RE: The Word "Racism" Doesn't Mean Anything Anymore
Okay. If you're saying that the term racism still means what it's always meant, that the definition hasn't ever changed even though it gets thrown out at the drop of the hat, I guess I have to agree that the word still means what it means.
However, to paraphrase a famous quote from The Princess Bride, I don't think the word means what too many people think it means. Or better said, too many want to claim that such a wide range of things constitute racism that it's virtually impossible to avoid being accused of it.
We might as well not speak of any other race not our own, ever, because in some circles, if you're not that race, you have no business saying anything about it. As it is, there's still debate over whether or not race actually exists, how many there are, and so forth. Many of us have all kinds of ethnic DNA in us.
In the end it's all rather pointless. Black and white are colors or hues on the light spectrum. They are not races. Neither are Germans, Hispanics, Muslims or Jews. They are words we use to describe nationalities, regional groups or religious adherence. Yet, they get bandied about when it comes to race, too.
The usage or definition of the word racism might have shifted a bit with time, but I think that when we say racist everybody knows what we mean. People might disagree on if a particular action, view or person is racist, but that doesn't make the word useless or hard to understand.
Sure, people will disagree on many things. On one hand, I personally don't think it's that hard to not get accused of racism, but I also understand that we all have our own prejudices and stereotypes that work as part of our subconscious, but it's all about how we handle that. If I firmly believe something I'm doing or saying is not morally objectionable, I wouldn't loose too much sleep over an accusation that I reject.
I wonder what good examples do you have of yourself or others being wrongfully accused of racism.
If races don't exist, what would be the thing that you would want to say about a particular race anyway?
Well, that's pointing out to the biggest change that has occurred with the word racist - it's meaning has shifted from talking about race, to including ethnicity and nationality. But that's a change that has happened that we're all aware of and I find it disingenuous when people claim they don't understand it. On one hand, as you noted, race is a bit arbitrary and ill-defined anyway, and on the other hand, this is a normal thing that happens with language, word shift from their original meanings and are not always faithful to their morphological roots. Objecting to the world on morphological basis is like saying that the phrase "a lot" is confusing because it's morphologically and historically supposed to refer to a designated piece of land. That's obviously not how language works.
The colors of our skins are indeed just hues on the light spectrum, but often people with different hues get different treatments and that's why people see value in using the word and discussing the topic of racism. If you are not discriminating against different skin tones or different nationalities, what are you worried about?
So glad you also got a bit carried away, glad to the tune of $0.13*(current SP + SBDmarket rate). 📈
I do tend to get carried away from time to time :) I'm glad someone sees some value in my ramblings :P
Thanks for the upvote and the reasoned reply. I'm glad to be able to discuss touchy subjects here. Doesn't happen a lot elsewhere on the Internet.
Based on what I think you're saying, I believe we're heading in the same direction with this discussion, other than I will respectfully agree to disagree on whether or not everyone knows what racism is. I think there are plenty who don't. I also think there are those who invoke it for the purpose of sowing discord and discontent.
Lastly, a clarification. I've not personally been called a racist that I know of. Nor have I personally watched someone be called a racist. I don't think it has to happen to me or someone I know for it to concern me. My reason for commenting was because I agreed with @schattenjaeger that the term is too misused, and in my mind, that leads to desensitization, and eventual rejection of the term all together.
Me too! One of the cool things about this platform really! :) I do make sure I try to engage with people that have opinions different from mine as I don't want to live in an echo chamber and I'm certain there are at least some belief that I hold that are wrong and it's good to put them to a test in a reasonable debate.
No doubt, the world is full of trolls who just want to see it burn :)
I did not assume that at all, it was an honest question. In my opinion if you're saying the term is often misused, you must have a lot of examples of that happening and I wanted to hear some of them so I'd know what kind of misuse you are talking about.
I don't think many people are desensitized to the use of this term, they might be annoyed with it or fed up with it, but surely not desensitized. Otherwise it wouldn't be a supposedly touchy subject, right? ;)
I truly wish I had more to upvote you with, but I'm not even six days old yet (on Steemit) and you know how that goes. :)
Okay, so I'll start with this one for your consideration. It happened over five years ago (time flies), but I believe it's indicative of what I'm talking about. Fired by ESPN for a racist headline, he’s finding his second chance as a Catholic priest. Not sure if you want to read through all of it, but for the most part, the part pertinent to our conversation is in the first 3-4 paragraphs.
Don't sweat the upvotes ;) I've been on the other end of a very similar debate with a very similar voting disparity when I was new now when I think about it. Also, notice that we're having this conversation under a post where the original poster declined a significant payout just because he felt that the fair thing to do on his part.
The example you are giving is actually an interesting case. The headline the guy wrote certainly sounds like a racial pun and there is no way to know if it was meant to be one or if he truly made an honest mistake as he claims. If intentional, it was racist and it is a problem that it got published. But I do think the guy deserved the benefit of the doubt and I'm not a fan of huge repercussions for solitary offenses. We all make mistakes and I'm not a fan of the outrage culture and the screams "off with his head" at the first instance of dubious behavior. I think the problem here is not identifying that the headline was not OK, it's the overreaction and outrage culture which is now the most common reaction to any kind of disagreement. It's certainly not just about racism, people get outrages about anything and are quickly ready to go to war against the perceived enemy. That's not OK and I don't support it, but I don't think it's something that should be blamed on using the term racism incorrectly.
I'll keep on throwing my plankton upvotes at you then. :)
I definitely agree that the reaction in this instance was overblown, and that too many people nowadays from all sides are too quick to judge.
However, I don't know why the phrase, 'Chink in the Armor' is racist in and of itself, regardless of whom the story was about. The phrase predates the use of 'chink' as a derogatory term for Chinese people, and it has to do with being vulnerable or deficient in something. In this case, Lin's game was supposedly lacking.
I think being insensitive, inappropriate or offensive with someone of another race might make you ignorant or racially unaware (or a jerk), but I don't think it should automatically without question or examination of intent make you a racist.
Since racism is a belief that people of the same race all have some particular (usually undesirable) traits because of genetics that somehow supposedly make them inferior to another race, there are quite a few requirements that need to be met before racism should be invoked.
I think it depends on the contest and the intention. It can be used in a racist way, it can be a stupid ill-advised joke and it can be absolutely nothing. As we don't know what the intention was, we can't really say. It can certainly look bad and it doesn't matter which phrase came first. He can be honest when he's saying it was a mistake and an oversight or he can be using it as a defense. If that's the only instance, I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt - innocent until proven guilty.
One instance of behavior like that is not enough to know if somebody is a racist. We can say that this or that action might appear racist, but to say it about a person, the person must have shown a consistent tendency towards this type of behavior. We can all be insensitive at times, we can all be jerks at time and we all have some prejudices like it or not, which can rear their ugly heads it one point or another. Or we can just attempt a joke that misfires or turns out bad. Anybody could mess up. Intent and long-term behavior are what's important in my book.
There might be different reasons for being racist, not just belief in genetic inferiority. Different people might have different reasons. As long as there is hate or desire to discriminate based on race or ethnicity, it's racist in my book. It can sometimes be emotional or culturally ingrained, not supported by any type of real reasoning.
I think we're now almost fully aligned on this segment of the topic. :)
My observations of racism and its use were based on the definition in the dictionary, which I think places it at a higher standard than its more common and ever devolving usage. There are other terms for all of the other instances that often are cited but then lumped together. I think they should be used instead.
I agree with your comments about context and consistency. By our thoughts, words and actions we tell the story of our true selves.
I am in agreement that hate or discrimination based solely on race or ethnicity is bad (hate being bad in general, while discrimination still depends on context, like race).
Most of what seems to constitute racism has more to do with differences in opinion, politics, culture, goals, interests, values, behaviors and real or perceived social and economic injustices. There's probably more, but as I said, I think we're already agreeing on principle here, and that's cool. :)