not have feelings or businesses to be hurt.
I don't see how this makes any sense.
PreyingShark
Member
I see 2 Asian kids and 4 Black kids in the uncool group.
Prototype Viktor
Member
Looking at the redhead
same. (the kid running looks debatable, but the dude drinking a beer definitely looks Asian to me)
Every single black kid other than the lifeguard is doing something "uncool". The only Asian kids in this poster are also relegated to doing something "uncool". All the white kids are doing something "cool" or not mentioned.
Chezzymann
Member
Uhh I was agreeing with you there. I wasn't being sarcastic in that post.
I don't really mean it like that. It's more about deliberately placing minorities in positive/non-negative roles, instead of just making the races of the people random. Minorities just want to be treated the same as everyone else, but I'd still be treating them differently in order to make the poster seem as inoffensive as possible. It seems like a problem without a good solution.
Right there are people who exist that are incredibly nice decent people in almost every other aspect of life but are racists.
here is an example of that that totally changed my perspective:
From the Book Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism & Wrecked the Middle Class
Weeeell, in America, a black kid breathing is the height of uncool...
On topic, I didn't even have to read the article to know exactly what was going to be considered racist, and then I read the article and was like, "Yup, that's what I suspected." My mind immediately jumped to the lumping of the minority kids doing "not cool" things, while the white kids were doing "good," things.
We can laugh and joke about it, but so much of how we absorb information as humans is done behind the scenes, subconsciously. The associations some people would make from seeing an image of the brown kids doing something bad and the white kids doing something good is a legitimate issue. It's why including diversity can't stop at just inclusion. The conversation has to also consider representation. It's great to see a poster featuring children of varying ethnicities, but the associations with said ethnicities and pool regulations/rules is unfortunate. A lot of prejudice isn't intentionally malicious, but that doesn't absolve it from being harmful to those that it's directed against.
TheChocolateWar
Member
As I was saying in my initial response; it is the mere proximity of an allegation of racism with an individual which can result in unwanted attention. Not everyone is going to carefully parse through the entire article. They might read "Red Cross" AND "Racism" AND "Artist name" and start drafting their own letter or threat. Such potentiality is real, and one has to be cognizant of the potential harm they cause when they start misapply a particular word.
Which is nice that the posters in this particular thread or forum are doing so, but that doesn't discount the possibility that the context of this discussion might be misread, causing serious harm to the individual. I would argue that actively using terminology like racism and misapplying it to an individual can amount to gross negligence. We are aware that such terminology tends to inflame, and we are aware that people are quick to anger over simple allegations. We know many people will not read these kinds of posts in their entirety, and will quickly jump to such activities which could be harmful. Despite knowing this, we continue to use such terminology with a conscious disregard for the harm it would cause.
I'm not quite convinced of that myself. Based on the information provided in this thread, is seems like a bunch of para-professionals have attempted to expand the term racism beyond the active, belief structure environment of its etymology. That does not mean that Racism does include the experiences of a third party individual. Based on my reading of accepted grammatical dictionaries, the prevailing trend is that racism is an active belief structure. Racism does not exist by virtue of another individual's discomfort. That is not the correct use of the word.
Because, like I stated earlier, making such grammatical mistakes can have serious negative repercussions to individuals. Being blind to the potential harm causes just as much danger as the original mistake.
The term is being diluted and misapplied in modern society, leading to potential harm to the recipients of misguided use of such terminology.
I know, this is why I said "unfortunate".
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
Could be worse
He is pouring acid into the pool
The craziest thing is this photo was taken the day after Brexit
Regardless of your arguments for pedantry on strict definitions of the word "racism" I would argue that this specifically seems misguided.
Instead of accepting a broader definition of racism that includes many subtle, unconscious, or insidious forms of racism, you are saying that we need to protect the sensibilities of an entire group of what are hypothetical victims from natural language evolution.
When really what we should be doing is shining a light on these subtle, unconscious, and insidious forms of racism so that they can no longer hide and we can address them in frank and reasonable ways.
What you're advocating for is people refusing to even acknowledge potential racism because it doesn't fit your definition.
Edit:
I really don't enjoy that many discussions like this get pulled off into the weeds of pedantry instead of talking about the actual issues.
freenudemacusers
Member
As a former racist, I can confidently state this is not racist.
Shamrock7r
Member
It's not obvious, and it's not right to call people ignorant if at first glance they don't think it's racist. Two of the not "not cool" people can be assumed to be hispanic or white. Also, it's a tough picture, in my opinion to even categorize as subconciously or passively racist without more context. Not every ad or commercial is going to have equality with race and gender on who is looking foolish. I've seen commercials where a white person looks foolish and a black person is correct, and vice versa.
That being said, absolutely nobody should be upset if the Red Cross goes ahead and changes it, even if you don't think its racist in any way.
lightskintwin
Banned
Given the history of White Supremacy, Racism, and Anti Blackness, if you don't think any artwork produced in that society which resulted in the majority of white kids behaving good, and the majority of kids of color behaving badly is not at the very least a byproduct of subconscious and implicit bias then you have indeed achieved your goal of color blindness.
eso76
Member
Damn, those Blacks and Hispanics always misbehaving around pools.
To be completely honest, I think the Hispanics part might be a projection (we see the black guys first, then look at the lighter uncool kids specifically looking for traits that might reveal they aren't quite white) but frankly it does stick out.
I don't know if it was intentional of the artist or the client, or just unfortunate, but someone should have noticed and asked the artist to fix it.
To be completely honest, I think the Hispanics part might be a projection (we see the black guys first, then look at the lighter uncool kids specifically looking for traits that might reveal they aren't quite white) but frankly it does stick out.
I don't know if it was intentional of the artist or the client, or just unfortunate, but someone should have noticed and asked the artist to fix it.
Without context? What context would make this image okay?
Shamrock7r
Member
Context in the sense that we probably won't know the the makeup of the artist, and the picture itself isn't so obvious enough to me that I going to say outright that he/she was being racist, either directly or passively. As for the context of the image being ok, I don't think I can articulate my opinion any more clearly than the previous post.
All that being said, and like I said before, nobody should have a problem with them modifying or creating a new illustration to remove any doubt if that's what The Red Cross wants to do.
All of the black people other than the lifeguard depicted in the poster are doing something "uncool"
I also dont think the other two people with them are white.(Not that it would make a difference if they were) They look at the very least hispanic/Asian.
Abilidebob
Member
How did that dude fuse with a child resulting into an abomination that has a kid instead of arms and hands?
Shamrock7r
Member
It's hard to tell what some of the races are. The lifeguard up top looks white but has a darker tan than the 2 kids up top that can be perceives as white or hispanic. For me, living in a beach town it's not uncommon to see white people that look just like those two. You also have other dark skinned people that are doing nothing wrong in the image. There are 2 people swimming that are clearly black, and yea, they are both doing something "uncool", but I am not ready to say that was because of passive racism, or coincidence, and it's why I have no issue with Red Cross creating a new drawing. Also, refer back to my example about commericals a few posts up for a better understanding of where my opinion is coming from.
lightskintwin
Banned
That's the intended point of it.
I think people were just arguing that this is a bad way to go about calling out this stuff (i.e. "Red Cross creates racist poster" headlines), not that its not worth discussing the poster. We can do two things at one.
Calling someone a racist/bigot/sexist/etc for things they did (at worst) subconsciously/ (at best) unintentionally, is a great way to put them on the defensive and prevent conversations from happening at all (or again, at best they'll probably concede to you and walk away hating you and dreading the next "conversation" they get to have when they make an honest mistake).
lightskintwin
Banned
I think the term racist/racism get's used far too frequently and dilutes the term overall, however I don't think it's that big of reach to conclude the poster is racist, whether intended or not. The fact that people didn't notice it for this long, shows how normalized negative associations to minorities are and the blind spots people have towards them.
He's drowning someone.
perfectchaos007
Member
The OP title said "Super Racist" so when looking for racist context I thought he himself was drowning ( because it perpetuates the blacks can't swim stereotype ). But if I wasn't told this drawing was super racist I wouldn't have had any clue why what he was doing was "not cool". If he was drowning someone you would think another hand would be sticking out of the water or something
I'm going to assume you're joking and that no person could ever be malicious enough to burn children with acid. Right?Could be worse
He is pouring acid into the pool
Please let it be that.
Unfortunately, no. That asshole was trying to get the black kids out of the pool by dumping acid in it. Fortunately, the water to acid ratio was in favor of the water, so it was harmless.
This is the era of American history my mother grew up in. Not my grandmother, or great grandmother, but my mother. She will sometimes tell me stories about how she wasn't allowed to drink from "Whites Only" water fountains, and had to use the restrooms in the back, labeled "Coloreds." Not to mention being harassed by police offers on the regular. She's 66 years old. I'm 36.
Gotdatmoney
Member
Man who cares? Everyone on this forum can read. We aren't gonna stray from callin things what they are because people can't be bothered to read the story.
Again who gives a shit about some poor unfortunate gaffer running away in genuine confusion over the thrwad title and content. This is a discussion post, if you aren't here to read you aren't entitled to some "true" definition of what is and isnt racist.
People who are more concerned with being called racist or things being labelled racism opposed to the underlying point don't need to be coddled with some idea that racism is only when you call someone nigger or wear face paint while spitting at a Native person. The consequences of actual racism reach much further than your ideal of the damage of applying the term "incorrectly". Come the fuck on.
If that is what you actually think racism is you are living a sheltered life man. One that has very little application to the modern world in which everything and the outcomes people live right this second are still entirely based on race.
The term isn't being misused. The issue is everyone wants to plug their ears and pretend racism doesn't exist because minorities can have jobs and not be considered 3/5ths of a person. Yall can't be serious here. That poster is a manifestation of years of negative stereotypes about black people that have been primed in the general population. Stereotypes rooted directly in racism. You are literally talking none sense.
paperboywriter
Member
Seems so irrelevant in face of everything that happened this week.
lightskintwin
Banned
Then why post in this thread?
The guy with beer and shades is cool please stop
- Status