Defining Racism

Ian64

A bit of a dispute arose on another thread as to what constitutes racism.
To me any remark, or action that seeks to negativley portray, or grant less favourable treatment to any person or group because of their colour,creed, or nationality is essentially racist.
I accept others have differing views and am only looking for a discussion on this, after all, I'm open to hearing how others percieve the term "Racist"

Logical Fallacy

The Oxford English Dictionary defines "racism" as : "Being a ****ing tool tbh"...which is the definition i tend to go with.

Sindri

Are you Jewish OP?

EDIT

Racism is usually predicated on an irrational fear or hatred of another race or culture.

44leto

A negative prejudice based on someone's race.

KungPao

I believe it's being sexually attracted to all types of homosapiens.

Chuck Stone

Usain Bolt is one of the greatest racists ever.

KungPao

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Usain Bolt is one of the greatest racists ever.

Why? because he is black?

Scanlas The 2nd

Ian64 wrote: »

A bit of a dispute arose on another thread as to what constitutes racism.
To me any remark, or action that seeks to negativley portray, or grant less favourable treatment to any person or group because of their colour,creed, or nationality is essentially racist.
I accept others have differing views and am only looking for a discussion on this, after all, I'm open to hearing how others percieve the term "Racist"

Surely racism is determined moreso by your beliefs.

You can call a black person a n1gger without actually being racist if your intentions are merely to get under that persons skin for example. You could have no racist beliefs whatsover but simply wish to piss off someone you hate. In fact in that circumstance by not using the most offensive insult (n1gger) you are being racist because you would have used the most offensive insult if they weren't black.

AnonoBoy

I'll get back to you on this when Wikipedia is easy to use again.

Freddie59

Not ANOTHER "racism" thread!!!!:rolleyes:

chin_grin

This is what infuriates me as stereotypes get labelled as racist remarks incorrectly.

I have no examples I can give right now of course, but it may involve taxi drivers. (Opens can).

Duggy747

I'm not racist.

I hate everyone equally.

fryup

what if you're anti-jewish

does that mean your racist or sectarian ?

because Judaism is a religon and a race, isn't it?

Domitius Felix Invictus Aurelianus

Racism in the animal world according to Pliny the elder is defined simply by the standing of each of the species. Dogs do to bark at cats. Wolves do not wear sheep clothing. A white man is more visible after dark and so on.

smash

Ian64 wrote: »

To me any remark, or action that seeks to negativley portray, or grant less favourable treatment to any person or group because of their colour,creed, or nationality is essentially racist.

That's racist.... it's not a colour, it's a skin tone! :P

Temptamperu

Freddie59 wrote: »

Not ANOTHER "racism" thread!!!!:rolleyes:

Stop being Racist to Racism threads :mad:

Ian64

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Surely racism is determined moreso by your beliefs.

You can call a black person a n1gger without actually being racist if your intentions are merely to get under that persons skin for example. You could have no racist beliefs whatsover but simply wish to piss off someone you hate. In fact in that circumstance by not using the most offensive insult (n1gger) you are being racist because you would have used the most offensive insult if they weren't black.

Tell me you're not serious!

sbsquarepants

44leto wrote: »

A negative prejudice based on someone's race.

Should be just a prejudice surely?
What's not racist about the mobo awards for example. There is no way a wobo award would be tolerated.
Bit of a double standard that really!

mongdesade

There are arseholes of every race, creed, colour, sexual preference out their...
I prefer to practice my rascism on a 1 to 1 basis...
I have strong predudicial views on rascist arseholes

Ian64

Freddie59 wrote: »

Not ANOTHER "racism" thread!!!!:rolleyes:

No! This is a DEFINITION thread!

Frank Black

fryup wrote: »

what if you're anti-jewish

does that mean your racist or sectarian ?

because Judaism is a religon and a race, isn't it?

And a nationality since 1948.

Scanlas The 2nd

Ian64 wrote: »

Tell me you're not serious!

Explain how it is necessarily racist to call a black person a n1gger.

Calling a black any name simply because they are black is racist. Calling a black person a n1gger because you hate them isn't. Hating them because they are black is racist.

sbsquarepants

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Surely racism is determined moreso by your beliefs.

You can call a black person a n1gger without actually being racist if your intentions are merely to get under that persons skin for example. You could have no racist beliefs whatsover but simply wish to piss off someone you hate. In fact in that circumstance by not using the most offensive insult (n1gger) you are being racist because you would have used the most offensive insult if they weren't black.

Exactly.
I listen to a good bit of rap music and it's all nígger this and nígger that. Is that racist? If not, why is it racist if i say it?

As they say, offence is taken not given. I'm not racist but if jay-z calls himself a nígger, then that's what he is and that's what i'll call him. He can call me a paddy and i won't cry about it. That seems fair to me.

Logical Fallacy

Ian64 wrote: »

Tell me you're not serious!

What he, is spot on!

fryup

black francis wrote: »

And a nationality since 1948.

but being an isreali doesn't mean your automatically jewish, there's arabs and christains who are isreali too

K-9

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Surely racism is determined moreso by your beliefs.

You can call a black person a n1gger without actually being racist if your intentions are merely to get under that persons skin for example. You could have no racist beliefs whatsover but simply wish to piss off someone you hate. In fact in that circumstance by not using the most offensive insult (n1gger) you are being racist because you would have used the most offensive insult if they weren't black.

Or the Luis Suarez defence as I call it.

Domitius Felix Invictus Aurelianus

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Explain how it is necessarily racist to call a black person a n1gger.

The word is Niger and as far as im concerned is not derogatory but simply a way of defining were a person hails from such as a predecessor of mine Pescennius Niger

sbsquarepants

K-9 wrote: »

Or the Luis Suarez defence as I call it.

Yea, worked well for him if i recall correctly!


Note to self: Get new racism defence asap

Nodin

Domitius Pius Felix Invictus Aurelianus wrote: »

The word is Niger and as far as im concerned is not derogatory but simply a way of defining were a person hails from such as a predecessor of mine Pescennius Niger

....that should go down as well as the 'Claiming Porch Monkey back' campaign.

The King of Moo

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Exactly.
I listen to a good bit of rap music and it's all nígger this and nígger that. Is that racist? If not, why is it racist if i say it?

As they say, offence is taken not given. I'm not racist but if jay-z calls himself a nígger, then that's what he is and that's what i'll call him. He can call me a paddy and i won't cry about it. That seems fair to me.

It would most likely be perceived as racist if you called a black person an iggernay, because most white people who've used the word have used it in a very racist way (even if you didn't mean it that way) and most black people hearing a white person use the word would assume it was being used in a racist way.

Though I don't see how a white person can call a black persona an iggernay without meaning it in a racist way, unless it's a black friend you kid around with regularly in such a manner.

Ellis Dee

I remember a horse opera starring John Wayne, who was no liberal by any stretch of the imagination, but spoke the lines the scriptwriters gave him.

In it he said: "Racism is hating in the plural.":)

If you have to hate people, do it one-on-one and always for a reason attributable to that individual.:D:D

Domitius Felix Invictus Aurelianus

Nodin wrote: »

....that should go down as well as the 'Claiming Porch Monkey back' campaign.

Porch monkey or Archway monkeys as we call them deserve to abused and ridiculed by Circus maximus monkeys for they do nothing but layabout and welch of the state. the are cute pets though

fryup

^^^^^^^^^^^

are you on drugs???

simit

Sindri wrote: »

Are you Jewish OP?

EDIT

Racism is usually predicated on an irrational fear or hatred of another race or culture.

But what if it's a rational dislike of a particular race or culture? I won't say 'hate' because I think it's a bit too strong, but I have had and have witnessed several bad experiences with a particular 'race' in my local community and now tend to be a lot less tolerent of them. Does that make me a racist?

Domitius Felix Invictus Aurelianus

fryup wrote: »

^^^^^^^^^^^

are you on drugs???

no but i partake in ointments

The King of Moo

simit wrote: »

But what if it's a rational dislike of a particular race or culture? I won't say 'hate' because I think it's a bit too strong, but I have had and have witnessed several bad experiences with a particular 'race' in my local community and now tend to be a lot less tolerent of them. Does that make me a racist?

Probably. You see, it's not rational, in my opinion, to form an opinion of an entire race based on a small number of its members living in one particular community.

sbsquarepants

The King of Moo wrote: »

It would most likely be perceived as racist if you called a black person an iggernay, because most white people who've used the word have used it in a very racist way (even if you didn't mean it that way) and most black people hearing a white person use the word would assume it was being used in a racist way.

Though I don't see how a white person can call a black persona an iggernay without meaning it in a racist way, unless it's a black friend you kid around with regularly in such a manner.

Which is my point, the offence is taken not given. For any individual black person to be ok with being called nígger by any other black person, but to have a problem with someone of another race saying it - that is racism.
It doesn't only work in one direction. You're either a nígger or you're not - just like you're either a racist or you're not.

Domitius Felix Invictus Aurelianus

The King of Moo wrote: »

Probably. You see, it's not rational, in my opinion, to form an opinion of an entire race based on a small number of its members living in one particular community.

Ethnicity is not racism, most 'racists' are not that at all. ive learned from my travels that opinions of the indigenous people are often more curious which can lead to the traveler to such assumptions of racism were they may only be innocent finger pointing to point out the curiosity.

taken from the lost Book of Hadrian Travels XXVI

sbsquarepants

The King of Moo wrote: »

Probably. You see, it's not rational, in my opinion, to form an opinion of an entire race based on a small number of its members living in one particular community.

It's perfectly rational to learn from your experiences.
If you were bitten by 4 or 5 dogs you'd be rightfully weary of all dogs.
That's not doggest - it's common sense!

simit

The King of Moo wrote: »

Probably. You see, it's not rational, in my opinion, to form an opinion of an entire race based on a small number of its members living in one particular community.

That maybe true but, isn't it your experiences and interactions with people that forms your opinions of them?
I will agree that it may not be 'rational' to judge an entire race because of unpleasant experiences with only a handful of them, but it sure is human nature not to want to have any more dealings with them.

The King of Moo

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Which is my point, the offence is taken not given. For any individual black person to be ok with being called nígger by any other black person, but to have a problem with someone of another race saying it - that is racism.
It doesn't only work in one direction. You're either a nígger or you're not - just like you're either a racist or you're not.

I agree with that, but unfortunately, it's all too easy to appear to be racist when you're not due to the way language evolves and changes meaning in different contexts.
Like old people who might use the term "coloured" in a non-racist way because it was acceptable back in their day might understandably be seen as being racist by some people.
I agree that offence can be taken when it's not intended, but I think that's always going to be the case unfortunately, unless English becomes very rigid and words can have only strict meaning, which I think would be a shame overall.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's perfectly rational to learn from your experiences.
If you were bitten by 4 or 5 dogs you'd be rightfully weary of all dogs.
That's not doggest - it's common sense!

It is doggist though: most pet dogs are lovely!

But seriously, I can understand if someone had a series of bad experiences with members of a certain race (which I don't think would happen too often) they might develop a prejudice, but if they were unable to overcome this prejudice through reflection (eg. if I had problems with African taxi-drivers I'd probably think about it and realise it probably has more to do with them being taxi-drivers rather than with them being black) or particularly with non-negative experiences with members of that race, and acted against this race in a prejudicial manner, then they'd be big racists.

Domitius Felix Invictus Aurelianus

Dogism - The nature of man to put burning crosses on their lawns after been bitten or crapped on by a dog.

Once bitten twice shy, three times = burning cross time.

The King of Moo

simit wrote: »

That maybe true but, isn't it your experiences and interactions with people that forms your opinions of them?
I will agree that it may not be 'rational' to judge an entire race because of unpleasant experiences with only a handful of them, but it sure is human nature not to want to have any more dealings with them.

I agree that people would tend to have an instinctive reaction against an entire race due to such bad experiences, as I think most people have an instinctive slight prejudice against people from groups seen as different from the ones they've been socialised into.

But at the same time, part of what makes us human also is our ability to reflect on our instincts and override them. So if someone had an instinctive feeling of anger towards black people after a few bad experiences with black taxi-drivers (and I'm not saying that happens all the time!) I'd understand that.
But if they developed that instinctive feeling into a conscious belief that all black people, or all Nigerians, are conmen because of a bad experience with some member of that community, I'd consider that racism.

rubadub

44leto wrote: »

A negative prejudice based on someone's race.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Should be just a prejudice surely?
What's not racist about the mobo awards for example. There is no way a wobo award would be tolerated.

+1,

if you are strictly calling it negative prejudice, then what do you call positive prejudice based on race? A common racist remark is that Asians are more studious or intelligent.

In many cases being prejudiced is common sense, but many view the term negatively.

K-9

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's perfectly rational to learn from your experiences.
If you were bitten by 4 or 5 dogs you'd be rightfully weary of all dogs.
That's not doggest - it's common sense!

Still pretty illogical!

The dogs didn't bite you because they are viscious by nature, certain types of dogs are likely to be more aggressive, even then not all boxers are angry types and all terriers cute!

It's a bit like having a bad experience with a few people from Clondalkin and saying I'm wary of Clondalkin people now. People don't have any control of where they are from, what religion they are, colour of their skin etc.

The King of Moo

rubadub wrote: »

+1,

if you are strictly calling it negative prejudice, then what do you call positive prejudice based on race? A common racist remark is that Asians are more studious or intelligent.

In many cases being prejudiced is common sense, but many view the term negatively.

I think "racialism" used to be used to mean a belief in differences between races, but without a negative or positive prejudice.
I think nowadays it's mostly come to mean the same as "racism" though.

Nothingbetter2d

Duggy747 wrote: »

I'm not racist.

I hate everyone equally.

including your mother?

sbsquarepants

Domitius Pius Felix Invictus Aurelianus wrote: »

Dogism - The nature of man to put burning crosses on their lawns after been bitten or crapped on by a dog.

Once bitten twice shy, three times = burning cross time.

How many times = riding strangers in car parks. Or am i thinking of something else dog related?:D

K-9 wrote: »

Still pretty illogical!

The dogs didn't bite you because they are viscious by nature, certain types of dogs are likely to be more aggressive, even then not all boxers are angry types and all terriers cute!

It's a bit like having a bad experience with a few people from Clondalkin and saying I'm wary of Clondalkin people now. People don't have any control of where they are from, what religion they are, colour of their skin etc.

I agree with you....but!
People don't have control over a lot of things that dramaticaly influence their up bringing and consequently who they turn out to be.
If, say 2 or 3 times that you went out in clondalkin you got jumped on, by different people of different races in different pubs and so on. Would you be all rational and say there's no link, or would you say that's it, no more going out in clondalkin for me?

I know which one i'd be thinking!