|
|
How? If I recognize that some guy from China valued school more than some guy from America, and is therefore better at academic things, how is that racism?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd argue that, if you knew both of the individuals concerned, you'd simply be choosing the more appropriate person for the task.
If on the other hand, as Colin's message implied to me, the persons were chosen purely on the basis of race, it would clearly be a case of racism. Just as its a case of racism and sexism when there are mandated quotas of ethnic minorities or women.
"Science adjusts its views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin
|
|
|
|
|
enhzflep wrote: I'd argue that, if you knew both of the individuals concerned, you'd simply be
choosing the more appropriate person for the task.
You don't disagree with me. You're making my point, in fact.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Racism is a terrible thing. But you make it sound as if even Mother Theresa could be guilty of racism just by even unconsciously going by a cultural stereotype.
When I think of racism I think of the Klan, and Nazism. That's the insidious nature of the victimhood culture: To blow things out of proportion and exploit feelings of guilt.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: Racism is the belief of the superiority of one race over another
No it isn't. Racism is
"the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."
Not the word 'especially'
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
That's pretty much what I said. The belief that a race is superior (or inferior) to another for whatever reason.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Splitting hairs, maybe, but you only said inferior - the implication being that finding another race superior would not be racist.
But the point is it is about difference and not being better or worse in any way - it is surely equally racist to believe black people are less intelligent (inferior) as to believe all black people like reggae (just different).
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: That is one definition. It doesn't have to be. What would a different definition be?
It's not sexism if I open a jar for a woman. Are women sexist because they birth children and men don't? Sexism is not differences in sexes, it's discrimination and devaluation of a sex. I didn't make the definition up, I just linked to it.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, but there are people who believe that pointing out differences is always an "ism" of some sort.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: There were 2 definitions listed in your link. Indeed. And they go together. So, it is attitudes about roles which devalue sexes.
By the way, where's your definition?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: The point is you took the definition that suited your argument and disregarded the one prior to it Wrong. I used the more commonly accepted definition and more importantly, the definition used in the article that started this discussion.
You used a different definition than what we were talking about just because.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: It seems you are good at it. Burn.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
If you open a jar for a person because you are stronger, they have failed, you're just being helpful etc., and that person happens not to have a willy, then no, it's not sexism.
If you open the jar for a person because they are of the female persuasion, then I'm afraid that is sexism.
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: If you open the jar for a person because they are of the female persuasion, then I'm afraid that is sexism. It's actually called being polite.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Actions can be described by more than one word or phrase - that is the beauty of the English language.
Because you deem something to be polite does not make it not sexist. It is sexist byu teh very definition of the word as you are performing an action based solely upon the sex of the person concerned.
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
Only if you exclude one of the definitions.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Each dictionary definition is stand-alone.
see Here[^] (make sure you expand to see all 13 definitions...
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
We can debate semantics all day long. However, the most commonly accepted definition, including the one in the originally posted article, has negative connotations. And, there is nothing negative about offering your seat to a pregnant woman, or to any woman for that matter.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
RyanDev wrote: We can debate semantics all day long.
Cool - I'm fed up with the work I'/m doing right now.
RyanDev wrote: the most commonly accepted definition, including the one in the originally posted article, has negative connotations.
And what particular line of research has led you to believe that that particular definition is the most widely accepted? The fact that in a survey of one person (yourself) that's how you take it?
RyanDev wrote: And, there is nothing negative about offering your seat to a pregnant woman, or to any woman for that matter.
Forget the pregnancy - if someone has a greater need for a seat is is obviously a good thing to offer yours.
But, offering your seat to a person because they are female is sexism in action. There is no semantic debate here, that is a fact; it is discrimination based upon sex, and only upon sex. If, given the exact same circumstance but a man rather than a woman is standing, and you do not perform the same action, then you are being sexist. That is not debatable.
If you feel that offering your seat to a woman is a good thing, then that is fine - it's how you have been brought up and something you have been taught. You mean no offence by it and, often, the woman in question will take no offence by it, realising it is offered as a polite gesture.
Some khaki-wearing militant feminist might knee you in the garfunkles for acting so, other women might just politely refuse, or even accept - nonetheless you have performed a sexist act, because there is no reason why a woman needs a seat more than a man.
The act of offering your seat to a lady will, I am sure, go the way of always ensuring the lady walks on the man's left (so he can grab his sword to defend her honour) or nearest the road (so he can protect her from splashes).
In the meantime, continue to offer your seat to women, but admit that it is a sexist act; and may you never cross a militant feminist on the train.
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: That is not debatable. Yes it is, in fact that's what we have been doing. You are taking a definition that is not widely used to support your side. So, you are technically correct by that definition alone. However, I am taking the more commonly used definition AND the definition used in the article I posted and therefore it is not sexist.
Quote: because there is no reason why a woman needs a seat more than a man. And there it is. The difference between you and me.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|