Even every now and then? I think we may just be using different terms for the same thing.
That isn't the complete definition of racism:The word "especially" means that isn't always the case.rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/Submit
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
That isn't the complete definition of racism:The word "especially" means that isn't always the case.
I am not claiming anything in that post, you are arguing with the dictionary definition. Nevertheless, notice the word "all" in the definition.Isn't that true by definition?
Are you trying to claim that believing that black people have darker skin than white people is racist?:hmm:
No, it is the belief that ALL people of a specific race share the same trait. That is the problem because it allows you to apply characteristics to people that do not warrant such application.The noting of characteristic differences isn't the problem. It's the superiority/inferiority that is the true definition/quantifier for the definition of racism. Noting that black people have more skin pigment and white people have less skin pigment doesn't make a person racist for pointing out those differences in the two categories of "races" of humans. Trying to state one is better or worse than the other because of that difference is the definition of racism. Again very straightforward.
No, it is the belief that ALL people of a specific race share the same trait. That is the problem because it allows you to apply characteristics to people that do not warrant such application.
Overly technical definition? Welcome to using the English language. Without overly technical definitions for words we might as well resort to using grunting sounds with pantomime to get what we want across.
That only makes sense once you let a toaster fuck your brains out.So in other words saying 99.9% of race X is dumber than race Y isn't racist.^_^
Your poll is missing my categorization: I am not racist, but I am viewed as a racist because I do not approve of racists being racists.
That only makes sense once you let a toaster fuck your brains out.
I think a rational mind can interpret the definition to mean exactly what I said in my original post: that you use statistics to form an opinion about someone you don't really know. If statistics were to show that 99.9% of race X were less intelligent than race Y then stating such would not be racism. Saying that 99.9% of race X are less intelligent than race Y when statistics show otherwise would be ignorant at best and racist at worst.You are the one that put ALL in capitals letters bro.
So clearly you think it is rather important to the definition.
I'm ok with being called a racist. And yes, the behavior of the group influences my opinion about them in some degree when I first meet them. Everybody does that every day about everything. You will treat a hot girl differently than some morbidly obese chick. That behavior is hard wired into everybody's brain. It's typically called intuitions and intuitions are based on patterns. If a negative pattern is constructed, is that the fault of the person who constructed the pattern, of based on the actions of those the patterns are built around?
In the case of a morbidly obese chick, you can assume she doesn't take care of herself, eats too much, is lazy, guess that her house is a mess, and has low self esteem. In how many cases is that true? Your brain creates that pattern.
There is nothing wrong with creating a pattern. Anybody who is honest with themselves does this. In fact, your brain does this at a subconscious level, and most people have to fight against it. All I know is if I drive through the inner city, I'm going to be more alert, and nervous compared to driving through a rural area. To call me a retard for being that way, fine, I'm ok with being a smart retard.
I wouldn't make any assumptions about a person's character based on their clothing. A person in a suit could be part of organized crime and a person in loose clothing could be going to college to become a scientist or anything at all. Either one of them could enjoy fucking toasters.
No, it is the belief that ALL people of a specific race share the same trait. That is the problem because it allows you to apply characteristics to people that do not warrant such application.
You do as well. If you see a redneck, you assume they drive around in 4 wheelers, have a large truck, and drink beer, and fish a lot. What's wrong with that?
Everyone's a little bit racist
But seriously everyone that claims they're not racist at all is full of shit. I was born and grew up in the south and my parents are white people who grew up in the Detroit area. So I definitely grew up with some racist influences and tendencies. I work very hard to not prejudge people or let race influence my behavior, but there's always thoughts that jump into my head first or assumptions that I have to overcome.
And truthfully probably anyone who voted "race realist" should have actually voted "more racist than most".
Again, the key word is all, or the implication that statistical probabilities for a certain group apply to every member of that group individually.Statistics. Such a wonderful thing. You should read up on this brand new theory...
What about an albino black person? Hopefully now you understand why you should be careful with broad generalizations.What??? Ascribing categorical traits isn't being racist. It's the quantifier of better or worse based off traits that makes it racism.
All black people have more pigment in their skin than white people. I just ascribed a categorical trait, one that can be easily verified with scientific backing as has been, to two sets of human races. The ascribing of the categorical trait means nothing in itself. It is nothing more than creating categories. Even stating that those with more skin pigment are less likely to receive severe sunburns or those with less pigment in their skin are able to process more vitamin D through their skin isn't racism.
Now stating one or the other is "better" or "worse" as a race because of their categories attributes is racism. Thus the application of the superiority quantifier is all that matters for the definition of racism.
Why? So I can make assumptions about individual people's characters instead of getting to know them?Statistics. Such a wonderful thing. You should read up on this brand new theory...
Again, the key word is all, or the implication that statistical probabilities for a certain group apply to every member of that group individually.
Why? So I can make assumptions about individual people's characters instead of getting to know them?