Random Thoughts Thread

[BoringSupreez]

I agree with Luke and Norris. If we want to be a non-racial society, we can't be giving people extra praise simply for their skin color. Bringing up the example of a movie award again, I wouldn't care if Best Picture had been given to a movie directed by a white male every year for a century: if a movie directed by a black female won, she shouldn't receive a single ounce of extra praise that a white director wouldn't have also gotten. No matter the historical precedent.

I'm a firm believer in the whole color-blind view of things. I judge everyone on the same scale, and I think everyone else should do the same.

[Luke]

My point was that you can't compare "first black woman to win best actress" to "first one handed person to win best actor" or "first Jewish person to win best actor" etc. because there isn't the same shared cultural context of oppression going on in any of the relevant contexts.



Jackie Robinson was a great ballplayer who didn't make race an issue, but his chief accomplishment is nonetheless as an inspirational figure to a group of people that had been left out of pro sports league because of the color of their skin.

Slavery is slavery. "First Jewish Male" and "First Black Female" are very comparable to me as both cultures shared a very similar oppression, albeit at different time periods.

I know you just didn't compare Jackie Robinson to Hallie Berry. Robinson will remain a legend, and not because he was "black" but because of his accomplishments and struggle. Hallie had it easy, isn't that good of an actress, but she showed her tits and won an Oscar and was celebrated because she was "black".

Jackie, as you mentioned, never made a race issue and didn't like being labeled. He hated being labeled as "MLB's first Black player" and had said many times to not look at him as being an athlete, or a black athlete, but to judge him as a human being. A person. Not a black person, a person. THAT is what I also find important.
Jackie wanted ALL kids to think, "Look what HE can do", not "Look what that Black guy can do".

Jackie is still (and should be) an inspiration to kids of all races, and if you only inspire one race, you have failed as a pioneer. Sure, the significance of Robinson's success strikes a deeper chord with African Americans because of his trials and tribulations, but my point is he should be remembered as one of the best Baseball players in history, not one of the best black baseball players in history.

Now you have me talking in circles.

To acknowledge the fact that Jackie was an African American is more than fine. A great fictional character said "I am what I am". But to reward and single Jackie out for being an African American is something he didn't want. Yes, there is significance, but pointing out differences is a step in the wrong direction.

[dsheinem]

here's a nice take on what I'm getting at: http://blog.sfgate.com/reyeschow/2010/0 ... ace-world/

[Luke]

Whoa whoa.

To clarify, in no way do I think that Dish judges people by skin color. No way, no how. And in no way do I mean to attack Dish or not listen to his opinions.

If I am correct, he is simply stating "Embrace your differences if it helps everyone in the long run".

I'm stating, " Embracing your differences is great, but not when when focused on one trait such as skin color".

Dish has brought up some excellent points, and hey, not everyone agrees on everything and he and I both bring up intriguing points.

I don't want this to turn into a finger pointing contest.

[flojocabron]

dont really know or care about whats goin on.

But I'm here to make it random.

Get over it!

[dsheinem]

dont really know or care about whats goin on.

But I'm here to make it random.

Get over it!

what a great Ginger American!

[noiseredux]

A great fictional character said "I am what I am".

I love that you basically figured out a way to work in dialogue from Airborne here.

[Erik_Twice]

To clarify, in no way do I think that Dish judges people by skin color. No way, no how. And in no way do I mean to attack Dish or not listen to his opinions.

Same here! I don't think we disagree that much in practise, either.

But I like his article because I can twist it a bit. Let's imagine we change race to a different concept, a more...interesting one.

Myth #1: It is possible to see anyone simply as a “person” devoid of perky breasts
Myth #2: People with perky titties do not want to be seen as people with perky breasts
Myth #3: Seeing perky breasts must lead to negative stereotypes and assumptions

And the whole thing solves itself. In any situation where pointing someone breasts is stupid, so is pointing race. Nobody has the position the article claims, BoringSupreez wants to treat people as, well, people, not as titties or crayons.

"I don't see you as a pair of breasts, but as a person" is a perfectly nice stament to make. It's not different with sexuality or race, it's just common sense!

I think I should get off my soapbox. Sorry.

[Blu]

here's a nice take on what I'm getting at: http://blog.sfgate.com/reyeschow/2010/0 ... ace-world/

Yes, this is a great article. I'll follow it up with some Peggy McIntosh:

http://ted.coe.wayne.edu/ele3600/mcintosh.html

[Luke]

A great fictional character said "I am what I am".

I love that you basically figured out a way to work in dialogue from Airborne here.

The fact that you got that reference to a reference astounds me.