It cuts both ways, though. If he said something along the lines of "Don't pay it any mind, it's just black moms complaining..." people would be up in arms.
Definition of racism for you:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism I met enough black people in New Orleans that were racist against blacks of darker skin color to know someone can be racist against their own color.
Ok, let's grab that definition of racism:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
Duncan didn't make any comments concerning race in terms of capabilities of people, nor was he saying anything prejudiced against whites.
He made a silly generalization about what groups oppose education standards, but it's pretty tough to tie statements aimed at white suburban moms as referring to the entire white population, considering many whites aren't suburban or moms.
If you had characterized his comments as sexist, you'd have more ammo.
When the evidence of outrage is a petition with a whopping 2,000 signatures, and a quote from Michelle Malkin, it should become clear that not even Republicans can pretend to give a gak about this.
And if you actually read what he said and the surrounding comments, he's talking about people who are threatened that the school district they bought in to isn't as good as they had thought. In that context white doesn't actually make much sense, because lots of white people don't do that, because they're not middle class, and lots of black people do do it, because they are middle class. The guy is actually using 'white' instead of 'middle class'. Which is, if we were to really stretch things to try and make some kind of news story about this, an indication that the guy still thinks in terms of 'white = middle class' and 'black = working class'.
Of course, that doesn't suit the pretend outrage of the FOX news crowd though, who are desperate to find something, anything that lets them think that white people are oppressed, so that's ignored.
Definition of racism for you:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism I met enough black people in New Orleans that were racist against blacks of darker skin color to know someone can be racist against their own color.
Ok, let's grab that definition of racism:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
Duncan didn't make any comments concerning race in terms of capabilities of people, nor was he saying anything prejudiced against whites.
He made a silly generalization about what groups oppose education standards, but it's pretty tough to tie statements aimed at white suburban moms as referring to the entire white population, considering many whites aren't suburban or moms.
If you had characterized his comments as sexist, you'd have more ammo.
The is also the definition from Webster:
: poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race
: the belief that some races of people are better than others
I would say his offhand statement that it's just a bunch of white suburban soccer moms complaining rates as bad treatment. Definitly true about the sexist point, also. People complained about Romney being out of touch with his 47% comment, yet allowing this kind of statement to go by without thinking twice about it is fairly strange. Any Republican saying something like this would be getting dragged through the dirt by now.
Definition of racism for you: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism I met enough black people in New Orleans that were racist against blacks of darker skin color to know someone can be racist against their own color.
Ok, let's grab that definition of racism:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
Duncan didn't make any comments concerning race in terms of capabilities of people, nor was he saying anything prejudiced against whites.
He made a silly generalization about what groups oppose education standards, but it's pretty tough to tie statements aimed at white suburban moms as referring to the entire white population, considering many whites aren't suburban or moms.
If you had characterized his comments as sexist, you'd have more ammo.
I can't believe that both of you have shown such a complete and thorough disability to actually look at a story objectively and realize what is really happening.
Racism? Sexism? I would laugh if I wasn't crushed by the loss of my faith in the ability of the human race to actually read a story and be able to determine what is actually happening. I can't believe that you guys are both just sitting here concentrating on -isms just because you both fail to peel back the layers and realize what the real problem is.
I can't believe that both of you have shown such a complete and thorough disability to actually look at a story objectively and realize what is really happening.
Racism? Sexism? I would laugh if I wasn't crushed by the loss of my faith in the ability of the human race to actually read a story and be able to determine what is actually happening. I can't believe that you guys are both just sitting here concentrating on -isms just because you both fail to peel back the layers and realize what the real problem is.
Definition of racism for you:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism I met enough black people in New Orleans that were racist against blacks of darker skin color to know someone can be racist against their own color.
Ok, let's grab that definition of racism:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
Duncan didn't make any comments concerning race in terms of capabilities of people, nor was he saying anything prejudiced against whites.
He made a silly generalization about what groups oppose education standards, but it's pretty tough to tie statements aimed at white suburban moms as referring to the entire white population, considering many whites aren't suburban or moms.
If you had characterized his comments as sexist, you'd have more ammo.
I can't believe that both of you have shown such a complete and thorough disability to actually look at a story objectively and realize what is really happening.
Racism? Sexism? I would laugh if I wasn't crushed by the loss of my faith in the ability of the human race to actually read a story and be able to determine what is actually happening. I can't believe that you guys are both just sitting here concentrating on -isms just because you both fail to peel back the layers and realize what the real problem is.
Clearly it is class warfare
Once again, d-usa cuts directly to the heart of the matter.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
People like you are disgusting.
Racism is racism, period. It doesn't matter what color you are. As soon as everyone can accept that, the quicker it will dissapear.
Arne Duncan is a fool that hasn't ever had his own classroom and the exact opposite of the type of person that should be making education decisions in this country.
As to common core: Just give this a listen if you haven't seen it already.
Boiling racism down to a collection of magic words that cannot be said, and ignoring the real impacts systemic racism has on people's lives is inane.
In effect, you end up pretending that one person can say the n word while someone else can't is an issue equal to black people earning on average about 2/3 of what white people earn.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cincydooley wrote: Arne Duncan is a fool that hasn't ever had his own classroom and the exact opposite of the type of person that should be making education decisions in this country.
Thing is, I think common core, and the general idea of education solutions should be imposed from a bureaucracy above, are straight up bad ideas.
Which is a large part of why pretend contraversies like 'he said white' are so fething annoying. There's a real issue here that needs to be discussed.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
People like you are disgusting.
Racism is racism, period. It doesn't matter what color you are. As soon as everyone can accept that, the quicker it will dissapear.
My point isn't that racism isn't bad my point it is that white people on average are not as effected as negatively as other races (at least in Canada and the US), if you want to look at real racial issues how about racial profiling of blacks by police, the earning inequalities of different races, laws
involving first nations, racial profiling of brown people by airports, Islamophobia, mistreatment of Filipino live-in care givers in Canada, black women who spend thousands of dollars to make the hair look like a white person's hair, etc not some guy making an awkward comment about white
soccer moms. At some point white people have to quit being phony about race and admit that being white just makes life easier (at least in Canada and the US) we dominate pretty much every industry like entertainment, politics, corporations, etc. Btw, that's not to say whites aren't effected
by racism but you have to be delusional to think that racism that effects whites is on the same level as other races (at least in Canada and the US) or that all forms of racism are equally bad as one and other.
When did airports become sentient and start racially profiling people, friggin skynet is here allready.
Lets get right down to it people. All people are racist. Anyone who thinks white people are the only racist people clearly has not worked as a minority in a workplace...get out more. I had years of people calling me white scum to my face.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
Summed on second post.
sebster wrote: The guy is actually using 'white' instead of 'middle class'.
The comments in this thread about racism against whites or sexism being a non issue totaly justify that guy pretending he was black to win an election.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
People like you are disgusting.
Racism is racism, period. It doesn't matter what color you are. As soon as everyone can accept that, the quicker it will dissapear.
Exalted.
Your skin color is your skin color, which is a genetic trait. You don't see the straight haired people ganging up on the curly hairs and vice versa. The blue eyes aren't in a war with the brown.
Class stereotypes are falsely attributed to being racial qualities far too often.
I love the part where he says he wants to "encourage a difficult conversation". What he really meant was that he wanted to make conversation for those who disagree with him difficult, so he decided to steryotype and marginalize them.
Again, I have no idea how someone that never taught and never went to a public school or worked in a public school is qualified to be our secretary of education.
You know what's sick? Only one secretary of Ed since the position was created in the carter admin has ever worked in a school.
The is also the definition from Webster:
: poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race
: the belief that some races of people are better than others
I would say his offhand statement that it's just a bunch of white suburban soccer moms complaining rates as bad treatment. Definitly true about the sexist point, also. People complained about Romney being out of touch with his 47% comment, yet allowing this kind of statement to go by without thinking twice about it is fairly strange. Any Republican saying something like this would be getting dragged through the dirt by now.
I mean, I think when they said bad treatment they meant something along the lines of segregation or making people sit at the back of the bus, not making an offhand comment about a very small portion of a race.
And he's not attributing the complaining to whites, he's attributing it to white suburban moms. Again, his comments were targeted at a specific group, not a whole racial group. You could say he's prejudiced against suburban moms who are white, and like I said, you could even argue he's being sexist by saying that women are complainers here, but when you look at it racially, white suburban moms are too small a part of the total makeup of "whites" for his offhand comment to be considered racist. Heck, one could argue he's prejudiced against suburban people too, they're one of the things listed.
Like, if I said that white country dads are lazy (for the record, I'm not actually saying that), does that make me racist against whites? Or just prejudiced against white country dads and not other whites?
I'm not saying it wasn't an inartful statement deserving of some flakk, but racist is just reaching.
It's bad in general just some is worse than others.
I hope you understand how awful this sounds, and how true civil rights crusaders like Dr King would abhor that statement.
You don't get to put racism on a scale of bad to good.
I'm pretty sure Martin Luther would recognize the difference in the amount of unfair treatment when it comes to slavery of black people in America vs some guy making awkward statements about "white soccer mom's", I know which racial issue I would be more concerned about.
I know it would be considered bad treatment by most here, myself included if he made such a sweeping comment about black urban moms, making it seem that in the first place, black moms aren't worth listening to, and in the second place they are the only ones complaining.
Being marginalized and ignored with race and sex listed as reasons for the treatment, compounding this arrogance, is not good treatment by a government for it's people.
It's bad in general just some is worse than others.
I hope you understand how awful this sounds, and how true civil rights crusaders like Dr King would abhor that statement.
You don't get to put racism on a scale of bad to good.
I'm pretty sure Martin Luther would recognize the difference in the amount of unfair treatment when it comes to slavery of black people in America vs some guy making awkward statements about "white soccer mom's", I know which racial issue I would be more concerned about.
Well never know, but I can honestly say I don't think he would recognize it. He would most probably say all racism is bad and equal.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
People like you are disgusting.
Racism is racism, period. It doesn't matter what color you are. As soon as everyone can accept that, the quicker it will dissapear.
Exalted.
Your skin color is your skin color, which is a genetic trait. You don't see the straight haired people ganging up on the curly hairs and vice versa. The blue eyes aren't in a war with the brown.
Class stereotypes are falsely attributed to being racial qualities far too often.
There's more to racism than just different skin (nor is that the only quality that people use to define certain races), also there's many problems with "Color Blindness" theory Wikipedia has an interesting article on it under the "Criticism of color blindness" section.
It's bad in general just some is worse than others.
I hope you understand how awful this sounds, and how true civil rights crusaders like Dr King would abhor that statement.
You don't get to put racism on a scale of bad to good.
I'm pretty sure Martin Luther would recognize the difference in the amount of unfair treatment when it comes to slavery of black people in America vs some guy making awkward statements about "white soccer mom's", I know which racial issue I would be more concerned about.
I think he would not approve of a man who slipped up and revealed that he doesn't think twice about being prejudiced against a group of people. Remember hearing his speeches about "black and white together"? I never heard anywhere in any of his speeches where he mentioned leaving anyone out because of race or sex.
So only suburban white moms pay attention to their kids education and will be upset if their kids are getting a poor education? So I guess inner-city minority moms don't care about their kids and need the government to implement common core?
There really was no reason to call out a demographic by gender and race unless his goal was to marginalized them, which was exactly his goal... To make their criticism invalid by discounting them in whole...
Some feel the reason why "common core" will show their school to be inferior, is because it will lower the standard and make their school inferior. So instead of trying to show evidence that their fears are potentially false, let's just attack and discount them as a whole.
There is a reason people use the term "political" to describe language designed not to be offensive. Because you can get your point across without having destroy your credibility because of "the way you said it" which is what he has done and harmed his agenda.
Relapse wrote: I never heard anywhere in any of his speeches where he mentioned leaving anyone out because of race or sex.
MLK supported affirmative action, which, by definition leaves at least someones out.
Anyway, another day in the OT. The usual suspects fish for today's Obama outrage, hook a little one, decide while it's not normally a keeper it's better than an empty plate, and throw it in the cooler.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
People like you are disgusting.
Racism is racism, period. It doesn't matter what color you are. As soon as everyone can accept that, the quicker it will dissapear.
My point isn't that racism isn't bad my point it is that white people on average are not as effected as negatively as other races (at least in Canada and the US), if you want to look at real racial issues how about racial profiling of blacks by police, the earning inequalities of different races, laws
involving first nations, racial profiling of brown people by airports, Islamophobia, mistreatment of Filipino live-in care givers in Canada, black women who spend thousands of dollars to make the hair look like a white person's hair, etc not some guy making an awkward comment about white
soccer moms. At some point white people have to quit being phony about race and admit that being white just makes life easier (at least in Canada and the US) we dominate pretty much every industry like entertainment, politics, corporations, etc. Btw, that's not to say whites aren't effected
by racism but you have to be delusional to think that racism that effects whites is on the same level as other races (at least in Canada and the US) or that all forms of racism are equally bad as one and other.
Basically so. Years ago, I wondered why white pride is frowned upon quite often. Then I realized that we don't deserve pride, we've got too much pride as it is; just look at all the damage we've done.
Also, the comment clearly wasn't an attempt to discount the experiences of white suburbanites. Quite the reverse: Duncan said that white suburbanites who have staked so much -- like a mortgage -- on their children's education (among other reasons, if we read between the lines, because they can afford to) do not appreciate finding out that investment may not be paying off because their kids are not doing as well in light of a national context.
Manchu wrote: Also, the comment clearly wasn't an attempt to discount the experiences of white suburbanites. Quite the reverse: Duncan said that white suburbanites who have staked so much -- like a mortgage -- on their children's education (among other reasons, if we read between the lines, because they can afford to) do not appreciate finding out that investment may not be paying off because their kids are not doing as well in light of a national context.
Manchu wrote: Also, the comment clearly wasn't an attempt to discount the experiences of white suburbanites. Quite the reverse: Duncan said that white suburbanites who have staked so much -- like a mortgage -- on their children's education (among other reasons, if we read between the lines, because they can afford to) do not appreciate finding out that investment may not be paying off because their kids are not doing as well in light of a national context.
A now some set of common core standards, arbitrarily created by a panel of non-educators, is going to tell them their districts are no longer as good, and that's acceptable?
So districts that were "good" under the previous standards could potentially now be underperforming? What kind of sense does that make?
Common core is garbage, people around the country, white and black, poor and rich, are realizing its garbage as districts start to implement the programs, and this is Duncan trying to deflect that fact by saying soccer moms are less concerned with the actual education and more concerned with how it's going to affect their property value.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I encourage you all to read this:
cincydooley wrote: saying soccer moms are less concerned with the actual education and more concerned with how it's going to affect their property value
No, that isn't what he said either. He spoke to people thinking they had invested in a good community for the sake of schooling their children being faced with the prospect that their investment may in fact (and whether it is a fact is certainly a separate issue) be so good.
Bullockist wrote: Lets get right down to it people. All people are racist. Anyone who thinks white people are the only racist people clearly has not worked as a minority in a workplace...get out more. I had years of people calling me white scum to my face.
Everybody, and every ethnic group is racist. No argument there. But the impacts of that racism are not felt equally by all. If I walk through an area with lots of non-white people and get a few stares, well thhen I keep walking, soon arrive at a majority white area and forget about the experience. That isn't the same thing as a black guy interviewing for a job and finding the interviewer has a lot of pre-conceived racial notions.
In the first situation, the people staring at me as I walk are probably being more racist, but the impact of the second situation is much greater. And given that the higher up the corporate food chain you go the higher the percentage of white people, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out who suffers the most impact from racism.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cincydooley wrote: You don't get to put racism on a scale of bad to good.
No, but you do recognise how some incidents impact people's lives more than other incidents. I mean, a guy getting called a racist word is not the same thing as a lynching.
sebster wrote: And given that the higher up the corporate food chain you go the higher the percentage of white people, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out who suffers the most impact from racism.
nkelsch wrote: So only suburban white moms pay attention to their kids education and will be upset if their kids are getting a poor education? So I guess inner-city minority moms don't care about their kids and need the government to implement common core?
No, you're deliberately misreading the comment to invent a false outrage. He is saying that the belief that one's school is better than it really is, is held by suburban white mums, and not by inner city minority mums. Which doesn't mean minority mums don't care about their kid's education, it means they don't hold overly optimistic opinions of the schools they send their kids to.
All of which may or may not be true, but is a million miles from what you were trying to pretend he stated.
No, but you do recognise how some incidents impact people's lives more than other incidents. I mean, a guy getting called a racist word is not the same thing as a lynching.
Certainly. But that's not what more than a few people here have said. We've read at least two people say that racism against whites is more acceptable than racism against minorities, which is shocking to me.
All racism is bad. Minorities certainly are affected by it more often than the white suburban soccer mom, but that doesn't make it "okay" when she is subjected to it, which is what some folks in this thread seem to be saying.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So wanted this to be "Obama's racy and sexy education secretary"...
First few times I read the title before I opened the thread were read as 'racist and sexy secretary', and I imagined a thread where people where weighing the pros and cons and coming to a conclusion of whether or not she/he was good looking enough to make up for the racism.
cincydooley wrote: Certainly. But that's not what more than a few people here have said. We've read at least two people say that racism against whites is more acceptable than racism against minorities, which is shocking to me.
All racism is bad. Minorities certainly are affected by it more often than the white suburban soccer mom, but that doesn't make it "okay" when she is subjected to it, which is what some folks in this thread seem to be saying.
I don't believe that's what was said. Those posters are welcome to come in and clarify, but I didn't read it as 'more acceptable', and 'something that's a lot less likely to get me to care'.
But then I think this thread is falling in to the old trap of moralising about racism... I don't know if that's the word, but there's this tendency to make racism about certain magic words that cannot be said, and shouting at people who dare utter those words. I think of the example of the business manager who would never say the n-word, and would be outraged at anyone who ever did... but when he interviews a young black guy who is otherwise very well qualified for a position, he finds his manner a little too casual given his skin colour, and thinks he might bother some of his older patrons and so passes on the guy.
The way this story has been treated is just like that. People are making some weird internet drama over this guy describing people as white, but spending no time either looking at the context in which it was said (it was effectively used in place of middle class... and if there's anything to be bothered about here it's that), or how this works in the context of the real world - no-one's life is materially impacted by him saying white, in the scheme of racial issues this just doesn't register.
My point isn't that racism isn't bad my point it is that white people on average are not as effected as negatively as other races
Given that white people tend to live in countries where they make up the majority I should hope so as it would mean a huge amount of racism on the part of other races otherwise. As it is, averages don't do much for the white guy who's just had his head kicked in by a gang of black people simply because he was white. Please consider that the victims are not part of some monolithic cultural block, they get no more support because they're white than a victim of any other race.
In regards common core, so long as the standards are maintained or improved, that is what should matter. Examples of where these schools have fallen down would also help in understanding what the problem is. Are they failing to teach technical and core subjects to an acceptable degree, or are they failing on some socially related subject.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So wanted this to be "Obama's racy and sexy education secretary"...
First few times I read the title before I opened the thread were read as 'racist and sexy secretary', and I imagined a thread where people where weighing the pros and cons and coming to a conclusion of whether or not she/he was good looking enough to make up for the racism.
Like that Greek triple jumper who got expelled from the Olympics?
H.B.M.C. wrote: So wanted this to be "Obama's racy and sexy education secretary"...
First few times I read the title before I opened the thread were read as 'racist and sexy secretary', and I imagined a thread where people where weighing the pros and cons and coming to a conclusion of whether or not she/he was good looking enough to make up for the racism.
Like that Greek triple jumper who got expelled from the Olympics?
You can't say that without supplying a picture for the debate...
H.B.M.C. wrote: So wanted this to be "Obama's racy and sexy education secretary"...
First few times I read the title before I opened the thread were read as 'racist and sexy secretary', and I imagined a thread where people where weighing the pros and cons and coming to a conclusion of whether or not she/he was good looking enough to make up for the racism.
Like that Greek triple jumper who got expelled from the Olympics?
You can't say that without supplying a picture for the debate...
Done.
Greek triple jumper Voula Papachristou wrote:With so many Africans in Greece… At least the West Nile mosquitoes will eat home made food!!!
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
People like you are disgusting.
Racism is racism, period. It doesn't matter what color you are. As soon as everyone can accept that, the quicker it will dissapear.
Lets be mellow now, Cheesecat is a pasty Canadian without benefit of queso, its not his fault.
First of all, I'm not impressed with Mr Duncan and his top-down approach to education. It's just more of the same failed Bush Education policies in a different wrapper.
That said, the comment wasn't that extreme. "White Suburban Mom's". aka "Soccer Moms" is a farily common way of grouping a certain affluent section of the population. He's expressing surpise that those folks are arguing against the raising of education standards.
For all we know, maybe a fair amount pushback is coming from white suburban moms. Why would it be racist to say so?
The only possible offense here is being somewhat condescending with the:
"all of a sudden -- their child isn't as brilliant as they thought they were and their school isn't quite as good as they thought they were, and that's pretty scary,"
line which assumes that these moms don't have a proper perspective on how raising standards will affect thier children.
Condescending, perhaps, but unless someone has proof that he hasn't gotten pushback from White Suburban Moms, it's hardly an open and shut case of racism.
Separately,
As for the racist issue that folks are going back and forth about, I will only say that two things are true.
1) All racism is Morally wrong.
2) In the USA, the Practical effects of Racism are more severe for Minorities than for White Americans.
yea I don't see any problem with a secretary, a government employee, publicly insulting a portion of the American public based on their gender and where they live. Anyone who has a problem with that will next start whining to me about those people again.
And why are we still talking about politics and race when we could be posting pictures of other hottie racist athletes from countries around the world? It boggles my mind.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
FIFY
No, that doesn't make any sense as my original distinction of using the word "white" was very deliberate as the racial issues we face are usually quite minor (at least in Canada and USA) compared to other races.
It's bad in general just some is worse than others.
right,
its like how when someone you dont care about had racist comments made about them, that isnt too bad,
but when its someone you DO care about, then its bad.
No, I don't like people making racist comments in general, but I'm not naive enough to think that calling a white person "Cracker" is anywhere as bad as say the Canadian government's practices on aboriginals.
Cheesecat wrote: My ability to feel sorry for white people who feel they're being persecuted due to their race is close to zero, this article is a non-issue to me.
In this age of "racial sensitivity" white people don't socially have the ability to call any disagreement with them racism. Which is racism in more than one instance here.
Eilif wrote: First of all, I'm not impressed with Mr Duncan and his top-down approach to education. It's just more of the same failed Bush Education policies in a different wrapper.
That said, the comment wasn't that extreme. "White Suburban Mom's". aka "Soccer Moms" is a farily common way of grouping a certain affluent section of the population. He's expressing surpise that those folks are arguing against the raising of education standards.
For all we know, maybe a fair amount pushback is coming from white suburban moms. Why would it be racist to say so?
The only possible offense here is being somewhat condescending with the:
"all of a sudden -- their child isn't as brilliant as they thought they were and their school isn't quite as good as they thought they were, and that's pretty scary,"
line which assumes that these moms don't have a proper perspective on how raising standards will affect thier children.
Condescending, perhaps, but unless someone has proof that he hasn't gotten pushback from White Suburban Moms, it's hardly an open and shut case of racism.
Separately,
As for the racist issue that folks are going back and forth about, I will only say that two things are true.
1) All racism is Morally wrong.
2) In the USA, the Practical effects of Racism are more severe for Minorities than for White Americans.
That pretty much nails the whole thing down perfectly. Brilliant post.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ThePrimordial wrote: In this age of "racial sensitivity" white people don't socially have the ability to call any disagreement with them racism. Which is racism in more than one instance here.
The desperate need for people who suffer little or no disadvantage to believe that are at least as hard done by as the genuinely disadvantaged is incredible.
I have to strongly disagree with you, Sebster. It is inexcusable for the government to marginalize and blow off with such disrespect any portion of it's society.
Maybe it's just me talking as a citizen of this country with a belief that all people in it should be accorded dignity and respect without being steryotyped in the fashion that happened.
If he had said the same thing about black people that oppose this curriculum, he would have had a pink slip on his desk within the hour. By saying what he did, aside from being sexist and racist, he put forward the idea the only people that oppose core curriculum are white suburban women, which is not true.
I wonder how many of these women that were disrespected, as well as those who oppose the curriculum will vote Democrat in the mid terms now that they see how well they are being represented?
Eilif wrote: First of all, I'm not impressed with Mr Duncan and his top-down approach to education. It's just more of the same failed Bush Education policies in a different wrapper.
That said, the comment wasn't that extreme. "White Suburban Mom's". aka "Soccer Moms" is a farily common way of grouping a certain affluent section of the population. He's expressing surpise that those folks are arguing against the raising of education standards.
For all we know, maybe a fair amount pushback is coming from white suburban moms. Why would it be racist to say so?
The only possible offense here is being somewhat condescending with the:
"all of a sudden -- their child isn't as brilliant as they thought they were and their school isn't quite as good as they thought they were, and that's pretty scary,"
line which assumes that these moms don't have a proper perspective on how raising standards will affect thier children.
Condescending, perhaps, but unless someone has proof that he hasn't gotten pushback from White Suburban Moms, it's hardly an open and shut case of racism.
Separately,
As for the racist issue that folks are going back and forth about, I will only say that two things are true.
1) All racism is Morally wrong.
2) In the USA, the Practical effects of Racism are more severe for Minorities than for White Americans.
That pretty much nails the whole thing down perfectly. Brilliant post.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ThePrimordial wrote: In this age of "racial sensitivity" white people don't socially have the ability to call any disagreement with them racism. Which is racism in more than one instance here.
The desperate need for people who suffer little or no disadvantage to believe that are at least as hard done by as the genuinely disadvantaged is incredible.
Someone missed an underlying point.
Race in America has nothing to do with how well off you are.
There are no apartments within a hundred miles of where I went to school, where I moved to , and where my daughter goes to school and there is an equal race distribution.
Someone who's black isn't disadvantaged because he's black. He might not try, he might not be intelligent, or athletic. These are actual disadvantages.The same goes for white people.
Racial sensitivity is a ouroboros (self destructive) concept because it treats people with sympathy because of their race, but this is still technically racism. Because Racism is treating someone's race like a part of what defines them or giving it any credence or importance at all. That's the definition.
I have loaded white friends and loaded black friends, and comments are only made about race jokingly. Why? It doesn't matter!!! All of these men tried hard to distinguish themselves from their peers by grades, perseverance, and planning and received payment for it.
In conclusion stop fighting a battle that has not existed for a good 10-15 years, because in America, race doesn't matter. Except Muslims. Ahhhhhh America.......
Relapse wrote: I have to strongly disagree with you, Sebster. It is inexcusable for the government to marginalize and blow off with such disrespect any portion of it's society.
It was a crass and needless comment, and should not have been said, for sure.
But focusing in on the word 'white' and pretending that therefore white people were marginalised and hard done by is simply nonsense. Read the comment - he's talking about middle class people. The only racism in the comment is the implication that white = middle class.
But of course that's been missed, and instead we're watching lots of concern and worry about how white people have been so hard done by.
ThePrimordial wrote: Someone missed an underlying point.
Race in America has nothing to do with how well off you are.
There is a massive difference in average earnings for black and white households.
Someone who's black isn't disadvantaged because he's black. He might not try, he might not be intelligent, or athletic. These are actual disadvantages.The same goes for white people.
Except, as mentioned above, there is a massive difference in earnings between black and white households, with black households earning on average 2/3 of what white households earn. Now, either black people have some kind of inherent disadvantage in intelligence or athleticism or laziness, or there remains a deeper problem.
Because Racism is treating someone's race like a part of what defines them or giving it any credence or importance at all. That's the definition.
Nonsense. You can belong to a culture, and people can recognise that culture without it being in any discriminatory. Just the other night I was watching a show about end of life care, and a Chinese lady was talking about how she decided what she would and wouldn't tell her father who was dying, because in her culture at that point they take responsibility. Recognising that basic cultural difference isn't racism, and it isn't racism for hospitals to learn how different cultures treat end of life care so they can better work with those cultures.
Racism means believing stupid, incorrect things about an ethnicity. Recognising actual, real differences in how cultures behave is not racism.
I have loaded white friends and loaded black friends, and comments are only made about race jokingly. Why? It doesn't matter!!! All of these men tried hard to distinguish themselves from their peers by grades, perseverance, and planning and received payment for it.
When I played cricket in the country the jokes between the white and black players in our team were hilarious. And the team all got on great, and honestly it was more for the friendship than the cricket that we got together (we never bloody won). But all of that changes not one fething thing about the problems in our country with aboriginal imprisonment rates and aboriginal poverty.
Just because some white and black people get along doesn't change the structural disadvantages one group experiences.
In conclusion stop fighting a battle that has not existed for a good 10-15 years, because in America, race doesn't matter. Except Muslims. Ahhhhhh America.......
No, seriously, go and read. Look up the different rates of income.
Relapse wrote: I have to strongly disagree with you, Sebster. It is inexcusable for the government to marginalize and blow off with such disrespect any portion of it's society.
It was a crass and needless comment, and should not have been said, for sure.
But focusing in on the word 'white' and pretending that therefore white people were marginalised and hard done by is simply nonsense. Read the comment - he's talking about middle class people. The only racism in the comment is the implication that white = middle class.
But of course that's been missed, and instead we're watching lots of concern and worry about how white people have been so hard done by.
What he has done is take anyone who disagrees with core curriculum and steryotyped them as white surburban women, whether they are or not. It is no wonder among suburbanites, Obama's approval rating has dropped to 37%.
Arrogance has a price, dearee!
ThePrimordial wrote: Someone missed an underlying point.
Race in America has nothing to do with how well off you are.
There is a massive difference in average earnings for black and white households.
Someone who's black isn't disadvantaged because he's black. He might not try, he might not be intelligent, or athletic. These are actual disadvantages.The same goes for white people.
Except, as mentioned above, there is a massive difference in earnings between black and white households, with black households earning on average 2/3 of what white households earn. Now, either black people have some kind of inherent disadvantage in intelligence or athleticism or laziness, or there remains a deeper problem.
Because Racism is treating someone's race like a part of what defines them or giving it any credence or importance at all. That's the definition.
Nonsense. You can belong to a culture, and people can recognise that culture without it being in any discriminatory. Just the other night I was watching a show about end of life care, and a Chinese lady was talking about how she decided what she would and wouldn't tell her father who was dying, because in her culture at that point they take responsibility. Recognising that basic cultural difference isn't racism, and it isn't racism for hospitals to learn how different cultures treat end of life care so they can better work with those cultures.
Racism means believing stupid, incorrect things about an ethnicity. Recognising actual, real differences in how cultures behave is not racism.
I have loaded white friends and loaded black friends, and comments are only made about race jokingly. Why? It doesn't matter!!! All of these men tried hard to distinguish themselves from their peers by grades, perseverance, and planning and received payment for it.
When I played cricket in the country the jokes between the white and black players in our team were hilarious. And the team all got on great, and honestly it was more for the friendship than the cricket that we got together (we never bloody won). But all of that changes not one fething thing about the problems in our country with aboriginal imprisonment rates and aboriginal poverty.
Just because some white and black people get along doesn't change the structural disadvantages one group experiences.
In conclusion stop fighting a battle that has not existed for a good 10-15 years, because in America, race doesn't matter. Except Muslims. Ahhhhhh America.......
No, seriously, go and read. Look up the different rates of income.
Is this Australia or America? If you wanna go and judge privledge (feth this tumblr bs right up it's tiny untoned ass!!!!) entirely by earnings then you're gonna run into a problem where white people, or Asian people actually seem more hard working. and or intelligent, due to having similar backgrounds.
Oh you mean aboriginese!!! Dude that's a whole nother thing. It's issues that only ended a few generations ago, and the government (unlike the US with the recently freed slaves) did little to help reintegrate them.
Relapse wrote: What he has done is take anyone who disagrees with core curriculum and steryotyped them as white surburban women, whether they are or not.
Reading is both fun and profitable;
""It's fascinating to me that some of the pushback is coming from, sort of, white suburban moms who"
Some. Anyone who disagrees. Some. Anyone who disagrees.
It is no wonder among suburbanites, Obama's approval rating has dropped to 37%.
Arrogance has a price, dearee!
Just purely in terms of building a political narrative, using that number to reinforce the horribleness of something the education secretary said is really, really stupid. Surely, you know, phone tapping or freakin ACA would be a better and more substantial policy to link it. Or even Benghazi.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ThePrimordial wrote: Is this Australia or America? If you wanna go and judge privledge (feth this tumblr bs right up it's tiny untoned ass!!!!) entirely by earnings then you're gonna run into a problem where white people, or Asian people actually seem more hard working. and or intelligent, due to having similar backgrounds.
No, that's an insane conclusion. Instead you can recognise that the economic system has racial impacts, and this can be the case even when the vast majority of people in the system are doing their best not to treat people differently through race. That bias may be as simple as inter-generational poverty, where the child of a share cropper is also likely to be poor, and so their children are also likely to be poor, and so on. Or there may be basic, underlying assumptions, that while no-one would ever dare say 'oh I wouldn't give a job to a black person', the colour of their skin may impact the weighting they give to various strengths and weaknesses in their application. Or a whole bunch of other stuff, it's a complex problem, with a lot of reasonable points of view on how it is to be addressed.
But what isn't reasonable is to just shut down conversation on the subject, or even worse, to claim that having that conversation is itself racist.
Oh you mean aboriginese!!! Dude that's a whole nother thing. It's issues that only ended a few generations ago, and the government (unlike the US with the recently freed slaves) did little to help reintegrate them.
Actually, as well as the Aborignal players there was a Somali guy. But anyway.
Saying the government did little to help re-integrate them makes absolutely no damn sense at all. We're not talking about people who were put to work in cotton farms or anything like that, we're talking about people who were dispossessed of their land and basically removed from the economic system. The better comparison is to Native Americans.
But the real point is that a bunch of people from one ethnicity can get on really well with people from another group, and that says exactly nothing about the how the system as a whole advantages one group more than another.
Relapse wrote: What he has done is take anyone who disagrees with core curriculum and steryotyped them as white surburban women, whether they are or not.
Reading is both fun and profitable;
""It's fascinating to me that some of the pushback is coming from, sort of, white suburban moms who"
Some. Anyone who disagrees. Some. Anyone who disagrees.
It is no wonder among suburbanites, Obama's approval rating has dropped to 37%.
Arrogance has a price, dearee!
Just purely in terms of building a political narrative, using that number to reinforce the horribleness of something the education secretary said is really, really stupid. Surely, you know, phone tapping or freakin ACA would be a better and more substantial policy to link it. Or even Benghazi.
.
Yes, reading is indeed fun, such as noting he points out one group of people to lime light and belittle. Why?
Yes, I agree everything else mentioned has contributed to Obama's decline, I just used the secretary's remarks as another example, not the prime reason.
Relapse wrote: Yes, reading is indeed fun, such as noting he points out one group of people to lime light and belittle. Why?
So now that you've read it again, you realise that your claim of "anyone who disagrees" was incorrect, as the statement said "some"?
Yes, I agree everything else mentioned has contributed to Obama's decline, I just used the secretary's remarks as another example, not the prime reason.
Narrative is a fragile thing, make noise about too many different things without any meaningful link and you'll just end up sounding like you're whinging about any damn thing you can think of. Linking this to Obama is a poor choice when there's so much better stuff to hammer him on that's topical right now.
The better option here is to try and make this a point on that other argument about how white people are so hard done by and the rules for them are different. Which is at least as much of a stretch, but that's a narrative that's been pursued for years on stuff as minor as this, so it should work okay.
Relapse wrote: Yes, reading is indeed fun, such as noting he points out one group of people to lime light and belittle. Why?
So now that you've read it again, you realise that your claim of "anyone who disagrees" was incorrect, as the statement said "some"?
Yes, I agree everything else mentioned has contributed to Obama's decline, I just used the secretary's remarks as another example, not the prime reason.
Narrative is a fragile thing, make noise about too many different things without any meaningful link and you'll just end up sounding like you're whinging about any damn thing you can think of. Linking this to Obama is a poor choice when there's so much better stuff to hammer him on that's topical right now.
The better option here is to try and make this a point on that other argument about how white people are so hard done by and the rules for them are different. Which is at least as much of a stretch, but that's a narrative that's been pursued for years on stuff as minor as this, so it should work okay.
I am saying that by his statement, he singled out one group. Why not say inner city black moms or some such thing like that? Answer, he'd get his ass handed to him by the press and people who seem to think racism and sexism is ok as long as it's against the right kind of people.
Are you kidding about no meaningful links? They've been provided time and again for all those things mentioned.
Relapse wrote: I am saying that by his statement, he singled out one group.
He did, he singled out one group. It was a needless, crude and just plain unhelpful comment. But he did say that only some of the pushback against common core was due to white suburban mums. But then you claimed he said that was all the complainants. Do you not see where you were mistaken?
Why not say inner city black moms or some such thing like that? Answer, he'd get his ass handed to him by the press and people who seem to think racism and sexism is ok as long as it's against the right kind of people.
He didn't say that because when he thinks of the middle class people who are upset the school districts they bought in to aren't as good as they believed... he's not thinking of black people. He's thinking of white people.
Are you kidding about no meaningful links? They've been provided time and again for all those things mentioned.
Well of course you'd think so, you're a true believer in the horrible monstrosity that is Obama. But it isn't good enough for a story to be believed by the true believers like yourself, because you're already on board. What you need is a coherent narrative that'll sell to people that aren't absolutely convinced of the sheer horror that is the Obama administration, and in my opinion trying to go from "Secretary of Education said something crass, therefore Obama is history's greatest monster" is about nine bridges too far.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cincydooley wrote: Racism is bad in any form. I don't think you can say racism against one group is worse than another.
I think the post from Eilif summed it up perfectly;
"1) All racism is Morally wrong.
2) In the USA, the Practical effects of Racism are more severe for Minorities than for White Americans."
With that being said, being a white dude most certainly makes life easier unless you're trying to get money for college.
And now I find myself agreeing with cincydooley. Strange times are upon us.
Caveat: using "white" as a descriptor isn't racist.
In broad terms, the way I've heard it described is racism is prejudice + institutional power. There's a difference between, say, a black guy discriminating against a white guy and vice versa in that the white guy has the backing of the institutional power and the black guy doesn't.
But then, I think on some level the "white people are the true oppressed!" crowd understand that, just they're under the impression the power is the other way around, because the true measure of oppression is what words you're allowed to say. Talking about racism is a "card", an advantage that non-white people have over white people and played for their gain. Not being able to use racial slurs is the only kind of racism left in our modern society, right?
Breotan wrote: And why are we still talking about politics and race when we could be posting pictures of other hottie racist athletes from countries around the world? It boggles my mind.
As you wish...(hottie, I can do without the racist)
Race in America has nothing to do with how well off you are. There are no apartments within a hundred miles of where I went to school, where I moved to , and where my daughter goes to school and there is an equal race distribution.
Someone who's black isn't disadvantaged because he's black. He might not try, he might not be intelligent, or athletic. These are actual disadvantages.The same goes for white people...
...In conclusion stop fighting a battle that has not existed for a good 10-15 years, because in America, race doesn't matter. Except Muslims. Ahhhhhh America.......
Sorry, but you are flatly wrong. So wrong in fact that I almost took your remark as in jest until I read the rest of it. Race matters big time in America.
We have decades of statistical data showing that even when the "starting point" of location, educational opportunities, etc are the same blacks (and latinos) are still are at a disadvantage. Just a few indicators that have been studied and shown: they make less than whites in comparable fields, are promoted less often, hired less often, pulled over by cops more often, make less over the course of their lives and their social mobility (how likely they are to be able to move up in social strata) is less than whites.
The battle is far from won, because race does matter.
Relapse wrote: I am saying that by his statement, he singled out one group.
He did, he singled out one group. It was a needless, crude and just plain unhelpful comment. But he did say that only some of the pushback against common core was due to white suburban mums. But then you claimed he said that was all the complainants. Do you not see where you were mistaken?
Why not say inner city black moms or some such thing like that? Answer, he'd get his ass handed to him by the press and people who seem to think racism and sexism is ok as long as it's against the right kind of people.
He didn't say that because when he thinks of the middle class people who are upset the school districts they bought in to aren't as good as they believed... he's not thinking of black people. He's thinking of white people.
Are you kidding about no meaningful links? They've been provided time and again for all those things mentioned.
Well of course you'd think so, you're a true believer in the horrible monstrosity that is Obama. But it isn't good enough for a story to be believed by the true believers like yourself, because you're already on board. What you need is a coherent narrative that'll sell to people that aren't absolutely convinced of the sheer horror that is the Obama administration, and in my opinion trying to go from "Secretary of Education said something crass, therefore Obama is history's greatest monster" is about nine bridges too far.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cincydooley wrote: Racism is bad in any form. I don't think you can say racism against one group is worse than another.
I think the post from Eilif summed it up perfectly;
"1) All racism is Morally wrong.
2) In the USA, the Practical effects of Racism are more severe for Minorities than for White Americans."
With that being said, being a white dude most certainly makes life easier unless you're trying to get money for college.
And now I find myself agreeing with cincydooley. Strange times are upon us.
On this subject, I see there is no point in talking with you, since it appears to you that Obama and his administration can do no wrong no matter what evidence and sources are presented. At this point I think we should just agree to disagree.
Relapse wrote: On this subject, I see there is no point in talking with you, since it appears to you that Obama and his administration can do no wrong no matter what evidence and sources are presented. At this point I think we should just agree to disagree.
You can stop posting if you want. But there's no 'agree to disagree' on the bizarro world interpretation you and the rest of the usual suspects have attempted to put on this issue. I am not, and never have been an Obama fan boy, and I'm happy to talk about the many failings of his presidency. But I have exactly zero patience for crazy right wing nonsense, and pretending that this is about singling out and belittling white people is nutty.
