Rush pulling the racism card on the judge lady?

[Premmy]

Originally Posted by Gorefiend

I'd like to note: modern American society. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that in modern society elsewhere, white people would be more discriminated against than brown/black people. And in certain parts of the US, white folks would be discriminated against at an individual level (I say this in full acknowledgment that in the US, as a whole society has historically and continues today to be very racist, if not tremendously overtly so.)

Actually more like modern western society... oh and Asian society if you're not Asian and living in an Asian area.... oh and African society if you're not african.. unless you live in South Africa. And, considering that most of modern society EVERYWHERE has been influenced by western society in SOME way, yeah....

Originally Posted by Gorefiend

And I doubt there is a culture in the world where culture wouldn't dictate that men should rule anyways.

Actually there were lots of them, but, the cyclical nature of human culture meant that they eventually got either, inverted to a patriarchy, or Steamrolled over by an invading one.

I know that I'm a minority, but what I guess I'm trying to say is that I exist, and people like me exist. Members of minorities so integrated into American society and wealthy enough that they haven't really suffered racism.

Except you know, the racist-ass culture they live in, where, apparently having to be "Normal" or "integrated" means "acting white and/or having money" and is seen as a plus instead of a cultural intolerance of people's differences. Where white is seen as a standard to aspire to instead of just another skintone/cullture/ ethnicity.

Originally Posted by Gorefiend

A larger example would be Guatemalan and Chinese children adopted by upper-middle class white folks, raised to be white folks of a different color, with the culture of being members of the upper-middle class, with the money to back that culture up, and who, I'll bet, mostly grew up in places where they didn't experience racism.

Like that. Where these Guatamalan kids can't be Guatamalans living in the U.S. but "exotically attractive" white people with tans in order to succeed in our society.

Originally Posted by Mannix

And while I personally haven't experienced much racism growing up in a small mountain town that had like 1 black family, 1 or 2 asian families, and a handful of mexican

soooo, you never questioned why your area was'nt more diverse?

[Gorefiend]

Ok...

I'd like to note, to start, that "acting <insert race here>" is, in my opinion, a horrible, fucked up concept that I feel ought to be abolished from social usage, the way most racial slurs are, and if possible from human thinking altogether. Now, maybe there are valid applications; acting "American" in the workplace is probably somewhat separate from acting "Argentine." Family dinners in Morocco are probably different from in Russia. But there are two things about it that disgust me; 1) when people feel that good cultural values are bad cause they belong to a group of Y's when we are X's, and 2) when people assume that because someone is of a certain ethnicity, they have to act a certain way or else its imperialism or evil. There's an episode of the Goode Family that explains that pretty well, but the fact that you think I'm a victim of cultural imperialism cause I live, dress, and act so much like a white guy is an example much closer to home. (In thinking about it, I think both are related to the sanctification of cultural values and race-thinking in our society.) So, let me explain this as simply as I can: you know how when you turn on, say, National Geographic, and see natives in countries who, say, hunt with bows or blow-darts, and dress in really colorful outfits, and live in huts or yurts or tents? Well, there are some people who live like that, but they are a minority, generally separate from society altogether. Then there are more people who live in a similar environment, but dress in more Western clothes and hunt with guns. And then there are the fellows who live in cities, and behave more like "white people" than you'd think. And among them, there's a few trying to eke out a middle-class lifestyle, trying to acquire wealth for themselves and their families and their countries. But when phrases like "cultural imperialism" and "native culture" get thrown around, what I hear as someone from a country that has some un-contacted natives and some urban dwellers, is that you want us all to live in huts and dress in colorful outfits and hunt with blowdarts for your viewing benefit. Like there's something wrong with your lifestyle. And, sure, there's plenty wrong with it, but there's also plenty wrong with "ours." Starting with that it hasn't been "ours" for generations.

I think I said this before, but the idea of ethnicity being linked to culture is based on ethnic stereotypes. And, it might be worth noting that much of what is called "acting white" can just as easily be referred to as "acting Japanese." And much else of what can be called "acting white" would probably more accurately be described as "acting upwardly mobile" in our society. After all, that's what social class IS: I can't explain it abstractly very well, but think of it like this: the expressions "swears like a longshoreman" or "mouth of a sailor" work both ways; sure, some person's swearing is comparable to that of an actual longshoreman, but also, they're acting like a member of the working poor, and they'd better straighten up if they want to amount to more! The only reason we in the US may ever conflate "whiteness" with "wealth" is that for the longest only whites were wealthy. But those aren't the attitudes of whites, they're the attitudes of wealthy people of all colors.

Now:

Originally Posted by Premonitions

Actually more like modern western society... oh and Asian society if you're not Asian and living in an Asian area.... oh and African society if you're not african.. unless you live in South Africa. And, considering that most of modern society EVERYWHERE has been influenced by western society in SOME way, yeah....

I tried to account for this; racism is a function of majorities oppressing minorities. If I made it sound like anything else, I apologize. Incidentally, a really good book on ethnic violence that demonstrates a facet of this phenomenon--that minorities are as much made as they are born--is Arjun Appadurai's Fear of Small Numbers.

Originally Posted by Premonitions

Except you know, the racist-ass culture they live in, where, apparently having to be "Normal" or "integrated" means "acting white and/or having money" and is seen as a plus instead of a cultural intolerance of people's differences. Where white is seen as a standard to aspire to instead of just another skintone/cullture/ ethnicity.

Originally Posted by Premonitions

Like that. Where these Guatamalan kids can't be Guatamalans living in the U.S. but "exotically attractive" white people with tans in order to succeed in our society.

Why should they be Guatemalan? They were raised by white peple. Are you saying that there's something in there genes that dictates that they should act Guatemalan? Cause we've already discovered that there IS no 'race' gene. And, while we're at it, what exactly IS acting "Guatemalan?" I think if anything the attitude that those kids should act like something they probably have never known just cause they were born elsewhere is more pressure on them to be "exotically attractive" than any pressure to act the way they were raised; and if they were raised by WASPs, shouldn't they act like WASPs? Wouldn't that be their new natural environment? Aren't we all humans equally? Or is there something inherently exotic about, say, me, cause I have darker skin and curlier hair, that I should strive not to break the illusion for the benefit of, ironically, white people who strive to not be racist?

(Another point I wanted to make; often the people who make these appeals are terribly ignorant of both foreign cultures and of why customs are in place. Foreign cultures aren't just a style of dress and a certain foods, or even certain architecture and religious practices. And they usually appear quaint to us cause they are out of place; wearing certain colors and fabrics makes sense in certain weather, as does making your "fancy" clothes in certain ways. All too often, the people who talk about "cultural imperialism" reduce a culture to its most 'colorful' portions.)

That said, we're hijacking this thread somewhat. Is this discussion gonna blossom into enough to merit a thread, or you think we can keep it here and have things be fine?

[Premmy]

Originally Posted by Gorefiend

Ok...

I'd like to note, to start, that "acting <insert race here>" is, in my opinion, a horrible, fucked up concept that I feel ought to be abolished from social usage, the way most racial slurs are, and if possible from human thinking altogether. Now, maybe there are valid applications; acting "American" in the workplace is probably somewhat separate from acting "Argentine." Family dinners in Morocco are probably different from in Russia. But there are two things about it that disgust me; 1) when people feel that good cultural values are bad cause they belong to a group of Y's when we are X's, and 2) when people assume that because someone is of a certain ethnicity, they have to act a certain way or else its imperialism or evil.

Ok first of all, I don't recall saying any of that, and I'm personally insulted that you'd presume me to be that kind of douchebag, especifically since I hate(to be fair I hate most things, and am enough of a douchebag on my own) such people and have dealt with bullshit about how I should be acting based on my combination of ethnicities all my life. But I think I've hit a personal hot point of yours that I used to share so I'll try to be cool.
Let's clarify the use of the word race for the sake of conversation.

"Race" as we currently know it is a purely fictional concept that could be losely described as a broad skin color palatte, encompassing a myriad of vastly different people in each simple distinction. It differs form place to place but if people are talking color instead of country, it's probably race. In the U.S. at least, I would'nt try to comment on places I have'nt been more than my own knowledge allows, race tends to be discussed more often than the others due to a myriad of annoyingly complicated issues. Basically "race" as a defining factor is complete and utter bullshit, but it's handy to discuss and use because much of our culture is based in it

"Ethnicity" is a much more concrete thing that boils down to a group of people who have dipped from the same gene pool(s) and thus share certain phenotypical traits, skintone, hair texture/color blah blah. Culture is tied to this because of the obvious. People who live together form certain customs, languages, and histories, whathaveyou. Certainly, you're not OBLIGATED to be a part of any culture, but it's a part of your family/history and it's there, take it or leave it.

Nationality: where you live, where you used to live, or where your parents came from, depends on where you are now and if that place still exists as it did. Tied to ethnicity for obvious reasons,and hence also tied to culture.

I feel this is important simply because these words get used really fucking oddly in the States and my free use of the American form of "race" can be confusing. Point is, It cuts down on the super long posts this type of shit gets me into and noone wants that. anywhooose

Originally Posted by gorefiend

There's an episode of the Goode Family that explains that pretty well, but the fact that you think I'm a victim of cultural imperialism cause I live, dress, and act so much like a white guy is an example much closer to home. (In thinking about it, I think both are related to the sanctification of cultural values and race-thinking in our society.)

I think you're a victim of cultural imperialism because you're ALIVE and you TALK TO OTHER PEOPLE I don't give much of a damn how you dress, my point is that if you watch T.V. use the internet, read books, speak damn near any western language(and plenty of other languages, in different ways, but I'm talking western here so stick with me), play videogames, listen to music. Pretty much any element of modern culture. You're taking in and taking part in a culture thoroughly steeped in racism and imperialism

Originally Posted by gorefiend

So, let me explain this as simply as I can: you know how when you turn on, say, National Geographic, and see natives in countries who, say, hunt with bows or blow-darts, and dress in really colorful outfits, and live in huts or yurts or tents? Well, there are some people who live like that, but they are a minority, generally separate from society altogether. Then there are more people who live in a similar environment, but dress in more Western clothes and hunt with guns. And then there are the fellows who live in cities, and behave more like "white people" than you'd think. And among them, there's a few trying to eke out a middle-class lifestyle, trying to acquire wealth for themselves and their families and their countries. [/quotes]
Ok, obviously there are different classes of people and the fact that we have a classist culture is a whole different pile of bullshit we have to deal with. The fact that there are different types of people within the same ethnicity/race/nationality is a completely different thing than what I'm saying.
[quote-gorefiend;940849]But when phrases like "cultural imperialism" and "native culture" get thrown around, what I hear as someone from a country that has some un-contacted natives and some urban dwellers, is that you want us all to live in huts and dress in colorful outfits and hunt with blowdarts for your viewing benefit. Like there's something wrong with your lifestyle. And, sure, there's plenty wrong with it, but there's also plenty wrong with "ours." Starting with that it hasn't been "ours" for generations.

This is one of those thigns I'm gonna be cool about....

Originally Posted by gorefiend

I think I said this before, but the idea of ethnicity being linked to culture is based on ethnic stereotypes. And, it might be worth noting that much of what is called "acting white" can just as easily be referred to as "acting Japanese." And much else of what can be called "acting white" would probably more accurately be described as "acting upwardly mobile" in our society.

And there lies the problem, why is our society not willing to allow people who talk and think and dress differently from the "standard" the same options? And, why is the "Standard" based on western culture? why is the standard one held by white ethnicities(hey, now that works, does both race and ethnicity.) Ok, like this, Sure, hair length matters in say, food service, maybe, what with hair ties, hair nets, hats and whatever, but yeah har style might have some signifigance THERE but you want to tell me why I can't have dreds or cornrows or purple hair in the corporate world? Or rather you want to tell me a reason that is'nt cultural imperialism/ racism? Because If I wanted to go in that world with my fro, I'd have a damn hard time getting work, and a damn hard time being taken seriously and a DAMN hard time making any progress. This is'nt even including the straight up racism I'll have to deal with. This is only "He has an afro, he's probably one of those anti-establishment types/jokey types/slacker types let's not hire him/listen to him/ give him anything."

Originally Posted by gorefiend

After all, that's what social class IS: I can't explain it abstractly very well, but think of it like this: the expressions "swears like a longshoreman" or "mouth of a sailor" work both ways; sure, some person's swearing is comparable to that of an actual longshoreman, but also, they're acting like a member of the working poor, and they'd better straighten up if they want to amount to more!

Rampant classism aside, every culture has their "Sunday go to meetin clothes" why in the fuck is a business suit/dress shirt and slacks not only the standard but the required standard? Why is anything else unacceptable? Fine, a "Succesful" person wears fancy clothes. Why only fancy clothes from a white ethnicity's culture? Why only the fancy clothes that that culture decides is the best? You tell me one actual reason(repeating myself, ugh) I can't wear jeans and a t-shirt or a damn Kimono to be a secretary or accountant or to run my own business.

Originally Posted by gorefiend

The only reason we in the US may ever conflate "whiteness" with "wealth" is that for the longest only whites were wealthy. But those aren't the attitudes of whites, they're the attitudes of wealthy people of all colors.

Except for the fact that there are lots of wealthy people, white or whatever, who only act that way when the people who write their checks are around. There are lots of people who don't at all agree with the culture of "successful" people in western society, hence all the depressed rich people. They want to succeed, so they take the only available path, because our culture won't accept or acknowledge a different path. That's on a macro level. I don't feel like getting into individual assumptions on a personal social level based on cultural cues

Originally Posted by gorefiend

Why should they be Guatemalan? They were raised by white peple. Are you saying that there's something in there genes that dictates that they should act Guatemalan? Cause we've already discovered that there IS no 'race' gene. And, while we're at it, what exactly IS acting "Guatemalan?" I think if anything the attitude that those kids should act like something they probably have never known just cause they were born elsewhere is more pressure on them to be "exotically attractive" than any pressure to act the way they were raised; and if they were raised by WASPs, shouldn't they act like WASPs? Wouldn't that be their new natural environment? Aren't we all humans equally? Or is there something inherently exotic about, say, me, cause I have darker skin and curlier hair, that I should strive not to break the illusion for the benefit of, ironically, white people who strive to not be racist?

That has nothing to do with what I said which was and I'm adding emphasis for clarification

Where these Guatamalan kids can't be Guatamalans living in the U.S. but "exotically attractive" white people with tans in order to succeed in our society.

The point is'nt that they would or would'nt but that if they wanted to they could'nt, not if they wanted all(read: about 2/3, because they're still brown) the freedoms and oppurtunites available to every white guy who "acts" white cultured

Originally Posted by gorefiend

(Another point I wanted to make; often the people who make these appeals are terribly ignorant of both foreign cultures and of why customs are in place. Foreign cultures aren't just a style of dress and a certain foods, or even certain architecture and religious practices. And they usually appear quaint to us cause they are out of place; wearing certain colors and fabrics makes sense in certain weather, as does making your "fancy" clothes in certain ways. All too often, the people who talk about "cultural imperialism" reduce a culture to its most 'colorful' portions.)

I've already addressed the clothes/style thing, otherwise this is another thing I'm going to roll on by.

[Azisien]

While slightly off-topic and long-winded, I don't think I've been this interested in reading Discussion threads in a while.

Originally Posted by Premonitions

"Ethnicity" is a much more concrete thing that boils down to a group of people who have dipped from the same gene pool(s) and thus share certain phenotypical traits, skintone, hair texture/color blah blah. Culture is tied to this because of the obvious. People who live together form certain customs, languages, and histories, whathaveyou. Certainly, you're not OBLIGATED to be a part of any culture, but it's a part of your family/history and it's there, take it or leave it.

Nationality: where you live, where you used to live, or where your parents came from, depends on where you are now and if that place still exists as it did. Tied to ethnicity for obvious reasons,and hence also tied to culture.

I've always found it rather odd to be asked the question "So, what are you?" as opposed to "So, where are you from?" at like a 95:5 ratio. Maybe there is some subtle significance the former has that my diluted European origins wash away, but where I personally came from/have been raised has always been the most important/defining factor of, well, me. And I think Gorefiend may have been saying something along those lines, possibly.

I've always wondered, too, if the former question is just like "Soooo, why are you black/asian?" On the other hand, my best memories of being asked these questions are from Indians I used to work in a restaurant kitchen with.

And there lies the problem, why is our society not willing to allow people who talk and think and dress differently from the "standard" the same options? And, why is the "Standard" based on western culture? why is the standard one held by white ethnicities(hey, now that works, does both race and ethnicity.) Ok, like this, Sure, hair length matters in say, food service, maybe, what with hair ties, hair nets, hats and whatever, but yeah har style might have some signifigance THERE but you want to tell me why I can't have dreds or cornrows or purple hair in the corporate world? Or rather you want to tell me a reason that is'nt cultural imperialism/ racism? Because If I wanted to go in that world with my fro, I'd have a damn hard time getting work, and a damn hard time being taken seriously and a DAMN hard time making any progress. This is'nt even including the straight up racism I'll have to deal with. This is only "He has an afro, he's probably one of those anti-establishment types/jokey types/slacker types let's not hire him/listen to him/ give him anything."

Aside from the probable racism you would encounter, I guess the rules are in effect because they're entrenched shitty rules we all have to follow? Minorities are at more of a disadvantage, though I can think of a million cases of white teenagers/young adults dressing punk or goth and they wouldn't get anywhere in the corporate world either. I actually have a friend who works for the Canadian government every summer in a student position and he basically has to go through a grooming process the week before he's hired. When I worked on the corporate end of a pharmaceutical research company for a summer, I got in shit for wearing jeans. Nope, HAD to be khakis. Despite the fact my khakis actually had a few permanent stains and my jeans were like, pristine.

[Gorefiend]

You raise some good points. I do apologize for my anger; you're right, this is a hot-button topic for me, personally, because I've met a lot of people who seem to believe that what we in Ecuador call modernization is actually cultural imperialism, and I find it to be some of the worst condescension and racism people can still get away with on both sides of the aisle: shouldn't WE get to decide what paths we want to take? Similar attitudes include the comment a friend of mine overheard that democracy "isn't in the DNA" of Iraqis or Afghanis a few years back, which I'm sure you'll agree with me is a pile of crap. I apologize for lumping you in with that lot.

That said, I guess now that I've slept on it and have a better response, I'd say: a lot of what gets passed off as different cultures is actually different class cultures, which makes intolerance thereof not racism but classism, which I find less distasteful (though not much less, my own defense of it aside) since class is much more mobile than race is; a poor family of any race can teach its children to display upper-class signifiers and hold upper-class ambition when possible and find that much more respect regardless of race--at least assuming a non-racist system. Some of these signifiers are actually semi-universal (I'd wager that attention to education, unaggressive stances and demeanors, eating manners, and emphasis on taste over expense in decor and dress were considered upwardly mobile around the world before globalization truly exploded) and therefore race, in the strictest sense, ought not be an issue (this is what I meant when I said that "acting white" may as well be "acting Japanese" or "acting upwardly mobile": in the strictest sense, it's not just white people, and the assumption that only white people act like what frankly most civilized, urbanized peoples act like is condescending and offensive.)

Now, there are many problems with the idea that everyone should act like the upper class, not least of which that the relentless pursuit of those values as expressed in Western/American society leads to, as you pointed out, tons of depression and isolation, and as I will add, to our economic crisis today; if you'll agree with me that the body that most represents those values is the corporation, and agree with the folks over at The Corporation that it is a sociopath, then it follows that our society asks its members to become sociopathic, and rewards sociopathy far too much. So, that we can agree on.

However, I am working from two standpoints. 1) too many people assume that we can't act like that, and when we do we shouldn't, which is why I got so defensive--it's the closest thing to racism I've yet encountered, and find it condescending--and 2) I really doubt that the system will change anytime soon, and from a realpolitik standpoint (or a real-whatever-the-hell-we're-talking-about standpoint) it would best serve the poor to start adopting those signifiers and acting "upwardly mobile" as fast as possible. The middle class often know that; that's why upper-class etiquette manuals have been bestsellers among the middle class for centuries. (A lot of the reason I will defend this system is that it implies the possibility of upward mobility on fairly even conditions, at least on its own. Removed from this possibility, I will concede without reserve that its pitfalls mostly outweigh its merits. A classic analysis of this is in Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.)

Some of this you may agree with already. Consider this less a rebuttal and more a collection of where I stand.

All that said, I think we're dealing with different arguments. I do find many of the individual rules, especially appearance ones, totally unnecessary, and hope that Silicon Valley's laxer corporate structures and culture of wealth will start making things better for people in the US and around the world. Interestingly, corporate dress used to be regular dress for everyone; that is to say, it wasn't born as a uniform or as "work clothes." That brief aside, well, aside, I would support the system itself, albeit arguing for more tolerance both for cultural differences and for plain old individualism.

[Premmy]

Some of these signifiers are actually semi-universal (I'd wager that attention to education, unaggressive stances and demeanors, eating manners, and emphasis on taste over expense in decor and dress were considered upwardly mobile around the world before globalization truly exploded) and therefore race, in the strictest sense, ought not be an issue

Ok... Let's take the bit about posture and mannerism as an example. In America, you're taught, regardless of class to make solid eye contact and maintain a firm upright posture to give the impression that you are both honest and confident. In Japan, traditionally, it's often disrespectful, regardless of class to stare someone in their face and hold your head too high. In the U.S. a head held high and eye contact are the mannerisms of someone who intends to succeed in life, in Japan, the opposite is true, they're the mannerisms of a presumptuous asswhole who will never make anything of himself. This is changing slowly over time. Going into clothes, "no accounting for taste", and when an entire culture's taste differs from another, how can you say that "choosing taste over expense" is an inherent aspect of the "upper class"?So to say that certain mannerisms are universal is taking part in the assumption that a certain culture is either

A: The standard, instead of it's own brand of weird, like every other culture.
B: The best, and one that all cultures aspire to.

See the problem there?

(this is what I meant when I said that "acting white" may as well be "acting Japanese" or "acting upwardly mobile": in the strictest sense, it's not just white people, and the assumption that only white people act like what frankly most civilized, urbanized peoples act like is condescending and offensive.)

Yes, but only white people look you dead in the eye,(originally, these practices have spread for... any number of reasons) stand rigidly upright, and shake hands, with each hand shaking party attempting to present an image of confidence and closeness by squeezing tightly and shaking heartily. These are not universal natural behaviors, but artificial cultural behaviors born of an individual culture. There's other collections of little things that I can't remember, but you get the point, and if you don't... fuck it this shit is getting too long... You were right, culture is'nt just clothes and whatnot, but the rules by which we deal with one another.
anyway....

Originally Posted by azisien

I've always found it rather odd to be asked the question "So, what are you?" as opposed to "So, where are you from?" at like a 95:5 ratio. Maybe there is some subtle significance the former has that my diluted European origins wash away, but where I personally came from/have been raised has always been the most important/defining factor of, well, me. And I think Gorefiend may have been saying something along those lines, possibly.

I know that the "what are you?" that I get is different from other people's, as mine usually has more question marks, maybe an exclamation mark, and different inflection/intention. But I think it's just used differently in that context, I.e. You ARE a southerner, you ARE british, you get the idea, they're asking you where you're from, but in a weird way. But then I don't know how ambiguous looking you are personally.

I guess the rules are in effect because they're entrenched shitty rules we all have to follow? Minorities are at more of a disadvantage, though I can think of a million cases of white teenagers/young adults dressing punk or goth and they wouldn't get anywhere in the corporate world either.

Go into your local hair-care store, if you don't have a store exclusively for hair care in your neighborhood, damn, sucks for you, go find one. Now go looking in the aisles for a "Nappyfication" product. You are'nt going to find one, now count the hair softening and/or hair straightening products. Remember to bring your laptop....