acceptable Racism ?

Megatron

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=287208

ok the joke is what it is , but please read my last post.

and Discuss please.

Chalk

meh,
get over it.
its only racist if people are offended by it.

if your offended fine,
but i think 99.9% of the population of ireland are quite capable of having a laugh at their own expense.

ever watch the simpsons?
they rag on the irish constantly and i find that funny,
do you not?

what i mwant to add was black people in americay calling each other ****** and so on,
they dont let it be used against them so it makes it useless.

Megatron

Chalk wrote:

meh,
get over it.
its only racist if people are offended by it.

No , calling a Asian person a Ch1nk and they are not offended by it doesn't make the word any less Racist.

Chalk wrote:

if your offended fine,
but i think 99.9% of the population of ireland are quite capable of having a laugh at their own expense.
ever watch the simpsons?

true , and no i'm not offended by it, I'm mearly pointing out that we have accepted it, If a english person or the simpsons ( as you posted) rag on us like this does that make it any less/more racist ?

Chalk wrote:

what i mwant to add was black people in americay calling each other ****** and so on,
they dont let it be used against them so it makes it useless.

This is something i don't like, if the term i so offensive that why use it ( See the scene in the bar in Rush hour where jackie Chan says "What's up my N1gga ?" he only uses it because Chris rock did, yet he gets attacked.

I personaly don't agree with using that term or "Paddy".
Now most of my forgien friends know this, and some of them wind me up sometimes over it. We have had this discussion ourselves .

Sometimes it's just seen as harmless fun, but as i stated in my other post, it becomes more pronounced Racism if you've been abused ( verbaly, phsicaly) before.

We for the most part have accepted it as part and parcel of who and what we are. I don't accept it, i used to but after the research i don't.

Dades

Getting wound up and referring to such a joke as "racist" really dilutes the word IMO. Racism is harmful. This joke is not.

The irony of joejoem's initial response is clear when you look at his sig line and the mostly naked body of the lovely Eve Mendes. Obviously he has a low threshhold to racism, but doesn't rate sexism too much in the grand scheme of things.

This reminds me of a conversation I've had before. Is it racist to refer to a Japanese person as a "Nip", when it is perfectly acceptable to refer to a British person as a "Brit"? Nippon is simply the Japanese for Japan. Yet still the opinion I usually hear is - "you can't say that".

But if we were to really look at what is racist - it's never about the word - it's always about the intent.

Sleepy

I think you're overly sensitive tbh. In a multi-cultural world we have to accept that there are differences between different nationalities and cultures. We make jokes about every subject here on earth from sex and sexuality to death. Why would nationality be any different? Is it racist when I call a Cork guy a 'langer'? When he calls me a 'yellow belly' for being born in Wexford? Or if he calls a Dubliner a 'Jackeen'?

There's no real difference between this and what you're discussing, just social sensitivities. It may be a particularly Irish thing to find slagging someone off to be 'just a bit of craic', but as a nation we dish it out so we really have to be prepared to take it when it's levelled at us.

Megatron

See veryone is saysing the joke is fine.

Would everyone be saying the same thing as if the joke was about Jews/blacks/Gay/etc. .... I highly doubt it.


We have different views on what is allowed and what isn't.
My point is , that we just accept it , we know it is racist, but we accept it no the less.

Kingsize

Chalk wrote:

meh,
ever watch the simpsons?
they rag on the irish constantly and i find that funny,
do you not?

Only because they can & get away with it. the simpsons takes the piss out of everyone but most of all it takes the piss out of America.
I'm never offended by the simpsons cos its done the same way a freind would slag you off & that's the problem.If i have a mate who calls me a fat bastard is it any different than a total stranger shouting the same thing at me!?
really its down to who is telling the joke & how it's told,seriously its not really the words that are the problem its how they are used.

I mean if the joke above was told by jim davidson - he'd be a racist
If it was told by frank carson hed be an uncle tom /token paddy
if it was told by des bishop he'd probaly be regarded as a comic genius/Fukkin gas!!!

Chalk

The Atheist wrote:

it's never about the words - it's always about the intent.

phrase i was looking for.

kingsize,
i agree,
its not racism if seinfeld cracks a jewish joke,
im not jewish but im still alowwed laugh,
it would be racism if some neo-nazi said exactly the same thing.

i dont think its acceptabel racism as the topic states,
simply that its not racist depending on the context / intent

Sleepy

Look at the joke again. It's a joke about the mispronunciation of words with an Irish rural accent. It's the same as slagging a Londoner for saying "Firty free an' a fird". There's nothing derogatory in it because it's something that a large percentage of Irish people do. Surely to be racist a joke has to have some negative predjudist connotations? E.G. Jokes about how tight Jewish/Cavan people are? And tbh, you'd have to be particularly sensitive to take offense to them.

Megatron

Chalk wrote:

i dont think its acceptabel racism as the topic states,
simply that its not racist depending on the context / intent

I'm not picking on you Chalk , more the statement that a few people have made.

Ok for a easier example, if 1 black person calls his friend/brother/sister/etc. a n1gger and in context it's mean as a friendly jibe it's accepted.

However if a person of another race says the same thing with the same context then yes it's taken the same way.

but BOTH of these remarks are racist.
But it is accepted and carried on as normal.

I know if certian communities in the US that the N word is being stamped out, i've head some of the arguments.

"It a word that was used to opress the african-americans for years it should be wiped out"
and
"We will keep using the word till we are equal in every way"
or
"Free speach" - now this one could be negated by the fact the word can ensue Racisal hatred speech (KKK for example).

Either way the N ( i can't be arsed typing in the 1 all the time) word is a racist slur no matter which race uses it. However if it is said by the same race it is amied at it is accepted easier than if i said it ( being Irish).

Just becasue we dont' find it offensive or know what context it's being used in doesn't make it any less racist, it just becomes less offensive to us, it doesn't.

I've got more to say, but i have to get back to work .. so i'll be back.

Blub2k4

MY girlfriend works in a department dealing with Africa, Botswana to be exact, one of her colleagues is Afro_carribean and goes on all the time about the "monkeys" on the phone from Africa, she has been brought up in an Anglo_saxon white environment and sees herself as something better than the Africans "in the jungle" who have just "fallen out of the banana trees". (her words are to this effect)
Because she is black does this make her any less racist, my girlfriend says her logic is that she is black so it cant be construed as racist whereby it clearly is and no one else in the Dept would do it and she would probably be the very one to pull them up if the did?

Dades

Megatron wrote:

Ok for a easier example, if 1 black person calls his friend/brother/sister/etc. a n1gger and in context it's mean as a friendly jibe it's accepted.

However if a person of another race says the same thing with the same context then yes it's taken the same way.

but BOTH of these remarks are racist.
But it is accepted and carried on as normal.

I disagree for the same reasons as are cropping up above. Context is possibly not the right term. If somebody is called a N with any intention of insult fair enough, but where both parties are comfortable with it how is that wrong? Does it not have to be wrong to be racist?

In fact is it even possible for someone to be racist about their own race? Unless you deny you are part of that race, you are really just being self-deprecating rather than racist. (And that is assuming that any remarks are derogatory).

With Blub2k4's example that girl is quite obviously racist as she feels superior to African Blacks. She feels that as part of a complete sub-culture she can differenciate herself. Her intent is to insult or belittle.

Like murder, the intent has to be there IMO.

Megatron

The Atheist wrote:

Like murder, the intent has to be there IMO.

While i do take your point i just don't agree with it.

yes you can be racist to your own race imo .

Just though of something....

Take the old sitcoms of the 70's where the term Darky and c00n where used a fair bit. while they where mean in a comedy context ( as in the person using them was portrated as a idiot in some cases) now days it wouldn't be excepted at all.

don't concertrate on the time part but rather on the context.

Dades

Megatron wrote:

now days it wouldn't be excepted at all.

don't concertrate on the time part but rather on the context.

Hmmm
it's somewhat difficult to ignore the time element. It's all interlinked.

Over time, less and less is deemed acceptable. To define your example - look at Blazing Saddles. Are you guilty of racism to laugh at it now? Was it racist in the 70s? (Lets not forget the 'hero' was a black character).

Maybe racism should be in the eye of the beholder, rather in the eyes of a third party.

Megatron, will your sig line be racist in 10 years?
Maybe it infers that Chinese people have funny names?
But if that's not what is meant then isn't it okay?

But it seems to me that that's the way the all-encompassing term "racism" is going.

Megatron

The Atheist wrote:

Hmmm
it's somewhat difficult to ignore the time element. It's all interlinked.

Over time, less and less is deemed acceptable. To define your example - look at Blazing Saddles. Are you guilty of racism to laugh at it now? Was it racist in the 70s? (Lets not forget the 'hero' was a black character).

yes but it was a overte racism , while it was written to be like this , showing that the colour of the 2 hero's skin was the only difference between them, it was still racist.. but stil always makes me laugh .

Maybe racism should be in the eye of the beholder, rather in the eyes of a third party.

The Atheist wrote:

Megatron, will your sig line be racist in 10 years?
Maybe it infers that Chinese people have funny names?
But if that's not what is meant then isn't it okay?

i was thinking about my sig, i don't believe it's racist, more a play on facts and words is all ;P

The Atheist wrote:

But it seems to me that that's the way the all-encompassing term "racism" is going.

it's always been like this, howeverwith the PC brigade that's abounding everywhere we look these days it will be getting worse.

In one job i did all someone had to do was report you for saying something racist and you where suspended without pay while the looked into it.
The thing was , somepeople knew this and would play on it as best they could. but i'm getting off topic now

Blub2k4

Megatron wrote:

In one job i did all someone had to do was report you for saying something racist and you where suspended without pay while the looked into it.
The thing was , somepeople knew this and would play on it as best they could. but i'm getting off topic now

ergo PC is wrong?
Is that what you are saying?

Megatron

No , just over reacting or being "too PC" is wrong.

While if i had been just abusive towards a co-worker there would of been a meeting , then they would of decided if i should be suspended, but because it was a racist allegation they suspend without pay .. that is just a over reaction ( well more like a prevent liable action reaction )

KnowItAll

A jokes a joke no matter what the content. Most Irish people have a good sence of humour and have no problem with these jokes.

Some people are too sensitive!

Kingsize

theres no such thing as the "PC brigade" by the way this is a phony phenomenon dreamt up by lazy right wing journalists in order to cause diversion & outrage & sell their shi-tty rags.
basically these cnuts would brand us as the PC brigade for even discussing
this topic
"you couldnt make it up" yes you can & you regularly do.

Dades

Kingsize wrote:

theres no such thing as the "PC brigade" by the way.

Of course there is. Whether or not journalists use this as fodder to sell newspapers is irrelevant. There are people out there that go too far in enforcing anti-racism, sexism, agism etc. The "PC brigade" is simply a collective term for such individuals. (Though I don't believe they have a multicoloured firetruck or anything).

Just how far is too far is a subjective test, but on the basis of the consensus of this thread we don't have to look too far for examples.

The Bouncer

Megatron wrote:

Either way the N ( i can't be arsed typing in the 1 all the time) word is a racist slur no matter which race uses it. However if it is said by the same race it is amied at it is accepted easier than if i said it ( being Irish).

AHEM!! Perhaps you are forgetting that being Irish does not equal being white

Dades

The Bouncer wrote:

AHEM!! Perhaps you are forgetting that being Irish does not equal being white

Don't you oppress me!

Megatron

The Bouncer wrote:

AHEM!! Perhaps you are forgetting that being Irish does not equal being white

thats my point, which you just didn't get.

Racism is about RACE .... i'm how many Irish people do you know who use the term N1gger to each other on a regular basis ?

very few.

IF you jus tin here to try and cause an argument and not discuss the topic at hand why don' t you go back to whereever it is you came from.

KnowItAll

The Bouncer wrote:

AHEM!! Perhaps you are forgetting that being Irish does not equal being white

Just because a piece of paper says your Irish dosn't mean you are! If you said you are 100% Irish race, than you couldn't be anything but white.

mycroft

KnowItAll wrote:

Just because a piece of paper says your Irish dosn't mean you are! If you said you are 100% Irish race, than you couldn't be anything but white.

I'm sorry whut?

So now race purity tests is de rigeur for you to prove you're irish.

Tell me if I am tested and we discover what? That I'm not a direct descendent of Brian Boru, I have to hand over my passport.

Tell me what's the statute of limitations for this wacky little theory of yours? Bo both sets of grandparents have to be Irish? What if we find, Norman? Or *gasp* viking? Blood!

rsynnott

Megatron wrote:

Ok for a easier example, if 1 black person calls his friend/brother/sister/etc. a n1gger and in context it's mean as a friendly jibe it's accepted.

This is an example of word reclaimation, like "c unt" (spaced out to avoid silly obscenity filter) among feminists and "queer" among the US gay community (in the Irish LGBT community, "queer" has a rather specialised and confusing meaning). The whole idea is that the offending world eventually ceases to be perjorative.

KnowItAll wrote:

Just because a piece of paper says your Irish dosn't mean you are! If you said you are 100% Irish race, than you couldn't be anything but white.

Irish race? Goodness me, Mr. Genology professor. What on Earth is that? Bronze-age Irish? Celtic? Anglo-saxon? Norse? A mixture of all four? Throw insome French or Spanish? Stop making up "races".

In any case, it's a temporary problem. The whole world'll be brown in 500 years, and they'll no doubt look back on racism in much the same way as we look back on witch-burning.

KnowItAll

rsynnott wrote:

Irish race? Goodness me, Mr. Genology professor. What on Earth is that? Bronze-age Irish? Celtic? Anglo-saxon? Norse? A mixture of all four? Throw insome French or Spanish? Stop making up "races".

In any case, it's a temporary problem. The whole world'll be brown in 500 years, and they'll no doubt look back on racism in much the same way as we look back on witch-burning.

Well Irish are generally of haplogroup1 type (see thread in History/heritage). Why do people say someone looks Irish? and when I say Irish race people are not going to picture asians or africans are they.

rsynnott

KnowItAll wrote:

Well Irish are generally of haplogroup1 type (see thread in History/heritage). Why do people say someone looks Irish? and when I say Irish race people are not going to picture asians or africans are they.

They probably will in 50 years

What is this obsession with "race", anyway? What does it matter? "Ooh, look, he's got different coloured skin". Why not "ooh, look, he's left-handed"?

And may I just say that I find the concept of "acceptable racism" deeply worrying? "Acceptable racism" sounds like the start of the slippery slope to "acceptable genocide".

Dades

KnowItAll wrote:

Well Irish are generally of haplogroup1 type (see thread in History/heritage). Why do people say someone looks Irish? and when I say Irish race people are not going to picture asians or africans are they.

Congratulations on your research paper.

You looked in another thread and concluded that unless someone conforms to a stereotype image as held by other nations, you are not Irish.

Now where did I leave my pipe and crock o' gold.

Out of interest, what colour are Americans?

Zombrex

KnowItAll wrote:

Just because a piece of paper says your Irish dosn't mean you are! If you said you are 100% Irish race, than you couldn't be anything but white.

That kind of logic is deeply flawed ... just because you have pale white skin and red hair doesn't mean you are Irish either :rolleyes:

For a start there is no such thing as the "Irish race", so I think you better think of a better way to describe someone as being Irish ... otherwise we should really be kicking out any blonde, tanned skinny women we find and personally I like them to stay if it is alright with you :rolleyes:

To me, setting aside the legal aspect, it is someone who has lived here for a while and considers themselves Irish. Where someone feels they belong shouldn't be dictated to them by others, especially not people with racist ideas of what a true Irish person is.

catholicireland

Why do people say someone looks Irish? and when I say Irish race people are not going to picture asians or africans are they

They probably will in 50 years

rsynnott, from your smilie, i take it that you think that would be a good thing. Do you not think that would be taking immigration too far? 20 years ago there was practically only white Irish in Ireland, does you prediction for 50 years time not seem a little bit extreme?

"Acceptable racism" sounds like the start of the slippery slope to "acceptable genocide".

Genocide? That is the mass killing of one group of people. Are you being a bit emotional here rsynnott?

The Corinthian

The Atheist wrote:

In fact is it even possible for someone to be racist about their own race?

Of course you can. Any prejudice towards an individual that is based upon the race of that individual is by definition racist. It doesn’t even have to be a negative prejudice, after all. So it’s quite easy to be racist about your own race - ask any Herrenvolk.

Blub2k4 wrote:

Because she is black does this make her any less racist, my girlfriend says her logic is that she is black so it cant be construed as racist whereby it clearly is and no one else in the Dept would do it and she would probably be the very one to pull them up if the did?

Except she’s not basing her prejudice upon race, but on culture and background. We, as a Society, do it all the time for individuals that we consider chavs or skangers, after all.

TBH, reading this thread has demonstrated that the term racism is so overused that many of the posters here don’t even understand it.

nesf

The Corinthian wrote:

TBH, reading this thread has demonstrated that the term racism is so overused that many of the posters here don’t even understand it.

I agree. I think the term has lost a lot of it's original meaning and has become just another PC buzzword.

Although that is pretty much me just stating the obvious tbh.

KnowItAll

rsynnott wrote:

What is this obsession with "race", anyway? What does it matter? "Ooh, look, he's got different coloured skin". Why not "ooh, look, he's left-handed"?

Weather you like it or not out race is part of our culture.

rsynnott wrote:

They probably will in 50 years

You seem to be happy at this outcome. Do you like Irish people? Are you ashamed to be Irish? I may be wrong but thats the message your sending.

rsynnott

KnowItAll wrote:

Weather you like it or not out race is part of our culture.

So is locking people up in Magdalene Laundries. We don't so it any more, though.


You seem to be happy at this outcome. Do you like Irish people? Are you ashamed to be Irish? I may be wrong but thats the message your sending.[/QUOTE]

I have nothing against Irish people; I'm one myself, after all. But I don't see a need for this "sanctity of race" that the white supremicists feel is so important. Ireland will become more multicultural, and that is a very, very good thing.

And yes, when I visit a hospital, or when I see Mary Coughlan saying Ireland is "not ready for gay marriage", or when I see racist, sexist and homophobic abuse shouted in Dublin, worse than I've seen anywhere else, then, yes, I'm often a little ashamed to be Irish.

Zombrex

KnowItAll wrote:

You seem to be happy at this outcome. Do you like Irish people? Are you ashamed to be Irish? I may be wrong but thats the message your sending.

They will all still be Irish, they just won't all be white ... so the question is really, why don't you like Irish people unless they are white/red headed/pale skin etc

Dades

The Corinthian wrote:

In fact is it even possible for someone to be racist about their own race?

Of course you can. Any prejudice towards an individual that is based upon the race of that individual is by definition racist. It doesn’t even have to be a negative prejudice, after all.

This idea seems daft to me. If I (as an Irishman) yell at another Irishman in the street "get knotted you dumbass Paddy" - I'm not being racist I'm being stupid. Racism is about implying that one race is inferior to another. Surly for that you need two races?

The Corinthian wrote:

So it’s quite easy to be racist about your own race - ask any Herrenvolk.

Busted! You invoked Godwin's Law.

The Corinthian wrote:

TBH, reading this thread has demonstrated that the term racism is so overused that many of the posters here don’t even understand it.

Your own comments don't help the overuse issue methinks?

KnowItAll - you still haven't answered my question... if Irish people are pale skinned only...

What colour are Americans?

Wibbs

I would say Americans are Asiatic in skin tone tending towards the darker end. The rest of 'em are immigrants don't ya know.

The Corinthian

The Atheist wrote:

This idea seems daft to me. If I (as an Irishman) yell at another Irishman in the street "get knotted you dumbass Paddy" - I'm not being racist I'm being stupid. Racism is about implying that one race is inferior to another. Surly for that you need two races?

Racism is about prejudice based upon race. Suggesting that blacks make better basketball players, for example, is racist - even though it is not suggesting (although it is implying) that any other race is inferior. So examine why the term Paddy was used; if it was based upon the belief that the Irish as a race (if such a thing exists) are stupid, then it is racist. If not, then it may still be offensive, but it is not actually racist.

Busted! You invoked Godwin's Law.

Does Godwin's Law invalidate the point or is it simply a convenient non-rebuttal?

Your own comments don't help the overuse issue methinks?

If you demonstrated knowledge on the topic, I’d take that statement more seriously.

catholicireland

Weather you like it or not out race is part of our culture.


So is locking people up in Magdalene Laundries. We don't so it any more, though.

So you admit that there is such thing as an Irish race, but from you answer above you say its a very bad thing, because you compare it to the Magdelene Laundries. Why is that?

Dades

The Corinthian wrote:

Racism is about prejudice based upon race. Suggesting that blacks make better basketball players, for example, is racist - even though it is not suggesting (although it is implying) that any other race is inferior. So examine why the term Paddy was used; if it was based upon the belief that the Irish as a race (if such a thing exists) are stupid, then it is racist. If not, then it may still be offensive, but it is not actually racist.

Nothing you have said there I disagree with - but you are completely circling my point here. What I'm suggesting is that if (e.g.) an American calls me a Paddy because he holds a stereotype of Irish people being stupid, then I guess that's mild racism. (I say mild because it wouldn't bother me). If a random Dub I've never met calls me a Paddy why the hell would I consider this racist, as opposed to being anything other than joke? Leave the dictionary down when deciding.

The Corinthian wrote:

Does Godwin's Law invalidate the point or is it simply a convenient non-rebuttal?

Lighten up? I thought this was a discussion not an argument that required a rebuttal.

The Corinthian wrote:

If you demonstrated knowledge on the topic, I’d take that statement more seriously.

WTF is that supposed to mean? By demonstrating knowledge do you mean agreeing with you? I made a point that one hand you say the term racism is overused while in the next breath try to tell me that an Irishman calling another Irishman a paddy is racism.

Sheesh.

gaf1983

So have we got a definition for the term "racism" then?

Is it the act of differentiating certain communities from the rest of the population on the basis of features such as physical appearance, skin tone, language/culture?

Or does it necessitate that the certain community must be held to be either inferior or superior to another section of people?

nesf

For a dictionary definition.

rac·ism Audio pronunciation of "racism" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rszm)
n.

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

racist adj. & n.

The problem is that people seem to confuse 1. and 2. a lot of the time.

1. is true but then you hit the and. Then it just gets messy.

Dades

nesf wrote:

The problem is that people seem to confuse 1. and 2. a lot of the time.

1. is true but then you hit the and. Then it just gets messy.

Yeah the "and" bit is everything there really isn't it? I mean the first bit is inarguable.

Am I racist if I say that coloured people make better sprinters, and white people make better swimmers?

Of course there are people who will take both those statements as racist toward coloured people.

So it's down to the whole inferior/superior thing. Without that it ain't racism.

rsynnott

The Atheist wrote:

Am I racist if I say that coloured people make better sprinters, and white people make better swimmers?

Of course there are people who will take both those statements as racist toward coloured people.
.

While in fact, they're just bizarre generalisations.

Also, "coloured" is a silly term, unless you can show me a colourless person.

The Corinthian

The Atheist wrote:

Nothing you have said there I disagree with - but you are completely circling my point here. What I'm suggesting is that if (e.g.) an American calls me a Paddy because he holds a stereotype of Irish people being stupid, then I guess that's mild racism. (I say mild because it wouldn't bother me). If a random Dub I've never met calls me a Paddy why the hell would I consider this racist, as opposed to being anything other than joke? Leave the dictionary down when deciding.

Sorry, I took you up wrong.

Lighten up? I thought this was a discussion not an argument that required a rebuttal.

Fair enough - you’d be surprised how many will consider Godwin's Law a valid rebuttal though.

I made a point that one hand you say the term racism is overused while in the next breath try to tell me that an Irishman calling another Irishman a paddy is racism.

I didn’t.

KnowItAll

The Atheist wrote:

Out of interest, what colour are Americans?

Americans come in many colours because America unlike Ireland was born from immigration.

The Atheist wrote:

Am I racist if I say that coloured people make better sprinters, and white people make better swimmers?

Of course there are people who will take both those statements as racist toward coloured people.

So it's down to the whole inferior/superior thing. Without that it ain't racism.

It's called the truth. The truth cannot be told in any way (though it's acceptable to say that blacks are faster than whites) because it will be seen by some people as saying that one race is superior in every way.

rsynnott

KnowItAll wrote:

Americans come in many colours because America unlike Ireland was born from immigration.

Really? Celts? Vikings? Anglo-Saxons? What on Earth are those? Ireland is just receiving another installment.

KnowItAll wrote:

It's called the truth. The truth cannot be told in any way (though it's acceptable to say that blacks are faster than whites) because it will be seen by some people as saying that one race is superior in every way.

Generalisations based on race are not generally very useful, any more than generalisations made on, say, rib count. Try treating people as people rather than as members of a "race".

Dades

KnowItAll wrote:

Out of interest, what colour are Americans?

Americans come in many colours because America unlike Ireland was born from immigration.

:rolleyes:

You're forgetting the fact that America was already inhabited.
So by your reckoning Native Americans (i.e American Indians) are only true Americans.
They were there first and they're still there.

Dades

Am I racist if I say that coloured people make better sprinters, and white people make better swimmers?

rsynnott wrote:

While in fact, they're just bizarre generalisations.

Also, "coloured" is a silly term, unless you can show me a colourless person.

I'm only trying to tease out a point. They're not bizzare at all. When is the last time a [caucasian] won Olympic gold in the 100 metres? And when was the last time a [insert preferred nomenclature for non-caucasian here] won a medal in any swimming event?

Okay then so 'coloured' is misrepresentative. Have you ever seen a person who was actually black?

Blub2k4

The Corinthian wrote:

Except she’s not basing her prejudice upon race, but on culture and background. We, as a Society, do it all the time for individuals that we consider chavs or skangers, after all.

TBH, reading this thread has demonstrated that the term racism is so overused that many of the posters here don’t even understand it.

Who doesn't understand the definition of racism?
I'd suggest it is your good self.

dictionary.com wrote:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=race
Race:
1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race.
3. A genealogical line; a lineage.
4. Humans considered as a group.
5. Biology.
1. An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.
2. A breed or strain, as of domestic animals.
6. A distinguishing or characteristic quality, such as the flavor of a wine.


http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=racism
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

So if you take point 2 of the defintion of race and either point 1 or 2 from the definition of racism, bang goes the skin colour theory :rolleyes:

Now we would have A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution who are descriminated against as a result of this. (one possible interpretation.)
Agreed?