User Tag List

First 123

Results 21 to 23 of 23

  1. #21
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Freesia View Post
    Yes, but I think it's also dangerous to pretend that those lines don't exist. You draw attention to these things simply by existing, by being yourself.



    Yeah, this is what I was getting at.
    The reason both are true and that this is such a conundrum is because perceived power is real power.

    In one sense, race is not real. For example, race does not have a legitimate biological foundation. There aren't really any lines dividing race that most people would think of as objectively real, that is, existing in some way other than a person or group of peoples' assertion that it exists.

    That being said, correct or not, people have believed race is a real thing and acted accordingly. The consequences of their actions have created really, tangible consequences, as tangible as physical health, geographical sorting, and material wealth. In this way, race is real.

    So how do we acknowledge the truth of the first part and correct the problems of the second part? Is impossible to do both? Or is it impossible to not do both?
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  2. #22
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iNtrovert View Post
    I agree with @Freesia that video was verging on ignorant the first time I saw it years ago and it's no better now.

    I just feel like it needs to be ok for people to be what and who they are. You can't get to that point by ignoring what they are. I don't like when people say I don't see color. Unless you have some kind of visual handicap you do in fact see what color people are. I mean imagine a doctor saying to someone "I don't see you as a female I just see you as a person". There are differences between male and female and if said doctor doesn't acknowledge that he/she can't do his/her job correctly. I am not the same as a white person even if you look at the issue from a historical perspective alone we are not the same. Why should we be seen as such? Isn’t that the point of promoting diversity?

    Bottom line Morgan Freedman is a black man. There is no way around it. That's just what he is. You however don't get to assign him an identity based on that any more than that doctor gets to use gender differences to assign an identity to his/her patient. There are all kinds of women just like there are all kinds of black people. Regardless of any other factors that make up an individuals identity that woman is still a woman and that black man is still a black man. I think it's less about invisibility and more about the weight we place on what we do see.

    I for one would just like it to be ok to be a black person or a gay person or a trans gender person or w.e person you are. I don’t want people to ignore or look past what I am to accept me. I’d rather them embrace what I am and celebrate me for that. Why is color something we have to not see or acknowledge in order to be accepting?
    The thing is, it's actually pretty debatable that a person is a black man and that's just the way it is. That in and of itself is pretty subjective and arbitrary. I could point out that someone has darker skin, but

    1) Different lineages of people have attained dark skin entirely independently.
    2) There's no particular reason to consider dark skin worthy of note and not, say, color of one's eyes or broadness of shoulders (of course there is a historical reason),
    3) The actual range of physical traits amongst so-called black people is so enormous as to cast the very physical identity into doubt.

    A child not inherently develop an idea that skin color is an important thing to notice, that's socialized. So while in a sense no is "color blind" in so far as they will observe the color of your skin just like your eyes or hair, they don't have to consider it important, and in theory a person could be socialized to be color blind in that sense.

    In the USA race is what's called a master class. It is one of the innumerable identifiable traits a person can have which is taken as top priority in categorizing them, but again, it could have been anything else. There is no biologically sound reason we have a so-called black minority culture today and not a blond minority culture.

    A reason for this to be of concern, and a point in favor of the position Morgan Freeman takes, is that different but equal may not be socially achievable. As long as people think race is a basis to put people in separate categories, people of different races may never be able to stand on equal footing.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  3. #23
    Senior Member iNtrovert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    MBTI
    Ni
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/so
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    362

    Default

    I feel like we are kind of saying the same thing in some ways like 2 sides of the same page. I’ll do my best to organize my thoughts externally the way I’m seeing them in my head. Who is black and how do we determine someone’s blackness or lack thereof. Visually or through the use of human faculties? Genetics or how they self-identify? I realize that race is a social construct and your points are very valid. So let’s look at the issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    The thing is, it's actually pretty debatable that a person is a black man and that's just the way it is. That in and of itself is pretty subjective and arbitrary. I could point out that someone has darker skin, but

    1) Different lineages of people have attained dark skin entirely independently.
    The color lines though filled with gray areas were drawn. U.S history grants us with the ability to look at your arm and tell whether you would have been considered less of a person or a person at all hundreds of years ago regardless of ethnicity or culture. That is a reality. So for someone to say when they look at you they can’t see that (in context) is just a lie .I personally don’t think black or white is ethnically or culturally exclusive. That hasn’t really been the case historically either as race is a floating signifier. Ex: One drop rule, shifting definitions of whiteness, accounts of darker Hispanics and Dominicans slaves ect

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    2) There's no particular reason to consider dark skin worthy of note and not, say, color of one's eyes or broadness of shoulders (of course there is a historical reason),
    A dark skinned person of any race gender or ethnicity is not socialized externally the same as a person who has a lighter completion. This is seen throughout history. The treatment of people of darker completions was/is so ingrained in our society that it has affected various aspects of our lives. There is not only a social impact but an economic and educational disparity and so on and so forth. The quality of life for black and brown minorities in the US as a whole is not and was not equal to that of those that are considered white or non-black. Even those who self-identify as black and appear white have had to deal with the effects of blackness. Ex The overall wealth disparity that would have resulted from disenfranchised darker ancestors, social rejection by black and white groups of people, internalized effects of injustice ect. Social constructs are still constructs and have very real effects.

    I can say to you there is no such thing as countries. We all live on earth there is no good reason to identify ourselves as anything other than earthlings. A child can be born into any country and taught any number of traditions and languages. At the end of the day we will speak different languages have different traditions follow different laws and the list goes on and on. Saying we are all the same just won’t cut it we are clearly different because of where we are from. We will have certain advantages and disadvantages ect. Weather that is all due to some social factor or not it’s still very real. Almost if not all of it will be rooted in history.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    3) The actual range of physical traits amongst so-called black people is so enormous as to cast the very physical identity into doubt.
    Your 3rd point goes back to the belief that being black is ethnically or culturally exclusive and basing blackness on those variables and not how an individual would be externally socialized. (Again has never really been the case) Also how their ancestors would have been socialized and the long-term effect that has had on the state of their offspring in various aspects of their lives.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    A child not inherently develop an idea that skin color is an important thing to notice, that's socialized. So while in a sense no is "color blind" in so far as they will observe the color of your skin just like your eyes or hair, they don't have to consider it important, and in theory a person could be socialized to be color blind in that sense.

    In the USA race is what's called a master class. It is one of the innumerable identifiable traits a person can have which is taken as top priority in categorizing them, but again, it could have been anything else. There is no biologically sound reason we have a so-called black minority culture today and not a blond minority culture.

    A reason for this to be of concern, and a point in favor of the position Morgan Freeman takes, is that different but equal may not be socially achievable. As long as people think race is a basis to put people in separate categories, people of different races may never be able to stand on equal footing.
    You can’t socialize people out of the past w.o flat out lying to them and even then it’s bound to be tainted. History is and always has been a key factor in overall human advancement. Racism has been ever apparent throughout history. Racism against black and brown people was so effective because it was not only socialized but institutionalized in every aspect of society. How do you then expect it is possible to socialize a child to not carry the very same ideologies that the societal system was built to perpetuate?

    This is why I say Morgan is black and that’s the bottom line. He looks black and would have been externally socialized as such. He self identifies as black, and he is the descendant of a people of various cultures and ethnicities who have been systematically discriminated against in the U.S. He is the product of a social and systematic system that recognizes him as such. This is also why it’s kind of like a slap in the face for someone to suggest we are all the same. We were not historically socialized the same and there are side effects that transcend social barriers.

    In addition to that we are still not socialized as such. If there is ever a future where we are socialized equally we will still be dealing with different side effects of our ancestors unequal socializations. If there is a future where the side effects of our history and past discrimination is no longer relevant we will still have the knowledge of past events and will inevitably view history through skewed lenses. This will be a factor in shaping our legal social and economic systems as it has been in the past.

    I would also like to point out that people have a way of finding some irrelevant thing to divide them. You are right it could have very well been anything else. If not color country if not that social class or sexual orientation ect. The fact that it would have been any of those things is the root of the problem. This leads me to believe instead of trying to erase differences to stand on equal ground by not saying "black man" or "white man" it is more productive to just accept people for what and who they are. There will always be something to polarize people. The need, willingness and desire to polarize is the problem not the fact that we recognize we are different to begin with.
    "Re-examine all that you have been told... dismiss that which insults your soul."_Walt Whitman

Similar Threads

  1. President Trump Holds Meeting Honoring Black History Month At The White House
    By Xann in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-17-2017, 10:14 PM
  2. Stacy Dash says there shouldn't be a black history month.
    By jixmixfix in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-24-2016, 10:36 PM
  3. What does your type and gender mean to you?
    By Vilku in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 07-20-2015, 09:50 PM
  4. What does the term "placebo effect" mean to you?
    By Octarine in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-14-2011, 05:09 PM
  5. what does goofy sense of humor means?
    By lkpo14 in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-08-2009, 07:52 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO