Is the term blacklisted racist? (1 Viewer)

[Optimus Prime]

NBC hopes not

 

[DaveXA]

NBC hopes not

Good show.

 

[rajncajn]

Well turn that around, if blacklisting is meaningless then you will not miss it’s absence so you’ve lost nothing in the exchange if the word is changed

Ok, let's turn it around, how do you know what I've lost? That's a rhetorical question. The point isn't what's lost by changing a term, it's what created by attaching race to something where it didn't exist in the first place. You keep asking, basically, "what do you care, what does it matter to you?" I keep telling you why it matters but that doesn't seem to matter enough for you to give it much thought. But that's OK, I get what you're saying and I don't necessarily disagree in this instance. I really couldn't care less if they can it a black list, but then that's never been the issue for me.

But
What I would want us all to do is if we cane to a topic like this, have whatever gut reaction you have, but then take a moment to assess ‘am I the best arbiter of what is racist or sexist or homophobic or xenophobic or whatever’? And if the answer is ‘ no’ (which, more often than not, it should be),

It is OK to have an opinion without considering oneself an expert.

then try to check in with those who actually have skin in the game
- bad pun intended

My neighbor is black and I work with a bunch of black folks that I see pretty much in a daily basis. I can already see how that conversation is going to go. They're going to look at me like I'm stupid for asking. They're going to look at me like I'm clueless as to what racial oppression looks like. But I'm going to ask because it'll be entertaining.

But, that does raise the question, at what point does asking such questions become insulting in and of themselves?

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Ok, let's turn it around, how do you know what I've lost? That's a rhetorical question. The point isn't what's lost by changing a term, it's what created by attaching race to something where it didn't exist in the first place. You keep asking, basically, "what do you care, what does it matter to you?" I keep telling you why it matters but that doesn't seem to matter enough for you to give it much thought. But that's OK, I get what you're saying and I don't necessarily disagree in this instance. I really couldn't care less if they can it a black list, but then that's never been the issue for me.

It is OK to have an opinion without considering oneself an expert.

My neighbor is black and I work with a bunch of black folks that I see pretty much in a daily basis. I can already see how that conversation is going to go. They're going to look at me like I'm stupid for asking. They're going to look at me like I'm clueless as to what racial oppression looks like. But I'm going to ask because it'll be entertaining.

But, that does raise the question, at what point does asking such questions become insulting in and of themselves?

The last part is an important question that I don’t have an answer to

To the earlier point you said it would be a meaningless change - that’s why I assumed you would not lose anything
It seems if it was meaningful, you would feel its loss

And yes we are talking past each other (TomWaits as well), both of you are in a ‘is blacklist racist’ binary
It is not. It was not intended to demean black people
That was not the issue I was discussing over and over
Black is mostly used to denote negative connotations
Black is also used to denote a ‘race’ of people historically marginalized in this country
These are parallel concepts - sometimes intertwined sometimes not
While changing ‘blacklist’ probably won’t cure racism, engaging in the conversation is more helpful than dismissing out of hand

 

[rajncajn]

The last part is an important question that I don’t have an answer to

To the earlier point you said it would be a meaningless change - that’s why I assumed you would not lose anything
It seems if it was meaningful, you would feel its loss

I think maybe you're misunderstanding what I mean by meaningless and perhaps that's not the best word to describe. It's meaningful because I care about the root issue and I feel that changes like this hold no substance. It's superficial change that just makes people feel good about themselves and give the appearance of being progressive without really having to make any effort.

And yes we are talking past each other (TomWaits as well), both of you are in a ‘is blacklist racist’ binary

Yes and no. I don't think anyone can argue with any intellectual honesty that it's racist. That's why i said that wasn't really the point.

Black is mostly used to denote negative connotations
Black is also used to denote a ‘race’ of people historically marginalized in this country
These are parallel concepts - sometimes intertwined sometimes not
While changing ‘blacklist’ probably won’t cure racism, engaging in the conversation is more helpful than dismissing out of hand

This is where we agreed. I agree with the concept that you're speaking of. I just disagreed with the way to combat it. I think that rather than focus on the benign changes, you attack the root issue directly. Certainly there are exceptions, such as master and slave being used. But I think a much more meaningful change is in the way we address each other.

 

[DaveXA]

The last part is an important question that I don’t have an answer to

To the earlier point you said it would be a meaningless change - that’s why I assumed you would not lose anything
It seems if it was meaningful, you would feel its loss

And yes we are talking past each other (TomWaits as well), both of you are in a ‘is blacklist racist’ binary
It is not. It was not intended to demean black people
That was not the issue I was discussing over and over
Black is mostly used to denote negative connotations
Black is also used to denote a ‘race’ of people historically marginalized in this country
These are parallel concepts - sometimes intertwined sometimes not
While changing ‘blacklist’ probably won’t cure racism, engaging in the conversation is more helpful than dismissing out of hand

I think you touched on something that is getting lost in all the back and forth. I think what I'm understanding now is that even something as mundane as the word blacklist can be an intersecting point in engaging in a conversation about something maybe unrelated, but still important.

I think in the past, and even still in the present to some degree, there haven't been enough opportunities to engage in a discussion of race. I do think though that people can react negatively to looking for every tangential point to engaging that discussion. It seems to me that when we're overemphasizing the topic in every small thing, the significance and meaningful impact of that discussion can be lost to precisely the emphasis on the language. Is the point to bring awareness, or to tweak people? There's a subtle, but real difference there. And many, if not most people will automatically assume the worst rather than good faith intentions. Personally, since I've gotten to know you on the site over the years, I think you come from a place of good faith discussions about race, but others certainly won't make that same assumption.

Of course, I might be missing the mark entirely. If that's the case, set me straight.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

I think you touched on something that is getting lost in all the back and forth. I think what I'm understanding now is that even something as mundane as the word blacklist can be an intersecting point in engaging in a conversation about something maybe unrelated, but still important.

I think in the past, and even still in the present to some degree, there haven't been enough opportunities to engage in a discussion of race. I do think though that people can react negatively to looking for every tangential point to engaging that discussion. It seems to me that when we're overemphasizing the topic in every small thing, the significance and meaningful impact of that discussion can be lost to precisely the emphasis on the language. Is the point to bring awareness, or to tweak people? There's a subtle, but real difference there. And many, if not most people will automatically assume the worst rather than good faith intentions. Personally, since I've gotten to know you on the site over the years, I think you come from a place of good faith discussions about race, but others certainly won't make that same assumption.

Of course, I might be missing the mark entirely. If that's the case, set me straight.

What I notice in these discussions- you allude to it; cajn refers to it - is the assumption that there is an intentional force at work
like some is in a bunker in Oakland dispatching sjws across the internet to apply one of a thousands cuts to the status quo.
it would be much easier if that were the case
in reality is that something even more amorphous than a hive mind is activated and responds to things sporadically and instinctively
THEN
the backlash comes in and (usually) makes more todo than the original reaction
how long did we spend talking about the houston realtors saying they weren’t going to use ‘master’ bedroom?
we talked about it WAY more than actual issues that were imbedded in other threads
- it’s probably not hard to guess why

consider also that Politically Correct started bc some academics (mainly feminists at first) asked, ‘why do we use the male pronoun when the gender is unknown or there is a mix of genders in a group’?
that and similar questions were kicked around grad schools for a good 10-15 years before it leaked out in to gen pop - the arguments were well covered
ultimately, and I think correctly, we decided that grammatical style should reflect a world pushing for inclusion and proper representation
if that original PC argument happened on Twitter instead of university, who knows where it would have ended (more than likely a hot topic for a week and then shouted down in the backlash

 

[LAhotsauce]

I've got a better idea. How about we stop calling people "white" & "black," neither of which is representative in the least of ones skin color, race, ethnicity or anything else?

A clear giveaway is that this idea of human race has no consistency. You go from using crayon colors, "white -- black", to suddenly continents, regions, or language groups "asian -- hispanic -- indian."

Then again, they figured out it's all a bunch of malarkey way back in 1950. But nobody listens. There is too much at stake since "race" is basically a caste in much of the world.

Why Are We Divided by Race When There Is No Such Thing?

The notion of race may be real, but the science is not. We are all the same, with no exceptions.

www.newsweek.com

In 1950, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) issued a statement asserting that all humans belong to the same species and that "race" is not a biological reality but a myth. This was a summary of the findings of an international panel of anthropologists, geneticists, sociologists, and psychologists.

But I'll say again that the origin of how we use words and phrases means nothing over time. Those meanings and phrases constantly change. This is a good video to watch.

 

[Charlie Brizzown]

This seems like a good place to insert this quote from the Master Bedroom thread.

So, my position has been that if you guys let things like this distract and frustrate you, then the momentum for this movement will subside very quickly. Like, if this is annoying to you, buckle up, because I promise you there will be many more iddy biddy, little, minor, inconsequential changes like this happening and if your patience is that thin, you will be provided many opportunities to abandon this cause. I need for White America to realize that with a groundswell this large, a pendulum swing back this hard, with this large of a course correction, you are going to HAVE to leave space for changes that overshoot the mark, miss the mark and, yes, changes that are mistakes. Those things are going to happen. Period. And if those things are dulling your resolve, then you need to reflect on what this moment is truly about. We are talking about making the type of institutional, political and societal changes that, ultimately, can save lives in minority communities. Let's keep that all the way 100. But, this isn't a drive from Baton Rouge to New Orleans. This big of a change, this is a cross country effort from LA to New York. There will be plenty of off-ramps between here and the destination. Make no mistake, White America's wherewithal will be tested. Some of this stuff yall just gonna have to chuck the deuces on and keep it moving.

 

[James Spader]

NBC hopes not

My show, nooooooooooo! I will not allow my show to be canceled. If so, I will make Crash 2.

 

[rajncajn]

What I notice in these discussions- you allude to it; cajn refers to it - is the assumption that there is an intentional force at work
like some is in a bunker in Oakland dispatching sjws across the internet to apply one of a thousands cuts to the status quo.
it would be much easier if that were the case
in reality is that something even more amorphous than a hive mind is activated and responds to things sporadically and instinctively

I'm not sure where I referred to that because I believe it to be a ridiculous notion formulated by conspiracy theorists with political (or worse) agendas behind their motives. I do not believe that one bit and if I ever gave off that impression then it was purely unintentional.

 

[First Time Poster]

This seems like a good place to insert this quote from the Master Bedroom thread.

Unfortunately, we are moving headlong into it. That subside.

"Why are they still protesting?"
"It's been 60 days, what do they want?"
"Why the violence?"

That fury, that righteous anger, isn't quite as strong as it was weeks ago.

 

[Optimus Prime]

You can argue if this word or that word is or isn’t racist

Maybe it is or maybe it isn’t

It might be a silly argument but it might not

But I do think it can all have a cumulative subconscious effect

 

[Consigliere]

I've got a better idea. How about we stop calling people "white" & "black," neither of which is representative in the least of ones skin color, race, ethnicity or anything else?

You gonna call people Pink? Ask Steve Buscemi how that feels...

 

[rajncajn]

If I wanted to describe a dark skinned person, but I didn't want to call them "black," then what would be the best ten to use? You have Caucasians, Asians, Hispanic etc and I know but everyone fits into this boxes, but they can be general terms used to describe a person's general appearance without calling them a color before trying to narrow down ethnicity. You could say African American, but they may not be American. You could say African, but would that fit? You could say negro, but some find that offensive and is really no different than calling them black.