Do you think Reverse Racism exists?

[Headie]

-w0LFYhedo0

This video pretty much sums up exactly how I feel about 'reverse racism' :clap1:

[Scarlett.]

There's no such thing as "Reverse Racism"

Racism isnt something that is exclusive to one ethnic group, it could happen to any race. That being said, racism against white people is quite rare, while unfortunately, racism against other cultures is more common.

[JoshBB]

Reverse racism is non-existent, and it's just sad that people want to be oppressed so badly.

[Marsh.]

Being offended/oppressed is the new geek chic trend. Everyone suddenly wants to jump on the bandwagon and be sidelined by society.... by making it mainstream. :laugh:

[JoshBB]

Being offended/oppressed is the new geek chic trend. Everyone suddenly wants to jump on the bandwagon and be sidelined by society.... by making it mainstream. :laugh:

I find it quite insulting when people pretend they're oppressed tbh

[Ninastar]

It exists 100% imo and until you've travelled to other places around the world, other than the place you live in, you can't have a say. If I had never lived in America, never travelled to places like Bradford/Keighley, I would totally agree and say it doesn't exist. But I also don't listen to everything I read on the internet/see on tumblr.

The actual definition, dictionary definition, is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." It says absolutely nothing about certain races being excluded from this.

What confuses me is that most of the people claim that they want equality, but they treat people differently based on their race/gender etc. Surely racism and sexism counts for everyone? Not just certain individuals?

[Northern Monkey]

It exists 100% imo and until you've travelled to other places around the world, other than the place you live in, you can't have a say. If I had never lived in America, never travelled to places like Bradford/Keighley, I would totally agree and say it doesn't exist. But I also don't listen to everything I read on the internet/see on tumblr.

The actual definition, dictionary definition, is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." It says absolutely nothing about certain races being excluded from this.

What confuses me is that most of the people claim that they want equality, but they treat people differently based on their race/gender etc. Surely racism and sexism counts for everyone? Not just certain individuals?:clap1:
I 100% agree.
I would'nt add the word 'reverse' in there though.It is needless.It's just racism whoever is doing it or on the receiving end.

[Dollface]

"Reverse racism" doesn't exist because it doesn't make sense, but "Racism" does and racism can be towards anyone of any race.

[Samuel.]

Why call it "reverse racism"? It's just racism. There are lots of examples of racism occuring that neither involve black or white people. White people are minorities in many countries. Either way, by definition racism can happen to any ethnicity by any ethnicity.

[Daniel.]

I agree with dollface

[Dollface]

I agree with dollface

:flowers:

[LukeB]

just call it racism.. reverse racism shouldn't be preached about or made a thing it does not exist.

[Firewire]

I've never seen any real cases of it.

[Jamie89]

Being offended/oppressed is the new geek chic trend. Everyone suddenly wants to jump on the bandwagon and be sidelined by society.... by making it mainstream. :laugh:

What? Can't tell if you're joking lol. You don't think people have the right to be offended by things they find offensive?

I take great offence to that! :hehe:

[Scarlett.]

Being offended/oppressed is the new geek chic trend. Everyone suddenly wants to jump on the bandwagon and be sidelined by society.... by making it mainstream. :laugh:

tumblr springs to mind :laugh:

[Marsh.]

What? Can't tell if you're joking lol. You don't think people have the right to be offended by things they find offensive?

I take great offence to that! :hehe:

I can't tell whether this is one big ironic post. :laugh:

But I'll answer. No, people can be offended and should speak up when they do.

BUT nowadays it's all the rage to be offended about every little thing. Which is kind of insulting to the actual offensive things that matter.

[Marsh.]

I've never seen any real cases of it.

I've never seen a male G-spot but I know it's there. :smug:

[Jamie89]

I can't tell whether this is one big ironic post. :laugh:

But I'll answer. No, people can be offended and should speak up when they do.

BUT nowadays it's all the rage to be offended about every little thing. Which is kind of insulting to the actual offensive things that matter.

:laugh: It was meant more as cheeky than ironic

BUT that begs the question, who then decides what is and what isn't offensive. Sure there's the obvious things we could list that of course are terrible, but with what you would consider the little things, everyone has different thresholds, and isn't that just part of being human? Sure there will always be people who complain about things and I'll think "get over it!" coz I don't get offended easily, or there'll be people who jump on bandwagons but I fear that if everyone took your attitude it would ostrasize a lot of people who are essentially just expressing how they feel and I don't like that. I think we need people who are going to push boundaries and offend, and we also need people who are prepared to push back at it and have their opinions heard, that's true freedom of speech for everyone, right?

[Marsh.]

:laugh: It was meant more as cheeky than ironic

BUT that begs the question, who then decides what is and what isn't offensive. Sure there's the obvious things we could list that of course are terrible, but with what you would consider the little things, everyone has different thresholds, and isn't that just part of being human? Sure there will always be people who complain about things and I'll think "get over it!" coz I don't get offended easily, or there'll be people who jump on bandwagons but I fear that if everyone took your attitude it would ostrasize a lot of people who are essentially just expressing how they feel and I don't like that. I think we need people who are going to push boundaries and offend, and we also need people who are prepared to push back at it and have their opinions heard, that's true freedom of speech for everyone, right?

I haven't said they should listen to me.

Just voicing my opinion that it's more "fashionable" than ever before (especially for celebs on twitter) to start speaking out in the desperate attempt to become some sort of icon as though they're Ellen Degeneres fighting for gay rights when really they're just "speaking out" about anything and everything for the sake of the attention and finding offence where there isn't any.

It's like I was reading an article on DS the other day about Cheryl. She'd apparently said in an interview something about "obese people shouldn't be told they look great...." or something like that but the headline read something completely different like "Cheryl slams the overweight" or something when she specifically mentioned "obese". They were purposely trying to stir up offence where there didn't need to be any. To jump on the bandwagon and say, look what minority this person is attacking, aren't I great for pointing it out.

[Ninastar]

I can't tell whether this is one big ironic post. :laugh:

But I'll answer. No, people can be offended and should speak up when they do.

BUT nowadays it's all the rage to be offended about every little thing. Which is kind of insulting to the actual offensive things that matter.

I agree with all of this tbh. But to say racism doesn't exist with X race is just ignorant and wrong IMO. Racism can happen to absolutely anyone.

[Jamie89]

I haven't said they should listen to me.

Just voicing my opinion that it's more "fashionable" than ever before (especially for celebs on twitter) to start speaking out in the desperate attempt to become some sort of icon as though they're Ellen Degeneres fighting for gay rights when really they're just "speaking out" about anything and everything for the sake of the attention and finding offence where there isn't any.

It's like I was reading an article on DS the other day about Cheryl. She'd apparently said in an interview something about "obese people shouldn't be told they look great...." or something like that but the headline read something completely different like "Cheryl slams the overweight" or something when she specifically mentioned "obese". They were purposely trying to stir up offence where there didn't need to be any. To jump on the bandwagon and say, look what minority this person is attacking, aren't I great for pointing it out.

Ok well yeah, that is kind of ridiculous, if somebody twists and changes what someone else has said for the purpose of offending, or if they're just trying to get attention for themselves. I wasn't trying to suggest that you think everyone should listen to you btw, I just meant generally that everyone should be entitled to not only having different opinions but accepting each others opinions as valid, even if they don't agree with it.

I actually think though that there is a very recent fashion of shaming people who get offended. There's kind of a Katie Hopkins culture of thinking that it's ok to say whatever you want, but not accepting that it's ok for people to argue against it. She's the obvious example and probably an extreme one but it's something I don't remember being as prevalent as it is today. What will happen is that they'll try and belittle the person by labeling them the "PC Brigade" or some other term which is basically an attempt to invalidate their opinion, whilst complaining that they themselves have no free speech because people are complaining. When actually everyone has free speech, but this means that anyone should be allowed to openly express that they are offended by anything that they find offensive, regardless of how little it seems to someone else.

[empire]

britain is under a PC over the top race law regime, that have not only caused reverse racism, but have made a fractured society, new labour enforced equality with a big touch of marxism, and it backfired badly, because they where trying to force change in a society, that would never be able to adapt too it, they thought by enforcing laws to make everyone a big one happy family would work, but it did not, the workers union banned words in the workplace, like, black tape,black mark, and this is something straight out of the soviet union, where saying the wrong words like,coke cola,star wars,hotdogs, would get you into big trouble, as a white british person, what really gets to me, is the word white privilege, in the child grooming in the north of england, if the word asian privilege, was used, the left wing would attack you with open arms, Im proud to be white, as I would be proud to be black, or asian, but what I don't like, is the hole race shame one group, but the other ones are perfect, the left wing have made it that way, because if you are white, you can't be proud of it, you have to be ashamed to be pale skinned, both poor blacks and poor white suffered because of greedy rich people, both suffered in different ways, for blacks it was slavery, with being flogged to death, for whites, it was working 18 hours a day in the work houses, with poor pay and going hungry, the left wing made reverse racism, because they don't want words, like black or asian privilege, to be brought to life, because it hits their fairytale about whites being piggy in the middle, as the evil race of the planet, I don't know why us brits did not wake up to this years ago,

[Cherie]

"Reverse racism" doesn't exist because it doesn't make sense, but "Racism" does and racism can be towards anyone of any race.

I agree with this.

[kirklancaster]

Being offended/oppressed is the new geek chic trend. Everyone suddenly wants to jump on the bandwagon and be sidelined by society.... by making it mainstream. :laugh:

:clap1::clap1::clap1: You are most wise O returned one.

[kirklancaster]

Why call it "reverse racism"? It's just racism. There are lots of examples of racism occuring that neither involve black or white people. White people are minorities in many countries. Either way, by definition racism can happen to any ethnicity by any ethnicity.

:clap1::clap1::clap1:

[kirklancaster]

I've never seen a male G-spot but I know it's there. :smug:

:laugh: I've known for years that a female 'G Spot' exists, but where I don't know, because I've never quite been able to my put my finger on it.

[user104658]

Does Heterophobia Exist 2.0 Redux Extreme: Race Edition

*ahem*

Anyway short answer from me; Racism exists in all forms, against all ethnicities. If a white person walks through a "black neighbourhood" in Los Angeles and feels threatened or experiences harassment because of their skin colour, then that is racism. Full stop.

INSTITUTIONAL racism does not exist in any meaningful form against white people in the west. It ----*does exist*----, however, in some Asian countries such as Japan and the Koreas. I've had people argue against me on this one on here before but it does exist. It is a fact.

[user104658]

:laugh: I've known for years that a female 'G Spot' exists, but where I don't know, because I've never quite been able to my put my finger on it.

You've been looking in the wrong hole!

Also... what are you doing in here :nono:.

[Kyle]

Does Heterophobia Exist 2.0 Redux Extreme: Race Edition

*ahem*

Anyway short answer from me; Racism exists in all forms, against all ethnicities. If a white person walks through a "black neighbourhood" in Los Angeles and feels threatened or experiences harassment because of their skin colour, then that is racism. Full stop.

INSTITUTIONAL racism does not exist in any meaningful form against white people in the west. It ----*does exist*----, however, in some Asian countries such as Japan and the Koreas. I've had people argue against me on this one on here before but it does exist. It is a fact.

It's a slight tangent but I'd be interested to know from people who have been to Japan what their opinion is on society there. By all accounts online I've heard there can be a slight xenophobic attitude to elements of their society but like I said I don't know anyone who's been there personally and always wanted to go.

[user104658]

It's a slight tangent but I'd be interested to know from people who have been to Japan what their opinion is on society there. By all accounts online I've heard there can be a slight xenophobic attitude to elements of their society but like I said I don't know anyone who's been there personally and always wanted to go.
My best friends little brother lived there for 3 years, seems like basically it's a mixed bag like anywhere I guess. Lots of Japanese people love / are slightly obsessed with US / UK culture I guess in the same way that a lot of people are big on Japanese culture here. Like I said though, there is a bit of institutional racism against non-japanese people, especially when it comes to getting a job or career progression. Again like here (and this of course may be stereotyping a bit?) younger generations tend to be more multicultural with a lot of the older ones being more... Umm... Traditional (ie a bit racist).

That's second hand info obviously but does otherwise come from someone who has been obsessed with Japan for most of his life and lived there for years. He actually ended up moving back because he started to feel very out of place.

[Kyle]

My best friends little brother lived there for 3 years, seems like basically it's a mixed bag like anywhere I guess. Lots of Japanese people love / are slightly obsessed with US / UK culture I guess in the same way that a lot of people are big on Japanese culture here. Like I said though, there is a bit of institutional racism against non-japanese people, especially when it comes to getting a job or career progression. Again like here (and this of course may be stereotyping a bit?) younger generations tend to be more multicultural with a lot of the older ones being more... Umm... Traditional (ie a bit racist).

That's second hand info obviously but does otherwise come from someone who has been obsessed with Japan for most of his life and lived there for years. He actually ended up moving back because he started to feel very out of place.

Interesting stuff thanks.

Do you think overall he would recommend it for a couple of weeks of sightseeing?

[user104658]

Interesting stuff thanks.

Do you think overall he would recommend it for a couple of weeks of sightseeing?
He still loves it just couldn't live there!

I personally would imagine it's a "must go" for anyone wanting to travel the world. Say a week in Tokyo and a week in rural Japan. Both are pretty unique.

[Tom4784]

People who are saying that it exists are misunderstanding what Reverse Racism is and are confusing it with racism in general.

It doesn't mean that black people can't be racist towards white people, that's nothing to do with it. It's about the idea that things like Black History Month, Black Lives Matter and other black-centric things are racist to white people because it isn't about them which is a ridiculous, self absorbed and ignorant thought process.

[Northern Monkey]

People who are saying that it exists are misunderstanding what Reverse Racism is and are confusing it with racism in general.

It doesn't mean that black people can't be racist towards white people, that's nothing to do with it. It's about the idea that things like Black History Month, Black Lives Matter and other black-centric things are racist to white people because it isn't about them which is a ridiculous, self absorbed and ignorant thought process.

Oh right.I did'nt know that was the definition.Well i don't believe that's racist.Black people can have as many events or groups as they like without me being offended.

[Niamh.]

Here is the definition of reverse discrimination

the unfair treatment of members of majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reverse+discrimination

[Northern Monkey]

Here is the definition of reverse discrimination

the unfair treatment of members of majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reverse+discrimination

Well.Surely that does exist if there's a definition?

[Niamh.]

Well.Surely that does exist if there's a definition?

Sounds more like Positive discrimination towards minorities = Reverse racism toward majorities?

[Northern Monkey]

Sounds more like Positive discrimination towards minorities = Reverse racism toward majorities?

Yeah.Sounds like two definitions of the same thing.
Problem solved
/thread

[Niamh.]

Yeah.Sounds like two definitions of the same thing.
Problem solved
/thread

:laugh:

[Tom4784]

It's a definition that only works in theory, the phrase as a whole is just something to propagate the idea that minorities are somehow privileged for having quota laws in place when it's not. There are more opportunities for white people in this world then there are for black people and that's a fact and those laws are just there to guarantee opportunities for people who would probably not have them otherwise due to the fact that many societies (America especially) are up to their necks in institutional racism.

[JoshBB]

I agree with all of this tbh. But to say racism doesn't exist with X race is just ignorant and wrong IMO. Racism can happen to absolutely anyone.

Can it exist? Yes. If the atmosphere was there, and society was different.. of course it could.

But does it exist? No. We have pretty much colonised the entire world, and during that period we pretty much gave white people superiority over the natives of those countries, established our own language as the global 'default', and so racism cannot properly exist against white people because we have power and privilege in society. You need both of those things to be be actively 'racist' so to speak.

[Niamh.]

It's a definition that only works in theory, the phrase as a whole is just something to propagate the idea that minorities are somehow privileged for having quota laws in place when it's not. There are more opportunities for white people in this world then there are for black people and that's a fact and those laws are just there to guarantee opportunities for people who would probably not have them otherwise due to the fact that many societies (America especially) are up to their necks in institutional racism.

Oh yeah, I absolutely agree with that. Same as I understand and agree with the need for positive discrimination towards women in work environments. It doesn't sound fair in theory but it is necessary to even up the playing field for men and women of all races

[user104658]

power and privilege in society. You need both of those things to be be actively 'racist' so to speak.

No you don't. I'm baffled about where this misunderstanding had spawned from, it's such a popular opinion these days but it's simply incorrect. It's just... Not the case. Racism implies intent, not consequence, therefore ANY individual of ANY ethnicity who dislikes, stereotypes, or otherwise insults ANY other individual or group of individuals, based arbitrarily on their race, is being racist. What happens afterwards, how affected the other person was (if at all) is irrelevant.

The only explanation I can think of is that someone, at some point, heard someone else say that only a majority race (in the West, white people) can be and often are institutionally racist and got confused and thought it applied to all racism and then that idea spread. But it doesn't apply. It's a misunderstanding of what the term means and implies.

[Headie]

People who are saying that it exists are misunderstanding what Reverse Racism is and are confusing it with racism in general.

It doesn't mean that black people can't be racist towards white people, that's nothing to do with it. It's about the idea that things like Black History Month, Black Lives Matter and other black-centric things are racist to white people because it isn't about them which is a ridiculous, self absorbed and ignorant thought process.

:worship:

[Kate!]

"Reverse racism" doesn't exist because it doesn't make sense, but "Racism" does and racism can be towards anyone of any race.

This

[the truth]

yes it exists

[Ninastar]

No you don't. I'm baffled about where this misunderstanding had spawned from, it's such a popular opinion these days but it's simply incorrect. It's just... Not the case. Racism implies intent, not consequence, therefore ANY individual of ANY ethnicity who dislikes, stereotypes, or otherwise insults ANY other individual or group of individuals, based arbitrarily on their race, is being racist. What happens afterwards, how affected the other person was (if at all) is irrelevant.

The only explanation I can think of is that someone, at some point, heard someone else say that only a majority race (in the West, white people) can be and often are institutionally racist and got confused and thought it applied to all racism and then that idea spread. But it doesn't apply. It's a misunderstanding of what the term means and implies.

Totally agree. Well said.

I don't believe the term 'reverse racism' exists. So no, I don't believe 'reverse racism' is real, it's just standard racism. Anyone of any colour can be racist to anyone of any colour. I don't think it's right to say otherwise.

[Northern Monkey]

No you don't. I'm baffled about where this misunderstanding had spawned from, it's such a popular opinion these days but it's simply incorrect. It's just... Not the case. Racism implies intent, not consequence, therefore ANY individual of ANY ethnicity who dislikes, stereotypes, or otherwise insults ANY other individual or group of individuals, based arbitrarily on their race, is being racist. What happens afterwards, how affected the other person was (if at all) is irrelevant.

The only explanation I can think of is that someone, at some point, heard someone else say that only a majority race (in the West, white people) can be and often are institutionally racist and got confused and thought it applied to all racism and then that idea spread. But it doesn't apply. It's a misunderstanding of what the term means and implies.This is exactly my view on this strange 'power and privilege' argument.That is 'institutional racism'.Anyone can be plain old racist to another ethnic group.Definately some confusion there.

According to that argument i could go to Pakistan and start calling the majority indiginous population dirty smelly p**i b******s and i'm not racist?
I don't think so.

[kirklancaster]

This is exactly my view on this strange 'power and privilege' argument.That is 'institutional racism'.Anyone can be plain old racist to another ethnic group.Definately some confusion there.

According to that argument i could go to Pakistan and start calling the majority indiginous population dirty smelly p**i b******s and i'm not racist?
I don't think so.

Great post.

[user104658]

I think I should add to this that I don't at all think it's "racist" to have things like black history month, celebrate music of black origins, or any of the other celebrations of identity that "white people don't have" and it IS ridiculous when people claim that they are or try to pretend that for "equality" we would need white equivalents. Obviously, we don't, and all of these things are great positives.

However pointing out that those things are clearly not racist doesn't mean that it "doesn't exist", in many other scenarios.

[Johnnyuk123]

When a black man says ****** that is ok but when a white man says it all hell breaks loose. Music videos for instance. Only black men can use that term freely. As soon as a white man reopeats that term OMG!!!! :joker::joker::joker:

[Johnnyuk123]

"Reverse racism" doesn't exist because it doesn't make sense, but "Racism" does and racism can be towards anyone of any race.

So a black man insulting a white man never happened?

[Ninastar]

I think I should add to this that I don't at all think it's "racist" to have things like black history month, celebrate music of black origins, or any of the other celebrations of identity that "white people don't have" and it IS ridiculous when people claim that they are or try to pretend that for "equality" we would need white equivalents. Obviously, we don't, and all of these things are great positives.

However pointing out that those things are clearly not racist doesn't mean that it "doesn't exist", in many other scenarios.

once again, totally agree.

[Tom4784]

When a black man says ****** that is ok but when a white man says it all hell breaks loose. Music videos for instance. Only black men can use that term freely. As soon as a white man reopeats that term OMG!!!! :joker::joker::joker:

Because white people invented the word as a derogatory term and some black people have reclaimed it for their own use as a term of endearment or solidarity. If a white person uses it, it hearkens back to it's original meaning.

A better question would be why are you so pressed that it's not socially acceptable for you to use it? In what situation would you, a white person, ever need or want to say it? Why then is it such an issue for you?

[Dollface]

So a black man insulting a white man never happened?

Did you actually read my post? It says very clearly that anyone of any race can be racist

[Headie]

Because white people invented the word as a derogatory term and some black people have reclaimed it for their own use as a term of endearment or solidarity. If a white person uses it, it hearkens back to it's original meaning.

A better question would be why are you so pressed that it's not socially acceptable for you to use it? In what situation would you, a white person, ever need or want to say it? Why then is it such an issue for you?

Totally agree with this. I will never understand the desire for a white person to so desperately want to use the N-word.

[Niamh.]

When a black man says ****** that is ok but when a white man says it all hell breaks loose. Music videos for instance. Only black men can use that term freely. As soon as a white man reopeats that term OMG!!!! :joker::joker::joker:

Is that not for pretty obvious reasons though? Jesus Christ?

[Northern Monkey]

I think I should add to this that I don't at all think it's "racist" to have things like black history month, celebrate music of black origins, or any of the other celebrations of identity that "white people don't have" and it IS ridiculous when people claim that they are or try to pretend that for "equality" we would need white equivalents. Obviously, we don't, and all of these things are great positives.

However pointing out that those things are clearly not racist doesn't mean that it "doesn't exist", in many other scenarios.Same.I have nothing at all against people having things from their own culture to teach them and remind them of their roots.

[kirklancaster]

So the Moral Of The Story Is:

Never buy a car from a racist - it has no reverse gear?

[JoshBB]

No you don't. I'm baffled about where this misunderstanding had spawned from, it's such a popular opinion these days but it's simply incorrect. It's just... Not the case. Racism implies intent, not consequence, therefore ANY individual of ANY ethnicity who dislikes, stereotypes, or otherwise insults ANY other individual or group of individuals, based arbitrarily on their race, is being racist. What happens afterwards, how affected the other person was (if at all) is irrelevant.

The only explanation I can think of is that someone, at some point, heard someone else say that only a majority race (in the West, white people) can be and often are institutionally racist and got confused and thought it applied to all racism and then that idea spread. But it doesn't apply. It's a misunderstanding of what the term means and implies.

You've defined prejudice. Racial prejudice can exist towards any race/ethnicity. But that is not the same as racism - which is institutional, practiced, and embedded in history.

[Livia]

You've defined prejudice. Racial prejudice can exist towards any race/ethnicity. But that is not the same as racism - which is institutional, practiced, and embedded in history.

Semantics, Josh. What is the subtle difference between racism and racial prejudice? They're both hateful. And any race can be racist against another race just like people from any religion can be prejudice against other religions. It's all hate. Giving it precise little labels justifies it. Hate is hate is hate.

[RichardG]

Going by the definition Niamh posted I'd say that 'reverse racism' isn't really 'racism' as such and unless all workplaces and so on hired a significant majority of one race in favour of others then it really isn't an issue. :laugh:


Anyway short answer from me; Racism exists in all forms, against all ethnicities. If a white person walks through a "black neighbourhood" in Los Angeles and feels threatened or experiences harassment because of their skin colour, then that is racism. Full stop.

INSTITUTIONAL racism does not exist in any meaningful form against white people in the west. It ----*does exist*----, however, in some Asian countries such as Japan and the Koreas. I've had people argue against me on this one on here before but it does exist. It is a fact.

:clap1: Agree with this about racism in general though. It can exist against anyone of any race and as someone implied earlier, people shouldn't be shamed or made to feel silly about being offended if someone held racist or any other type of prejudiced views against them just because they've never been oppressed.

[Samuel.]

people shouldn't be shamed or made to feel silly about being offended if someone held racist or any other type of prejudiced views against them just because they've never been oppressed.

Very true.

[JoshBB]

Semantics, Josh. What is the subtle difference between racism and racial prejudice? They're both hateful. And any race can be racist against another race just like people from any religion can be prejudice against other religions. It's all hate. Giving it precise little labels justifies it. Hate is hate is hate.

I've just defined what racism is for you. The institutional practice of discriminating against people of a certain race - this does not exist against white people anywhere in the world. With colonialism in our history, it will be very difficult for that to happen as well, so I don't see it in the near future.

Prejudice does not equal discrimination. It can lead to it, but they are not the same.

[Northern Monkey]

I've just defined what racism is for you. The institutional practice of discriminating against people of a certain race - this does not exist against white people anywhere in the world. With colonialism in our history, it will be very difficult for that to happen as well, so I don't see it in the near future.

Prejudice does not equal discrimination. It can lead to it, but they are not the same.No,You have described institutional racism.That does not describe racism as a whole.Just one aspect of it.

[kirklancaster]

I've just defined what racism is for you. The institutional practice of discriminating against people of a certain race - this does not exist against white people anywhere in the world. With colonialism in our history, it will be very difficult for that to happen as well, so I don't see it in the near future.

Prejudice does not equal discrimination. It can lead to it, but they are not the same.

You are coming across as anti-semantic Josh. :hehe:

[kirklancaster]

No,You have described institutional racism.That does not describe racism as a whole.Just one aspect of it.

You are SERIOUSLY trying to knock a nail in a very dense knot Paul. Wasting your time mate.

[Northern Monkey]

racism
ˈreɪsɪz(ə)m/
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
"theories of racism"
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

I don't know how many times this needs copy/pasting on here but could somebody please point to me in the above definition where the words "power","privilege","institutional"(ised) are?

[Northern Monkey]

You are SERIOUSLY trying to knock a nail in a very dense knot Paul. Wasting your time mate.

You are right.Some things are best left alone for sanity's sake:laugh:

[user104658]

I've just defined what racism is for you. The institutional practice of discriminating against people of a certain race - this does not exist against white people anywhere in the world. With colonialism in our history, it will be very difficult for that to happen as well, so I don't see it in the near future.

Prejudice does not equal discrimination. It can lead to it, but they are not the same.

You're incorrect Josh and I'm going to have to say, your inflexibility is sometimes in dangerous proximity to arrogance. You've defined what racism means to you which is indistinguishable from institutional racism. I don't know what to say. You're wrong and / or misinformed.

"prejudice on the ground of race" and "racism" are not different things... They have exactly the same meaning and exactly the same implications.

You seem to be very focused on discrimination. Discrimination CAN be a result of racism but it need not necessarily be present in order for someone to be racist.

In other words, discrimination can be a consequence of racism but it is NOT part of the definition.

[lostalex]

I don't know what reverse racism really means... I'm guessing it means like that south park episode when Stan is ostracized and abused because people see him as a racist...

Are racists also abused by people and treated poorly just because they are a racist? yes.

Being accused of racism these days it's like being called a pedophile. just the accusation itself is a way to abuse and discriminate against people, even if there is no truth behind the accusation.

If you are asking if it's possible for racial minorities to be racist? then it's an absolute YES. all of the most racist things i've ever heard in my life have been from racial minorities especially blacks. If you heard the things i've heard black people say about asian people and latino people....well let's just say if a white person had said those same things they would have been stoned to death by everyone around them.

[Ammi]

..not using my on words but this was quite an interesting explanation on something I found..which also mentions 'heterophobia' as well...


http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/08/racist-against-white-people/

..anyway, I'll only post bits of sections but the link is there as well..


Precision of Language

Yes. Any person of any identity can be an asshole to any person of any other identity. But that doesn’t make it oppression. It doesn’t even make it racism or sexism or heterosexim or any other -ism.

There is a profound danger in watering down our discussion of identity by removing any mention of societal power, oppression, and privilege.

Doing so ensures that the conversation remains about interpersonal slights rather than about the larger systems of oppression that are the true problem.

Now, this is not to say, that the real issue is the system, so I can say whatever I want, and it shouldn’t matter. Not at all.

Our interpersonal interactions are reflections of and support structures for the larger problems of systematic inequality and oppression.

Instead, we need to recognize that not all hurtful words or deeds are equal when certain ones are backed by a history and current system of domination, violence, oppression, repression, dehumanization, and degradation.

We need to be clear that when we are talking about oppression or a particular -ism, we are not simply talking about an interpersonal slight. We are talking about something much bigger.

[lostalex]

..not using my on words but this was quite an interesting explanation on something I found..which also mentions 'heterophobia' as well...


http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/08/racist-against-white-people/

..anyway, I'll only post bits of sections but the link is there as well..


Precision of Language

Yes. Any person of any identity can be an asshole to any person of any other identity. But that doesn’t make it oppression. It doesn’t even make it racism or sexism or heterosexim or any other -ism.

There is a profound danger in watering down our discussion of identity by removing any mention of societal power, oppression, and privilege.

Doing so ensures that the conversation remains about interpersonal slights rather than about the larger systems of oppression that are the true problem.

Now, this is not to say, that the real issue is the system, so I can say whatever I want, and it shouldn’t matter. Not at all.

Our interpersonal interactions are reflections of and support structures for the larger problems of systematic inequality and oppression.

Instead, we need to recognize that not all hurtful words or deeds are equal when certain ones are backed by a history and current system of domination, violence, oppression, repression, dehumanization, and degradation.

We need to be clear that when we are talking about oppression or a particular -ism, we are not simply talking about an interpersonal slight. We are talking about something much bigger.





who ever wrote that bit of nonsense that you just reposted Ammi, is an idiot. They couldn't be more wrong.

People are not systems, and people are not responsible for the actions of similar people, and generalizing about people based on race is racism itself, no matter what race that person is.

[Cherie]

You are SERIOUSLY trying to knock a nail in a very dense knot Paul. Wasting your time mate.

Everyone is wasting their time then as I have never seen anyone change stance on anything in here, :laugh: they just provide a counter argument so I think your post is a bit unfair.

[Northern Monkey]

..not using my on words but this was quite an interesting explanation on something I found..which also mentions 'heterophobia' as well...


http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/08/racist-against-white-people/

..anyway, I'll only post bits of sections but the link is there as well..


Precision of Language

Yes. Any person of any identity can be an asshole to any person of any other identity. But that doesn’t make it oppression. It doesn’t even make it racism or sexism or heterosexim or any other -ism.

There is a profound danger in watering down our discussion of identity by removing any mention of societal power, oppression, and privilege.

Doing so ensures that the conversation remains about interpersonal slights rather than about the larger systems of oppression that are the true problem.

Now, this is not to say, that the real issue is the system, so I can say whatever I want, and it shouldn’t matter. Not at all.

Our interpersonal interactions are reflections of and support structures for the larger problems of systematic inequality and oppression.

Instead, we need to recognize that not all hurtful words or deeds are equal when certain ones are backed by a history and current system of domination, violence, oppression, repression, dehumanization, and degradation.

We need to be clear that when we are talking about oppression or a particular -ism, we are not simply talking about an interpersonal slight. We are talking about something much bigger.


So according to this.I can go into say an Arab country for instance and start calling people 'rag heads' or other similar language and i'm not actually being racist?Just an asshole.

I don't agree with this.I think it is quite ridiculous.I think it's just a way to excuse racism in the west from non whites.

Racism is racism and non of it should be excused from anybody,No matter their colour.

[Ammi]

So according to this.I can go into say an Arab country for instance and start calling people 'rag heads' or other similar language and i'm not actually being racist?Just an asshole.
I don't agree with this.I think it is quite ridiculous.I think it's just a way to excuse racism in the west from non whites.

Racism is racism and non of it should be excused from anybody,No matter their colour.

..that's not how I interpreted the article/blog or whatever it is exactly but more inline with the OP and the vid in that really...get out of that Arab country quick before you get hurt Paul...:laugh:...

[Mystic Mock]

Why call it "reverse racism"? It's just racism. There are lots of examples of racism occuring that neither involve black or white people. White people are minorities in many countries. Either way, by definition racism can happen to any ethnicity by any ethnicity.

I agree with all of this.

[Mystic Mock]

Here is the definition of reverse discrimination

the unfair treatment of members of majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reverse+discrimination

Does 3 Asian women beating up a white girl whilst calling her a “white slag” got a slap on the wrist, yet the white woman on the Train or Bus who verbally attacked black and asian people and was locked up in Prison for three years count as reverse racism? I'm kinda torn on how to term those decisions that got completely different outcomes from what was essentially racism in both cases.