the eye of Nova&#39;s mind

When I see car or train wrecks, I look away, because I don't want to look at it. I'd rather look at fuzzy woodland creatures instead

Yeah, but you're, like, sane or something.

From:

I think this goes a lot the same way debates about rape goes. Yes, men are raped. Yes, there are women who make false claims of rape, and men are victimized when that happens. However, neither of those excuse the fact that there's an unacceptable level of sexual assault going on in this country and that a change in societal attitudes about gender and sexuality is deeply needed.

Yes, there are some minorities who "play the race card." Yes, there are some Black folks (or insert minority of choice) who are think-skinned and are constantly looking for a fight about race. Yes, there are some minorities who engage in behavior that reinforces cultural stereotypes or do a disservice to the cause of racial justice.

None of that negates the facts that:
1. Racism is still alive and well in the USA. It's not just for your grandfather's generation.
2. People need to be called out and publicly censured when they make racist comments.
3. A better way of discussing and addressing racial issues in this country needs to be found (though fuck me if I know how to do it...).

From:

sorry about all the typos. The more passionate I get, the worse the typing.
-"debates about rape go"
-"thin-skinned"

From:

Yes, there are some Black folks (or insert minority of choice) who are think-skinned and are constantly looking for a fight about race.

The problem is that every time you give those people a national soap-box to spout from all it does is EMPHASIZE differences rather than smooth them over. This Imus thing would be a non-issue if it hadn't gotten the news media in a frenzy, and that frenzy has people picking sides largely by race, which does more damage to racial relations than that comment! Was his comment funny? To some people it was, to some it wasn't, but that's the case with any kind of humor. Find me a comedian who does NOT do any racially-charged jokes and I'll point out a comedian who doesn't have much of an audience. Almost all jokes have a "victim", whether it be slapstick or stand-up, but most of the victims laugh with the comic. You see jokes charged with gender stereotypes, racial stereotypes, economic stereotypes, class stereotypes, and so on, but that's just the standard. Hell, that's Carlos Mencia's stock-in-trade and he's a funny guy! He makes jokes about black people stealing the "bling" at the Olympics and the black people in the audience laugh with him because it's a compliment. Maybe it's a delivery issue, that Imus just isn't funny, but you can't say what he said was any more racist than Carlos's opening jokes.

From:

I think there are a lot of assumptions in your comments here, namely that

1. The goal should be to minimize differences.
2. That it's OK for one person to make racially-charged jokes just because another person "gets away" with it (Tu Quoque fallacy here?).
3. That people are picking sides by race.

I'm not saying you're wrong on any of those, just that they're pretty big assumptions.

From:

1) The goal should be to minimize differences OF TREATMENT. A diverse culture is fine so long as no segment of it is exclusive to outsiders, which black culture really is. You can't both say "We're different, we want to be treated differently" and "Treat us as equals." The two are mutually exclusive.

2) If it's not OK for ANYBODY to make racially-charged jokes, your first mission should be to shut down all stand-up comedy in this country. Once you do that, THEN it's fair to start banging on the doors of guys who do that on the radio. You can't call what Imus said "despicable, deplorable, unconscionable" while at the same time laughing at Chappelle's skits about Whitey. They're equally racist, but (in my opinion) neither was said in hatred like Mel Gibson's or Michael Richards's were. There's a difference racially-charged and racial-hatred charged.

From:

If you wont' watch a Chappelle show episode, how would YOU know what kind of jokes he makes? For your information, he makes racially-related jokes, but doesn't "dig on whitey." I also don't think Mencia makes (for the most part) racial-hatred jokes, he's usually making fun of racial stereotypes.

Imus wasn't being clever, he was just being racist. There's a difference between making fun of a stereotype and perpetuating it.

I'm not a big fan of the same kind of humor when it comes to gender, either. I am being consistent. I HATE the kind of standup that goes, "Oh, you know how women are. They're always doing X, Y and Z. And you know dudes are different, they're always doing A, B, and C."

From:

I HAVE seen Chappelle show episodes. Four or five. That's *why* I won't watch any more of them.

From:

guttaperk.livejournal.com

Chapelle goes around calling specific people bitches and whores?

Because that's what much of this is about. Imus did not make general statements. He called a specific group of women whores, using racial epithets.

I don't know that Chappelle et al have ever done anything similar.

From:

Chapelle goes around calling specific people bitches and whores?

Huh? I don't think so. I don't watch his show just because I don't think it's funny.

From:

Another assumption:
If you ignore it, it'll go away.

I don't think that's true. I think people need to be called out on their racist comments every time. I'm not brave enough to do it every time, but I try.

We need a climate where it's not acceptable for people to make racist comments without penalty. I'm talking social penalty, obviously. People have freedom of speech, but there's also freedom to socially sanction racist jackasses.

From:

We need a climate where it's not acceptable for people to make racist comments without penalty.

In that case it has to be all-encompassing. Racist comments (of the Gibson ilk) and racist jokes (Mencia et al) are often too close together to tell the difference. Often it's a matter of tone, delivery, context, and yes, even race of the speaker. While 90-95% of the time you can tell the difference, satire's a fine art form and often intent is the only difference between hate-speech and mockery of same, and intent isn't always easy to discern. (Especially in print form.) For example, is Apu on The Simpsons a perpetuation of a racial stereotype, or mockery of that stereotype? Or maybe both? Mockery of a thing DOES perpetuate it. Fighting over it DOES perpetuate it. You want the stereotypes and hate-speech to go away? Get rid of all of it, then. And on both sides of the aisle. No more of black guys saying, "Hey, my nigga!" to one another, no more rap songs talking about bitches and hos, no more of any of that. As long as it's perpetuated on one side, the other will use it. You don't hear Jews calling one another kikes, do you?

Picking and choosing comments to slam just because it's a slow news week makes things worse, not better. Especially when it's a guy like Imus, whose entire career was built on being a shock-jock. People listen to him HOPING to be offended, just like Howard Stern or Ice-T (back in his rapper days) or a hundred others, so when he says something offensive it's hardly a surprise. What you're talking about is basically cutting out an entire segment of "acceptable" speech, and while I think it's a great idea I don't see it happening any time soon.

From:

Please be clear that I'm not talking about censorship, but public *censure*. Calling people on unacceptably racist talk, every time, is what I'm talking about.

I realize that it can be hard to draw the line, but I think that's where you leave it up to folks to go with their conscious, whether they think, like the commenter below, that Mencia and his ilk need to go as well as the Imus-types, or whether you're OK with people who make racially-charged jokes that make fun of stereotypes while you will not support comedians, artists, and so on who make blatantly racist jokes or comments.

From:

guttaperk.livejournal.com

I really have to say that I:
- agree with
- applaud
- am heartened by
...every word that I have read, that you have posted thus far in this thread.

I am a brown-skinned Caribbean man of predominantly African (but significantly 'blended') extraction, who does not identify in the slightest with the perspectives often expressed by African-Americans on the issue of race.

Racism has been primarily an intellectual exercise for me. I've observed it, but have never really cared; I've always felt secure in my own familial/cultural/economic roots to feel primarily amused by the few instances.

I do find myself outraged more and more, however, by the blindness and hypocrisy that seems more and more to be spouted by others like me- others who have not personally been touched.

I have not been hurt by racism, but I have read and studied and looked, and its ongoing effects are clear. To deny American racism is an injustice on the order of denial of the Jewish Holocaust or of the near-extermination of Native American cultures.

Justice starts with remembrance.

From:

dionysus1999.livejournal.com

I think you've highlighted the various ways people fall into the state of denial.

"Wasn't that bad" (the get over it comments)

"That was a long time ago" (ancient history)

"They're worse than we are" (people who are worse don't get sympathy)

Honestly, I think its a good sign these type of incidents are now publicized. Maybe large segments of Americans still don't "get" racism, but maybe a few of them, each time something like this happens, will be bugged enough to try to learn what's really going on.

From:

Personally I don't really think that this is newsworthy, at least not national news. I really don't care.

And, yes, black people ARE oversensitive about racial issues. You don't get NEARLY the reaction over calling someone of the appropriate race/orientation a paisan, a wop, a spic, a dyke, a fag, or whatever as you do calling someone a nigger, even nigga to a friend. Hell, when people make fun of asian driving skills they laugh with you. When people make fun of indian accents and food *I* laugh.

I don't think we're ever going to agree on this concept of racial privilege because you insist on taking a victim mentality on behalf of your entire race. My dad came here with nothing, worked his ass off, and made something of himself. You can say, "well, black people don't have the privileges (read: money) of white people"... but that doesn't hold up at all if someone with nothing can do what my dad did. If you keep saying "We need special treatment" you'll keep GETTING special treatment... and always be treated as different.

In addition, if any person or group or race wants to be treated as equals they have to treat others as equals, and black people in particular (and Native Americans) are very EXclusive rather than inclusive. If I hang out with a group of greek or italian or jewish people I'm treated as someone who, though a guest and outsider, isn't that different. I haven't guested with too many black groups, but the treatment is different, like I'm almost an alien. It may be that black people are treated the same in white groupings, I don't know, but that needs to be dissolved from both sides, not just one, if AS A RACE black people want to be treated as equals. No minority group can emphasize differences and then expect to be treated identically as the majority. That's basically demanding that the larger group conform to the smaller, which never happens. Things like ebonics, the so-called pimp-limp, BUFU clothes, and many others serve only to emphasize differences. Sure, you can talk about "maintaining our cultural identity", but if you want to maintain an identity different from those you're living among, treating one another differently than you treat others, then how can you expect to be treated the same BY outsiders? As long as you have an in-group/out-group dynamic it's bound to go both ways. You can also talk about "how we've been downtrodden and mistreated as slaves", but that was FOUR GENERATIONS AGO! It's time to get over that and move on. The Irish were treated like shit in the 1800s, formed gangs, excluded outsiders, and so on, but they got over it and aren't nearly as sensitive to that any more. Native Americans... well, they haven't. Nor have blacks. Someone makes fun of a "jewish" nose, not even jewish people get upset because it's just biology, but you make fun of a black person's hair (if not a black person yourself) and you're crucified. That's just stupid.

From:

To be fair, my dad's become a pretty damned racist guy in the past 10 years or so, and regularly makes comments like, "Those black folks next door actually aren't too bad." As if by default, just being black, they would be. He says similar things about other races, and his take on Pakistanis is just weird.

My take on it is when you meet someone you give them a chance to show you who they are, and decide if you like them based on that showing rather than their race. However, if they don't give me that same chance, that IS showing me who they are. Living in Ann Arbor I've met, had classes with, and worked with people of practically every race there is, and almost all of them have been great. There was one guy I wasn't "Indian enough" for, two or three black people who pre-judged me because I'm not, and a few lesbians who just didn't like men, but I think that's the only times I've had problems of that nature.

From:

Are you talking in general, or really about me?

I don't like racist/intolerant speech, period. Or do I need to really go back and pull up my comments about Mel Gibson, Michael Richards, and Tim Hardaway (each of whom singled out different minorities)?

I already have problems with your reaction to my bringing up these stories. I really do. You've already admitted that you have no personal history of being discriminated against (for which you should be glad), but then you don't try to put yourself in the shoes of those who have. When I recently had a very personal and blatant racist attack, you said the person who did it "might have" gone over the top with his comments. Your reaction to the topic of racism really, really disturbs me.

From:

Your reaction to the topic of racism really, really disturbs me.

Yeah, me too. It's always been one of his less-endearing qualities to me as well.

From:

Are you talking in general, or really about me?

Sorry, that was the general "you", not the personal.

You say you don't like racist speech, but yet you like the Chappelle Show. His commentary and sketches are at LEAST as racist as any other comic, just from the other side. So it's OK to be racist as long as one is black? I know you didn't specifically say that, but you seem to be being a little inconsistent here.

Regarding your recent racist attack, the my exact quote was: "The verbal abuse was a little over the top, but as for the rest I can't see what else he could've done." Note there was no "might have been". If you're going to quote me, at least don't MISquote me. And I said I haven't been discriminated against OFTEN, not that I never have; it's just that when I have been my first reaction wasn't to make a federal case out of it. Is it annoying? Sure. Would it be worse the more often it happened? Sure. But making a huge deal every single time is probably the worst thing I could do since it just emphasizes the differences. The people who do it can then say, "See, I told you so" to their friends and thus MORE people get involved rather than less.

My reaction to the topic of racism/sexism is that I'm against anything that treats one person differently than another, whether that be a law (women having the advantage in child-custody cases in many states), a handout (affirmative action), a tradition (I can say X but you can't), a clique, or something else. Two wrongs don't make a right. If one group was badly treated in the past, treating the other group badly now doesn't make up for it. Giving one unfair advantage to offset another unfair advantage (especially one long past) doesn't balance the playing field. The ONLY way that these differences of treatment are going to go away is by treating everyone the same over a long period of time, and by not intentionally emphasizing those differences.

From:

Carlos Mencia or Dave Chappelle are making fun of racism and racists and are making fun of racial stereotypes, while Imus was just making an out-right racial slur.

I'd feel the same no matter what race the person making the comment or telling the joke was. Lenny Bruce was a white guy who was criticizing racism and forcing people to confront it with his infamous listing of racial slurs (i.e. jigaboo, kike, and so on). That's comedy-as- social critique.

Nothing of what Imus said was clever social critique; it was the equivalent of some old white bastard shouting, "Nigger," at a black person passing on the street and then saying, "Cancha take a joke?" when the passing black person becomes offended.

From:

Part of my problem with this whole thing is that I can't even FIND what Imus said. Amidst all this controversy about how bad a guy he is I can't even find his original statement! He said something about the team being "nappy-headed hos", but without the context I can't even tell if it was a slur or satire or sarcasm. And that, precisely, highlights my point: even if the context makes that statement as vile as everyone's saying it was, the fussing about it makes the issue bigger than the initial wrong ever was.

EDIT: OK, I finally found it. Those same lines would've been completely ignored if they were spouted by a rapper, or even anyone else who happened to be black, and in addition are pretty much this guy's standard schtick if I read things right. Was it racist? Yeah. But I still say it's not on the same level as the Gibson/Richards lines. This guy's like Howard Stern; controversy ==> ratings, so he says shocking things ON PURPOSE. So do rap artists, and they're paid huge money and nobody looks twice. Why are they not taken to task for every record, or even every song? You can't have that kind of double-standard. You can't. That, in itself, is at least as racist.

From:

I don't listen to rappers who perpetuate the ho/pimpin' thing either, for the most part. I listen to a few who make fun of that stereotype, though. No double-standard here.

From:

You ARE being consistent across the board. You aren't a fan of anyone who makes sweeping generalizations in their humor or derogatory comments in their art. It's those who are attacking Imus while turning a blind eye to a far more common black source of the same language that have double-standards.

From:

http://novapsyche.livejournal.com/1303590.html#cutid1

Do you feel or have you ever felt discriminated against?

simianpower -- No

Maybe you answered "no" because you hadn't felt discriminated against due to race, gender, sexual orientation, education, or socioeconomic status. Other than ageism, weight, or handicap (which I managed to leave out of the poll), I don't know what other social axis could have been bent against you. Perhaps you'll enlighten us.

"The verbal abuse was a little over the top, but as for the rest I can't see what else he could've done." Note there was no "might have been". If you're going to quote me, at least don't MISquote me.

I apologize for misquoting you. However, to me, the difference is six of one, half-dozen of the other. "A little" approximates "might have been," especially in context. And if the flagrant use of "nigger" counts only as "a little over the top" for you, I can see why you don't see the Imus controversy as important.

My reaction to the topic of racism/sexism is that I'm against anything that treats one person differently than another, whether that be a law (women having the advantage in child-custody cases in many states), a handout (affirmative action), a tradition (I can say X but you can't), a clique, or something else. (emphasis mine)

How many times have we gotten into discussions about feminism and your response has been, "That's just the way things are"? What else is that but tradition, or the status quo?

And please don't make me into the strawman of allowing Black people to use the word nigger and others not. I don't like the word at all. When I was growing up, I could have used that word in its current Black slang manner. But I didn't, and I don't. It comes out of my mouth when I'm speaking in an academic manner, or when I speak from personal experience (like the one referenced above).

Comedians who use their talents to examine racism and expose it for the hairy creature it is? Yes, I find them funny. I suppose I shouldn't blame anyone else for the fact that I listened to Richard Pryor as a child, then Eddie Murphy. But yes, I respect Dave Chappelle's sketches (particularly the black white supremicist and the Niggar family) that try to explode racism from the inside out. Like

sarahmichigan said, that's what Lenny Bruce tried to do, too. There is a big difference between examining race and participating in racism.

And, the other strawman comment you have in this thread: I don't listen to hardcore rap/hiphop with liberal uses of "nigger" or "bitches" or "hos." In fact, it was when that language started showing up more and more in rap that I turned away from that form of music. I like old school rap, like stuff from 1985. You won't hear language like that during that era. (At the same time, I don't agree with this movement to ban the word "nigger," because banning speech is impossible.) I don't support the use of such language in rap music. I vote my conscience with my pocketbook, and I can only hope others do the same.

But none of that has anything to do, really, with what Don Imus said. At best, they are tangentially related. What is at issue is racist speech going out over radio waves and television. Imus may have been trying to make a joke, but it's obvious he's not a comedian, nor is his show marketed as comedy. He wasn't trying to examine race; he was an active participant in racism. He should no longer have a job.

From:

I apologize for misquoting you. However, to me, the difference is six of one, half-dozen of the other. "A little" approximates "might have been," especially in context. And if the flagrant use of "nigger" counts only as "a little over the top" for you, I can see why you don't see the Imus controversy as important.

It is "a little" over the top. I'm sorry, but it's just a word. It has as much power over you as you let it. If you, personally, have been brought up to think it's the worst possible insult, that it has centuries of hatred behind it, that nothing could possibly be worse, then to you that's what it is. But that's YOU assigning weight to it. To me it's just a word. If he'd called you a fucking bitch I'd have also said it's "a little" over the top. It doesn't sound like he went into a ten-minute cursing diatribe.

I was taught when I was growing up that saying "shut up" was almost unforgivable, that saying "crap" was absolutely horrid... but they're not; they're just words. When I grew up I discovered that. If someone tells me to shut up, or for that matter calls me a fucking asshole or goddamned cattle-worshipping hinduspawn, I'll be offended. But it probably won't stay with me past a couple of hours later. The power of the word nigger is being kept alive solely by black culture, and to no purpose. It's rude, it's insulting, but it's not something worth agonizing about for months. It doesn't make you suddenly into a slave. It doesn't put you into a position as a lesser person except insomuch as you let it. I keep hearing from black people that the word nigger is so terrible, that it's far worse than any other racial epithet, but it's not. There are epithets for every single race, including white, and they're all equivalent. You can say, "You don't know, you aren't black, you haven't had our experience." Well, the experience that made nigger such a terrible word was slavery, and NOBODY LIVING has had that experience.

There is a big difference between examining race and participating in racism.

Sometimes. Sometimes the two come very close. I finally heard Imus's original comments on The Daily Show tonight, and it doesn't sound like he was trying to be funny. It sounds like he was trying to get a reaction. He's a shock-jock, and that's what he does. It's not like his audience is unaware of what he does. Does that make it OK? Probably not, but it does mean that picking his comments as an example of inflammatory speech is a little silly. It's like going after Howard Stern for making derogatory comments about someone's boobs; that's just what his show was about and people paid for it.

And please don't make me into the strawman of allowing Black people to use the word nigger and others not. ... I don't listen to hardcore rap/hiphop with liberal uses of "nigger" or "bitches" or "hos." ... What is at issue is racist speech going out over radio waves and television.

Voting with your wallet is a lot different than posting diatribes online about how hateful something is. When black rappers use phrases you don't like, you simply don't listen, but when an old white guy uses them you go ape. You personally, not the general you. I don't imagine you listen to the Don Imus show on a daily basis, so probably didn't hear his comments live, but you make a point to find out about things like that and post about them. You don't listen to gangsta rap songs with similar word usage, or watch the videos, but you know they're out there and DON'T make a point to post about them. That says something to me. It says that while you don't LIKE the language even used by black people, you accept its existence and dissemination. You're not a strawman for this double standard, you're an exemplar of it. You make a much bigger deal out of something said by one racial group than the same thing said by another. That IS racist. To quote a movie, "You girls have GOT to stop calling one another bitches and whores. It just makes it easier for guys to do it." The same thing applies here. You want to stop hate-speech? Stop it for everyone. Stop picking and choosing those you speak out against by their race.

From:

The n-word ONLY has power because black people are thin-skinned about it? Come ON! Do you really believe that?

You're coming off as so ignorant, I'm embarrassed to be your friend right now.

Way to blame the victim! Go you!

From:

I think you're being silly. novapsyche has pointed out other issues where she has been upset by bigotry perpetuated by other ethnic groups. She slammed a black guy who made bigoted comments about gay people, for instance. I don't think she's picking-and-choosing in a racist way; you can't hold up every example of racism/prejudice on both sides and critique them every day in your blog, or you'd go nuts.

Sometimes, a particular incident just really touchs a hot spot for you. Perhaps the fact that novapsyche was, herself, recently the target of a racial slur made her especially sensitive to Imus racial slur (not to mention how misogynist the comment was).

I think your reaction to her feelings about being the victim of race-bashing by someone in a position of power over her is really lacking in compassion, and your unwillingness or inability to empathize with people of other races and their reaction to racial slurs is astounding to me.

Maybe YOU are lining up by race on this issue, but I can assure you that many white folks are equally disgusted by racial slurs.

Really, the one point I sort of agree with you about is that getting outraged about this sort of thing can back-fire because it just gives Imus and his ilk more publicity. I think novapsyche was reacting more to the ignorant comments in response than to the initial incident, but I can't speak for her.

I'm sorry you felt I was making an ad-hominem attack in my other comment, so I'm trying to respond to the issue rather than to my (obviously strong) feelings about how you've responded to the issue.

From:

Sometimes, a particular incident just really touchs a hot spot for you.

That's a valid point. And Imus IS a jackass, so it's not like he doesn't have it coming. And I'm not saying that every single example of objectionable speech can be fought against by any one person. You're right, they'd go crazy! But when you have, say, 1000 instances in hip-hop songs every few months (which are broadcast on TV and radio) and a handful of instances by bigoted public figures, I have to say that the people to fight against are the ones with the greatest prevalence. I'm NOT saying Imus gets a pass because he's one guy in a hundred; I'm saying that however much effort you have to fight this, give him his one percent and the other 99 guys the rest. Not because they're black or white, but because of the sheer amount!

From:

Further "nigger" will never be "just a word" until we've adequately addressed race relations in this country.

Racial epithets are NOT equivalent, no matter what you say, because they have denotations and social context.

If a jailer said to a prisoner, "When you sleep, I'm going to come in there and slit your throat," those words have MUCH more power than if the prisoner said to the jailer, "When I get out of here, I'm going to catch you in your sleep and slit your throat."

The reason is that the jailer has the power, and the prisoner's threat is impotent.

With the history of racial inequality in this country, "nigger" has much more potency than any other racial slur ("Wetback" is a pretty close second considering all the racial animosity and issues with illegal immigration) because it has the baggage of the years of not just slavery, but also Jim Crow, segregation, and discrimination that continues today.

I've known people in the last few years that were denied jobs or were not shown appropriate housing because of racial discrimination (in one case, I knew this because my boss straight-out said he didn't think he'd ever hire a black sales agent), so this is not some issue that happened hundreds of years ago. This is a problem TODAY.

From:

As far as me going on a crusade against "nigger" being used in the Black community: I actually don't consider myself an active participant in the Black community. I don't self-identify as Black unless forced to (e.g., when filling out official forms). There are other activists who are deeply involved in the community who are trying to change things. I applaud their efforts (though, again, I think the current movement to ban the use of racial language is misguided and doomed to fail).

I also hesitate to interfere with the creation and production of art. Music--even rap--is art, and I support the right of artists to create and reflect what they view as reality. (Imus is not an artist, by any means.)

Like I've said before, Imus has a right to speak whatever is in his heart. He just doesn't have a right to say it over the air. Public airwaves are protected, regulated space. To permit his speech to go unpunished (and a two-week suspension is a slap on the wrist as far as punishment goes) is tacit permission for any other person in radio or TV to do the same.

It's wrong to use racial epithets as insults, across the board. I've never wavered in this stance. I am not being hypocritical, and I take offense of you accusing me of being so.

From:

I don't self-identify as Black unless forced to

That is, I generally don't. My LJ profile lists my race, mainly as a way to let potential readers have a sense of why I do post things about race and why I might have the stance that I do.

From:

I understood what you meant.

From:

As far as me going on a crusade...

I addressed this above. I don't see that as a black or white issue, but simply an issue of numbers of instances. And I agree that banning language will fail if it's done by legislation. But if it's done at a grass-roots level by record companies, that might make a huge difference. If young black men (and women, but I think this is mostly men) don't hear about bitches and hos and niggers in every song they listen to, maybe they will stop using that language themselves and thus, over time, other people may also stop using it. That's my hope, anyway. And no, I'm not saying it's all the fault of the media, just like violence isn't the fault of video games, but the prevalence of that kind of language in rap/hip-hop is frankly scary, and what it does to the music video industry is worse. In particular the after-hours videos (I forget the correct term) which are basically sanctioned misogyny festivals.

The problem is it's very hard to unbottle the genie, and that language and attitude HAS crept into the music and art, so where does that leave us? Black women in particular are being hurt by this, other women and black men to a lesser extent, and white men practically not at all. And it's the white men running the record companies. So how can this be fought? You personally fight it by voting with your wallet, but it's going to take a lot MORE people doing that, and letting the record companies know why, to get them to change. I've never had much of a belief in boycotts alone, but as part of a concerted, SUSTAINED effort it might hit them where it hurts. There are crusaders out there doing that, as you say, but more is better. You have not only an interest in the subject, but a vested interest in making this better. I guess we just disagree about the methods. I see your posts attacking white racists (and male sexists and straight gay-bashers for that matter), but nothing about the most prevalent source of public hate-speech, so it does look like you're picking and choosing your targets. As S said above, this one may have just struck a chord, so I apologize for calling your tactics racist.

Public airwaves are protected, regulated space.

That also have caustic lyrics spouted on many stations/channels. Just because a syllable or two are bleeped out doesn't mean people don't realize what's being said.

From:

There's a difference between starting from zero and starting from -10 and working your way up. If someone comes here from another country with "nothing", but they aren't starting off with a negative, that's a lot different than starting out with negatives on your score card.

Sure, slavery happened many years ago, but segregation and Jim Crow weren't all that long ago, and the effects still linger. It's a given that people who start off as working class have a harder time getting ahead and jumping up in the class framework because they not only start with less money, but less connections, less institutionalized knowledge about how to network, and so on. All those things apply to working class Blacks, AND they also bear the negatives of racial stereotypes about them, assumptions that they can't speak proper English, and so on.

From:

Maybe being here in AA and before that Warren is skewing my perspective, but I don't see the -10. Maybe it's BECAUSE there is such a large minority population here. It's possible that the south is a lot different, but what I see here is black people being treated pretty much like whites, asians, greeks, indians, lesbians, geeks, and martians.

I also don't see someone coming FROM OVERSEAS as having less connections/money than someone from the working class. Maybe less expectations. My dad, putz though he may be, washed dishes for years just to get by. He wasn't even a citizen, so I don't think he was even eligible for wellfare. And he couldn't (and to be honest still can't) speak proper English, if by proper you mean unaccented. Sometimes even I have to ask him to repeat himself on the phone. Starting with no money is one thing, but starting with no money, connections, citizenship, etc is a lot harder... but it's harder still if you have high expectations. The so-called American dream is something that was handed to me, so I can't entirely see it from the other side, but it wasn't handed to him any more than it is to a working-class black.

From:

pstscrpt.livejournal.com

black people in particular (and Native Americans) are very EXclusive rather than inclusive... that needs to be dissolved from both sides, not just one, if AS A RACE black people want to be treated as equals... Things like ebonics, the so-called pimp-limp, BUFU clothes, and many others serve only to emphasize differences... As long as you have an in-group/out-group dynamic it's bound to go both ways.

This is also a function of class, and to a lesser extent, age and gender. Every young black man I've ever seen in Hamtramck seems to behave as you describe, along with a lot of the women (I'm not sure it's as exclusionary as you think, though -- they're pretty nasty to each other, too). My son's school, on the other hand, is majority black (or maybe biracial), and none of the parents or teachers are like that at all.

From:

vrax.livejournal.com

"I really fear for the future of my country."

Shit, I fear for the present.

I remember the first time I went to a corner store with my best friend as a kid. I noticed that one of the clerks was following us, which seemed odd and foreign to me at the time. I asked my friend "Hey man, why do you think that guy's watching us?" He answered "Because I'm black."

That was my first experience with racial discrimination but it wouldn't be my last.

Imus needs to go. Frankly, Mencia should go too. There's nothing wrong with pointing out, and reveling in, the differences that we all bring to the table, but when any joke or punchline relies on a negative stereotype for effect I think that's just hate speech with a smily face on it.

Chappelle is not in the same category as Mencia when it comes to productive racial commentary as comedy. There is a difference there folks.

The big issue, for me at any rate, is doing something to eliminate the constant boogeyman fear-mongering on the nightly news. How many times do I have to hear "An unidentified black male"? When will they change the 'rules' of broadcasting to allow single victim non-white murders to be covered. Or robberies committed by whites. And we've got to do something about the fact that more and more minority males are spending more and more of their lives incarcerated.

Oh goodness, I could go on forever. Anyway,

novapsyche, it's not silly to fight the good fight, nor to keep watching lest an opportunity go unnoticed.

From: