We get to share the guilt while knowing Estonian lands were under the annexation of foreign empires and people were serving under serfdom of mostly German overlords during the mentioned colonisation and slavery.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
LOreal Drops Transgender Model After All White People Racism Post
- Thread starter DogDude
- Start date
We get to share the guilt while knowing Estonian lands were under the annexation of foreign empires and people were serving under serfdom of mostly German overlords during the mentioned colonisation and slavery.
Black culture developed for way more reasons than just simple in group/out group theory. And it's not an internet thing either. As much as it would be easy to label all this stuff as just 'humans being humans', you're missing a whole lot of social and cultural historical context for the trees my man.
Darth Ghandi
Banned
Nah, man.
Never wrote "fuck white people" so trying to compare the two is ingenuous.
Had I written "Fuck white people" you may have had a point if I we both also decided to ignore the fact that Muslims aren't a privileged group.
If ALL it take for a white person to be alienated is being hurt by me saying "fuck tone policing white moderates", then how you gonna convince me they are an ally?
Audioboxer
Member
Nothing develops just due to in/out group theory. It's simply an explanation of human behaviour that can often be observable, and it's observable in the animal kingdom. That might be a problem for some if they do not believe in evolution, but that's another argument for elsewhere, evolution is fact. It's also behaviour which is observable across all walks of life, not even explicitly race (which you've focussed on). The theory is to do with anywhere grouping can form, and how people within those groups may feel or behave. I illustrated feelings and wanting to be a part of groups is entirely healthy and normal, where it can go wrong is when people oppress/get violent/discriminate. My post isn't negative at all, it is simply aiming to be explanatory for anyone with incredibly primitive understandings of socialisation and any sorts of grouping. Some genuinely believe any sort of in-group behaviour is by nature hostile/negative/abusive/derogatory/discriminatory, when it's not that simple. Ironically for the reason you've just said to me!
The remark about the internet was just because we're on the internet, and even if you live on an island with a population of 100 people you can observe behaviour online with not too many clicks of your mouse. There are topics on this board I wouldn't contribute to as I don't feel like I'm part of the group they are catering for. That doesn't make me personally feel excluded, hostile, angry or resentful. Why should it? Anyone with a decent understanding of why their identifiable traits/personality/hobbies are excluded at times in life should be absolutely fine sitting out some things. It's not that you actually have a restriction to posting/contributing/taking part, it's just many people in life understand and accept some things aren't aimed at them as they are some times part of the out-group.
You can offer up some daft examples like people who don't like football aren't part of the in-group for a football discussion. People who don't own an Xbox aren't part of the in-group for Xbox discussions. People who don't ride horses aren't part of the in-group for horse riding discussions. Most people can accept those realities and never say a word, it's all about hobbies or what electronic goods are under your TV. Fanboyism and tribalism around brands/companies are more a joke than anything to take seriously. When you move onto more heartfelt identifiers, like someone's sex, race, ethnicity and even religion, it gets more people paying attention/alarmed. Understandably. There haven't really been any massacres throughout history to do with horse riding. Some of the worst death tolls since our planet has been a thing have been to do with racial, ethnic or religious bloodshed. When it gets to points where an in-group as a large enough collective decide violence/bloodshed and worse is the acceptable outcome to wipe out any other groups who do not identify as they do. I get all of that, accept it, and understand. What my original post was trying to do however was show nearly everyone still feels and thinks about in-group preferences around sex, race, religion and so on, and it doesn't instantly mean "shit, we've got fundamentalists/supremacists/evil people here". To be relevant to this topic, "all these people with x identifier are y". That is just scientifically ludicrous.
In part, it's about how you handle such socialisation you get hit with from birth, and how you try to integrate and co-exist with any out-groups to your identifiers such as other races/ethnicities/sex. Treat people as human beings, treat them as individuals and learn to deal with socialisation that may encourage you to stick solely to your group/tribe. People do not get to choose their sex, race, ethnicity and so on like a Fallout 4 creator prompt at birth. Religion is the only one of the big traits you do get to choose, but even then religion often is formed because of your parents raising you from birth into whatever religion they are part of. Even with being an upstanding citizen yourself, you may still have in-group preferences with some things in life, where you understandably take part in friendships/groups/hobbies/interests or whatever it is with people you identify with that have similar traits to yourself. Due to all these complexities around socialisation/in&out groups, simply blaming everyone with an identifier they had no control over at birth is taking a hacksaw to issues that require a scalpel. EviLore saying "everyone is racist" to me was more attempting to lead into discussions around socialisation and possible in/out group theories. It could maybe be changed to "everyone is discriminatory" if we want to talk about the scientific understanding of what they word discriminatory can mean (the ability to distinguish between different stimuli, such as your in and out group differentiating themselves on different stimuli). That to me is probably the scalpel knife approach to trying to scientifically explain some of what this model may have been hitting out at, except she has used the hack saw method. Hence why I quoted him. He can, of course, come back and say I'm off the mark and misunderstood him.
The last quick note I want to say is I'm not stating biological essentialism either. The fact humans have the level of intelligence we do is precisely what helps the vast majority of people challenge socialisation, grouping, tribalism and other biological/evolutionary groundings. I sometimes side eye people too keen to launch into the "everything is a social construct" realm because no, that's intellectually dishonest. We need to have serious and grounded talks about biology, evolution and psychology first. I do however as any respectable person in the fields of science accept humans SHOULD be expected to try and overcome some of our more primitive legacies when it comes to only catering for our "own group" and being hostile/aggressive to societal change/inclusion/progression. It's in our own interests and desires as a species not to be as dumb and vicious as some of the animal kingdom, and to try and live in harmony and get on with our fellow humans no matter what identifies them.
I consider myself white and I say that all white people are racist without a single problem.
It is not the same thing because MANKIND favors being white. We lived DECADES, no CENTURIES of slavery. The fact that we don't just give back stuff to black people for compensation makes us pretty shitty and racist.
If you don't understand how the history of "all white people are racist" and "all muslims are terrorist" are insanely different than the problem is on YOU for feeling alienated.
History, context, the world we live in.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Yep, racism goes both ways. She's blaming an entire race, including all those who have never contributed to any oppression of other races. She's judging me solely based on my skin color. That's racism, and EXACTLY what we don't want people to do toward black people
FairFriend
Member
She could have picked her words more wisely. The gist of what she is saying is true: white people benefit from their privilege, and those that don't actively fight against it are complicit in maintaining it.
Problem is, she just went in emotionally and phrased it poorly, which isn't likely to change anyone's mind about anything, which is a shame
Off-topic: She is crazy pretty. Hope she lands on her feet because I could stand to see her model a bit more. Edit: And because I think her heart was in the right place.
Wholeheartedly agree with this post.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
So, original sin or something? Nah, this is all bullshit. We SHOULD do what we can to make sure everyone is treated equally and has an equal chance in life, but I'm not gonna take responsibility for what people did ages ago. I'm also Swedish, so I have no connection to the American history of African slavery. But that's still on me according to you? All white people, you say. Nah, fuck that.
Darth Ghandi
Banned
I'd urge you to read the second part of the OP.
"Whether aware of it or not, in today's society the lighter your skin tone (people of colour included) the more social privileges you will be afforded. Whether that's access to housing, healthcare, employment or credit. A person's race and skin tone has a HUGE part to play in how they are treated by society as a whole, based on their proximity to whiteness.
When I stated that "all white people are racist", I was addressing that fact that western society as a whole, is a SYSTEM rooted in white supremacy - designed to benefit, prioritise and protect white people before anyone of any other race. Unknowingly, white people are SOCIALISED to be racist from birth onwards. It is not something genetic. No one is born racist."
Surly that is something that would also apply in Sweden?
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
What tip toeing around what? I get the sentiment but the people that this is always applied to are people who make stupidly inflammatory statements on purpose and then lash out at everyone else. This statement was in no way tip toeing around people's feelings and they just happened to get hurt about something.
Besides the "we white people takes the spoils of that till today" thing,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_slave_trade
I am brazilian, the slave trade we had was Portugal's fault ... and yet here we are.
Subpar Scrub
Banned
Basically, this. I don't have the mental energy to address the shitstorm that's been occurring over the last 12 pages.
MikeBreezy92
Member
How so? I'm pretty sure there are plenty of black brits who would disagree.
Although some European ethnicities may not have contributed directly to white supremacist institutions, I think it could be argued that white ethnicities enjoy to some extent the privileges of their race being positively promoted in western media.
Just looking white is probably a major boost in various contexts like dating for example. That white features are considered attractive among non-white ethnicities probably attests to that notion of shared privilege.
Just looking white is probably a major boost in various contexts like dating for example. That white features are considered attractive among non-white ethnicities probably attests to that notion of shared privilege.
Yeah Greece lived CENTURIES of black slaves, I probably missed it in history lesson during school or better yet they hid it from us so we don't know the truth, you are so right.
Really ? Ancient greece expanded hard into africa and it took a shit load of slaves from everywhere
You guys have STATUES of black slaves
Code:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/NCcSvxQ.jpg[/IMG]If you go that far back everyone enslaved everyone. There was no dominant culture that didn't have slaves of the people they conquered. And that includes white people (and the greek themselves).
Airola
Member
Black people this.
Brown people that.
White people this and that.
It feels like race, or rather a skin color, is an obsession to some.
Why not throw yellow people or [insert any skin color here] people into the discussions as well. I'm sure people can find ways to lump all of them into some categories of good and evil as well.
Brown people that.
White people this and that.
It feels like race, or rather a skin color, is an obsession to some.
Why not throw yellow people or [insert any skin color here] people into the discussions as well. I'm sure people can find ways to lump all of them into some categories of good and evil as well.
ClosingADoor
Member
The fact that (a lot/most) white people enjoy a privileged position in the world is not the same as saying that all white people are racists. The first is indeed based on a understanding of history and society, the second is just a stupid thing to say and might be seen by some as racist.
I don't really know what kind of compensation you want most people to give. Sounds like buying off your own guilt instead of actually fixing a problem.
Slavery in Roman and Greek times can not be compared to the type during colonization. It was a lot different back then. Slavery was not less terrible of course, but you can't really compare the two like that. Ancient slavery in Greek times have zero impact on the current day.
I'm guessing he is talking about Alexander the Great and his conquest of Egypt. Although he was from Macedon, so do we now blame Macedonia for that. The image is a Nubian slave from the Ptolemaic Kingdom.
You only care about black slaves right, even if they were the absolute minority of slaves? Show me your sources for the hard expansion into Africa.
MikeBreezy92
Member
Well there doesn't seem to exist a system that benefits East Asian people like there is when it comes to white people... At least not yet anyways. If that's what you mean by yellow...
Besides Asian people get back-handed benefits to white supremacy (model race) and almost no kind of representation in American media unless it's pointedly because they're Asian and half the time they're whitewashed out of those opportunities.
Airola
Member
Can you say the same if someone says "fuck black people?"
What if someone says "fuck tone policing black moderates?"
Can the inclusion of "black" be seen as racist?
Sure if we ignore small places like China or Japan, or do you believe white privilege also exist there?
So are we talking about the US specficially? Because I have yet to see news of ALL European countries (as a reference to her "ALL white people") having PoC murdered in the streets and oppressed daily.
Also, I would like to see how my family who comes from generations of humble land workers who have lived in our little farmhouse amidst the Basque mountains benefitted from colonialism or imperialism or have oppressed entire other races so they can be called "racists".
I just feel all this issues are very American-specific yet they are brought up as if they were happening everywhere in "the West". And before someone jumps on me, I'm not saying there isn't racism in Europe or anywhere else outside of the US. But the institutionalised, internalised racist system (and the white privilege that emerged from it) is very US-specific.
Airola
Member
And if there was, why would there be any reason to start talking about "yellow people" or whatever other skin colors there might be?
That was my point.
People seem to be up for not looking at skin color but skin color seems to be the first thing people hang on to in every discussion like this. By mentioning yellow I meant to show how stupid that is. I also included all other possible skin colors because obviously black, brown, white and yellow are all caricature colors. There aren't many people who really are black or brown or yellow or white out there.
MikeBreezy92
Member
So you're gonna ignore the context of the statement right?
Darth Ghandi
Banned
I care the same amount about tone policing black moderates as a do the easter bunny.
Airola
Member
You know what I meant, don't play as if you didn't.
It's not about whether or not that hypothetical entity exists but the inclusion of skin color in the equation.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Yes, ethnic Swedes probably enjoy privileges some other people may not. And as I said, we should all do what we can to make that change, or at least not contribute to it staying that way. But the fact that I was born white does NOT automatically make me racist when I didn't cause those inequalities. I don't believe in inherited sin. I can't accept that, just as I can't accept the collective blame some people want to put on all men because some abuse and rape women. I would never do that shit, so fuck you if you lump me in with those people.
I wonder why people seem to want to make negative generalizations about white people. That's the thing that throws me. It obviously doesn't help to make your point, and only people who are also comfortable with these sorts of generalizations are going to agree - and what value is it to impress people who already agree with you?
I think if you're pragmatic about wanting to reach a lot of people and change minds, you think about what you say a bit more.
I guess unless you're of the mindset that people can't change their minds (ridiculous and self serving lie some people tell themselves) - in that case, I guess it doesn't matter what you say, nothing matters.
I think if you're pragmatic about wanting to reach a lot of people and change minds, you think about what you say a bit more.
I guess unless you're of the mindset that people can't change their minds (ridiculous and self serving lie some people tell themselves) - in that case, I guess it doesn't matter what you say, nothing matters.
This post is a good example of the reaction the average US citizen has when the word "racist" is used, and why it's always difficult to call out discriminatory actions as racist/it takes a lot of "evidence" for the general US public, or to even talk about systematic racism or racist policies. When someone thinks racist = KKK member on hearing or seeing the label used getting that person to acknowledge, for example, the store clerk following a Black man in a store because they think he may steal something as a racist action is going to be an uphill battle when that person thinks it's only supposed to be used for people who want to hang Black people and put burning crosses on their lawns. It's how "I have Black friends" still gets used as a defense for racist behavior and actions.
Good posts. Most people don't see that racism is like a spectrum and everyone basically is on that spectrum to varying extremities.
She went too far and lost her job, I'm not sure what more there is to say. I mean, any time you reduce a massive group to an abstraction, you're putting yourself in hot water. I mean, there was no equivocation in her statement - 'all white people' is pretty definitive.
She included those people who are trying to change things, trying to fix the inequalities, who straight up admit the problems -- so, yeah, they're gonna be annoyed.
It's like if you used to be an addict, then you clean up your act and now you're trying to help keep other people off drugs -- but someone keeps coming up and saying it doesn't matter what you are now, your past actions prove you're nothing but but a loser addict. Sure, may be true, but you're gonna be pissed off at someone throwing it in your face.
How you communicate a truth is important ... She may have been right on all counts, but pissing off your allies does no service to anyone.
She included those people who are trying to change things, trying to fix the inequalities, who straight up admit the problems -- so, yeah, they're gonna be annoyed.
It's like if you used to be an addict, then you clean up your act and now you're trying to help keep other people off drugs -- but someone keeps coming up and saying it doesn't matter what you are now, your past actions prove you're nothing but but a loser addict. Sure, may be true, but you're gonna be pissed off at someone throwing it in your face.
How you communicate a truth is important ... She may have been right on all counts, but pissing off your allies does no service to anyone.
ClosingADoor
Member
Pretty much all these discussion online are very American centric. The model in question is British, and she worked for L'Oreal UK. But a lot of discussion will be about racism seen through an American perspective.
You see this in most online discussions though, from talking about immigration, terrorism, income inequality, etc, etc. The situation in most European countries is different, but the media we consume online is of course very American, or at least aimed at the Anglosphere most of the time. And that impacts these discussions a lot.
Guess that is also why we Europeans can come across a bit defensive in these discussions, because while we have enough problems with racism here, the situation is different, even if only because of the demographics in most European countries.
gutter_trash
Banned
a proffesional lost a gig for being grossly unproffesional.
While Jeffrey Star is still sponsored by Cover Girl 🤔
It is
Every white person gains from racism of society, but not every white person is racist.
PdotMichael
Banned
So would every minority living in such country.
BossDarkseid
Member
That's...an interesting way of putting it. Genuinely. I'm not from the US but Kreed's example of the reactions of an average citizen when the word "racist" is used...not so much seems familiar, but I think when there tends to be a flippant dismissal in our media of any form of racism that's not on the more extreme end of the scale, people get conditioned that the stuff more in the centre of the spectrum is not "racist"....
I think that makes sense >_>
Basically you could see how someone could think like that. Although I'm not trying to absolve an individual of blame. Tbh as much as people could talk about it here or in person, if someone randomly said to me "You're racist" i'd probably be "Wait, what!?" : /
Alligatorjandro
Banned
Weird
It probably helps if your offensive comments were over a decade ago and you issue an emotional apology for them rather than double down.
I can find them saying and doing racist shit recently.
ebullientprism
Member
Pretty much. She is not wrong but should have handled that better.
Oh. Well fuck him then. I only knew about him because one of the youtubers I watch linked to his apology. Which I thought was thoughtful and sincere. Guess I was wrong.
Edit: not that I don't believe you, but what has he said or done recently?
James Charles, also sponsored by cover girl, said some racist shit about Africans and still is a brand ambassador with Cover Girl offering a defense for him.
Similar threads
- Locked