Is it Racism if there is no malicious intent?

I have to wonder if the country your raised in affects your view on racism. Lots of people on this site are from America but In England Racism isn't an huge issue like it appears to be in America, I'm not saying it's perfect, of course not we have a few bad eggs but in comparison to other country's we just don't have the same deep rooted issues. Of course some police will stop a black person more often than a white person but it seems to be fairly well distributed.
Maybe it's because we don't have guns, so we don't here about the police shooting innocent people on the grounds that because of there skin colour they looked dangerous or suspicious or whatever crock of bull they come out with to explain away the ingrained racism of the American police force.

I don't see a racist issue in what my uncle said, I understand there was no maliciousness intent so I don't consider it worthy of being reprimanded. He's stupid I'll give you that but he's a man that has no idea as to how his words could be construed.

jazzyjazz666 said:

I have to wonder if the country your raised in affects your view on racism. Lots of people on this site are from America but In England Racism isn't an huge issue like it appears to be in America, I'm not saying it's perfect, of course not we have a few bad eggs but in comparison to other country's we just don't have the same deep rooted issues. Of course some police will stop a black person more often than a white person but it seems to be fairly well distributed.
Maybe it's because we don't have guns, so we don't here about the police shooting innocent people on the grounds that because of there skin colour they looked dangerous or suspicious or whatever crock of bull they come out with to explain away the ingrained racism of the American police force.

Click to expand...

I think you're on point here. Cultural and social facts of life definitely seem to affect people's sensitivity and views of racism.

Kanzler said:

Why should we try to change what people say if it's neither wrong nor hurtful? Jeeez I spent the whole last post demonstrating that such language is NOT a generalization (expressing "all X do Y) but reflects the preferences/norms of a group. I really really don't see how "you (A) people like B" means "every person of culture A likes B", because it's not logically implied at all - a culture is perfectly capable of finding something popular without every single person belonging to that culture finding it well, and we are capable of referring to cultures as wholes instead of simply collections of individuals. When there is a perfectly tame and reasonable explanation, it's really going out of one's way to suggest that a sentence implies something else.

Why are we so insistent on finding harm in just every single racially-themed comment?

Click to expand...

These sentiments can still be phrased in a better way that prevents any misunderstands or feelings from getting hurt. I'm not sure I understand this resistance to saying "I hear hockey is very popular in Canada" instead of "you people like hockey." To me, "you people like cricket" sounds just as silly as "you people like watermelon," and why would anyone ever want to be associated with that?

Nick said:

All of the divisive judgments you just made against people is inherently racist because it a) is exclusionary and hurts those you do not consider "disadvantaged" through their race (okay?), and b) because nowhere have you made any calls or statements regarding treatment of people by anything besides their race! Where the hell is your paragraph about how everyone is subjugated by racism, or heck, just a split about "content of character"?

tl;dr it's another case of Reverse racism. There isn't a big bad system any more than there are racist people. It's that simple.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make, here. I do not know what judgements you're claiming I've made. Are you saying that any and all reference to race is inherently racist? That calling attention to the difficulties and injustices faced uniquely by some groups takes away attention from other inequalities?

I don't have a paragraph about everyone being subjected to racism because not everyone is subjected to racism. I as a white person will almost never be subjected to racism, especially not the systematic, institutionalized racism faced by many. For me to even claim that such a thing is possible is horribly minimizing to the people who face that every day.

Reverse racism actually still remains a point of contention within racial discourse, so you're standing on some pretty shaky ground. If you don't believe that there is a system of oppression that disproportionately affects black people, I would encourage you to do some research. Studies have proven that people with names that sound white are 50% more likely to get called for a job than people with black-sounding names, that black (and latino) people get stop-and-frisks over 4x more than white people, and here are even more ways black people are discriminated against by the judicial system.

I did not write about how people are judged by their character because this is a thread about racism, so I am only talking about how people are judged by their race. Multiple examples have been given in this thread of black people being unfairly judged just because of their race, and that isn't being acknowledged. Racism is a complex topic, and if you would like to continue discussing it, I encourage you to please learn more and read accounts from black people first, because saying this will be fixed by just being nicer to each other really trivializes and simplifies a very serious and complex topic. I look forward to reengaging with you then. :)

Hiidoran said:

I respectfully disagree. Just because you belong to the minority in question here does not give you the right to reclaim the word that had horrible origins. That is why the black community in the United States long since had a funeral for the N-word; they discouraged even their own from using it. I do agree that outside groups' (ie the majority) use of these words hurt more, but I digress. By using the word, you continue to give it power. Semantically, I would agree with you that a word can be reused for other purposes, but when it comes to race and racially-heated words, it's best to just put them to rest. Like my opinion on keeping those convicted of murder off the media, it's best to let them just silently drift out. This is, of course, the ideal. Realistically, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to retire a word. You yourself even stopped using racist jokes ironically because you realized it did nothing but propagate the usage. So too does using it within the community. I used to call my own boyfriend a "fag" out of jest, but I realize now I'm just continuing to breathe life into that word.

Click to expand...

Only people from the group who bore the brunt of that word get to make those decisions. We do not get to tell people "hey, I know that word really hurt your community and you are taking a great deal of strength and power by reclaiming it, but we think you shouldn't do that and we should get the final say, not you." For a group that has been subject to the whims of another for so long, I hope you can see why that is important.

While I agree about not giving media coverage to criminals, I do not think that is comparable. For the black community, the n-word is a huge part of their history, and in many ways, to "let the word die" means erasing part of their history. It's very meaningful to them, and I would strongly encourage you to read accounts from black people about why they believe this.

jazzyjazz666 said:

I have to wonder if the country your raised in affects your view on racism. Lots of people on this site are from America but In England Racism isn't an huge issue like it appears to be in America, I'm not saying it's perfect, of course not we have a few bad eggs but in comparison to other country's we just don't have the same deep rooted issues. Of course some police will stop a black person more often than a white person but it seems to be fairly well distributed.
Maybe it's because we don't have guns, so we don't here about the police shooting innocent people on the grounds that because of there skin colour they looked dangerous or suspicious or whatever crock of bull they come out with to explain away the ingrained racism of the American police force.

I don't see a racist issue in what my uncle said, I understand there was no maliciousness intent so I don't consider it worthy of being reprimanded. He's stupid I'll give you that but he's a man that has no idea as to how his words could be construed.

Click to expand...

I'm from Canada, and this has definitely affected my views, and has made me very aware of race issues in the US. Race relations are very different in the UK, but I do not know the specifics. Can you look up some statistics on who police tend to pull over? That would help shed some light!

As I mentioned in my first post, you can tell your uncle "that wasn't cool of you to say" without accusing him of being a racist. Words can hurt, and a lot of people will apologize and avoid something if they know it's rude or hurtful. Again, it depends on his personality and your relationship to him, but it's something to consider.

~Psychic

Psychic said:

I don't have a paragraph about everyone being subjected to racism because not everyone is subjected to racism. I as a white person will almost never be subjected to racism, especially not the systematic, institutionalized racism faced by many. For me to even claim that such a thing is possible is horribly minimizing to the people who face that every day.

Click to expand...

Of all the things I have seen in the thread, this has to be the only thing that really bothers me. White people can be and are targeted for racism quite often. The biggest and most victimising racial stereotype for white people is the assumption that we are racist and all propagate racism. I have to tell you I think that belief is a lot more harmful than a belief that a certain racial group tends to be partial to fried chicken.

Let this be a note to all white people, if you are a victim of real racism (not ironic humour) then you have every right to be offended and to do something about it if need be. The issues afflicting one group do not invalidate your own and they never will.

The notion that black people like watermelon seems to be supported only by the stereotype. That's why jokes like that can be harmful - the stereotype is made-up and is mistaken at best and misleading at worst. It was once believed that black slaves were so simple they could be satisfied with watermelon and a little rest. After slavery was gone, the imagery persisted in the media for the while, perpetuating the negative stereotype that black people are simple minded. Watermelon stereotypes are therefore a reference to slavery and oppression in the past and that's why they are harmful.

The popularity of hockey and cricket in Canada and India respectively, however, are well documented. Many people of either culture follow those respective sports, to the point of making big games an occasion, and taking international championships seriously. I'm a Canadian who doesn't especially appreciate hockey and I can point that out about my own country - even though I'm not part of the bunch who likes/loves it. To compare watermelon to a national sport is to be ignorant of the racial context of the watermelon stereotype, as well as ignorant to the fact that it's the content of a statement that makes it hurtful, not its structure (X people like Y).

I express no resistance to saying things one way over another. I express resistance to your insistence that things are "better" said one way instead of another when neither are hurtful to begin with. I don't think that's a necessary attitude to take. What it leads to is people walking on egg-shells whenever they talk about race. Take this for example:

Many people in India DO happen to like Cricket...

Click to expand...

"DO happen to like":

*some time long long ago*

Indian person 1: oh dear me I do happen to fancy playing some cricket

Indian person 2: why so do I!

Indian person 3: my whole village just happened to like cricket today! dear me

*the indian nation has just happened come across their love of cricket. history was made*

ARE YOU KIDDING ME? INDIAN PEOPLE PURPOSEFULLY LIKE CRICKET. I've grown up around Indians who play cricket as children, as adults, every summer when that season comes. I know that when the Cricket World Cup comes around every four years, Indians back in India and abroad get world cup fever. There's nothing generalizing or negative about that, yet we feel the need to constantly hedge the things we say because we're afraid of offending to the point that we don't even realize how silly the things we say become.

I believe that excessive (read: where it's not necessary) language policing leads otherwise comfortable people to become afraid from engaging the issues of race, and makes it harder for people to embrace those of other cultures and explore their ideas. It can be needlessly alienating.

Psychic said:

Only people from the group who bore the brunt of that word get to make those decisions. We do not get to tell people "hey, I know that word really hurt your community and you are taking a great deal of strength and power by reclaiming it, but we think you shouldn't do that and we should get the final say, not you." For a group that has been subject to the whims of another for so long, I hope you can see why that is important.

While I agree about not giving media coverage to criminals, I do not think that is comparable. For the black community, the n-word is a huge part of their history, and in many ways, to "let the word die" means erasing part of their history. It's very meaningful to them, and I would strongly encourage you to read accounts from black people about why they believe this.

Click to expand...

Hmm... I mean, I see where you're coming from. Empowering the word and changing its connotation would be an ideal way to deal with it, but I feel like that hasn't happened, at least not yet. I previously referred to the decision made by the NAACP in the United States, and the funeral they had for the word, which means I'm not completely unread about this topic, but one can never be too educated, right? The truth of the matter is, there is more than one side of this debate, even among the documented accounts from black people who face this issue every day. There are even entire college courses devoted to discussing this one word [Teaching Tolerance]. I just feel it is so difficult to delineate such a powerful word into a separate, new meaning. In linguistics, you often discuss the connotation of a word by its native people, and I feel that word will forever have just a shred of malignancy. To me, discouraging a word is not erasing it from history. Simply discouraging a word in and of itself, will do nothing anyway, so perhaps my point is moot. The following pretty much sums up my opinion, and there are many more like it, however.

AARegistry; said:

******, like the false impressions it incorporates and means, puts down Blacks, and rationalizes their abuse. The use of the word or its alternatives by Blacks has not lessened its hurt. This is not surprising in a racial hierarchy four centuries old, shaping the historical relationship between European Americans and African Americans. Anti-Black attitudes, motives, values, and behavior continue. Historically, ******, more than any other word, captures the personal hatred and institutionalized racism directed toward Blacks. In 2013, incidences such as Atalanta born restaurant entrepreneur Paula Dean and Oklahoma football player Reilly Coopers comfortable reference to the word against Blacks shows that it is alive in the White vocabulary and it still does great harm. [http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/******-word-brief-history]

Click to expand...

To me, people are free to use whatever word they wish, but they should realize that it may have a meaning other than what they intended. Perhaps this was my way, albeit it very convoluted, of saying we should just be cognizant of the words we say, regardless of intention.

I'm completely baffled that people still believe jokes can cause harm to someone unless one chooses to take them personally.

Or that the same can come of single words. How does that work?

Yikes @ This thread.

To answer OP, not racist. Certainly could have been worded better though. "You people" comes off incredibly accusatory and a little rude. Even something like "Indians really like cricket?" sounds better.

At pretty much the rest of the discussion.... language carries tone and double meanings, and you need to have the social skills to really just step back and learn to word things better at times. It's not hard. I really don't think arguing over "omg I worded it this way I'm technically correct it's not offensive etc." is worth your time.

I am curious. Is referring to someone as black/white, particularly black since its a sensitive topic, racist? For instance, if someone asks me "Who's John", because lets say that someone needs to meet John for some reason, who happens to be black, would me saying "The black guy over there standing near the door" be considered racist? I dont know a single black person and I rarely see black people around my town so I dont really know what ok or not ok to say around people of different race. I should emphasize that I couldnt care less for (different) skin color, I see nothing wrong with it.

Guardian said:

I am curious. Is referring to someone as black/white, particularly black since its a sensitive topic, racist? For instance, if someone asks me "Who's John", because lets say that someone needs to meet John for some reason, who happens to be black, would me saying "The black guy over there standing near the door" be considered racist? I dont know a single black person and I rarely see black people around my town so I dont really know what ok or not ok to say around people of different race. I should emphasize that I couldnt care less for (different) skin color, I see nothing wrong with it.

Click to expand...

If describing someone as "a black person" or "a white person" offends them, I really think that they have the problem not you. It's not a derogatory term or something, it simply means "hey you have really dark skin but I have really pale skin."

Guardian said:

I am curious. Is referring to someone as black/white, particularly black since its a sensitive topic, racist? For instance, if someone asks me "Who's John", because lets say that someone needs to meet John for some reason, who happens to be black, would me saying "The black guy over there standing near the door" be considered racist? I dont know a single black person and I rarely see black people around my town so I dont really know what ok or not ok to say around people of different race. I should emphasize that I couldnt care less for (different) skin color, I see nothing wrong with it.

Click to expand...

In this case, I think that going out of your way to find "uncontaminated" words to refer to someone with black skin is probably more disrespectful than anything. Ideally, "black", "white", "hispanic", "asian" and all variations should be mere descriptors of someone's ethnicity, as offensive as saying that your red car is "red". The problem is when society implies (or, well, outright states) that being black is somehow "wrong", and it's something black people should be ashamed of and therefore not pointed in their presence. Then it becomes like when you are talking to someone who has lost an arm and you try not to mention it. That's when "coloured", "African-American" and all those words that mean "black" but are somehow "nicer" were created.

Society will be free from racism when you can say "that person is black" without anybody (neither the speaker nor the referred) feeling bad in any way, and then you move on into the next topic because nobody really cares whether you are white, black or purple other than for statistical purposes.

There is a small but clear difference I would like to highlight for the very mild instance of racism in this Indian Cricketer Hypothetical Situation.

If you have prior knowledge that the person regardless of their race lives in India/has lived in India etc, then you're making a judgement on something popular in a country's culture. Completely fine. Could be wrong, but the information you're using is not the race, but instead valid information which could draw a conclusion.

Even if a person appears to have Indian heritage, they may consider themselves to be French (if they were raised in France etc), they may consider themselves to be Australian (in this case, "you're Australian therefore you like cricket is valid), or just a citizen in whatever country they may be in. Making a judgement on the race of someone alone is ignoring that. It's mild for the scenario provided. It's the equivalent of putting your elbows on the table in a restaurant. Impolite but still not proper. It isn't a pivotal battle to be had on the racism front.

There are much greater, present and real problems posed by racism as a whole though and I never seem to see such fervour over those.

gimmepie said:

Of all the things I have seen in the thread, this has to be the only thing that really bothers me. White people can be and are targeted for racism quite often. The biggest and most victimising racial stereotype for white people is the assumption that we are racist and all propagate racism. I have to tell you I think that belief is a lot more harmful than a belief that a certain racial group tends to be partial to fried chicken.

Let this be a note to all white people, if you are a victim of real racism (not ironic humour) then you have every right to be offended and to do something about it if need be. The issues afflicting one group do not invalidate your own and they never will.

Click to expand...

There are different degrees or types of racism though. White people don't usually suffer from institutionalized racism (in predominantly white countries especially). I feel like I could give examples or go into depth about institutionalized racism vs. individual racism, but I don't know if I can really get the idea across well enough. Basically, there are people who don't think they're being racist who still have biases and it affects their actions and those actions ripple through society in different ways. And the second half of it is that depending on your race and where you live (again, using white people in mostly white countries as examples) if you're white you have a lot of safe spaces you can go to where you won't be questioned, followed, harassed, etc. because you fit in or whatever. And, yes, as was mentioned several posts ago, there are a lot of intersecting groups people belong to so that even if you're white you can still suffer prejudice because you're a woman, or gay, or poor, or any number of things. But if you were those things and black you'd have on average an even tougher time.

Esper said:

There are different degrees or types of racism though. White people don't usually suffer from institutionalized racism (in predominantly white countries especially). I feel like I could give examples or go into depth about institutionalized racism vs. individual racism, but I don't know if I can really get the idea across well enough. Basically, there are people who don't think they're being racist who still have biases and it affects their actions and those actions ripple through society in different ways. And the second half of it is that depending on your race and where you live (again, using white people in mostly white countries as examples) if you're white you have a lot of safe spaces you can go to where you won't be questioned, followed, harassed, etc. because you fit in or whatever. And, yes, as was mentioned several posts ago, there are a lot of intersecting groups people belong to so that even if you're white you can still suffer prejudice because you're a woman, or gay, or poor, or any number of things. But if you were those things and black you'd have on average an even tougher time.

Click to expand...

There are definitely different types of racism, but there's not "degrees of racism". Either something racist or not, the only variable is how much each different person is offended. Furthermore, whilst on average black people might suffer more as far as institutionalised and probably even individual racism that doesn't invalidate the suffering of white people who deal with similar problems and nobody should pretend that you cannot be racist to someone white, which is more or less the direction the post I replied to was going.

gimmepie said:

that doesn't invalidate the suffering of white people who deal with similar problems and nobody should pretend that you cannot be racist to someone white, which is more or less the direction the post I replied to was going.

Click to expand...

Well, the issue is that whites suffering racism is a much rarer situation. After all, racism happens when your skin colour is considered "not normal", and, in a white country, whites are the "normal" by default. For whites to suffer racism in a white country, a very complex and specific amount of circumstances have to happen (them living in a certain, black-filled city, and not even that, as it's more likely that even the white minority will still be treated as the "normal" even when they are the "different ones"). Otherwise, you have to look for anecdotes, or for whites considering that giving non-whites a preferential treatment is "inverse racism being used to discriminate whites" or something.

Ivysaur said:

Well, the issue is that whites suffering racism is a much rarer situation. After all, racism happens when your skin colour is considered "not normal", and, in a white country, whites are the "normal" by default. For whites to suffer racism in a white country, a very complex and specific amount of circumstances have to happen (them living in a certain, black-filled city, and not even that, as it's more likely that even the white minority will still be treated as the "normal" even when they are the "different ones"). Otherwise, you have to look for anecdotes, or for whites considering that giving non-whites a preferential treatment is "inverse racism being used to discriminate whites" or something.

Click to expand...

I could probably get onto the whole "inverse racism" thing, because I believe it does exist at least to a degree in some places but that's not really the big issue. You're saying that racism towards whites is rarer, and it is I don't dispute that. This still doesn't invalidate the fact that it does happen though, which is what my original response earlier was about.

I dislike the notion that a white person claiming racism should be considered offensive by no-white people or that it doesn't compare somehow. Racism is racism regardless of how common it is.

gimmepie said:

I dislike the notion that a white person claiming racism should be considered offensive by no-white people or that it doesn't compare somehow. Racism is racism regardless of how common it is.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone was trying to invalidate a person's feelings or experiences if they'd been treated badly and suffered from other people's prejudice. I really don't. But a phrase like "racism is racism" or "everyone has [whatever]" and similar statements feel like they're trying to equate all experiences, or in other words, they feel like something someone would say if they thought that the experiences of racism that a black person experiences are the same as that a white person does.

It's like the arguments you see online and elsewhere where people in the Black Live Matter campaign get confronted by people saying "all lives matter". While true, it misses the point of having specific attention directed at a specific difficulty which isn't shared or experienced in the same way by other groups.

So this might be based in part on a lot of half-communicated ideas, but if a person gets upset when a white person (or any person I guess) says "white people suffer from racism, too" it's because they feel like the person making that statement is ignoring differences or assuming a level playing field. It's not (necessarily) that they think a white person can't experience racism, but that it's not the same kind/degree/amount/etc. non-white people typically experience.

God said:

Intent doesn't erase the content of one's words.

Click to expand...

intent is the reasoning behind ones words, and its been proven over & over that most "slurs" where not even slurs at all til someone changed their intent behind their use of the words
for example, the infamous "N" word originated from a word that means god
gay used to mean happy
fag used to mean cigarette
i can create an even longer list then this. intent can change the content of the words

gimmepie said:

Basically there's a lot of social justice warriors out there who don't seem to be happy unless they're making a mountain out of a molehill and turning something harmless into a big issue. I'm inclined to agree with that perspective honestly, I know personal experience isn't the best thing to bring to a debate but I've honestly met more people who get sensitive about black jokes who are white than actual black people.

Click to expand...

somehow, i don't find that to surprising. people tend to get caught up in what other people think of them & that "all white people are racist" stereotype weighs heavily on whites who care to much about what others think of them.

Psychic said:

Racism is a complex topic, and if you would like to continue discussing it, I encourage you to please learn more and read accounts from black people first, because saying this will be fixed by just being nicer to each other really trivializes and simplifies a very serious and complex topic. I look forward to reengaging with you then.

Click to expand...

+1 because this applies to so many people.

gimmepie said:

White people can be and are targeted for racism quite often.

Click to expand...

Do you anything to actually back that up? Or any more actual examples? I mean, prejudice against white people does exist, but it's not nearly on the same level as racism towards non-white people is and I wouldn't say that white people are "targeted often".

The biggest and most victimising racial stereotype for white people is the assumption that we are racist and all propagate racism. I have to tell you I think that belief is a lot more harmful than a belief that a certain racial group tends to be partial to fried chicken.

Click to expand...

But it's not really a stereotype. We're all raised in a racist society and virtually everybody grows up with racial biases. It doesn't make you a bad person, but it's still there and it's still a problem.

I also think you're blowing it out of proportion. "All white people are racist" is not something that's widespread outside of the internet, and the people saying that aren't trying to imply that we're all secretly KKK members or something. It's definitely not a "victimising racial stereotype", and TBH, it sounds more like you personally being uncomfortable with acknowledging how widespread racism is/the fact that you might have internal biases than anything to do with actual racial discrimination.

I'm not sure what point you were trying to make with the last sentence, because I assume you have enough awareness to realise that stereotypes about food are generally not what people are referring to when talking about racism.

Do you anything to actually back that up? Or any more actual examples? I mean, prejudice against white people does exist, but it's not nearly on the same level as racism towards non-white people is and I wouldn't say that white people are "targeted often".

Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be on the same level, my comments were directed at one person who was implying that the suffering of other races invalidates that of white people.

But it's not really a stereotype. We're all raised in a racist society and virtually everybody grows up with racial biases. It doesn't make you a bad person, but it's still there and it's still a problem.

Click to expand...

It is a stereotype, people tend to believe that white people are more racially prejudiced than others, including white people.

I also think you're blowing it out of proportion. "All white people are racist" is not something that's widespread outside of the internet, and the people saying that aren't trying to imply that we're all secretly KKK members or something. It's definitely not a "victimising racial stereotype", and TBH, it sounds more like you personally being uncomfortable with acknowledging how widespread racism is/the fact that you might have internal biases than anything to do with actual racial discrimination.

Click to expand...

I'm not blowing it out of proportion, I've met too many people who actually have mindsets like that. The only internal biases I have are that I tend to be more physically attracted to white people than those of other races, that's something I'm not afraid to admit and it isn't something I can control. I also don't have a problem acknowledging racism exists, I just want people to be aware of all racism instead of pretending it only happens to black people.