Siddhartha
Lifer
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
So you are saying that racism does not exist but it is all in the mind of Afro-Americans and Sharpton and Jackson promote this neuroses.
This truly is some of the most head of the butt thinking I have heard in a long time.
Originally posted by: Chrono
So I was stopped at a traffic light and this 4 runner pulled up next to me playing loud rap music. I usually get irritated when people play music very loudly, so I rolled up my window. All of a sudden I hear this black guy say "Oh, ya, roll up your window because a black person is here" in their usual black tone. In my mind I'm thinking, "No, it's not you sir, it's your crap music."
Yeah right....deep in your heart you wanted to bump your own system...
...then you realized you got an AudioVox tape deck hookedup to a couple of Radio Shack 4 x 6's hahaha LOL
OK this "ebonics tone" as you call it, you see many black people using ebonics, but you see any thuggish people talking like that, chinese, korean, mexican, white, filipino, maraccino, pepperoni, all races.
"In their black tone" - I'm not even gonna touch that.
My guess is you really did put your windows up because you were intimidated that they were black. You of course aren't admitting it. And you justify it to yourself by saying that they couldn't have KNOWN that you were putting your windows up because of their race, it could have been because...um... the music was too loud, yeah, the music was too loud! WHy didn't I think of that in the first place?!!
And come on, black people aren't the only ones who get monster sound systems in their cars, not even majority by far. At least not any city i've been to for a decent amount of time (LA, Berkeley, San Francisco, Miami). Not a disproportionate amount of blacks bump music, AND not a disproportionate of music bumpers are black.
You know what? ASIANS CAN'T DRIVE FOR SH!T. I can vouch for that. Of course these asians are mainly FOBS who are indecive about their judgement. I've had a few experiences? On the contrary, stop stating things that you do not know.[/quote]
Dude... now your are offending me!! I am an asian and drive just fine.... And i HATE when people say otherwise!!
Stereotypes are wrong, and you sir shud be the LAST one to support any of them!!
Dont get yourself in more sh!t than you already are!!
I usually see people next to my car rolling up their windows when i am playing music at a high volume..... does that mean they are racist... hell NO!! they are usually my race... and they do that...They just hate the music...
you werent wrong for what you did Chrono.... next time, speak up, or simply ignore!
By not reacting to the guy's comment, you simply confirmed his accusation to you of being a racist...
Tell me frankly, would you have taken that sh!t from an asian kid?
you werent wrong for what you did Chrono.... next time, speak up, or simply ignore!
By not reacting to the guy's comment, you simply confirmed his accusation to you of being a racist...
Tell me frankly, would you have taken that sh!t from an asian kid?
Just in case other people don't understand I'll interpret this for you. You can see the subject making an attempt at reverse psychology, to obliquely quell the animousity he has garnered here today. He hopes that by making racist comments towards his own race he will prove that he can't be racist because "you can't be racist agaisn't your own race". So all the asians, please don't get mad that he is martyring the lot of you for his own personal vindication.
Having read Chrono's boorish posts in the past (reference furnished upon request), I am inclined to believe that his crude nature was simply disguised as an extremely prejudiced behaviour. He's generally impolite toward people.
Now, let me piece back together exactly what took place: Chrono's car comes to a stop, as well as that of a gentleman according to the rules of driving. Chrono observes the design of the car. He also observes that the person has his music on. He then winds his window up.
Those are factual statements. Subjective statements: The music was ridiculously loud. I'll grant him that perception. Note that Chrono tries to lead us to believe that he rolled his window only because of the sound. He learned that the man was Black because of his "usual Black tone" and because the man mentioned "Black". So at the time he wound up his window, he didn't know who was driving the car. His goal is to eliminate the impression that he has a preconceived notion; and to establish that the individual involved had no basis for such conclusion. Nevertheless, he states that he observed a 4-runner. He's stipulated that the 4-runner was by his side. So he must have looked at some point. From his account, he observed the 4-runner before the individual made a comment to him. According to Chrono, he [Chrono] has every basis and right to draw inferences. The only question left is whether or not the Black man had a reasonable reason to respond as he did.
Then here are possible inferences to draw upon piecing together the puzzle:
Chrono's biases, as we all do have one, begins flashing. He matches the skin tone with the practice of loud music. I'll venture to say that Chrono likely gave a stare that exposed fear and prejudice on his face. The man with the loud music concludes that Chrono associated his skin tone and music with the stereotype about Blacks. For all we know, Chrono may have ommitted relevant information. Perhaps he gave an intense look of dislike or fear before winding up his window. Or maybe he wound up his window, then stared intensely from the comfort of his window. Thus, the individual involved again inferred that Chrono was subscribing to the stereotype. Is not it ironic that Chrono wants us to subscribe to his stereotype, yet his complaint here is about a man subscribing to a stereotype that he's treated inferiorly on the basis of his race? The Black man's response was also a subscription to stereotypes about treatments of Blacks by certain races, which is a corollary of the stereotype subscribed by Chrono.
Now, Chrono wants us to believe that his stereotype was founded. Let's for a moment accept it. If we are to validate stereotypes based upon our personal experiences, then it is fair to validate the stereotype that goes with loud music and Blacks. Hence, Chrono implicitly accepts that the individual driving that car was also a gangbanger. Did he have a bandanna tied, by the way?
If Chrono denies such conclusion, then he's selectively picking stereotypes. Perhaps he can see the problem with his reasoning? Stereotypes are hasty generalisations, founded upon few and poorly selected samples. It is this error that constitutes a stereotype. There isn't sufficient evidence to make a general statement. Does this mean that it's impossible for a stereotype to be true? No. It just means that it is inconclusive because there isn't sufficient evidence at the moment. Chrono by his own admission made hasty generalisations, except he wants us to believe that his sample is a fair and sufficient sample.
Now, let me piece back together exactly what took place: Chrono's car comes to a stop, as well as that of a gentleman according to the rules of driving. Chrono observes the design of the car. He also observes that the person has his music on. He then winds his window up.
Those are factual statements. Subjective statements: The music was ridiculously loud. I'll grant him that perception. Note that Chrono tries to lead us to believe that he rolled his window only because of the sound. He learned that the man was Black because of his "usual Black tone" and because the man mentioned "Black". So at the time he wound up his window, he didn't know who was driving the car. His goal is to eliminate the impression that he has a preconceived notion; and to establish that the individual involved had no basis for such conclusion. Nevertheless, he states that he observed a 4-runner. He's stipulated that the 4-runner was by his side. So he must have looked at some point. From his account, he observed the 4-runner before the individual made a comment to him. According to Chrono, he [Chrono] has every basis and right to draw inferences. The only question left is whether or not the Black man had a reasonable reason to respond as he did.
Then here are possible inferences to draw upon piecing together the puzzle:
Chrono's biases, as we all do have one, begins flashing. He matches the skin tone with the practice of loud music. I'll venture to say that Chrono likely gave a stare that exposed fear and prejudice on his face. The man with the loud music concludes that Chrono associated his skin tone and music with the stereotype about Blacks. For all we know, Chrono may have ommitted relevant information. Perhaps he gave an intense look of dislike or fear before winding up his window. Or maybe he wound up his window, then stared intensely from the comfort of his window. Thus, the individual involved again inferred that Chrono was subscribing to the stereotype. Is not it ironic that Chrono wants us to subscribe to his stereotype, yet his complaint here is about a man subscribing to a stereotype that he's treated inferiorly on the basis of his race? The Black man's response was also a subscription to stereotypes about treatments of Blacks by certain races, which is a corollary of the stereotype subscribed by Chrono.
Now, Chrono wants us to believe that his stereotype was founded. Let's for a moment accept it. If we are to validate stereotypes based upon our personal experiences, then it is fair to validate the stereotype that goes with loud music and Blacks. Hence, Chrono implicitly accepts that the individual driving that car was also a gangbanger. Did he have a bandanna tied, by the way?
If Chrono denies such conclusion, then he's selectively picking stereotypes. Perhaps he can see the problem with his reasoning? Stereotypes are hasty generalisations, founded upon few and poorly selected samples. It is this error that constitutes a stereotype. There isn't sufficient evidence to make a general statement. Does this mean that it's impossible for a stereotype to be true? No. It just means that it is inconclusive because there isn't sufficient evidence at the moment. Chrono by his own admission made hasty generalisations, except he wants us to believe that his sample is a fair and sufficient sample.
Originally posted by: SweetSweetLeroyBrown
Originally posted by: Chrono
So I was stopped at a traffic light and this 4 runner pulled up next to me playing loud rap music. I usually get irritated when people play music very loudly, so I rolled up my window. All of a sudden I hear this black guy say "Oh, ya, roll up your window because a black person is here" in their usual black tone. In my mind I'm thinking, "No, it's not you sir, it's your crap music."
Yeah right....deep in your heart you wanted to bump your own system...
...then you realized you got an AudioVox tape deck hookedup to a couple of Radio Shack 4 x 6's hahaha LOL
Ya right LOL. Dude, I was with my mom. We were just having a nice chit chat about daily news/politics and etc.
I don't bump my system when my mother is around.
I'm more or less saying, you don't see chinese people running around karate chopping people. Yet, you do see very very many black people using that ebonics tone.
That was a throwaway post. No rhetorical value whatsoever, and yet that's the one post by me you chose to reply to. Thanks you make me feel special.
EDIT: Removed the annoying unecessary quotes
Uh, nice analysis Luvly. How can you state that I'm being prejudice or racist in any matter? I did not know he was black until he specified himself that he was black and that I was scared/intimidated that he is black. He was telling his whomever that. Do you honestly believe that you can comprehend this situation in my terms? You were not there when this happened, so don't go analyzing something you do not know Ms. Prissy.
I'm always so astonished when I see AT moderators allow certain threads that have racist tone stay on--in spite of the sticker that was put 2 years ago, emphasising that racist comments would not be tolerated.
Oh, believe me, I will take someone's racist comment rather than stifle their thoughts and expressions. I like to know what people are thinking, so I can be prepared for responses and avoid situations within my control. And to clarify my statement: I have no objection to someone asking a question about certain behaviours, but they should be worded differently. Only when it is worded appropriately should it be allowed to stay unlocked.
Platinum Gold, I enjoyed your posts, as usual.
You're right that positive statements can and do constitute stereotypes too. Whether or not it's negative or positive does not determine its stereotypical nature. It just determines how receptive it should and would be. Often people think of stereotypes as any general statement about a group of people that is negative.
Nonetheless, I have to disagree with your response to Kalster's question (i.e., where it begins). He raised a good question. I don't understand why people think that lynching or segregation, for instance, must happen first before there's proof of "racism". Remember, for instance, that lynching didn't really begin until much later. Do you think anyone woke up overnight and decided to hate all blacks and burn them? Racism is simply a full-blown form of prejudice. We all have prejudices, in response to our natural instincts. However, the prejudices of the average person is curbed. On the other hand, that of a racist isn't. The reason lynching or segregation no longer happens is because of drastic intervention of the law. Why not try for a moment to take out those laws and see what happens? Do you honestly think that everyone who pretends to be just prejudiced but not racist will allow self-discipline and treat other people equally as far as their actions? Racism has morphed . . . you see it in verbal form and daily practices. It's kind of like people engaging in verbal abuse because they know it would be just as effective, if not more, than physical abuse.
I agree with you that more people are prejudiced but pretend not to be. And I do agree that it's a reason we should not try stifling thoughts. At the same time, there are many things we think but never utter that do not concern race. We generally use the rules of our society to abide peacefully with others. I am sure there are certain thoughts you have that do not concern prejudice of any kind but is forbidden by society, so you don't utter them. Think of obscene related materials, for instance. There are certain things we find important to refrain from, and there are revolutionary changes that occur due to coercion of this sort. I remember a recent news about a German man teaching his dog the Nazi salutation, in spite of the fact that it was illegal to do such in Germany. Why did Germany make such ban? A revolution that took place not too long ago led to such drastic laws. It is paradoxical in a so-called free society, but I guess paradox is part of man's existence and will remain so.
On an ending note: You know, I always wondered how people could allow the greatest tragedies in human history happen and do nothing. It was not until later that I realised that even in my own generation, spiteful and maliciously plotted tragedies are happening everyday to a group of people but no one is doing anything. The pundits are writing philosophically sound arguments to justify mistreatments of other human beings. It is history . . . only history when all are dead that will tell the story from a different view, and our descendants will ask "how come no one cared to do anything?" We make history everyday in our lives but do not realise it. It is always easier to criticise others than search within ourselves what contributions we make to our fellow beings and in improving our conditions.
P.S.: I will tell you that I really dislike loud music. But I get it from Blacks, Mexicans and Whites. It may be different music, but they all amount to loud. I don't like heavy metal, nor do I like hardcore rap. However, I do know that it's one in a million Mexicans or Blacks or Whites or even a few in a billion Americans that I hear play loud music in their cars, so I wouldn't make such hasty generalisations as Chrono has done. Not all Blacks like the same music, same sound, not most play loud music in their cars, nor are all men dead beat dads.
Oh, believe me, I will take someone's racist comment rather than stifle their thoughts and expressions. I like to know what people are thinking, so I can be prepared for responses and avoid situations within my control. And to clarify my statement: I have no objection to someone asking a question about certain behaviours, but they should be worded differently. Only when it is worded appropriately should it be allowed to stay unlocked.
Platinum Gold, I enjoyed your posts, as usual.
You're right that positive statements can and do constitute stereotypes too. Whether or not it's negative or positive does not determine its stereotypical nature. It just determines how receptive it should and would be. Often people think of stereotypes as any general statement about a group of people that is negative.Nonetheless, I have to disagree with your response to Kalster's question (i.e., where it begins). He raised a good question. I don't understand why people think that lynching or segregation, for instance, must happen first before there's proof of "racism". Remember, for instance, that lynching didn't really begin until much later. Do you think anyone woke up overnight and decided to hate all blacks and burn them? Racism is simply a full-blown form of prejudice. We all have prejudices, in response to our natural instincts. However, the prejudices of the average person is curbed. On the other hand, that of a racist isn't. The reason lynching or segregation no longer happens is because of drastic intervention of the law. Why not try for a moment to take out those laws and see what happens? Do you honestly think that everyone who pretends to be just prejudiced but not racist will allow self-discipline and treat other people equally as far as their actions? Racism has morphed . . . you see it in verbal form and daily practices. It's kind of like people engaging in verbal abuse because they know it would be just as effective, if not more, than physical abuse.
I agree with you that more people are prejudiced but pretend not to be. And I do agree that it's a reason we should not try stifling thoughts. At the same time, there are many things we think but never utter that do not concern race. We generally use the rules of our society to abide peacefully with others. I am sure there are certain thoughts you have that do not concern prejudice of any kind but is forbidden by society, so you don't utter them. Think of obscene related materials, for instance. There are certain things we find important to refrain from, and there are revolutionary changes that occur due to coercion of this sort. I remember a recent news about a German man teaching his dog the Nazi salutation, in spite of the fact that it was illegal to do such in Germany. Why did Germany make such ban? A revolution that took place not too long ago led to such drastic laws. It is paradoxical in a so-called free society, but I guess paradox is part of man's existence and will remain so.
On an ending note: You know, I always wondered how people could allow the greatest tragedies in human history happen and do nothing. It was not until later that I realised that even in my own generation, spiteful and maliciously plotted tragedies are happening everyday to a group of people but no one is doing anything. The pundits are writing philosophically sound arguments to justify mistreatments of other human beings. It is history . . . only history when all are dead that will tell the story from a different view, and our descendants will ask "how come no one cared to do anything?" We make history everyday in our lives but do not realise it. It is always easier to criticise others than search within ourselves what contributions we make to our fellow beings and in improving our conditions.
P.S.: I will tell you that I really dislike loud music. But I get it from Blacks, Mexicans and Whites. It may be different music, but they all amount to loud. I don't like heavy metal, nor do I like hardcore rap. However, I do know that it's one in a million Mexicans or Blacks or Whites or even a few in a billion Americans that I hear play loud music in their cars, so I wouldn't make such hasty generalisations as Chrono has done. Not all Blacks like the same music, same sound, not most play loud music in their cars, nor are all men dead beat dads.
Originally posted by: luvly
I'm always so astonished when I see AT moderators allow certain threads that have racist tone stay on--in spite of the sticker that was put 2 years ago, emphasising that racist comments would not be tolerated.
Oh, believe me, I will take someone's racist comment rather than stifle their thoughts and expressions. I like to know what people are thinking, so I can be prepared for responses and avoid situations within my control. And to clarify my statement: I have no objection to someone asking a question about certain behaviours, but they should be worded differently. Only when it is worded appropriately should it be allowed to stay unlocked.
Platinum Gold, I enjoyed your posts, as usual.
Nonetheless, I have to disagree with your response to Kalster's question (i.e., where it begins). He raised a good question. I don't understand why people think that lynching or segregation, for instance, must happen first before there's proof of "racism". Remember, for instance, that lynching didn't really begin until much later. Do you think anyone woke up overnight and decided to hate all blacks and burn them? Racism is simply a full-blown form of prejudice. We all have prejudices, in response to our natural instincts. However, the prejudices of the average person is curbed. On the other hand, that of a racist isn't. The reason lynching or segregation no longer happens is because of drastic intervention of the law. Why not try for a moment to take out those laws and see what happens? Do you honestly think that everyone who pretends to be just prejudiced but not racist will allow self-discipline and treat other people equally as far as their actions? Racism has morphed . . . you see it in verbal form and daily practices. It's kind of like people engaging in verbal abuse because they know it would be just as effective, if not more, than physical abuse.
I agree with you that more people are prejudiced but pretend not to be. And I do agree that it's a reason we should not try stifling thoughts. At the same time, there are many things we think but never utter that do not concern race. We generally use the rules of our society to abide peacefully with others. I am sure there are certain thoughts you have that do not concern prejudice of any kind but is forbidden by society, so you don't utter them. Think of obscene related materials, for instance. There are certain things we find important to refrain from, and there are revolutionary changes that occur due to coercion of this sort. I remember a recent news about a German man teaching his dog the Nazi salutation, in spite of the fact that it was illegal to do such in Germany. Why did Germany make such ban? A revolution that took place not too long ago led to such drastic laws. It is paradoxical in a so-called free society, but I guess paradox is part of man's existence and will remain so.
On an ending note: You know, I always wondered how people could allow the greatest tragedies in human history happen and do nothing. It was not until later that I realised that even in my own generation, spiteful and maliciously plotted tragedies are happening everyday to a group of people but no one is doing anything. The pundits are writing philosophically sound arguments to justify mistreatments of other human beings. It is history . . . only history when all are dead that will tell the story from a different view, and our descendants will ask "how come no one cared to do anything?" We make history everyday in our lives but do not realise it. It is always easier to criticise others than search within ourselves what contributions we make to our fellow beings and in improving our conditions.
P.S.: I will tell you that I really dislike loud music. But I get it from Blacks, Mexicans and Whites. It may be different music, but they all amount to loud. I don't like heavy metal, nor do I like hardcore rap. However, I do know that it's one in a million Mexicans or Blacks or Whites or even a few in a billion Americans that I hear play loud music in their cars, so I wouldn't make such hasty generalisations as Chrono has done. Not all Blacks like the same music, same sound, not most play loud music in their cars, nor are all men dead beat dads.
Oh wow, you're even more hilarious now. I didn't even specify anything about anything else other than tone and the use their race as a plea.
There is a reason why my thread isn't locked. The mods obviously see it.
Wait now, Chrono, did you see me mention your name there as one of the persons with a post that has racist tone? Aren't you being presumptuous there? You're immensely criticising an individual for his statement about you, yet here you are doing the same thing--assuming what I have not explicitly stated.
By the way, you keep denying any prior knowledge of the race of the individual. You also want us to believe you that you had your window wound up. You also want us to believe that the power of the Black man's voice was strong enough to vibrate through a closed window with a ridiculously loud music. You haven't stated that he toned down his music. You haven't stated that you wound down your glass to hear what he was saying. You haven't said that he did this whilst you were winding up your window, so you had a chance of betterr hearing.
So how exactly did you know or hear what he was saying? If you could still hear him loud enough in spite of the loud music and your window wound up, then why did you bother with winding up the window? You basically implied that the window up meant less noise and possible sound proof. Oh, once again, Chrono wants us to accept his interpretation of facts.
By the way, you keep denying any prior knowledge of the race of the individual. You also want us to believe you that you had your window wound up. You also want us to believe that the power of the Black man's voice was strong enough to vibrate through a closed window with a ridiculously loud music. You haven't stated that he toned down his music. You haven't stated that you wound down your glass to hear what he was saying. You haven't said that he did this whilst you were winding up your window, so you had a chance of betterr hearing.
So how exactly did you know or hear what he was saying? If you could still hear him loud enough in spite of the loud music and your window wound up, then why did you bother with winding up the window? You basically implied that the window up meant less noise and possible sound proof. Oh, once again, Chrono wants us to accept his interpretation of facts.
Luvly, you make a great point.
Maybe it's selective memory as he doesn't remember rolling down the window to hear the black man speak in his "tone".
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter