Race and Rosario

[snepp]

Let's try this, just for ****s and giggles.

 

The next post made in this thread, targeted at "posters," be it individually or by lumping them together, and not the subject at hand, will result in an immediate week-long timeout from the forum.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I know you don't care. That's kind of the problem....

 

What's the difference between telling another poster their post is tinged with ugly racial stereotypes and flat out calling that person a racist? IMO not much but if you want to split hairs on that point be my guest. The issue is that you've conveniently appointed yourself as the lone juror and executioner, but being the merciful soul that you are you've allowed those who stand accused a rope to explain themselves to your satisfaction and thus escape your wrath. 

 

Can you see how problematic that is? 

 

We aren't talking about overtly racist posts here, i.e. Sano eating fried chicken. We're talking about posts were one person sees a fair critique and you see racial motivation. I feel strongly about some issues that are brought up on TD but that doesn't mean I get to attack anybody I disagree with and shrug it off as "their feelings don't matter." This isn't about feelings. It's about not acting like an jerk in a thread and trying to excuse by making claims as unfounded as those you attacked in the first place. This attitude of "by whatever means necessary," gives individuals carte blanche to do just that. 

 

Yeah we're just going to flat out disagree that those participating in this thread don't understand that coded language or stereotypes can be harmful. 

 

I don't think we can credit the cleans boards on this site to your vigilante enforcement of your belief system.

Okay, this is a lot to unpack and I accidentally deleted my last post so I'll try again.

 

First, no one is saying your post is "tinged with ugly racial stereotypes". PUT THIS IDEA TO BED ALREADY. This conversation is not about anyone reading the tea leaves on any single post. As far as I've seen, no one has said it is racially-motivated to criticize Rosario. The problem here is that if it's even mentioned that anyone might unfairly criticize a Latino player, that everyone who criticizes a Latino player is a racist.

 

If you think that really huge distinction is splitting hairs, America cannot have a conversation about race. Full stop.

 

Now on to the more nuanced and second point...

 

We can all admit that America's institutions are racist, right? I mean, that's not really up for debate, is it? We stop people of color at a higher rate. We try them in court at a higher rate. We convict at a higher rate. We incarcerate for a longer period of time. The numbers are right there... we are a racist society in every way you can measure such a thing.

 

That doesn't mean every individual or every individual statement is racist. BUT...

 

Where does that come from? Who built, maintains, and executes those institutions? We do. So if an institution is racist, how are we not responsible for it in some fashion?

 

And that's the question being posed by so many in this thread. It's soooooo easy to step back and say "I don't use the N word" or "I have black friends" and wash our collective hands of the institutions we may not have built but certainly maintain.

 

Because if we weren't collectively racist, this conversation wouldn't have to happen. And a little personal responsibility can go a long way toward resolving the issue.

 

A racist society cannot be built by a handful of blatant racists. It takes deep-seeded biases we all need to turn around and face as individuals to fix the problems we all know exist.

 

Not having a knee-jerk reaction to a general statement about bias is a good place to start that repair.

[KirbyDome89]

 

Okay, this is a lot to unpack and I accidentally deleted my last post so I'll try again.

 

First, no one is saying your post is "tinged with ugly racial stereotypes". PUT THIS IDEA TO BED ALREADY. This conversation is not about anyone reading the tea leaves on any single post. As far as I've seen, no one has said it is racially-motivated to criticize Rosario. The problem here is that if it's even mentioned that anyone might unfairly criticize a Latino player, that everyone who criticizes a Latino player is a racist.

 

If you think that really huge distinction is splitting hairs, America cannot have a conversation about race. Full stop.

 

Now on to the more nuanced and second point...

 

We can all admit that America's institutions are racist, right? I mean, that's not really up for debate, is it? We stop people of color at a higher rate. We try them in court at a higher rate. We convict at a higher rate. We incarcerate for a longer period of time. The numbers are right there... we are a racist society in every way you can measure such a thing.

 

That doesn't mean every individual or every individual statement is racist. BUT...

 

Where does that come from? Who built, maintains, and executes those institutions? We do. So if an institution is racist, how are we not responsible for it in some fashion?

 

And that's the question being posed by so many in this thread. It's soooooo easy to step back and say "I don't use the N word" or "I have black friends" and wash our collective hands of the institutions we may not have built but certainly maintain.

 

Because if we weren't collectively racist, this conversation wouldn't have to happen. And a little personal responsibility can go a long way toward resolving the issue.

 

A racist society cannot be built by a handful of blatant racists. It takes deep-seeded biases we all need to turn around and face as individuals to fix the problems we all know exist.

 

Not having a knee-jerk reaction to a general statement about bias is a good place to start that repair.

Where is my knee jerk reaction? 

 

I think it was very clear, if you follow those posts back, that my issue is with the implementation of perceived "justice." I'm not claiming I'm being attacked, and I'm not referencing any of my personal posts. Honestly, I'm not sure where you got that idea. 

 

You're misrepresenting what I said. There's a massive difference between saying Latin players may face racial injustice and going after another poster because you've (not you personally Brock) decided their critique falls into that category. Telling somebody their post is full of ugly racial stereotypes is in essence calling them a racist so yes, in that regard it's splitting hairs. Again, I shouldn't have to say this, but this isn't about overtly racist posts not is it a defense of them; it's about posts that, at worst, could be considered in a grey area, and whether an attack on them is justified simply because another poster feels a certain way about them. 

 

You've beat the drum for "this isn't about you, it's about the collective," which isn't being debated, so I find it confusing that you're sanctioning attacks at an individual level. That's precisely what was being promoted and that's exactly why I pushed back. 

 

I truly have no idea why anybody would support a structure where an individual can label you or some extension of you as X, the label grants that individual license to do Y, and Y is justified because that person labeled you as X. It's textbook circular logic, and that's exactly what the posts I was quoting were advocating for.  If you're passionately opposed to X, I suppose I can understand why this type of structure, no matter how misguided, receives support, the problem is the fluidity of X. One day you're fighting against X, the next day you're being called X. 

 

The "I'm going to attack anything I think might be X, and if some of it turns out to not be, then shrug, I'll still get a few," mentality only exacerbates the irrationality. We shouldn't accept that the level of disapproval excuses the subsequent magnitude of rebuke. To me these last two paragraphs are universal. 

 

On your second point...

 

You've said that a discussion is being avoided, but the entire second half of your post is just a rebranding of earlier posts you made. If the idea is to just tell everybody to have personal responsibility and be introspective then we're attending a lecture. 

 

I doubt you'll find an argument about the existence of a racial component in American institutions. If that's the discussion you want to have then by all means start down that road. 

 

 

 

 

[Craig Arko]

For whomever is interested...

 

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/04/24/author-discusses-new-book-how-americans-respond-discussions-race

[USAFChief]

 

For whomever is interested...

 

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/04/24/author-discusses-new-book-how-americans-respond-discussions-race

Heh...a professor at an American university claiming he's the victim of "white privilege." 

 

And those that dare question his theory, well...they just refuse to accept their own racism.

 

 

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

His original column is worth reading. This Q&A goes a bit sideways.