Yes folks seems like we can’t even go a day without college students hosting “racially themed” parties. Today, the Smokinggun.com featured some pictures from a Martin Luther King Day party at Clemson University. The theme of the party was “Living the Dream.” Yes folk this is what some ignorant people think about the dream of the Civil Rights Movement. They could care less about providing equal opportunities, stopping hate crimes, ending segregation, and several of the other noble themes of the Civil Rights movement. No they would rather celebrate d-rags, malt liquor, big booties, and blackface. To them this is what Martin Luther King Day is about. Their dream is making fun of African Americans, claiming that they are parodying “ghetto culture” and if they are part of the academy awards, voting for groups like 36 Mafia, since they allegedly represent “real” black life and hip hop.
A few months back I put up a post called “Halloween for White People,” which included a few pictures I found on the internet of whites in blackface; this post is an extension of that post. Here I’ll be posting pictures from facebook and these parties. As I have highlighted before, facebook is rampant with racism, but on the positive side a group of over 2,000 students is fighting back by having a group called “Students against Racially Themed Parties” (you can only access this if you have a facebook account). First let me post a few pictures from the Clemson party:
Students Against racially themed parties has collected several pages of photos documenting racist parties and racism on facebook. Here’s picture that one guy decided to put up as his profile.
I was particularly struck by the friend comment on this profile. The friend says, “i’m lovin the nig costume.”
Here are a few more
Unfortunately some of these are a little grainy, but this is some of what’s going on on college campuses. I waiting for the apologists to come out of the woodwork on the last photo with the “look her black friend thinks it’s OK.”
Pingback: screedette
Pingback: Screed
Pingback: ChurchGal
Pingback: Editorials from Hell's leading daily newspaper, The Dis Brimstone-Daily Pitchfork
what can really be said here. Hopefully these jerks will come to regret this internet exposure even more than those sex tapes from the other week…
Urg. I know someone at my (UK, old and well respected) uni who turned up at a party and found everyone there was in blackface. Ah, the universality of bigotry.
Yeah, those photo’s are pretty racist. The looting picture in particular cannot be explained any other way.
As a matter of interest, how would you reply if someone were to make that argument?
Daran, I know this question is for Rachel, but to stick my nose in, my response would be that particularly given the historical context of blackface, perhaps one black friend thinking it’s okay shouldn’t be extrapolated to “all black people are/should be okay with it”, and perhaps some further and deeper consideration of appropriateness might be a better path to take.
Since this thread seems to be moving at a snail’s pace, I’ll take a whack at Daran’s question in 4.
I think I’d focus on how few black friends this person likely has and what that means. There’s a definite power imbalance involved in these “But our one black member thought it was okay!”, and I don’t see these kids interrogating that at all.
Especially for the UConn future-lawyer crowd, that’s really shocking — these are college students who I think would need to understand power and social structures in order to do their future jobs. I’d hate to be a client of one of those UConn kids if I were ever in need of an attorney, and not because of the racial overtones of their actions, but because they just seem STUPID.
But just because something isn’t universally offensive doesn’t mean that it’s okay.
It’s not even that it isn’t universally offensive, but that the very phrase “My black friend thinks it’s okay!” is itself offensive.
Okay, so you have one or two black friends, and they don’t want to offend you, because you and your lily white ass have more power than they do and they know it, so they go along with your offensive behavior. They need your connections to power in ways that you don’t need them for much of anything except (apparently in the case of the speaker of that sentence) validating that your down with black people.
I can’t think of too many instances where blackface is acceptable, outside of theatrical performances or political activism where blackface is central to making a politically appropriate statement. I have a circle of friends that are Katrina refugees (I live in Central Texas and we got about 8,000 people from New Orleans in my home town) and if I showed up in blackface I’d be run out on a rail. We can all sit around and be Yats (from the New Orleans’ greeting “Where y’at?”), but they, as a group, don’t have to tolerate some white woman’s offensiveness the same way a single black law student at a school like UConn does.
In response to #4, I would add to the points already made by saying that people of color can be racist. We all grow up in the same white supremacist social system, which is pervasive and has an impact on everyone. Black people are not immune to white supremacy and racism. Therefore, the assumption that a black person’s approval means that something is not racist is not the case. Black people and people of color can be complicit in white racism.
Just like women are often complicit in sexism.
Rachel, are you feeling better?
Yes, my fever is gone. I think I had food poisoning.
I’m so nauseous.
There’s something deeply disturbing to this behavior. It’s especially disturbing given the long history of white portrayals of the black man as brutal, animalistic, and hyper-sexualized in order to play down their basic humanity and indicate the need to keep them as second class citizens. To put the most charitable gloss on such things, it seems to come from a complete failure to understand a lot of the background.
Certain aspects of “ghetto culture” seem to have been in their origin a response to white attempts to emasculate the black man–think of terms of address like “boy” and the fact that so much lynching and anti-black legislation had to do with the sexuality of black men. Likewise, that n-word as used among blacks at its best represents an appropriation of a term whose very existence is meant to reinforce social hierarchies.
When, though, upper- and upper-middle class white kids are imitating these tropes, such behavior is deeply problematic. In the guise of humor, they’re recycling all of the white stereotypes of black people without any of the redeeming features of an authentic response to subvert white construction of hierarchies. The statement, “What’s wrong with using the word ‘nigger?’ Black people do it all the time and it’s not racist then.” represents a congenital cluelessness, the kind in which creepy guys quote Borat lines without realizing that Borat is meant to mock the very behavior they’re taking part in. “In through irony and out the other side” as someone much smarter than me put it.
In addition to cluelessness, there’s the disturbing way in which role playing treats black people in general not as people but as representative of a wish-fulfillment of what an upper-middle class white person imagines that it must be like to allow the id to rampage unrestrained. Black people become the Other by which they identify aspects of themselves.
Finally, worse than the above two thoughts is that in many ways, “humor” of this sort is merely a way to get away with being racist by saying, “I was only joking.”
Good grief. As a college student I’m very embarrassed, but unfortunately not surprised. *midgetqueen commences much eye-rolling*
Oh, and thanks for the heads-up on this Facebook group. I’m totally joining. Anything to see the culture of fratboys’ “pimps-n-hoes” nights come to an end.
It is insensitive, but really, when are young people known for being particularly sensitive and tasteful. My question is, do they even know it is offensive or is this just an MTV generation’s version of the toga party? Nothing perpetuates black stereotypes like an MTV booty video.
Bfd.
A party that parodies the “Thug Life” videos on MTV and BET.
So friggin what.
Rachel’s Note: I’m going to let this comment through because I want people to see the kinds of bigots who are out there. Lately, I have been getting several of these comments. Generally, I delete them and just go on, but given the nature of this thread, I think it is appropriate for people to see the kind of white supremacist nonsense we deal with damn near everyday in the moderation queue. Maia and Marcella seem to attract the misogynists and Amp gets people who love to complain about child support. I get white supremacists over and over again. In fact, it is probably fair to say I get three times the hate mail of any other poster on this site. The more white supremacists I anger the more I know I’m doing the right thing.
What does that have to do with lynching people? I see flattery.
What now? Did whites invent black hip-hop culture?
Since whites have a 1.2 birth rate and blacks have a 7.1. Summer Jewstone and his rap music videos seem to be doing them a service. Look at the birth rates, that’s what who’s oppressing who, comes down to, racism doesn mean sh-t, in the face of such an extremely disproportionate birth rate.
The black race is doing great. I’m happy for them. But where are the racist lynchers who cause sisters to miscarry, Ms. Rachael Sullivan, a authority family within judiasm? It’s one of your tribes jewish provocur lies. In reality, it’s your guilt you put on others, jew’s ran the slave ships, justified with the Hamitic myth as found only in your holy Talmud. Non-jewish whites need to stop being guilty to get with the program; join in with blacks and celebrate our own cultures.
FormerlyLarry says:
“It is insensitive, but really, when are young people known for being particularly sensitive and tasteful. My question is, do they even know it is offensive or is this just an MTV generation’s version of the toga party? Nothing perpetuates black stereotypes like an MTV booty video. ”
PLEASE tell me you are not trying to claim these photos are not really racist. OR that you are going to blame black people for giving white people stereotypes to perpetuate.
If there is anyone over the age of, oh, 10, in the US who is willing to look at these pictures, know that the party occurred in “honor” of MLK day, and tell me they are not racist. I am suspect of you. Period. It does not take a genius to figure this out. It does not mean anyone is being “overly sensitive” or “too PC.” It is RACIST – can we please CALL IT THAT????
I’m sorry folks, I am losing my patience for civilized conversation on this.
EVEN IF we PRETEND for a minute that the “kids” [cough cough -they are adults goddamn it!] are only guilty of ignorance or stupidity, does no one have a problem with that??????????
Because EVEN IF I stretch every gut feeling I have to say, “Nah, they just didn’t know any better” that is a sorry statement about the backlash that anti-racism education is experiencing – don’t you think? I think it’s a fairly clear example that we are clearly doing something wrong if college students don’t know better than this.
I’m disgusted by the amount of people who are excusing this behavior.
“I think it’s a fairly clear example that we are clearly doing something wrong if college students don’t know better than this.”
And by that I mean, if college students REALLY don’t know better than this, then it tells us a WHOLE LOT about the problems of institutionalized racism and how it continues to perpetuate itself. Whether or not these students INTENDED to be racist does not belittle the fact that it WAS RACIST. The fact that so many are unwilling to admit it also another little clue that racism is still alive and well.
I for one am SICK TO DEATH of people who are staring at evidence DIRECTLY IN THE FACE and are still unwilling to call it racism.
My favorite thing about the white supremists is that they assume anyone like Rachel must be Jewish. It would be totally impossible that a “true” white woman could possibly think like she does.
Can’t beat that.
Kate L: “PLEASE tell me you are not trying to claim these photos are not really racist. OR that you are going to blame black people for giving white people stereotypes to perpetuate.”
I made no such claim. Again, I was questioning whether they knew it was insensitive or not. I think intent is critical. Unlike others, I am not presumptuous enough to claim that I can read their minds and will not assume they are all simply just a bunch of racists – end of story. Maybe they are, maybe not, will reserve that harsh judgment until other information is available.
What part of insensitive and tasteless did you find as an excuse? Is it only that I didn’t describe the students by one magic little word? Again, to me the usage of the word implies a certain level of clairvoyance based on the information provided. Had they began chanting “white power” or something else that cast some light their motivations I would have a different opinion. Or was it that I questioned the possibility that being raised on 10 years of booty and gangsta rap videos might have something to do with it? Maybe we can agree at least that the party certainly had certain racist implications.
God…I so need to find that quote about whenever racism is brought up, its always white people bringing up intent, as if it means more than the consequence.
OK Pheemo, For just a moment, lets take this out of the racism debate:
If you stabbed someone with a pen in a dark parking lot, should you simply be judged JUST by the consequences, or should the fact that your intention was to defend yourself from an attack (self defense) also be taken into consideration by the DA and public opinion. Intentions are important.
Or…
suppose in preparation for your trip to Japan you payed a local Japanese kid to teach you some of the language and customs. Also, the kid being a prankster, decided to teach you some very offensive words rather than proper polite greetings, etc. You didn’t know the difference, should your intentions matter?
Yes, I am the Zionist conspiracy. LOL!!
Formerlylarry: threats, which are nothing but intentions, are punishable by law. White youth dressing up as blacks, donning blackface, as a form or entertainment is, indeed, a threat. It shows all the latent power that these white youth hold relative to their position in society. They can pick and choose what they mock, what they use as entertainment, because the symbols, the actions, the choices made by a different group are meaningless to the white youth outside the context of entertainment and mockery.
Formerly Larry,
both of your situations require bad behavior on the part of someone else BEFORE you act. If you are acting in self defense to one guy and instead stab his friend who was just standing there, – it’s still an accident, it’s still self defense., the outcome still very much matters to the guy who got stabbed as well as his friends and family.
You might not have MEANT to hurt an innocent bystander, but you did nonetheless – what is your response in this situation?
Do you say, “You idiot, it’s not my fault you were in the wrong place at the wrong time.”
Or do you say, “I’m so sorry. I didn’t mean to hurt you, let me call you an ambulance.”
… as found only in your holy Talmud.
That made me laugh. The holy Talmud? Well, with their knowledge about Judaism being so thorough, I have no choice but to accept the rest of their screed as gospel.
Then imho, it is simply a tragedy, an accident, and any blame should be placed on the attacker that provoked the situation. I am not saying intent is everything, but it is very important. I imagine that most liberals probably think hate crimes should be judged by a different standard entirely because of intent.
I’ve got to leave for class soon, so for now I’ll just leave this link to a Powerpoint presentation called “What Does It Mean to Be White?” by Professor Derald Wing Sue of Columbia University.
http://www.uwm.edu/~gjay/Whiteness/WhitePrivilege.ppt
If you’re interested in more info, click here.
http://www.uwm.edu/~gjay/Whiteness/WhitePrivilege.ppt
I have to say that link is kind of funny in a pathetic kind of way. It reads like some old propaganda piece designed to convince you of the Jewish banker conspiracy, or some super secret government organization covering for and cleaning up after the alien abductions. Its always there, but you can’t see it until you have been “re-educated.” Spooky.
You’re arguing negligence?
I’ll buy that up to a point. But at some point it’s just silly. In law there’s a standard off reasonableness. So, do you think it’s reasonable to assume that 20something college students have no idea that wearing blackface and aunt jamima costumes to a ‘black’ themed party on a national holiday designated to honor the memory of a black civil rights leader who was killed for advocating equal protection under the law would be offensive?
I don’t.
I’m willing to give people the benefit of the doubt. But I think that this is a pretty easy question.
1) we ARE discussing racial issues.
2) Im not even going to bother, because the people who constantly inject this intent crap dont want to understand, because it would leave them with responsibility they just dont want and feel too priveledged to have to deal with.
Formerlylarry;
check out the other thread on this stuff. Somebody else had your idea about the analogy first.
Oh and thanks for the implication that a white guy must bring up intent, because minorities don’t think about that or anything.
What on earth would we do without your mighty white assistance?
curiousgyrl: “check out the other thread on this stuff. Somebody else had your idea about the analogy first. ”
OK, I will check it out, I was reluctant to wade thru all the posts in the other thread.
Pheeno: “1) we ARE discussing racial issues.”
Yes, but your previous post suggested the mention of intent was somehow specific to racist debate. I only demonstated that its not. Just curious, but do you think hate crimes should be judged differently than other crimes? (ie, is shooting someone because they are black worse than shooting him for his wallet)
I have to save this one:
Frigging hilarious!!!!! In a debate about racism, let’s take racism out of it… What comes next “forget you’re black for just one moment and put yourselves in their shoes”?
FormerlyLarry writes:
Yanno, on many issues I’m to the right of Ronald Reagan, which hardly makes me a “liberal”, but I do think that hate crimes need to be judged on by an entirely different standard.
Hate crimes terrorize entire populations, that’s why they are different. If someone robs me, and I’m white, I’m not being targeted because of my whiteness, I’m being targeted because I’m there. No one else is going to go “Oh, no, there’s an anti-white robber on the loose!” because they don’t exist. But if I get gaybashed because I’m a big queer, all the other big queers (and the little ones, too) are going to feel threatened by this person who’s out bashing queers. Non-queers have nothing to worry about.
The same thing happens when someone is pulled over for Driving While Black. I’ve never been arrested for Driving While Black, but I understand it’s a pretty scary thing to happen.
That’s the difference.
More from FormerlyLarry:
First, I’m not unpersuaded to some extent by your argument. I do think that the steady diet of MTV consumed by many kids tends to dull their experience of the world. Not excusing it or saying it’s a good thing (because I think it’s a bad thing, but I digress), just saying that’s what’s going on.
Now, for the important part — can you see that doing things with “racist implications” isn’t all that far from racism? If making fun of blacks at a party is okay (which you aren’t clear about), do you see that making fun of blacks somewhere else might also get a pass, and that before long more people think it’s okay and do things you might think of as even worse?
No one starts off being a big-R Racist by burning crosses on the lawns of blacks. They start small — an insensitive remark, a crude joke — and before long they internalize what they’re doing or the jokes they are telling. In other words, even if these college kids are perfectly and completely innocent, just acting out the MTV videos they’ve seen a million times, enacting negative imagery is still a bad thing. It is the road that leads from “racist implications” to big-R Racism.
So far you’re four or five steps down that road and you’ve only got a few more to go before you get to the end.
The first step, I think, is that you think it’s not such a big deal if you make fun of other people because that’s just what people do — they have theme parties and they make fun of others.
The second step is thinking that people who are hurt by other making fun of them are complaining too much. The people making fun didn’t “intend” to be mean, even though you recognize that there are “racist implications”.
The third step is that you think trying to get you to see how this behavior is “bad” is all a part of some conspiracy, an attempt to brainwash you, and not an accurate report of their experience of being offended.
The fourth step is that you don’t see that there’s a difference between actions taken against individuals and actions taken against entire classes. You think that the kids only offended individuals rather than ridiculed an entire class.
The fifth step is that you’re now dismissing people who aren’t members of that group who are calling you out on your behavior because we’re “liberals”.
You’re now in a place where you’re backing yourself into a corner, isolating yourself from any understanding of race and racial dynamics all because you refuse to see the connection between “racial implications” and full-blown racism. But there you are — displaying some of the most common examples of full-blown racist thought. You’re dismissing real examples of how racism hurts people of color and you’re refusing to listen to others and labeling us as “liberals” who are out to propagandize you. On a scale of 1 to 10 where David Duke is a 10, you’re about a 7 right now. I guess you can feel good that you’re not an 8 or a 9, but I bet that if you work really hard at ignoring us, and keep coming up with ways to blame other people for the racist shit that goes down every day, you can make it to an 8. Something to shoot for, no?
I think this reaction comes from post-civil rights era white people learning that racism IS THE WORST THING EVER but never learning what it is.
No one’s stopping them from finding out.
pheeno, yes I agree.
pheeno,
I think many whites don’t take initiative because there are real consequences for them if they take an anti-racist stand. Those hate mails I get are a great example of this. These are whites trying to keep another white person in line. I know of a famous sociologist who apparently has to have body guards at some of his speaking engagements due to white supremacists death threats.
Of course, that is an extreme example, but nevertheless, even everyday actions against racism can result in ostracism from friends and relatives. Often, standing up against racism makes you stand out, and unfortunately, many whites who might otherwise take a stand against racism end up being silently complicit in racism because of this fear.
I’m not trying to justify this behavior, but I think it is a very common reaction to racism among whites. It certainly doesn’t mean that people can’t make a stand, but it does mean that there are risks involved
Even for white people who aren’t contemplating actually doing something significantly anti-racist that might draw death threats or the disapproval of their co-workers, paying attention to the existence of racism makes them (us) feel bad and ineffectual, and no one likes to feel like that.
Assuming the best about the intent of people makes one feel magnanimous and gracious instead. Good people assume the best of other people’s intentions. So if you have no intention of actually doing anything, it really is much more pleasurable to just be the good person and try to explain to everyone else how they are just being mean, just leaping to conclusions.
Pingback: Slant Truth » Oh I Love My Link Love
Rachel writes:
Hey, people have tried killing me before and thus far failed.
But seriously, the worst thing that’s ever happened to me is I’ve been called a “N*gg*r lover”. I have a “Black Power” fist on the right shoulder of my denim jacket and a couple of ex-Panthers’ home phone numbers in my cell phone. The risks really aren’t that great. It might mean you have to quit hanging around so damned many white people, but if they’re big racist assh0les, I don’t think it’s that much of a loss.
The worst they can do is kill you, and the most likely thing they’ll do is stop inviting you over for dinner and maybe liberate you from your job working with a bunch of racist sh1theads.
And to be blunt, if you’ve picking racist family and friends over blacks who’ve never done a thing to them, you’re part of the problem. In fact, that IS the problem.
Charles writes:
Makes them feel bad WHY?
Feeling bad and ineffectual means they aren’t paying attention. The objective of racism is making sure the dominant race remains dominant, however that needs to take place. Giving in to “I feel bad” means racism wins and the person who gave in didn’t really care about racism in the first place.
Let’s try being honest — most whites can’t be bothered to deal with racism. They care about racism as long as it doesn’t cost them anything, which is never, and ain’t going to change until either whites lose power or the Messiah comes (soon and in our days). Or, if they can be bothered, their level of effort is limited to standing on corners with signs, or writing a lot on blogs.
FurryCatHerder writes:
I see, so when I described the participants as insensitive and distasteful you somehow think that was ambiguous and perhaps I meant that it was OK?
I am not sure what to make of the rest of these giant leaps of …something, well I will be kind and just call it chaotic extrapolation. Again, insensitive and distasteful are not activities that I would classify as no big deal.
What in the world are you are you going on about? I was talking about a link to some strange PowerPoint presentation that someone else provided earlier. I was not talking about this thread or anyone in this thread.
No idea where you got this or why would you assume such a thing given the limited conversations but you are almost entirely wrong.
Wow, this is strange. Are we really to the point to where the word “liberal” itself is offensive? I wasn’t aware saying “I imagine that most liberals probably think X” was dismissive. I wasn’t even aware that I had been called out for some behavior. I could have sworn we were only discussing an issue here. I apologize if you were offended as I certainly didn’t intend it.
Here I am here making a couple of rational polite arguments over a current event when suddenly some palm reader (who hasn’t even seen my palm) strangely interprets and twists the very few things I have said then puts me on some made up 10 step racist scale. I think these enormous chaotic leaps might accurately describe the relevant issue at hand. You are more than willing to take some small piece of information, blow it up until its well pixilated, then apply some form of clairvoyant tracing, that your obviously not very good at, then use that to completely judge another person most harshly. I try to treat people a little better than that and not ascribe bad motives until there is clear evidence of it.
Larry,
I underestimated you. You’re at least an 8. Maybe a 9.
You don’t want to learn about racism, or how it works, you want to make sure you definitely not a racist.
Sorry — no can do.
Why is “palm reader” now offensive also?
Look, this isn’t a class room, and you are not the teacher here. This is a place where people discuss things. People have different opinions about things and hopefully make rational arguments supporting those opinions. Sometimes these arguments can be persuasive enough to change someone’s mind so one might consider this “learning something”. But it might be a little arrogant to assume that I should consider you the instructor and myself some student that needs to be taught. I hope I misunderstood you on that.
I think the worst thing that I experienced was having people in a car calling me an “n—-r lover” and throwing a huge chunk of ice which barely missed my head, which was strange because though I am White and write for a Black-owned publication(which some Whites definitely don’t like), I didn’t know if it was related or not, though when I wrote about how the KKK was planning to crash a NAACP meeting about White supremacist violence in several local high schools, a couple newsracks were vandalized and I think one was set on fire. But that happens quite a bit.
I’ve gotten phone calls where they’ve said “we know where you live” but that beats the ones with radio dispatch noises in the background that I received a few years ago.
But if being White and taking a stand on racism is tough, what about being a person of color and having to deal with racism day in and day out, with no reprieve, no breaks, no timeouts when you get tired, no “this is too much for me, I’ll stop now” and so forth.
It’s risky sometimes. That’s a hazard of taking a principled stand. But it’s also your responsibility to act when something’s wrong and being White still offers you a layer of protection most people of color don’t have. It’s difficult but I think it’s actually more difficult at least for me when I did nothing. Sometimes, you have to take that first step.
FormerlyLarry
How big hearted of you! You are such a great guy to be willing to attribute the best of motives to people who wear black face and celebrate racist stereotypes on MLK day! Of course, no need to attribute anything but the worst motives to anyone who might think that someone who celebrates racist stereotypes on a day celebrating a hero of the civil rights movement has racist motivations. People like that are just small minded and mean.
FCH,
It is depressing to realize that other people are treated like shit. It’s like paying attention to news from Iraq or Darfur. You know you aren’t going to do anything about it, but you still feel like you ought to. Being aware of the fact that you don’t give a shit about other people makes most people feel diminished. Much better to remain unaware that you don’t give a shit about other people. Better still to cast your self-willed unawareness as magnanimousness towards the people who are treating other people like shit. “We don’t really know the intentions of the Janjaweed militia members. I bet they are trying to do their best to protect their families. Maybe they just feel like the people in the refugee camps are a potential threat to them.” etc. Obviously for the Janjaweed and and Darfour, such an argument would lead too quickly to cognitive dissonance, so it is easier to just look away and say nothing. Presumably, FormerlyLarry would do the same for a cross burning or something else that he can’t avoid thinking of as racist, but throwing a racist part on MLK day falls into the borderlands where he can pretend to himself that denying racism is a magnanimous gesture on his part, and that it is the rest of us who are small and mean.
Agreed, by the way, that pretty much all white people don’t do shit to try to combat racism (myself included, and, unless you have some strong evidence to the contrary, I’ll assume yourself included). I’m just trying to explain why most white people who don’t do shit about racism also try to pretend to themselves that racism is something that doesn’t exist anymore or that only evil clansmen in white sheets do. To recognize that it exists, that it is common as dirt, that there are ways in which they themselves are racist, and to do nothing about it is unpleasant. Far better to pretend that nothing is wrong, that no one like them is doing anything wrong.
Are you another student of the clairvoyant arts or is this just your way of shouting down someone else? If have any rational argument beyond wrongly ascribing perverted thoughts to me, then by all means proceed. Otherwise can we please stop all the attempted ESP and personal stuff?
FormerlyLarry,
I haven’t seen anything worth treating as a serious argument from you yet on this thread. So I’m not really struggling to have a serious argument with you. Consider my response to your repeatedly going on about how you are above imputing motivations to people (while imputing motivations to FCH) as an explanation of how you are likely to be read. I’m sure that your intent is as pure as the driven snow (wind driven? diesel truck driven? who can tell), but you should be aware that when you start talking about how you are above assuming people’s intent, and therefore you would never call a group of people who held a party to celebrate racist stereotypes on MLK day racist (unless they were handing out solicitations for the KKK or otherwise behaving even more like cartoon racists than simply wearing black face), that you will be read as:
a) suggesting that all of us who leap to conclusions and ascribe evil intent to these poor innocent students are small hearted and mean
b) a self aggrandizing ass
c) trying to pretend that obviously racist actions aren’t racist at all
Likewise, when you argue that intent is important, you will be read as suggesting that:
a) the rest of us believe that intent is irrelevant
b) that so long as these poor students did not sin in their hearts, you are unconcerned by their actions
I think you are trying to pretend that we can’t guess their intent from their actions (something that people do all the time, something you just did to FCH) because restricting legitimate accusations of racism to extreme cases makes you feel like racism isn’t that much of a problem, and also because doing it in this particular way (going on about how you are above guessing people’s intent) makes you feel like a good person and better than the rest of us. I think that partly because I think both of those things are fairly typical behavior and because they match what you have written so far. I recognize that I may well be wrong, and that you might be able to demonstrate to me that your motives are entirely otherwise. I find it useful to have a guess of other people’s intent when I interact with them (and how could I not) and to adjust that based on the only evidence I have (their actions).
Now, there is also the question that FCH raised in the previous thread: are our actions (FCH, myself, everyone else who has responded to you) serving the purpose of trying to get you to recognize this incident as racist? Probably not. I think we have reached the point where we are more using you as an example than as a fellow discussant.
Also, the suggestion that over-the-top music videos on MTV are what likely leads white people to dress up in black face and mock MLK day is more than a bit bizarre and distasteful. Actually, there is another word for it, but I think you can figure it out for yourself.
Also, the suggestion that over-the-top music videos on MTV are what likely leads white people to dress up in black face and mock MLK day is more than a bit bizarre and distasteful.
Weelllll…I wouldn’t be so sure of that. MTV isn’t turning pure-hearted followers of the doctrine of racial harmony and love into bile-spewing KKKers. But it’s part of the culture – a big part, for the younger generation (defined as anyone I don’t want hanging out in front of my house). It’s the drunken-idiots-are-funny part of the culture, and it promotes an atmosphere of crudity and disrespect for everyone. That atmosphere is in turn acidic to the kind of idealism and kindness of intention that are necessary for an individual person to decide not to be personally racist. And it is a racist culture we’ve got, so if you don’t make that affirmative decision, you’re going to be very easy to lead in racist directions.
So MTV=blackface parties on MLK day, no. MTV = more people of the sort who would throw a blackface party on MLK day…could be.
Hmm,
That the idiot culture (more Jackass and Girls Gone Wild than hip-hop videos) contributes to white morons swimming in the racist culture deciding it would be fun to throw a racist asshole party does make sense to me. But it doesn’t make throwing a racist asshole party not a marker of being a racist, which was what FormerlyLarry started off arguing.
As far as I can tell “MTV Booty Video” is not a common parlance that I haven’t previously encountered, it gets 6 hits on Google. “Booty Video” gets lots more hits, but doesn’t seem to refer to a clear phenomenon. I had been assuming that “booty video” equals particularly vulgar hip hop or rap video featuring lots of barely clothed women showing off their asses (as opposed to the equivalent heavy metal videos from back in “our” day, for which the word “booty” is not used). However, if MTV is actually showing something more like “girls gone wild” videos of random drunken black women showing off their asses to the camera, I could see how “MTV Booty Videos” could fall in the same category as Jackass and Girls Gone Wild as a part of idiot culture.
I’m still not seeing why it would lead anyone to put on black face. Other than swimming mindlessly in a racist culture and being a racist.
Formerly larry;
What is your definition of “racist”? I’m kind of just curious at this point.
Rachel;
i agree with you that consequences–and the choice to opt out of them–are a problem for white people to pointing out, standing up to or otherwise addressing racism.
I was once at a family wedding where one of Amadou Diallo’s still-largely-unpunished-and-walking-free murderers was present as a guest. The realization that I was breaking bread with this person, though he was across the room, turned my stomach. That he was (unbeknownst to me until that moment) in my social network made whiteness seem more real to me.
But I didnt do anything. except point out his presence to a couple of people and act slightly horrified.
Interestingly, the reaction of my family members to my comments was to say that the whole thing was “a tragedy.” You see, he didnt mean to accidentally shoot Diallo! His inentions were good, therefore it is ok that he is free, unrepentant and actually, its “tragic” that he had to go through as much trouble/pain/accusations of being a racist killer cop as he did.
The consequences part was that I was afraid from being ostracized and accused of ruining a family wedding.
I should have posted the consequences bit on the other thread. Oops.
Clearly,
Most of you do not watch MTV. I can’t remember the last time I saw an actual music video on MTV. And when they DO show music videos on MTV, they certainly aren’t rap or hip hop ones.
I just wanted to clear that up. MTV is bad – very very bad for a lot of reasons – “My super sweet sixteen” and the new one “Engaged and Underaged,” but they aren’t really the booty video bad that you all are talking about.
I just wanted to clear that up. Unless you are specifically seeking our rap and hip hop videos (and I won’t deny that they have serious issues – they do) you won’t really find too much of them on mainstream cable.
During prime time you are correct Kate L, but during the day/morning, there are videos. Lots of them are rap and hip hop.
Charles,
Is there some pamphlet available where one can read these stock irrational and hyper defensive responses? Before FCH bizarre palm reading episode I don’t believe I ascribed any motives to anyone. Are you perhaps projecting here? Do you honestly believe that there can be no other possibility than a bunch of racists got together in an attempt mock black people in general? Just a new age klan rally?
Again, more non sequiturs.
1. “The rest of us” Do you believe that this some cultish club where everyone is required to have the same opinion or is this another clumsy attempt at ostricization. I was making an argument to individuals, not some cult. In reading the other threads on similar incidents there seemed to be a range of opinions with several people sharing my own. Are we the “them”?
2. You are again ascribing thoughts that are only in your head. I distinctly criticized those involved with the party but because I refused to pass the specific personal judgment you deemed appropriate I must be demonized. Very arrogant and cultish response. You have absolutely nothing to ascribe my level of concern except your own projections.
FCH twisted my statements beyond all recognition of original intent then decided psycho analyze me with a concocted outcome. Since I disagreed with her I was obviously a racist. Considering her dishonest vile personal attack I thought I reacted rather politely. As for the second part of you paragraph I generally give people the benefit of a doubt with regards to intentions until they become clear. It is the difference of a pessimist to an optimist.
(In the spirit of reciprocity here is my own palm reading attempt) You seem to be a very arrogant pessimist that generally believes that people are bad. Those people “them”, being bad, can eventually demonstrate their goodness by agreeing with you and become an “us.” Since the “thems” are by default bad it is ok to attack them personally and to ascribe the worst motives based on nothing but defaults. If they later turn out to be “us’s” there will be no hard feelings because they agree with you.
Yes, this would be called an ad hominem attack. It is a fallacy and also a dishonest way of trying to stop an argument and win by default rather than putting forth the effort to actually persuade someone.
Alright, I just wanted to post quickly before I run off.
I think learning that the worst thing that’s typically going to happen is being called some racially offensive name if one stands up against racism is a HUGE thing to learn. Because what a lot of people think is that if one stands in the breach, they’re going to get killed. And that just doesn’t happen because, well, it just doesn’t. Arrested, maybe. Killed, not all that likely.
It’s more likely that the white person is going to be shunned by their racist family members and to be honest, I’d like it if all of my racist family members would just stand up, identify themselvse as such, and save me the effort. I survived my kid brother asking me who all the “Sp*cs” were at my last wedding” (they were my in-laws, FWIW), I’ll survive being called stupid, racist, insensitve stuff until I assume room termperature. I’ve been out to my family as a big queer for 11 years and finding out who the ‘phobes were and weren’t quickly was a HUGE savings of time and energy. This is something I think those of us who are big queers learn really fast — there is life after being taken off the Christmas card list. Some don’t and my ex-wife blew her brains out because some people just don’t like big queers. Be kind — the person you’re being kind to may need it to survive another day.
As regards “Gee, I’m tired of fighting racism, I’m going to wrap myself up in my special white hiding place and rest”, okay, that’s one of those things everyone has to decide for themselves because being burnt out isn’t the same as being effective. I’m just now emotionally recovering from being burned out after a 2 year stretch of “Rawr! I’m angry! Rawr!” on the whole subject of trans and that’s really mellowed me a lot.
There is an alternative to wrapping oneself up in their whiteness and taking a breather, and that’s hanging in the community you’re standing up for. My experience of being in the black community is that the worst things I experienced are being called “Miss Julie” by everyone younger than me, but not young enough to be my own child, and “Auntie Julie” by everyone who’s young enough to be my child. I’m also expected to act like I live there, instead of act like a guest, which means I clean dishes, wash toilets, yell at children to get their baths, and if the kids have homework, I help them with it. I get hugged by everyone, which can be time consuming. I get slobbered on by babies, or climbed on by older kids. I also get swept up in all the family drama, the same as when I’m around my own family or other close friends. Considering that my family lives 500 miles east of here (or more …) and some of them are big homophobic assh@ts, having friends that accept me as I am, even if they think “bulld@gger” is an appropriate substitute for “lesbian”, isn’t all that bad.
Finally, because I really have to run, if you’re going to stand up for a community, being willing to identify yourself as a member of that community. Not like “I’m doing anti-racism / anti-transphobia / anti-homophobia work! Yeah, me!!!”, but, like “These are my people. I’m one of them.” My closest black friend, a woman just a few years older than me, has had my back more than once on the big queer thing (even if she persists in calling me a bulld@gger …) and that means a LOT me. I’m not going to toot my own horn by saying what I do for her, but knowing someone really does have your back is huge. If you screw up, sit down with the other person, take your lumps, learn your lessons, and get back at it.
Oh — and those of you committed to ending homophobia, the worst thing you are going to experience is going to commitment ceremonies and dancing with members of the same sex. You’ll survive just fine. We don’t actually bite.
FormerlyLarry,
Here’s the deal — when someone makes a homophobic comment to me, I have no way of knowing if they are a homophobe or not. However, it is in my best interest to assume that I’m about to be beaten, raped or murdered. I do this as a survival skill. I then rely on my experience and intuition to tell me if the person is out to get me or not. If they act defensive, it’s a safe bet that they see my offense as “my problem”, and my experience with people who see my offense at homophobic remarks is that they are threat to my safety.
It’s not mind reading, it’s just my life experience. I’m not assuming that being black is like being a big queer, but I’ve been around enough blacks for enough years to have learned that many of the same “Identify Friend or Foe” techniques are common.
Curiousgyrl,
I reserve the personal label racist as a strong pejorative. A person who purposefully harms or insults a person or a group solely based on race. A racist should be tainted. Like the word nazi I think one should be very careful of its usage else you dilute its taint.
David Duke and Louis Farrakhan are racists. Simple.
Here is where it gets murky so I will use examples to hopefully clarify. I think someone can do or say something with racial implications that doesn’t necessarily mean you are a racist. (Perhaps you could call it racist tendencies or insensitive)
When Jesse Jackson referred to Jews as “Hymies” and to New York City as “Hymietown” it certainly had racial implications and perhaps displayed racist tendencies, but he is not someone I would label as racist. I give him the benefit of a doubt.
When Sen. Byrd referred to a class of people as “white n*gg*rs” in 2001 this definitely displayed racist tendencies and he certainly was an actual racist in his past. But I think people can change and his 2001 comments, while terribly inappropriate, could conceivably be due to generational ignorance. I give him a benefit of a doubt.
I also think something (non personal) can have racial implications and although it probably is, its not necessarily a bad thing.
The Chapell show race draft (I love that skit) although it has racial implications its not necessarily bad. Stereotypical humor, when done tastefully or by the right person, can be funny.
As to the MTV stuff, I remember the effect MTV’s head bangers ball and metal culture had on me when I was a young man. Maybe I am odd, but with some twenty years of hindsight I can see how it influenced my language, attitudes and lifestyle. I simply raised the possibility, to again, give them the benefit of a doubt.
FormerlyLarry,
Constantly having to give other people the benefit of the doubt, when one is the target of the offense, is emotionally tiring.
It’s probably easy for you to give people the benefit of the doubt. So far as I can tell you’re a straight white Christian (or at least, not Jewish …) guy. It doesn’t get more privileged than that.
When Jesse Jackson referred to Jews as “Hymies” and to New York City as “Hymietown” it certainly had racial implications and perhaps displayed racist tendencies, but he is not someone I would label as racist. I give him the benefit of a doubt.
I wouldn’t label him as a racist, either. He is merely an anti-semite.
I wouldn’t label him as a racist, either. He is merely an anti-semite.
Yeah, but Jews own everything, including Jesse Jackson, and that makes it okay.
Furry Cat Herder,
I certainly hope you are being sarcastic in #67. If you are, make sure, you make that clearer in the future.
I suppose you are technically right. I lump anti-semitism in with racism. To me there really isn’t much difference.
Rachel,
As you’re not a Jew, you’re apparently unaware that everything is the fault of Jews.
This doesn’t mean that it actually is our fault, just that if someone says such-and-such group or individual did something wrong and Jews are involved, it’s automatically our fault. I was filling in the blanks. If FormerlyLarry had mentioned Mel Gibson, I’d have pointed out that as an actor, he’s part of the International Jewish Media Conspiracy, and therefore everything he does is our fault.
As for FormerlyLarry’s response, “Jewish” isn’t a race. Therefore, antisemitism isn’t racism. The only way one can conclude that they are the same is if Jews are a race. Antisemitism has its roots in the belief the Jews murdered Jesus, not in Jews being a race. Even at the time Jesus was murdered by Rome, Jews weren’t a single race. But people like to insist that Jews are somehow a race so they can shift their hatred from being based on the incorrect belief that Jews murdered Jesus to the incorrect belief that Jews are somehow racially inferior or just plain mean.
No doubt that’s true of some antisemites, but I don’t think antisemitism is the only reason people think of Judaism as a race.
Being Jewish isn’t a race, and yet one can be Jewish based solely on a parent being Jewish; it is a religion, but you can be Jewish without believing in the religion at all; it is a culture, and yet there are many different cultures that fit under the word “Jewish”; it isn’t a nationality, but there is a Jewish nation.
My point is that people can be legitimately confused about how Judaism is categorized.
… but you can be Jewish without believing in the religion at all…
I don’t buy this at all. I suppose that it can be true if you don’t believe in the religion, but do consider yourself to be Jewish. But the same is true of any religion, I would think.
For example, although my family is Jewish, I do not consider myself to be Jewish. However, many, if not most, people will consider me to be Jewish because my parents were Jewish. This is very similar to the way people decide whether or not one is Black or Native American or Asian, etc. Admittedly, I am more sensitive to anti-semitism because of my background, but that doesn’t make me Jewish.
… it is a culture, and yet there are many different cultures that fit under the word “Jewish”; it isn’t a nationality, but there is a Jewish nation.
But this is also true of Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, etc.
Are you saying that there is something about Judaism that is unique, culturally or socially? Some generality not found in other religions and cultures?
I think that FCH makes a strong point about the transition from Christ-killer to inferior and impure race.
Amp,
All of that is correct, and it still doesn’t address the mistaken belief that “Jewish” is a race. Once someone has a matrilineal ancestor who is a Jew, that person is a Jew by Orthodox Jewish law. And that would include my Japanese-American cousins because their Japanese father married the daughter of a Jew. But even without that bit of Jewish law, anyone can become a Jew, provided they agree to abide by the rules of being a Jew, etc.
In many ways it’s related to the (now defunct, replaced by the psycho suicide bomber) image of Moslems as “Camel Jockeys”, as if all Moslems were desert living Arabs, ignoring, as Malcolm X discovered (and then was murdered for discovering …), that many Moslems are blue-eyed, fair-skinned, blond-haired white people.
Christians, as a group, seem bent on racializing other religions. Jews know we’re not a race, and Moslems know they aren’t a race as well. For some reason, Christians don’t seem to be getting the message. My personal opinion is that it’s likely related to the way that Christians like to send missionaries off to distant lands and tell them all about Jesus or kill them if they don’t get with the program. Another possibility is that the racialization of “Jewish” is related to Christian beliefs that members of the African diaspora were “marked” with black skin as a sign of their sinful ancestors. Making Jews a race insures that the sin of rejecting Jesus as the messiah stays within our race, along with our Jewfros, hook noses, beady eyes and horns. Christians who claim otherwise (“I’m so confused!”) have either never read the bible (read “Esther”) or put their fingers in their ears whenever Judaism is discussed.
I see it more as Jews are an ethnicity, like the Irish or gypsies for instance, and hating an ethnic group is similar to hating a race (whatever “a race” really is. It seems to be a rather subjective way to categorize people in many instances). Think of the attempts to ethnically cleanse a population is many parts of the world, other than the scale is it really that much different than a racial genocide attempt?
FormerlyLarry,
We’re not an ethnicity either.
But thanks for not listening. I’ll be sure to write more things that I fully expect you to not listen to.
FHC said,
“As you’re not a Jew, you’re apparently unaware that everything is the fault of Jews.”
So you were being sarcastic up thread….You don’t have to be Jewish to know that this is part and parcel of white supremacist and general anti-Semetic discourse. Did you read that stupid comment upthread? I’ve been fishing anti-Semetic remarks directed at myself out of the queue for a long time, especially lately.
It’s funny that y’all are debating this, sounds like my class yesterday. I think it is fair to say Jews are an ethnic group (with a great deal of variation), even those people who aren’t very religious can still be ethnically Jewish. Maybe Jake is Jewish in kind of the same way I’m Irish–it’s in my ancestry but I don’t have a great deal of connection to it.
I think it is fair to say Jews are an ethnic group…
Technically that is correct, but that is not the way that ethnicity is commonly thought of. How many times have you heard of Catholics or Buddhists being referred to as an ethnic group? I’ve never heard that. As far as I can tell, the current usage of ethnicity refers to racial, national or clearly delineated subculture and not to religion.
I tend to think that there’s also an aspect here of being a member of a minority culture, whether you believe in the religion or not.
I mean, I’m ‘culturally’ Christian, in that I celebrate Christmas and color eggs for Easter, but I don’t believe in the invisible sky father.
Here in America that’s pretty unremarkable, but I would imagine that there are plenty of places around the world where celebrating Christmas and Easter would make me “Christian” whether I actually engaged in worship or not.
Jake Squid writes:
I think we’re only an ethnicity when we say we’re not a race. I think that’s why FormerlyLarry jumped to “ethnicity”, because if we can’t be lumped under “race”, well, the next thing in the lumping heirarchy is “ethnicity”. If there’s something “wrong” with us, well, there has to be a reason that all of us suck, and that requires that we belong to some kind of group.
If you look at the scene in “The Passion of the Christ” where all the Jews (I mention this because the stereotypes are there for all to see) say that the curse for killing Jesus is on them and all their ancestors, they have to have a way of identifying the people guilty for killing Jesus (my advice, look for anyone still propping up the Roman Empire. What? They disappeared 1500 years ago? Oh well …). That means we’ve got to be a race or an ethnicity. We can’t be something that to Christians registers as a choice.
Rachel,
It’s all sarcasm. I caught your comment upthread about catching grief because you’re named after one of the matriarches.
Ironically, most people peg me for a feminist Jew when I use my Hebrew name. It’s clearly Hebrew, but not biblical, and not a happy sounding name like Shoshanna.
FCH:”We’re not an ethnicity either.”
I could be wrong, I am just giving my opinion. Look at Bosnia-Herzegovina. The genocide by the Serbians was directed against the Muslims. As far as I know they were considered as a separate ethnic group, not just a just a different religion.
And I really wish you would stop ascribing my motives. Its rude. I didn’t “jump on” ethnicity for any reason other than its what I believed for a long time. It was being discussed and I put my 2 cents in, just like you. And whether you acknowledge it or not, its certainly plausible and entirely debatable.
FormerlyLarry,
Jews aren’t an “ethnicity”. Come to my synagogue. I’ll let the rest of the Jews there tell you the same thing.
And I don’t much care if you think I’m “rude”. The proper behavior is to listen to the people who are members of the group being discussed, not to tell them they are all wrong because you’re somehow the expert on other people. You’re not. That’s one of the central principles of feminism — subjectivity. Women are the experts on being women, members of the African diaspora on their experiences wherever they might be, big queers on the experiences of being big queers. We constantly get told what it “means” to be whatever by people such as yourself all the time. It’s very seldom for benevolent reasons, and when it isn’t for malevolent reasons, it’s part of the overall brainwashing of people to reinforce whatever malevolent purpose the incorrect information was put out there in the first place.
And in case you think you’re $0.02 is worth even $0.02, as a non-member of the groups you keep throwing your $0.02 at, in my opinion, I’m tired of having wooden nickles thrown at me by people who think they are worth a nickle.
Jews are widely viewed by ethnologists and anthropologists as being an ethno-religious group; i.e. an ethnic group (actually several ethnic groups) with a cultural-religious overlap that can be voluntarily assumed. That’s different than an “ethnic group” per se – you can’t generally sign on to an ethnic group, while it’s a relatively straightforward (albeit difficult) process to sign on as a Jew.
So Jews aren’t an ethnicity, but there are ethnicities whose membership are Jews.
I like the subjectivity argument. Of course, if the argument is actually taken seriously and not simply used as a rhetorical club when convenient, then it grossly undermines the whole anti-intentionalist view of racism. Racists are the experts on being racists, so their narrative of what’s racist or not should be the privileged one, per this argument. If you really believe in frames of knowledge which only group members have access to, then you have to accept the privileged narratives of all groups, not just the ones you are sympathetic to.
Personally, I prefer the shared universe vision, where everyone’s opinion has some weight, and we argue these things out instead of accepting the word of small groups of people. But that’s just me.
I’m not insensate to those considerations, Robert, and I think your point is well taken. I do want to take the opinions of people who do not share my experiences into account . . . but I don’t think it’s all that controversial to recognize that people who have a lived experience of a situation are more likely to be able to speak with authority about that situation than people who do not.
For me, this doesn’t mean that I need to ‘shut the hell up’ or something when issues about the lives of women come up, but it does mean that I need to listen closely and offer my opinions humbly, if at all.
I think your racist example, by the way, commits a sort of a logical error. I have no doubt that a racist has more authority to speak about ‘what it’s like to be a racist’ than an African American person, but I also believe that an African American person has more authority to speak about racism (having had more of a lived experience of racism) than the racist. It’s two different topics.
I also believe that this is true, and I see the hypocrisy you’re pointing out often. I think it was especially visible in the recent threads on transgender issues.
I don’t think it’s all that controversial to recognize that people who have a lived experience of a situation are more likely to be able to speak with authority about that situation than people who do not.
I basically agree with this. (It’s Fellowship Day at Alas!) I think the authority of one’s viewpoint is proportional to its personalization. My grandmother can speak with authority about how it felt to be an Italian immigrant in the 1920s; she was one and she was there. She has a unique contribution/perspective to make in a discussion of how Italian immigrants were treated overall – but we don’t have to give special consideration to her views on how things went down in Chicago, because she wasn’t there. And if we’re talking about “what should immigration policy look like”, then she has a unique and valuable perspective on the topic, but it doesn’t deserve any priority over anyone else’s POV; we all have something to say about that.
Myca writes:
I think it is more an example of lack of desire to produce a meaningful self-examination of what the experience of being a “racist” means. What a self-avowed racist even care that being a racist isolates them from others? Wouldn’t that be, perhaps, an objective of a racist? The whole “separation of the races” thing?
Where being a POC, woman, queer deviates from being a self-avowed racist is the power relationship. The disadvantaged group member desires to move upward in the social structure, and I think a lot of that analysis — “What it means to be a woman” — comes from trying to understand how women are at the effect of sexism. But for a racist nothing is to be gained by examining “racism” — they’ve already gained whatever it is they want to gain (or are actively working towards it by becoming “more racist”).
Actually, excluding religion as a basis of ethnicity completely erodes the entire basis of understanding that I’ve ever had…
I believe that is true in a scholarly sense. However, I think that the non-academic usage of “ethnicity” does exclude religion. At least in the USA. Seriously, outside of academia have you ever heard the phrase “ethnic Episcopalian?” Or heard Christians referred to as an ethnic group? I certainly haven’t. But that doesn’t mean I’m 100% sure that I’m right about this.
There is a cultural belief that Jewishness is passed down ancestrally; but not so much with Christianity.
I’m certain I’m not getting your meaning here. Okay, in Judaism you are considered Jewish at birth if your mother is Jewish. In Christianity, are you not considered Christian if your parents are Christian? I’ve never known anyone from a Christian family to say that there was a moment when they decided to become a Christian. They were Christian from birth.
Anyone can convert to Christianity at any time, there isn’t a single Christian out there who is going to think that a convert is not a “real” Christian because their mother (or father) wasn’t a Christian.
The same can be said for Judaism. Sure, you have the same arguments among sects about whether the other sects are “real” or not. But, within the sect to which you convert, nobody is going to consider you not a “real” Jew. Hell, in the synagogue that my parents belonged to, there was a black family. They were certainly a curiosity since you don’t find a high percentage of American Jews to be POC, but I never heard anybody question whether or not they were “real” Jews.
The fact that there aren’t Christian beliefs regarding ancestry and geneology and Chrisitanity pretty much exclude it from any definition of an “ethnic group” right there.
I may be totally off-base here, but geneology is not big among American Jews. It may be that I’m not understanding what you are saying or it may be that your understanding of what Jews consider important to Jewishness is somewhat mistaken.
They were Christian from birth.
Nope. Not until they personally and intentionally take Christ, are they genuinely a Christian. This was a pretty big controversy in the church – infant baptism, and all that. But it’s become a consensus value that becoming a Christian is an act of adult will, not a matter of parentage or upbringing.
For Catholics, the moment of truth is the sacrament of confirmation. Protestants have altar calls and such, but in reality the sacrament or the call is just a ceremony or a public confession. The actual change is internal and private. You could become a Christian right this minute, if you wanted to. (And, of course, you should!)
The genealogy comment, I believe, has to do with the fact that Judaism does provide a genealogical entry into the faith. If your mom was Jewish, and so forth.
Robert
You might be correct that the Jews might not meet some technical requirement for a distinct ethnic group. I don’t know. I did a quick google search:
wikipedia:
From a page called “Judaism 101”
This doesn’t prove anything other than maybe it is not such an outlandish notion. Anyway, I am no expert on this, but really whether they meet some technical threshold for “ethnicity” is probably beside the point.
Jake,
It looks hereditary because that’s the way Christianity works — parents take their kids to Sunday school, kids absorb Christianity and Christian traditions, kids grow up to take their kids to Sunday school.
But there’s no Christian law, in the sense of Jewish law, which says that if one’s mother and/or father were Christian, one is automatically assumed to be Christian, or unavoidably Christian.
And while genealogy may not be big among all American Jews, there are sects of American Judaism where genealogy is hugely important, especially as you get into the more Orthodox / Hasidic communities, as well as the Converso / Crypto-Jewish communities where they can often give you genealogies going back 400 years or more. By comparison, the 200 or so years of genealogical history I have for myself is a stroll in the park.
There are certainly ethnicities that hinge on Christian denomination, Serbs and Croats being the most famous and obvious. Minnesotan Lutherans and Catholics being a less extreme example.
Ethnicity in a non-academic setting is something that one only acknowledges in people who aren’t like oneself (thus, the use of the term “Ethnic” as a signifier of ethnicities very different from one’s own, very different from the dominant ethnicity), so in a country where most of the population is Christian, Christianity is not going to be seen as a marker of ethnicity in a non-academic sense. Where Christianity is one religion among many, then “the Christians” will mark an ethnicity (consider Lebanon). Likewise, in a culture in which Christian denominational fellowship is fluid (many people convert between denominations), denomination will not be seen as equaling ethnicity either. Where denomination is not fluid, then denomination is more likely to be seen as a marker of ethnicity. If what marks a Lutheran as different from a Catholic is not that the Lutheran personally feels more comfortable with the structure or theology of Lutheranism, but that the Lutheran’s ancestors have been Lutherans for many generations, and likewise the Catholic, and their ancestors can be presumed to have fought on different sides in the Thirty Years War, then Lutheran and Catholic are much more likely to be the markers of ethnicity.
However, where national origin or other ethnicity determiners clash with shared religion, it is less likely that the religion will be seen as marking a shared ethnicity (instead, differing religion marks different ethnicities where a shared ethnicity might otherwise be expected). So we are less likely to talk about Catholic as an ethnicity, because the ethnic differences between Italian Catholics, German Catholics, Irish Catholics, and an American Catholic who converted in college after a Pentecostal upbringing outweigh the shared religious beliefs. Instead, we talk about Minnesotan Catholics and Minnesotan Lutherans, or Serbs (Orthodox) and Croats (Catholic). Or American Jews and American Christians.
If there were more Sephardic Jews in the US, then people would be more likely to view Sephardim and Ashkenazi as two separate ethnicities, and not view Jews as an ethnicity, but the cultural/linguistic/religious differences between American Jews whose ancestors were Russian Jews and those whose ancestors were German Jews are small enough that I don’t think most people (Jewish or not) tend to view national origin differences among Jews as creating different ethnicities.
Okay, I’ll buy your definition. Even if I find certain aspects problematic.
For example, if your mother is Jewish you are Jewish in the sense that you don’t need to go through a process of conversion. If, as you grow older, you decide that you are Jewish (and go through any rituals your sect requires)… there you are. However, if you later decide that you’re not Jewish then you’re not Jewish. So, Jewish mom = no need for conversion – in practical terms. If you don’t get Bar Mitzvah’d you won’t be considered Jewish, even if Mom was Jewish.
Although it is somewhat subtler than what has been explained to me here about becoming a Christian, a conscious choice must still be made at some point in your life. For most of us, both Christian and Jewish, that decision is made and recognized by the community before we probably have the critical faculties for making an informed decision. My Catholic friends went to confirmation long before I got Bar Mitzvah’d.
But, as I said, those cognitive problems are mine and do not invalidate what others have put forth as a definition of ethnicity.
OK, here’s the way I look at it. The party was a private party. Sure, what they did was ugly. BUT, it was a private party of private property so it is really not the business of Clemson to even be involved.
As mean spirited as the party was, we live in a free country and have the right of free speech and free association. I say they should be able to do whatever they want and people who are offended should realize that they are idiots and just move on and get over it.
They were only imitating what they see in Black culture. Perhaps we African Americans should take a look at their own culture if we don’t like what we see when others imitate it. We are the ones who give them the ammunition.
blackandproud writes:
But are whites accurately mirroring back black culture? Or are whites picking and choosing the embarrassing parts? Hip-Hop culture isn’t an accurate reflection of “the black experience”, any more the industrial metal, trance, or the dance club scene is an accurate reflection of “the white experience”.