People of color.

[Revoltingest]

the only thing obvious in this nonsense argument by the OP is that he is a Republican right wing apologist and a minority among his own race, that makes me sad

 

[Kfox]

So black people are not disproportionately the victims of police violence?

If you live in a low high crime neighborhood, you will be treated different by the police than if you live in a low crime neighborhood; regardless of race. Unfortunately, black people disproportionately live in high crime neighborhoods. However more white people are victims of police violence (because there are so many more of them) than black people, but if you look at the media, you would think more black people get it; because that is what the media likes to report on.

 

[Kfox]

Indeed.

What did I say to give you that impression? How did you make that leap?

 

[Kfox]

I feel that sometimes SJWs use this term, which once again highlights how problematic identity politics are.

They may have brought it back, but now it seems to be mainstream; everybody seems to be using it.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you live in a low high crime neighborhood, you will be treated different by the police than if you live in a low crime neighborhood; regardless of race. Unfortunately, black people disproportionately live in high crime neighborhoods. However more white people are victims of police violence (because there are so many more of them) than black people, but if you look at the media, you would think more black people get it; because that is what the media likes to report on.

We never see what is...only what we're shown.
So it's useful to explore what else can be seen
to improve our grasp of that elusive reality.

 

[Kfox]

the only thing obvious in this nonsense argument by the OP is that he is a Republican right wing apologist and a minority among his own race, that makes me sad

I am a black man who does not see himself as a victim, who does not see himself as oppressed, who only see himself as your equal. Why does that make you so sad?

 

[Kfox]

We never see what is...only what we're shown.
So it's useful to explore what else can be seen
to improve our grasp of that elusive reality.

Unfortunately most don't do that. Most only see what they are shown, and they react accordingly.

 

[Lyndon]

I am a black man who does not see himself as a victim, who does not see himself as oppressed, who only see himself as your equal. Why does that make you so sad?

because you have to be blind to not see black people as oppressed, and that is what's sad

 

[Kfox]

because you have to be blind to not see black people as oppressed, and that is what's sad

How are we oppressed?

 

[Lyndon]

How are we oppressed?

let me count the ways!!

 

[Kfox]

let me count the ways!!

It's been more than an hour already; are you gonna give some examples? Or what!

 

[Revoltingest]

Unfortunately most don't do that. Most only see what they are shown, and they react accordingly.

True dat.

 

[Revoltingest]

How are we oppressed?

Even Roland Fryer found that cops have overt &
implicit racist attitudes toward blacks. And this
includes black cops.
I say "even" because of his research on shootings,
which found no racial bias. So his finding of
racism is particularly cromulent.

"Oppressed" is a loaded word....suggesting far more
than merely an increased likelihood of having rights
violated by cops. I wouldn't use it because it conveys
too much evil in this age. Earlier in the 20th century
though, it works.

 

[Kfox]

Even Roland Fryer found that cops have overt &
implicit racist attitudes toward blacks. And this
includes black cops.

So according to Roland Fryer, Black people become white supremacist once they become cops? Consider the possibility that Roland Fryer is just wrong.

I say "even" because of his research on shootings,
which found no racial bias. So his finding of
racism is particularly cromulent.

But his research found no racial bias! How can you say his claim of racism is credible?

 

[We Never Know]

My thoughts? Black and white aren't colors.

Yep. They are shades

 

[Revoltingest]

So according to Roland Fryer, Black people become white supremacist once they become cops? Consider the possibility that Roland Fryer is just wrong.

But his research found no racial bias! How can you say his claim of racism is credible?

"Implicit racism" isn't about becoming any kind of supremacist.

 

[Kfox]

"Implicit racism" isn't about becoming any kind of supremacist.

So black people become implicit racist against themselves once they become cops? Do men become implicit sexist against men once they become cops? After all; even male cops arrest men at a disproportionate rate when compared to women. Maybe just maybe it's something else.

 

[Revoltingest]

So black people become implicit racist against themselves once they become cops? You jokin' right??? Maybe just maybe it's something else.

You keep making incorrect inferences.
This has become unproductive.

 

[Ella S.]

I'm going to get into trouble with this.

Years ago (the 1980s) I came over to the USA from England to work on a contract. At the time, the PC thing in England was that "black" should not be used to refer to, well, negroes (I thought for some time what word to use there). The correct term was "colored" (yeah yeah, coloured) we were told, and I dutifully dropped "black" in favor of "colored". The first time I used the word over here (I now live in the USA) it was greeted with shock. "You shouldn't say that, it should be 'black'". OK, I thought "black" it is. Since then I have tried to be good and used "African American*" and so on.

I guess I've become old and grumpy, but I get more and more fed up with being told what words, in my native language, I am allowed or not allowed to use. I get it that people get offended and I don't want to do that, but isn't there some onus on the offended person to consider whether the speaker intends to be offensive? Is it unreasonable for me to ask that people should make up their minds what words I am allowed to use and stick to it?

Here's a good reason not to be so easily offended. Lots of people, myself included, really try to remove all traces of racism from their thoughts and actions. They also, and this is where the problem usually arises, try to express support for oppressed groups of people, only to be rejected because they don't use the "correct" word. Can you see how these well meaning people can be put off and just give up on the whole thing?

OK, flame away.

* I think it was Bush the younger that said (in South Africa) "Nelson Mandela is the first African American President of South Africa". OK, very funny, but think for a minute. What was he supposed to say? "African American" was the PC way to say it at the time in the USA. He couldn't use any other words and still be PC. But it doesn't make sense outside the USA.

I understand the frustration.

I think it's worth noting that, for a long time, there hasn't exactly been a single, unified equal rights movement. Intersectionality is becoming more popular, but it's also not agreed on by everyone and has sometimes just become another competing movement.

I totally see why it might seem like people are having a hard time getting their story straight or like you need to be constantly on top of the newest language, but the reality is that there are still a lot of competing ideas about which words to use, how to use them, or even how to approach these problems in general. It's a very complex and nuanced topic that genuinely is constantly evolving and changing over time as new issues enter our awareness and old issues come back in new ways.

Believe me, though, however frustrated you are by it, equal rights activists are even more frustrated with it because they're more directly involved with these sorts of problems and they have to deal with all of the other equal rights activists that can often be extremely zealous about their own perspective.

So, unfortunately, sometimes there aren't simple answers that you can just take and run with. Some people think "black" is disrespectful, and even the ones who don't usually see its use a noun as disrespectful, but some people also see "African American" as disrespectful because it qualifies their American status and puts them in relation to a country many of them have never been to. Equal rights activists have to figure out what language to use to both garner the support of the people affected without unintentionally insulting them and to avoid validating the dog whistles and language games that bigots hide behind.

It's just not an easy, straightforward task. It probably won't be for at least another few generations, although luckily these are now questions that are being seriously investigated by academics so we are genuinely making progress towards some sort of workable resolution since all parties involved are motivated to find one. It's just going to take awhile for the better ideas to win in conceptual combat.

And that's why, if you really want to help rather than do damage to these movements, it takes serious concerted effort and study and, yeah, you have to try to keep up to date with new information as it comes out. Even equal rights advocates slip up on this constantly; they just know how to apologize and correct themselves.

 

[We Never Know]

I'm going to get into trouble with this.

Years ago (the 1980s) I came over to the USA from England to work on a contract. At the time, the PC thing in England was that "black" should not be used to refer to, well, negroes (I thought for some time what word to use there). The correct term was "colored" (yeah yeah, coloured) we were told, and I dutifully dropped "black" in favor of "colored". The first time I used the word over here (I now live in the USA) it was greeted with shock. "You shouldn't say that, it should be 'black'". OK, I thought "black" it is. Since then I have tried to be good and used "African American*" and so on.

I guess I've become old and grumpy, but I get more and more fed up with being told what words, in my native language, I am allowed or not allowed to use. I get it that people get offended and I don't want to do that, but isn't there some onus on the offended person to consider whether the speaker intends to be offensive? Is it unreasonable for me to ask that people should make up their minds what words I am allowed to use and stick to it?

Here's a good reason not to be so easily offended. Lots of people, myself included, really try to remove all traces of racism from their thoughts and actions. They also, and this is where the problem usually arises, try to express support for oppressed groups of people, only to be rejected because they don't use the "correct" word. Can you see how these well meaning people can be put off and just give up on the whole thing?

OK, flame away.

* I think it was Bush the younger that said (in South Africa) "Nelson Mandela is the first African American President of South Africa". OK, very funny, but think for a minute. What was he supposed to say? "African American" was the PC way to say it at the time in the USA. He couldn't use any other words and still be PC. But it doesn't make sense outside the USA.

"African American" was the PC way to say it at the time in the USA. He couldn't use any other words and still be PC. But it doesn't make sense outside the USA."

Good point!

I don't think there are African Russians, African Italians, African Australians, etc.
Are they called African Americans in Africa? If so why?

It would be interesting to know how African Americans / Africans are referred to in other countries.