Race and Religion

[SomeRandom]

I never said it was only for Indians or Asians in general. I said I understand the suspicion. You may not understand it or empathise with it but I do.

I can understand people actually born in India who hold the suspicion (the tactics of some Evangelicals over there are quite appalling and deceptive.) Fist geners and direct immigrants, certainly. But today's generation? Or even just the generation after said immigrants? In the West? Aren't we past that crap by now?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I can understand people actually born in India who hold the suspicion (the tactics of some Evangelicals over there are quite appalling and deceptive.) But today? In the West? Aren't we past that crap now?

No because there is still white privilege which allows white people to disrespect and capitalise off other cultures and that is wide spread

 

[Vinayaka]

I can understand people actually born in India who hold the suspicion (the tactics of some Evangelicals over there are quite appalling and deceptive.) Fist geners and direct immigrants, certainly. But today's generation? The generation of migrants even? In the West? Aren't we past that crap by now?

No, we're not, but there is a misunderstanding too. It's more about traditional versus liberal, and that has racial overlap, and is therefore sometimes mistaken as a race issue, when in actuality it's a 'tradition' issue. For example, I've had to ask Indian people to remove their hats at our temple. If the races were reversed, it could be misconstrued as racial.

 

[SomeRandom]

No because there is still white privilege which allows white people to disrespect and capitalise off other cultures and that is wide spread

White privilege? Really? I mean, yeah I've encountered racism, I've even been accused of being racist (for checking people's bag at the store I work at. IOW doing my damned job!) Even Indians, which I always counter with some Hindi to their astonishment. Quite amusing actually.

But is it really still a thing?

 

[Poeticus]

Aren't we past that crap by now?

Not really, because many Desis still sprout stupid crap like "#stopwhitepeople2015". Atrophy of the mind exists amongst our own folks, and it's rather discouraging. Western Desis, as per my own Desi observations, since I'm Indian myself, are some of the most arbitrarliy selective peeps out there. While they mindlessly parade in such "#stopwhitepeople2015" abomination, they overlook, for example, the massive conversion of numerous villages in India to Christianity by predatory missionaries. In the whole "protect our culture" conundrum, most of them forget to look East. Instead, they, like robots produced by self-anointed activist circles, operate on platforms that don't get anything done and continue the denigration accompanied by divisive straw-manning. And next thing you know, I'm lambasted as an Uncle Tom. Psst---not my fault that Brad Pitt was awesome in Troy.

 

[SomeRandom]

No, we're not, but there is a misunderstanding too. It's more about traditional versus liberal, and that has racial overlap, and is therefore sometimes mistaken as a race issue, when in actuality it's a 'tradition' issue. For example, I've had to ask Indian people to remove their hats at our temple. If the races were reversed, it could be misconstrued as racial.

Well that's depressing. Also, who wears hats inside a Temple? My Mother would have been scandalized if I ever did that as a kid.

 

[SomeRandom]

Not really, because many Desis still sprout stupid crap like "#stopwhitepeople2015". Atrophy of the mind exists amongst our own folks, and it's rather discouraging. Western Desis, as per my own Desi observations, since I'm Indian myself, are some of the most arbitrarliy selective peeps out there. While they mindlessly parade in such "#stopwhitepeople2015" abomination, they overlook, for example, the massive conversion of numerous villages in India to Christianity by predatory missionaries. In the whole "protect our culture" conundrum, most of them forget to look East. Instead, they, like robots produced by self-anointed activist circles, operate on platforms that don't get anything done and continue the denigration accompanied by divisive straw-manning. And next thing you know, I'm lambasted as an Uncle Tom. Psst---not my fault that Brad Pitt was awesome in Troy.

This is why I stay out of that stupid crap. (Well, obviously I'm concerned about Indian villages and Predatory missionaries.) It's just a poo flinging contest, imo. Well truthfully I didn't even know "stopwhitepeople2015" was even a thing. Perhaps the circles I run in are just too drunk or too Aussie to give a crap. lol

Brad Pitt was indeed awesome in Troy!

 

[Vinayaka]

No because there is still white privilege which allows white people to disrespect and capitalise off other cultures and that is wide spread

That can be seen in the 'non-dual' western teachers who've borrowed Hindu concepts, altered a few words, and made a ton of money.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

White privilege? Really? I mean, yeah I've encountered racism, I've even been accused of being racist (for checking people's bag at the store I work at. IOW doing my damned job!) Even Indians, which I always counter with some Hindi to their astonishment. Quite amusing actually.

But is it really still a thing?

Yes white privilege is a thing...bye girl!

 

[Poeticus]

White privilege? Really? I mean, yeah I've encountered racism, I've even been accused of being racist (for checking people's bag at the store I work at. IOW doing my damned job!) Even Indians, which I always counter with some Hindi to their astonishment. Quite amusing actually.

But is it really still a thing?

Unfortunately, yes. For example, there are many areas/communities here in the States wherein, regardless of how clean or well-dressed I may come across, I'll still be held suspiciously under preconceived notions relegated to members of "the Other", while a member of the in-group, on the other hand, will not be subjugated under those notions. However, this is a naturally occurring phenomenon born from societal interaction between different social groups. It's fallacious to expect members of a majority to self-regulate in their own country without taking into account their socio-economic stability.

"Privilege", in this sense, therefore, is to be relatively expected. Instead, the "privileges" that should be concentrated upon, and are rather worthy to even articulate, are those that have the capacity and the ability to greatly damage another social group. For example, the taking of diverse and non-Western philosophies and regurgitating them under different perspectives without giving them proper credit. Not only is that theft, but it's also a "privilege" born from operating under the global perspective that such non-Western "trinkets" are free-game. Examples like these are worth addressing.

However, White girls in saaris, for example, which goes back to the "#stopwhitepeople2015" crap, are the least of my worries. The concern is this, or at least my concern as a conscious Hindu, address the realities that have the ability to affect a group collectively and greatly damage their socio-economic and socio-cultural standing in the long-run. White girls in saaris, however, is not as damaging as missionary activity in the Subcontinent whose conduction by mostly Whites acts as a measure through which the "downtrodden" are seen as "finally worthy" to be "saved". And what many White Hindu sympathizers also forget, is that many members of such camps deem non-Brown converts to Hinduism as misappropriationists. So while they may be "fighting the good fight", there is the obvious reality of facing backlash from your own in-group members (i.e., White person telling a "born hindu" not to wear hats inside the temple, and others misconstruing it as racism; and many White Hindus arbitrarily conceding that such an act is, indeed, racist and the White Hindu should only relegate such rules to other White attendees).

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Unfortunately, yes. For example, there are many areas/communities here in the States wherein, regardless of how clean or well-dressed I may come across, I'll still be held suspiciously under preconceived notions relegated to members of "the Other", while a member of the in-group, on the other hand, will not be subjugated under those notions. However, this is a naturally occurring phenomenon born from societal interaction between different social groups. It's fallacious to expect members of a majority to self-regulate in their own country without taking into account their socio-economic stability.

"Privilege", in this sense, therefore, is to be relatively expected. Instead, the "privileges" that should be concentrated upon, and are rather worthy to even articulate, are those that have the capacity and the ability to greatly damage another social group. For example, the taking of diverse and non-Western philosophies and regurgitating them under different perspectives without giving them proper credit. Not only is that theft, but it's also a "privilege" born from operating under the global perspective that such non-Western "trinkets" are free-game. Examples like these are worth addressing.

However, White girls in saaris, for example, which goes back to the "#stopwhitepeople2015" crap, are the least of my worries. The concern is this, or at least my concern as a conscious Hindu, address the realities that have the ability to affect a group collectively and greatly damage their socio-economic and socio-cultural standing in the long-run. White girls in saaris, however, is not as damaging as missionary activity in the Subcontinent whose conduction by mostly Whites acts as a measure through which the "downtrodden" are seen as "finally worthy" to be "saved". And what many White Hindu sympathizers also forget, is that many members of such camps deem non-Brown converts to Hinduism as misappropriationists. So while they may be "fighting the good fight", there is the obvious reality of facing backlash from your own in-group members (i.e., White person telling a "born hindu" not to wear hats inside the temple, and others misconstruing it as racism; and many White Hindus arbitrarily conceding that such an act is, indeed, racist and the White Hindu should only relegate such rules to other White attendees).

The problem with white girls in saaris is that in the west POC face harassment for wearing their cultural dress. Whilst when a white person does it its suddenly "cool" "trendy" "edgy" "fashionable" that's the problem. Until brown people are accepted for being part of a different culture white girls in saaris need to be more mindful about making a "fashion statement"

 

[Revoltingest]

The problem with white girls in saaris is that in the west POC face harassment for wearing their cultural dress. Whilst when a white person does it its suddenly "cool" "trendy" "edgy" "fashionable" that's the problem. Until brown people are accepted for being part of a different culture white girls in saaris need to be more mindful about making a "fashion statement"

It's interesting that you call them "girls" instead of "women", & that you presume that because of their race that their dress is mere fashion statement. This bespeaks not just racism, but also sexism. Would it not be more tolerant & less "privileged" of you to allow people to define themselves, instead of being arbitrarily defined by race & gender?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

It's interesting that you call them "girls" instead of "women", & that you presume that because of their race that their dress is mere fashion statement. This bespeaks not just racism, but also sexism. Would it not be more tolerant & less "privileged" of you to allow people to define themselves, instead of being arbitrarily defined by race & gender?

Revoltingest I'm not interested in having any more discussions with you about racism or sexism. I don't care what you think. Don't engage me on this subject. You are a troll to me.

 

[SomeRandom]

Unfortunately, yes. For example, there are many areas/communities here in the States wherein, regardless of how clean or well-dressed I may come across, I'll still be held suspiciously under preconceived notions relegated to members of "the Other", while a member of the in-group, on the other hand, will not be subjugated under those notions. However, this is a naturally occurring phenomenon born from societal interaction between different social groups. It's fallacious to expect members of a majority to self-regulate in their own country without taking into account their socio-economic stability.

"Privilege", in this sense, therefore, is to be relatively expected. Instead, the "privileges" that should be concentrated upon, and are rather worthy to even articulate, are those that have the capacity and the ability to greatly damage another social group. For example, the taking of diverse and non-Western philosophies and regurgitating them under different perspectives without giving them proper credit. Not only is that theft, but it's also a "privilege" born from operating under the global perspective that such non-Western "trinkets" are free-game. Examples like these are worth addressing.

However, White girls in saaris, for example, which goes back to the "#stopwhitepeople2015" crap, are the least of my worries. The concern is this, or at least my concern as a conscious Hindu, address the realities that have the ability to affect a group collectively and greatly damage their socio-economic and socio-cultural standing in the long-run. White girls in saaris, however, is not as damaging as missionary activity in the Subcontinent whose conduction by mostly Whites acts as a measure through which the "downtrodden" are seen as "finally worthy" to be "saved". And what many White Hindu sympathizers also forget, is that many members of such camps deem non-Brown converts to Hinduism as misappropriationists. So while they may be "fighting the good fight", there is the obvious reality of facing backlash from your own in-group members (i.e., White person telling a "born hindu" not to wear hats inside the temple, and others misconstruing it as racism; and many White Hindus arbitrarily conceding that such an act is, indeed, racist and the White Hindu should only relegate such rules to other White attendees).

Oh. I think I understand. It's like the "whites" are allowed to play with other cultures as mere toys, without care about tradition, culture or paradigms. And this is just the status quo, so they get away with it.


It's quite......saddening. I experience "the other" vibe whenever I visit Fiji. Which I was always a tad perplexed about as a kid because Fijian people are often really really friendly (and startlingly without accent when they speak English.)

 

[Poeticus]

The problem with white girls in saaris is that in the west POC face harassment for wearing their cultural dress. Whilst when a white person does it its suddenly "cool" "trendy" "edgy" "fashionable" that's the problem. Until brown people are accepted for being part of a different culture white girls in saaris need to be more mindful about making a "fashion statement"

... but it's not something that merits an online campaign that is desirous to "stop White people in 2015". Think about it, "stop...White...people...in...2015". Doesn't that sound ridiculous? It's crazy! It's inherently violent and counterproductive. Plus, as an Indian, I do not see White females wearing saris to be a crime against the universe. It's incredibly trivial. And so trivial in fact, that which socks I choose to match with my shoes is a reality that is a hundred times more concerning. Indians that participate in such "#stopwhitepeople2015" nonsense are, ultimately, going after imaginary baits. I hardly see them going after matters that deserve to be addressed, such as the articulation of yoga not having anything to do with Hinduism, which is nonsense, yet they actively participate in assisting the separation of the two. For some reason, they go bonkers when it comes to a picture of a White female smoking marijuana in front of a picture of Lord Ganesha, and condemn it as misappropriation, but have no issues with the horrible misrepresentation of Hinduism in Western school textbooks and academia.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

... but it's not something that merits an online campaign that is desirous to "stop White people in 2015". Think about it, "stop...White...people...in...2015". Doesn't that sound ridiculous? It's crazy! It's inherently violent and counterproductive. Plus, as an Indian, I do not see White females wearing saris to be a crime against the universe. It's incredibly trivial. And so trivial in fact, that which socks I choose to match with my shoes is a reality that is a hundred times more concerning. Indians that participate in such "#stopwhitepeople2015" nonsense are, ultimately, going after imaginary baits. I hardly see them going after matters that deserve to be addressed, such as the articulation of yoga not having anything to do with Hinduism, which is nonsense, yet they actively participate in assisting the separation of the two. For some reason, they go bonkers when it comes to a picture of a White female smoking marijuana in front of a picture of Lord Ganesha, and condemn it as misappropriation, but have no issues with the horrible misrepresentation of Hinduism in Western school textbooks and academia.

You can't separate the subtle from the extreme. The subtle works along side the extreme to make the extreme more acceptable when faced with it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Revoltingest I'm not interested in having any more discussions with you about racism or sexism. I don't care what you think. Don't engage me on this subject. You are a troll to me.

Of course it feels that way to you.
But this is an unrestricted forum, & we are all free to discuss the issues. In particular, when I see posts with racist & sexist commentary, is it not even obligatory to oppose such things? Also, you should avoid name calling, which is a rule violation.

 

[Poeticus]

You can't separate the subtle from the extreme. The subtle works along side the extreme to make the extreme more acceptable when faced with it.

But the subtle is addressed as something that is all-concerning, where no effort is made to even address examples of the extreme. And in the process, these "stalwarts" continue to indirectly aid in the propagation of anti-Hinduism and, if it can be termed as such, Indophobia. They'll rally behind causes that call out and condemn children and youths that wear a piece of clothing that has historically been seen as the ultimate feminine attire (which is ironic since the sari is meant to be worn by females irrespective of their origin), but are mum when it comes to actual concerns that one would expect such "stalwarts" to fight against. For the life of me, I can never understand how White females wearing saris is a grave affront, in dire need of being corrected through "stopping" White people as whole, to the culture and integrity of India and Indians. It's nonsensical demagoguery.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Of course it feels that way to you.
But this is an unrestricted forum, & we are all free to discuss the issues. In particular, when I see posts with racist & sexist commentary, is it not even obligatory to oppose such things? Also, you should avoid name calling, which is a rule violation.

You can discuss whatever you want with other people on this forum. I AM saying I do not care what you think and I'm not going to debate with you. I could have just ignored your post, but I prefer to be upfront with people when I don't want anything to do with them, I prefer that they are aware of it.

 

[Revoltingest]

You can discuss whatever you want with other people on this forum. I AM saying I do not care what you think and I'm not going to debate with you. I could have just ignored your post, but I prefer to be upfront with people when I don't want anything to do with them, I prefer that they are aware of it.

You needn't debate me. You will respond (or not) as you wish.
My "white privilege" & "male privilege" cannot silence anyone.