People talking about racism but throwing around the term "oriental". Love it.
Honestly though, I thought asian americans hated that word.
Originally posted by cdtm
I mean, Shang Chi himself is that.So don't really see shit eaters point, nor why Sin would agree with it, when it would mean Shang Chi doesn't get made at all.
That's any media. It's usually in American stuff, but you see it in others. You can't have a different nationality most of the time without them playing in to at least a few stereotypes, no matter how harmful they might be.
Originally posted by -Pr-
People talking about racism but throwing around the term "oriental". Love it.Honestly though, I thought asian americans hated that word.
That's any media. It's usually in American stuff, but you see it in others. You can't have a different nationality most of the time without them playing in to at least a few stereotypes, no matter how harmful they might be.
Trouble is you'd end up with any sort of word being racist in the end. I mean typically oriental just means from the Orient or something shiny. Like do we say Hong Kong being the pearl of the Orient is a racist thing.
Does Westerner end up becoming a racist term if someone who isn't from the West says it in a derogatory way. Which is another thing racist as people use the word isn't anything to do with the actual meaning of it. Do we call the stereotype of the English drinking tea as "racist".
People will end ups o scared to do anything for a fear of causing offence it will make people insular. Actually causing the opposite thing to happen.
Steretypes and actual racism aren't really the same. A steretype doesn't usually thereby claim superiority over another race because of it, as that would then lead to what is actually considered superior in general if at all.
I think one of the most funny examples is people who are critical of religions (particularly Judaism and Islam) are racist. Or Islamophobic/Antisemitic. A group of people designate which is "wrongthink" and then can accuse you of being rude or whatever. You can mock Christ in a newspaper but mock Mohammed and that's somehow a bad thing.
Originally posted by One_Angry_Scot
Trouble is you'd end up with any sort of word being racist in the end. I mean typically oriental just means from the Orient or something shiny. Like do we say Hong Kong being the pearl of the Orient is a racist thing.Does Westerner end up becoming a racist term if someone who isn't from the West says it in a derogatory way. Which is another thing racist as people use the word isn't anything to do with the actual meaning of it. Do we call the stereotype of the English drinking tea as "racist".
People will end ups o scared to do anything for a fear of causing offence it will make people insular. Actually causing the opposite thing to happen.
Steretypes and actual racism aren't really the same. A steretype doesn't usually thereby claim superiority over another race because of it, as that would then lead to what is actually considered superior in general if at all.
I think one of the most funny examples is people who are critical of religions (particularly Judaism and Islam) are racist. Or Islamophobic/Antisemitic. A group of people designate which is "wrongthink" and then can accuse you of being rude or whatever. You can mock Christ in a newspaper but mock Mohammed and that's somehow a bad thing.
Hey Scot.
You're not wrong. I've had actual asian friends/partners telling me that the word isn't bad. Now, some asians might think it is, but I'm just pointing it out to show that it's not as bad as some other, more universally hated words.
Well it is bad. It’s like the N word.
When the Europeans came up with it, they thought that the Asians were primitive, barbaric even. China and India both have a rich history filled with innovation. Of course those old euro trade merchants didn’t know this so used the word to convey a sense of superiority to all east/ far east Asians. In the past when America was really racist people accepted it. Then when it became less racist in the 60’s and 70’s people started resenting it and then from 90’s on it became a derogatory.
Originally posted by -Pr-
Hey Scot.You're not wrong. I've had actual asian friends/partners telling me that the word isn't bad. Now, some asians might think it is, but I'm just pointing it out to show that it's not as bad as some other, more universally hated words.
No prob, I get too into a discussion and just blurt out stuff haha.
Originally posted by Diesldude
Well it is bad. It’s like the N word.When the Europeans came up with it, they thought that the Asians were primitive, barbaric even. China and India both have a rich history filled with innovation. Of course those old euro trade merchants didn’t know this so used the word to convey a sense of superiority to all east/ far east Asians. In the past when America was really racist people accepted it. Then when it became less racist in the 60’s and 70’s people started resenting it and then from 90’s on it became a derogatory.
I wouldn't say its as bad as the "n word" at all. And I think they did know they had impressive history. It's just they valued their history above other countries. Which i think many peoples do and still do today. Look at countries like China and the pride they have. Or for example in Judaism some sects believe they are the chosen race. Would you be ready to call them racist.
The word Oriental has no racialist connotation to it at all.
Should I for instance tell my local Chinese and Thai takeaway place that is called the Oriental Chef that they are being racist to their own race?
Originally posted by One_Angry_Scot
Steretypes and actual racism aren't really the same. A steretype doesn't usually thereby claim superiority over another race because of it, as that would then lead to what is actually considered superior in general if at all.
Depends on the stereotype and the context. Keep in mind that "actual racism" is enabled by the society insisting in rarefying certain cultures and appearances. When you spend your time saying "these people are different" it's only a matter of time before a wacko takes it the wrong way and feels justified because "everyone can tell they are different".
All in all, why would you even defend stereotypes of any kind as a practice? It's not ingenious nor culturally interesting nor productive in any shape of form. Give them to young and idiots and they just breed negativity and hate such as fatshaming and other random form of irrational bullying does.
Originally posted by Diesldude
Well it is bad. It’s like the N word.When the Europeans came up with it, they thought that the Asians were primitive, barbaric even. China and India both have a rich history filled with innovation. Of course those old euro trade merchants didn’t know this so used the word to convey a sense of superiority to all east/ far east Asians. In the past when America was really racist people accepted it. Then when it became less racist in the 60’s and 70’s people started resenting it and then from 90’s on it became a derogatory.
I just feel like you're proving my point, tbh. No offence intended.
Originally posted by One_Angry_Scot
It's just they valued their history above other countries. Which i think many peoples do and still do today. Look at countries like China and the pride they have. Or for example in Judaism some sects believe they are [b]the chosen race. Would you be ready to call them racist.[/B]
The problem with all that logic is the colonialist mindset you need to have to make what these culture think a criterea to judge them as if they were a monolithic object. Jews get to call themselves whatever they want as long as they don't expect goys to act following those beliefs.
This is still something society struggles to get: the identity of people and their convictions do not somehow magically apply to you as a detriment. You will have terfs convinced that the existence of trans women somehow makes their womanhood less valuable, but that's just not how it works. The myth of people "imposing their identity" is absolutely ridiculous and lacks of any awareness.
Originally posted by Bentley
The problem with all that logic is the colonialist mindset you need to have to make what these culture think a criterea to judge them as if they were a monolithic object. Jews get to call themselves whatever they want as long as they don't expect goys to act following those beliefs.This is still something society struggles to get: the identity of people and their convictions do not somehow magically apply to you as a detriment. You will have terfs convinced that the existence of trans women somehow makes their womanhood less valuable, but that's just not how it works. The myth of people "imposing their identity" is absolutely ridiculous and lacks of any awareness.
Except trans identity insists gender is a construct, while feminism is rooted in the concept of female uniqueness.
They can't both be right. You can't accept that sex is fluid, while destroying narratives of female empowerment.
Originally posted by Bentley
Depends on the stereotype and the context. Keep in mind that "actual racism" is enabled by the society insisting in rarefying certain cultures and appearances. When you spend your time saying "these people are different" it's only a matter of time before a wacko takes it the wrong way and feels justified because "everyone can tell they are different".All in all, why would you even defend stereotypes of any kind as a practice? It's not ingenious nor culturally interesting nor productive in any shape of form. Give them to young and idiots and they just breed negativity and hate such as fatshaming and other random form of irrational bullying does.
First thing here would be that not all stereotypes are as offensive as others, Scottish people only eat deep fried pizzas and Mars bars, Welsh people shag sheep etc. Then you've got the ones that are more offensive to particular people. Not actually racist though. Doesn't mean you would want to go around picking on Asian people for instance, or Eastern European people.
By a wacko do you mean like a mass shooting event (just didn't 100% get what you meant there).
Because a lot of stereotypes have been weaved into brilliant comedy.Just because you defend one it doesn't mean you defend someone who says all Albanians who come into the UK are in crime gangs. Though in my case I would defend someones right to say that but in this society you will find out the results of openly declaring that. I don't think that person should though as free speech seems to supersede peoples rights to be offended by a stereotype. Thigns that aren't funny naturally run their course.
Originally posted by Bentley
The problem with all that logic is the colonialist mindset you need to have to make what these culture think a criterea to judge them as if they were a monolithic object. Jews get to call themselves whatever they want as long as they don't expect goys to act following those beliefs.This is still something society struggles to get: the identity of people and their convictions do not somehow magically apply to you as a detriment. You will have terfs convinced that the existence of trans women somehow makes their womanhood less valuable, but that's just not how it works. The myth of people "imposing their identity" is absolutely ridiculous and lacks of any awareness.
Again I don't think it comes from an entirely colonialist worldview as you put it. Take the slave trade, People aim the crosshair at white people but neglect to mention that a huge portion of the slave trade was perpetrated by Arabic empires.
And that's before we mention someone like King Gezo of Dahomey. The transgender thing is another one entirely. With your point on Jews would you then see that white people for instance can claim to be a particular epiphet as long as they keep it to themselves? And to be honest I think they (they being Israel) do expect 350 million people in the US to follow their beliefs. Or at least act in their defence. AIPAC being a particular example. Though that is kind of going off topic.
If it comes to objective judgments lets go to the extremes. Would you say the culture of Rome and all its accomplishments is greater than that of Bhutan?
Originally posted by One_Angry_Scot
I don't think that person should though as free speech seems to supersede peoples rights to be offended by a stereotype. Thigns that aren't funny naturally run their course.
Let's be clear: free speech doesn't mean that you are not going to prison if you spread dangerous information, free speech doesn't mean you get access to any platform to say stuff with no potential sanction. The current argument has nothing to do with free speech and I sure as phuck am not talking about laws and legislation.
Perpetuating division among people to make gags is an iffy justification at best: just find better jokes. The fact that you are allowed to say stereotypical jokes doesn't mean it's good to do it and that it should be celebrated, there are lot's of things like that: being a jealous boyfriend, smoking when your kids are around, etc.
Originally posted by One_Angry_Scot
Again I don't think it comes from an entirely colonialist worldview as you put it. Take the slave trade, People aim the crosshair at white people but neglect to mention that a huge portion of the slave trade was perpetrated by Arabic empires.
I get that this is a very american thing and that I'm not entirely sure of how people pretend to rationally discuss this stuff. But this is a clear problem with representation that goes for many kinds of discussions.
For example, here in France the police is racist af and people are terribly colonialist. But get a single black person to talk about racism in France and suddenly they are "bringing arguments from America" and the black person gets called racist for talking race. Which is just a cop out any way you look at it. You are not any less racist because people at the US have a different history of segregation, starting to point fingers at other countries at that point doesn't help to solve anything. The point to even have discussions about race is to get more actions towards equality, it's not a Battlezone.
Originally posted by One_Angry_Scot
If it comes to objective judgments lets go to the extremes. Would you say the culture of Rome and all its accomplishments is greater than that of Bhutan?
That's a fun comparison but why would I indulge on it? Half of my point is that the divisions people advance to make people feel bad or justify themselves are artificial and devolve into "pretend offense".
Theres a thread for this.
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=362941&pagenumber=17033#post17427112
Originally posted by BentleyVery good post 👆 Agree 100%
Let's be clear: free speech doesn't mean that you are not going to prison if you spread dangerous information, free speech doesn't mean you get access to any platform to say stuff with no potential sanction. The current argument has nothing to do with free speech and I sure as phuck am not talking about laws and legislation.Perpetuating division among people to make gags is an iffy justification at best: just find better jokes. The fact that you are allowed to say stereotypical jokes doesn't mean it's good to do it and that it should be celebrated, there are lot's of things like that: being a jealous boyfriend, smoking when your kids are around, etc.
I get that this is a very american thing and that I'm not entirely sure of how people pretend to rationally discuss this stuff. But this is a clear problem with representation that goes for many kinds of discussions.
For example, here in France the police is racist af and people are terribly colonialist. But get a single black person to talk about racism in France and suddenly they are "bringing arguments from America" and the black person gets called racist for talking race. Which is just a cop out any way you look at it. You are not any less racist because people at the US have a different history of segregation, starting to point fingers at other countries at that point doesn't help to solve anything. The point to even have discussions about race is to get more actions towards equality, it's not a Battlezone.
That's a fun comparison but why would I indulge on it? Half of my point is that the divisions people advance to make people feel bad or justify themselves are artificial and devolve into "pretend offense".
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Very good post 👆 Agree 100%
Nah, he's about half right.
What is dangerous informarion, and who gets to decide? Maybe the ruling party thinks CNN is dangerous information, so they should go to jail?
No one in America goes to prison for this. Can't speak for other countries.
Originally posted by cdtm
I mean, Shang Chi himself is that.So don't really see shit eaters point, nor why Sin would agree with it, when it would mean Shang Chi doesn't get made at all.
I mean single digit iq hillbily cross eyed inbred like you can't see any point, being a racist won't elevate you from the genetic mistake you are