The difference of isms.

Recommended Videos

chikusho

New member
Jun 14, 2011
873
0
0
wulf3n said:
Just go back and replace every instance of race with ancestry, because as far as I'm concerned it's effectively the same thing.
Aaaaand, ancestry is completely irrelevant, _especially_ in the case of making assumptions about people.

I disagree, distinction of common genetic differences resulting from geographical location doesn't cause discrimination. Trying to ignore differences that exist may solve the problem, but it's a case of treating the symptoms not treating the cause.
What are you saying the "symptoms" and "cause" are here exactly?

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

wulf3n

New member
Mar 12, 2012
1,394
0
0
chikusho said:
Aaaaand, ancestry is completely irrelevant, _especially_ in the case of making assumptions about people.
Finally we're on to assumptions :)

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

chikusho said:
What are you saying the "symptoms" and "cause" are here exactly?
The symptom is "race" as a reason for discrimination, the cause... well that's purely speculation but I believe deep down most if not all people need to feel better than others.

chikusho said:
It's a matter of ignoring irrelevant information, because these supposed differences _only superficial_, and not may not even necessarily be indicative of ancestry.
ignoring? I don't think so, unknown yes.

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

Realitycrash

New member
Dec 12, 2010
2,779
0
0
To whatever moderator is watching this unfold: If you move this thread to the R&P instead of closing it down, I will pray to Crom for your swift demise.
(After which Crom will laugh at me, but to hell with him then).

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

chikusho

New member
Jun 14, 2011
873
0
0
wulf3n said:
Finally we're on to assumptions :)

Which aren't inherently evil, and quite a useful tool when it comes to having limited information.
And making assumptions based solely on ones "race" (or, in this case, ancestry) is what we call racism.

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

And while these superficial differences may not be indicative of ancestry, they're a good place to start, and if you're wrong you get corrected, no harm done.
I'd argue there's a lot of harm done.
The problem lies with putting ancestry and superficial differences as valuable information, and they are an awful place to start. Especially for the people who constantly have to correct you, knowing every day what is incorrectly assumed about them by everyone.
 

wulf3n

New member
Mar 12, 2012
1,394
0
0
Realitycrash said:
Which I find hilariously misguided.
Guys, it's not what what makes a 'race' and what does not. It's about what's ethically relevant. Fungi-people from Yuggoth aren't even our species, but if they become members of our society then whatever difference in anatomy is irrelevant when it comes to ethics.
So fine, you wanna quibble over specifics? Go ahead. Just don't pretend to be doing it for the sake of discussing 'racism'.
:O someone putting forward their opinion of a situation they didn't bother looking into. A rare specimen indeed.

chikusho said:
And making assumptions based solely on ones "race" (or, in this case, ancestry) is what we call racism.
Call it what you will. Everyone makes assumptions, why is an assumption about race any worse than any other assumption.

chikusho said:
I'd argue there's a lot of harm done.
The problem lies with putting ancestry and superficial differences as valuable information, and they are an awful place to start. Especially for the people who constantly have to correct you, knowing every day what is incorrectly assumed about them by everyone.
Valuable information? I wouldn't go that far. But it's information none the less. And when left with no other, we have to work with what we have.

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

Realitycrash

New member
Dec 12, 2010
2,779
0
0
wulf3n said:
Realitycrash said:
Which I find hilariously misguided.
Guys, it's not what what makes a 'race' and what does not. It's about what's ethically relevant. Fungi-people from Yuggoth aren't even our species, but if they become members of our society then whatever difference in anatomy is irrelevant when it comes to ethics.
So fine, you wanna quibble over specifics? Go ahead. Just don't pretend to be doing it for the sake of discussing 'racism'.
:O someone putting forward their opinion of a situation they didn't bother looking into. A rare specimen indeed.
Mate, don't be rude. I made a summary statement about the question of race and ethics. I never put words in anyone's mouth. So either be polite and summarize your statement, or don't respond at all.
 

wulf3n

New member
Mar 12, 2012
1,394
0
0
Realitycrash said:
Mate, don't be rude. I made a summary statement about the question of race and ethics. I never put words in anyone's mouth. So either be polite and summarize your statement, or don't respond at all.
You talk of politeness, yet insult you insult others without any provocation.

"Hilariously Misguided" hardly a benign statement.

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

Perhaps you should look inward, before lashing out.

edit:

Hence I reiterate my initial objection.

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

Realitycrash

New member
Dec 12, 2010
2,779
0
0
wulf3n said:
Realitycrash said:
Mate, don't be rude. I made a summary statement about the question of race and ethics. I never put words in anyone's mouth. So either be polite and summarize your statement, or don't respond at all.
You talk of politeness, yet insult you insult others without any provocation.

"Hilariously Misguided" hardly a benign statement.

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

Perhaps you should look inward, before lashing out.

edit:

Hence I reiterate my initial objection.

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

runic knight

New member
Mar 26, 2011
1,118
0
0
Are people saying things are racist or sexist or whatever too often? Ok, I'll agree with that general idea. People can and will be assholes, and it doesn't matter the sex or skin color of the person they are being an asshole to if they are being an asshole to them in the same way they would be to anyone else. Or, to put it another way, if the way you insult someone is the same regardless, it isn't racist or sexist, it is just being an asshole.

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

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

Schadrach

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 20, 2010
2,324
475
88
Country
US
thaluikhain said:
If someone says something racist, they are being racist. It's not a leap to assume that this isn't the only time they are racist.

It doesn't mean they are very racist, but it means they are being at least somewhat racist.
I could theoretically be quoted as having said: "I never understood historically black universities until I saw black people." Does that mean I'm racist, or merely that I was playing Cards Against Humanity and had one of those white card pairs practically designed for that black card? (Hint: It was the latter.)

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