-
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Society/Culture What is, and what is not, 'racist'/'racism'?
- Thread starter fairdinkum
- Start date
- Tagged users None
But it's not about Majak Daw, or Liam Jurrah, or any individual. It's about the attitudes that this sort of stuff represents and reinforces within the community, and the flow-on effects that it has on a broader level in society.Race is merely a social construct in the "real world". If people understood this there would a lot less "offence" being experienced.
This is first and last will ever say this: more people should study a little post modernism. there I said it.
Majik Daw doesn't need Malifice or Demetriou being outraged on his behalf. I bet he is doing fine.
Whether it makes sense on an intellectual level to be personally offended by arbitrary and conceptually meaningless distinctions is rather beside the point.
- Feb 14, 2002
- 17,797
- 6,858
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Lexton, Northcote Park
'Racist'/ 'racism' are words. All words other than these also qualify as words. The serious concept of 'racism' has been rendered meaningless by its overuse and flagrant abuse, to the extent that it's become just another word.
I'm Macedonian. I have been called serbian, bulgarian, greek, albanian. I have been told I don't exist. I have been told I am a figment of someones imagination. I have been told I am deluded into even thinking I am anything resembling Macedonian. A Greek acquaintance said he pitied me because I am confused about my identity. I have been threatened, sworn at, ridiculed. One guy said my mother is a slavic whore. I usually reply that I consider myself Australian, and my mother has never accepted money for sexual favors.
This has all happened in Australia mind you. 99% of the time it comes from other 'wogs'. Oh and in primary school I was called a wog by a few aussies because I wasn't born in Australia.
Having traveled overseas I can honestly say your average 'aussie' is one of the most tolerant groups of people in the world. If you want to see racism fly to Greece with a passport surname that ends in 'ski' and you'll witness what real racism is.
Get over yourself Australia. You skippy fish n chip eating NTTAWWTtas arent racist
This has all happened in Australia mind you. 99% of the time it comes from other 'wogs'. Oh and in primary school I was called a wog by a few aussies because I wasn't born in Australia.
Having traveled overseas I can honestly say your average 'aussie' is one of the most tolerant groups of people in the world. If you want to see racism fly to Greece with a passport surname that ends in 'ski' and you'll witness what real racism is.
Get over yourself Australia. You skippy fish n chip eating NTTAWWTtas arent racist
I'm Macedonian. I have been called serbian, bulgarian, greek, albanian. I have been told I don't exist. I have been told I am a figment of someones imagination. I have been told I am deluded into even thinking I am anything resembling Macedonian. A Greek acquaintance said he pitied me because I am confused about my identity. I have been threatened, sworn at, ridiculed. One guy said my mother is a slavic whore. I usually reply that I consider myself Australian, and my mother has never accepted money for sexual favors.
This has all happened in Australia mind you. 99% of the time it comes from other 'wogs'. Oh and in primary school I was called a wog by a few aussies because I wasn't born in Australia.
Having traveled overseas I can honestly say your average 'aussie' is one of the most tolerant groups of people in the world. If you want to see racism fly to Greece with a passport surname that ends in 'ski' and you'll witness what real racism is.
Get over yourself Australia. You skippy fish n chip eating NTTAWWTtas arent racist
Excellent post.
Although sadly your opinion is worthless because (a) you don't have a chip on the shoulder and (b) you look nothing like what an african-american slave might have looked like.
Unfortunately, it is also a tool to silence debate or to evoke special treatment where none is deserved.
TheStinger
Brownlow Medallist
- Apr 23, 2009
- 12,748
- 1,352
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Penguins, Aston Villa, Adel Utd.
1) 'Majak Daw's racial heritage gives him a physical edge in the AFL'. - It is a scientific fact that black African people and their descendants have an abundance of fast twitch muscle fibres, making them able to run faster and jump higher and longer than white people. Although, the development of other muscles needs to be done to make them fast, they have a distinct head start in development. So, not racist, an observation.
2) 'Majak Daw's skin is very very dark'. - Another observation.
3) 'Majak Daw should be forgiven for lying to Brad Scott because of his upbringing'. - Upbringing should never be used as a get out of jail free card in a moral situation. You are either a liar or not, a thief or not, a murderer or not. This upbringing rubbish is ridiculous and plays into the do-gooders hands of "oh it's his fault, he's had a hard life."
4) 'No surprise Majak Daw owes teammates money, given his background'. - This could be construed as racist depending on a follow up question. "What do you mean, background?" "Well, he is black." That would be racist. But if it is just because he was poor and now likes to have money now he can get it, that is just a socio-economic situation.
5) 'Majak Daw likes to eat KFC fried chicken'. - Again with this American crap. That is an American problem that they are trying to spread around the world. I'm not even sure that Africans or indeed Aboriginals have a high regard for fried chicken at all. It is basically a stereotype that has become a racist term in America. And yet a lot of African Americans say "Hell yeah, we like fried chicken." I don't get it.
6) 'North should play Majak Daw in a night match because he is harder for the opposition to see'. - I find it kind of humourous but I am sure there would be some black people that would arc up at a comment like that so it is probably borderline racist.
7) 'Majak Daw is less likely to succeed in life in Oz because he is Sudanese/black'. - Because in today's society, we are doing our best to even things up for all people regardless of background, I think this is bogus. If you take the opportunities as presented and try to succeed, the chances of you succeeding are quite high. If you just sit there and say "yeah, but I'm black and no-one gives us nothing so why should I even try", well of course you won't succeed.
I think we really need to make a distinction between saying something a little racist and actually being a racist. Being a racist involves showing complete disregard for them as a group of people (whoever it may be) and wishing ill on them, whether physically, financially or mentally. Saying something like "look at that fried chicken eating mother ****er over there" would be considered racist in America, but does it necessarily make you a racist?
I think not. Racism is in your heart. If you refuse to speak or associate with someone purely based on the colour of their skin, you are a racist. If you say a few off-colour jokes and spout a few stereotypes amongst friends but when actually approached by a person of that race are courteous and engaging with them on a personal level, then how can you be a racist? You are just making a few jokes amongst friends, but don't actually hate them just because they exist.
Some groups of people think that everyone hates them and are just waiting for someone to make a misstep in their speech so they can call them a hate mongerer and a racist. Maybe if they stopped feeling sorry for themselves and started making a difference in their own lives they might actually get somewhere and discover that on the whole, people are pretty tolerant around here.
2) 'Majak Daw's skin is very very dark'. - Another observation.
3) 'Majak Daw should be forgiven for lying to Brad Scott because of his upbringing'. - Upbringing should never be used as a get out of jail free card in a moral situation. You are either a liar or not, a thief or not, a murderer or not. This upbringing rubbish is ridiculous and plays into the do-gooders hands of "oh it's his fault, he's had a hard life."
4) 'No surprise Majak Daw owes teammates money, given his background'. - This could be construed as racist depending on a follow up question. "What do you mean, background?" "Well, he is black." That would be racist. But if it is just because he was poor and now likes to have money now he can get it, that is just a socio-economic situation.
5) 'Majak Daw likes to eat KFC fried chicken'. - Again with this American crap. That is an American problem that they are trying to spread around the world. I'm not even sure that Africans or indeed Aboriginals have a high regard for fried chicken at all. It is basically a stereotype that has become a racist term in America. And yet a lot of African Americans say "Hell yeah, we like fried chicken." I don't get it.
6) 'North should play Majak Daw in a night match because he is harder for the opposition to see'. - I find it kind of humourous but I am sure there would be some black people that would arc up at a comment like that so it is probably borderline racist.
7) 'Majak Daw is less likely to succeed in life in Oz because he is Sudanese/black'. - Because in today's society, we are doing our best to even things up for all people regardless of background, I think this is bogus. If you take the opportunities as presented and try to succeed, the chances of you succeeding are quite high. If you just sit there and say "yeah, but I'm black and no-one gives us nothing so why should I even try", well of course you won't succeed.
I think we really need to make a distinction between saying something a little racist and actually being a racist. Being a racist involves showing complete disregard for them as a group of people (whoever it may be) and wishing ill on them, whether physically, financially or mentally. Saying something like "look at that fried chicken eating mother ****er over there" would be considered racist in America, but does it necessarily make you a racist?
I think not. Racism is in your heart. If you refuse to speak or associate with someone purely based on the colour of their skin, you are a racist. If you say a few off-colour jokes and spout a few stereotypes amongst friends but when actually approached by a person of that race are courteous and engaging with them on a personal level, then how can you be a racist? You are just making a few jokes amongst friends, but don't actually hate them just because they exist.
Some groups of people think that everyone hates them and are just waiting for someone to make a misstep in their speech so they can call them a hate mongerer and a racist. Maybe if they stopped feeling sorry for themselves and started making a difference in their own lives they might actually get somewhere and discover that on the whole, people are pretty tolerant around here.
Cosmic Slop
Debutant
I'm Macedonian. I have been called serbian, bulgarian, greek, albanian. I have been told I don't exist. I have been told I am a figment of someones imagination. I have been told I am deluded into even thinking I am anything resembling Macedonian. A Greek acquaintance said he pitied me because I am confused about my identity. I have been threatened, sworn at, ridiculed. One guy said my mother is a slavic whore. I usually reply that I consider myself Australian, and my mother has never accepted money for sexual favors.
This has all happened in Australia mind you. 99% of the time it comes from other 'wogs'. Oh and in primary school I was called a wog by a few aussies because I wasn't born in Australia.
Having traveled overseas I can honestly say your average 'aussie' is one of the most tolerant groups of people in the world. If you want to see racism fly to Greece with a passport surname that ends in 'ski' and you'll witness what real racism is.
Get over yourself Australia. You skippy fish n chip eating NTTAWWTtas arent racist
Great Post. When I have travelled as well I have picked up the level of racism in other countries goes beyond name calling and broad brush stereotyping.
- Dec 7, 2001
- 22,761
- 7,318
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Nov 20, 2011
- 10,164
- 1,259
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Banned
- #37
sad you feel that way os.
i hate being called a b.... whatever.
Dearest campbell, it has been a pleasure to once again serve as the vehicle for your melancholy.
Next time I will provide some accompanying cello music.
Not in this brave new world, Eminence, anything can be deemed to be racist.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2001/jun/21/conferences1
Housing associations and council landlords should all adopt the controversial definition of a "racist incident" recommended by the Stephen Lawrence inquiry, according to new government guidance on tackling racial harassment.
The Macpherson inquiry into the murder of the black teenager Stephen Lawrence said a "racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or by any other person".
Cheech14
Team Captain
- Banned
- #40
Nothing worthy of being put in jail for.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...ist-tweets-twitter-muamba-dead_n_1381876.html
He's clearly a cretin, but how does that "incite racial hatred"? Aside from the "cotton" comment, what there was racist (unless there are tweets which are not posted there), and even including that, how does it incite hatred?
Thanks Cheech.
Interesting article on it here, which I tend to agree with:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/apr/08/victoria-coren-liam-stacey-tweets
Even in the Huff Post article, you can't actually see what he said - it's a maze of asterisks.
There is no stopping the PC stormtroopers
http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-e...nnan-skintland-slur-is-a-hate-crime-1-2238579
Until last week, that is, when The Economist magazine looked at possible Scottish independence and decided to have some “fun” at Scottish expense by printing a map of “Skintland” on its cover with the Capital renamed “Edinborrow”.
I understand what The Economist was trying to do, but there is no doubt in my mind that the cover is racially offensive and possibly a criminal act.
For the avoidance of doubt let me quote you the exact words from the Act: (1) A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if (a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or (b) having regard to all the circumstances, racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.
The Act helpfully explains what is meant by racial hatred: ‘in this Part “racial hatred” means hatred against a group of persons . . . defined by reference to colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.’
http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-e...nnan-skintland-slur-is-a-hate-crime-1-2238579
Until last week, that is, when The Economist magazine looked at possible Scottish independence and decided to have some “fun” at Scottish expense by printing a map of “Skintland” on its cover with the Capital renamed “Edinborrow”.
I understand what The Economist was trying to do, but there is no doubt in my mind that the cover is racially offensive and possibly a criminal act.
For the avoidance of doubt let me quote you the exact words from the Act: (1) A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if (a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or (b) having regard to all the circumstances, racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.
The Act helpfully explains what is meant by racial hatred: ‘in this Part “racial hatred” means hatred against a group of persons . . . defined by reference to colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.’
I don't think you understand. It's only racism if it is directed towards black people, because all black people carry the burden of their ancestors being slaves and need to be handled with kid gloves. That's what I've been taught by the enlightened ones on these forums.
P.S. I think Martin Hannan's article is more likely to stir up racial hatred than the economist article. I think most people would have gone "meh" at the cover or possibly found it a bit amusing - by drawing attention to it, Hannan has no doubt encouraged people to see it as racist and therefore react towards The Economist with hatred.
I'd better watch my back next time I make a joke about poms and teeth, although after watching 'Are You Being Served?' last night, I really have a lot to say about the stereotypical English...
</serious post>
Edit: Having now skimmed the comments on the article, it would seem that most are seeing sense
I'd better watch my back next time I make a joke about poms and teeth, although after watching 'Are You Being Served?' last night, I really have a lot to say about the stereotypical English...
</serious post>
Edit: Having now skimmed the comments on the article, it would seem that most are seeing sense
I think that Applies in america only.
along with the misconception that American and Britain were the driving force of slavery and only the Africans were victims of it.
- Banned
- #49
As stand alone comments without context 1 was the only one that seemed racist (or at least false).
The other remarks could be referring to Daw personally and/or were jokes (that some might not find funny).
The other remarks could be referring to Daw personally and/or were jokes (that some might not find funny).
You may be on to something (though of course you will have to conveniently ignore white slavery in North Africa as well as the involvement of black tribes in selling slaves in West Africa as well as Arabic involvement in general).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-racist-says-former-Ken-Livingstone-aide.html
Ken Livingstone's former race adviser Lee Jasper has claimed that “no black person in the UK can be racist”.
Similar threads
