• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Desmond Clark Faces Misdemeanor Charges (Race-related)

I'm embarrassed to engage with such #density, and I know the ones commenting don't actually want an answer, but here goes. Identifying a black woman as angry because she is black is harmful because of the effects that come to pass as a result: less likely to be considered for a job (when controlling for all other factors), more likely to be dismissed in academic and professional settings, etc. Identifying a white woman as into a TV show has virtually no effect on her well-being (besides being pretty stupid to make that assumption). Were you to assume that a woman was more likely to be, say, wasteful with her money or less likely to be a good mother because she was white, then yes, your prejudice is harmful.

The point is that you are removing agency from the individual when you ascribe certain characteristics to their behavior because of the race, sex, etc. The brain does this naturally, and our prejudices are reinforced strongly through the media, but they are not biological properties of that person. So when you assume that a black woman is angry on account of her blackness then it is problem.

When done from a position as a privileged group, a group that has a disproportionate amount of power than the general population, then those presumptions manifest into real social ills whereby a less privileged group (e.g. black women) are denied access to certain spaces in society. Done over and over and over again, it becomes systematic.

The ones defending the angry black woman stereotype on here are probably not black women and probably lack to courage or strength required to live the life of a black woman in America today.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I'm embarrassed to engage with such #density, and I know the ones commenting don't actually want an answer, but here goes. Identifying a black woman as angry because she is black is harmful because of the effects that come to pass as a result: less likely to be considered for a job (when controlling for all other factors), more likely to be dismissed in academic and professional settings, etc. Identifying a white woman as into a TV show has virtually no effect on her well-being (besides being pretty stupid to make that assumption). Were you to assume that a woman was more likely to be, say, wasteful with her money or less likely to be a good mother because she was white, then yes, your prejudice is harmful.

The point is that you are removing agency from the individual when you ascribe certain characteristics to their behavior because of the race, sex, etc. The brain does this naturally, and our prejudices are reinforced strongly through the media, but they are not biological properties of that person. So when you assume that a black woman is angry on account of her blackness then it is problem.

When done from a position as a privileged group, a group that has a disproportionate amount of power than the general population, then those presumptions manifest into real social ills whereby a less privileged group (e.g. black women) are denied access to certain spaces in society. Done over and over and over again, it becomes systematic.

The ones defending the angry black woman stereotype on here are probably not black women and probably lack to courage or strength required to live the life of a black woman in America today.
Click to expand...

That last part sounds dangerously close to a stereotype.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I'm embarrassed to engage with such #density, and I know the ones commenting don't actually want an answer, but here goes. Identifying a black woman as angry because she is black is harmful because of the effects that come to pass as a result: less likely to be considered for a job (when controlling for all other factors), more likely to be dismissed in academic and professional settings, etc. Identifying a white woman as into a TV show has virtually no effect on her well-being (besides being pretty stupid to make that assumption). Were you to assume that a woman was more likely to be, say, wasteful with her money or less likely to be a good mother because she was white, then yes, your prejudice is harmful.

The point is that you are removing agency from the individual when you ascribe certain characteristics to their behavior because of the race, sex, etc. The brain does this naturally, and our prejudices are reinforced strongly through the media, but they are not biological properties of that person. So when you assume that a black woman is angry on account of her blackness then it is problem.

When done from a position as a privileged group, a group that has a disproportionate amount of power than the general population, then those presumptions manifest into real social ills whereby a less privileged group (e.g. black women) are denied access to certain spaces in society. Done over and over and over again, it becomes systematic.

The ones defending the angry black woman stereotype on here are probably not black women and probably lack to courage or strength required to live the life of a black woman in America today.
Click to expand...

And what gives you the right to do that? That's affirmative action's job.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I'm embarrassed to engage with such #density, and I know the ones commenting don't actually want an answer, but here goes. Identifying a black woman as angry because she is black is harmful because of the effects that come to pass as a result: less likely to be considered for a job (when controlling for all other factors), more likely to be dismissed in academic and professional settings, etc. Identifying a white woman as into a TV show has virtually no effect on her well-being (besides being pretty stupid to make that assumption). Were you to assume that a woman was more likely to be, say, wasteful with her money or less likely to be a good mother because she was white, then yes, your prejudice is harmful.

The point is that you are removing agency from the individual when you ascribe certain characteristics to their behavior because of the race, sex, etc. The brain does this naturally, and our prejudices are reinforced strongly through the media, but they are not biological properties of that person. So when you assume that a black woman is angry on account of her blackness then it is problem.

When done from a position as a privileged group, a group that has a disproportionate amount of power than the general population, then those presumptions manifest into real social ills whereby a less privileged group (e.g. black women) are denied access to certain spaces in society. Done over and over and over again, it becomes systematic.

The ones defending the angry black woman stereotype on here are probably not black women and probably lack to courage or strength required to live the life of a black woman in America today.
Click to expand...

I think you are mischaracterizing the stereotype. The stereotype is not that she is angry because she is black; the stereotype is that if/when she becomes angry (which isn't necessarily at a greater or lower likelihood than any other race), that she will respond in a certain cultural way. The stereotype is as to the culturally promoted response, not the innate anger.
My kid goes to a predominantly black school. Now, when he laughs, he often covers his mouth with a sideways fist but otherwise goes into a full body convulsion akin to a dry heave and falls over onto whoever is next to him. There is nothing racist about him innately laughing, but there is a stereotype as to the cultural manifestation of the laugh.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I'm embarrassed to engage with such #density, and I know the ones commenting don't actually want an answer, but here goes. Identifying a black woman as angry because she is black is harmful because of the effects that come to pass as a result: less likely to be considered for a job (when controlling for all other factors), more likely to be dismissed in academic and professional settings, etc. Identifying a white woman as into a TV show has virtually no effect on her well-being (besides being pretty stupid to make that assumption). Were you to assume that a woman was more likely to be, say, wasteful with her money or less likely to be a good mother because she was white, then yes, your prejudice is harmful.

The point is that you are removing agency from the individual when you ascribe certain characteristics to their behavior because of the race, sex, etc. The brain does this naturally, and our prejudices are reinforced strongly through the media, but they are not biological properties of that person. So when you assume that a black woman is angry on account of her blackness then it is problem.

When done from a position as a privileged group, a group that has a disproportionate amount of power than the general population, then those presumptions manifest into real social ills whereby a less privileged group (e.g. black women) are denied access to certain spaces in society. Done over and over and over again, it becomes systematic.

The ones defending the angry black woman stereotype on here are probably not black women and probably lack to courage or strength required to live the life of a black woman in America today.
Click to expand...

Agreed but AZNs are still terrible fucking drivers. If we can reinforce stereotypes enough to relegate them out of certain spaces in society, i.e. the public roads, then I am all for it.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I'm embarrassed to engage with such #density, and I know the ones commenting don't actually want an answer, but here goes. Identifying a black woman as angry because she is black is harmful because of the effects that come to pass as a result: less likely to be considered for a job (when controlling for all other factors), more likely to be dismissed in academic and professional settings, etc. Identifying a white woman as into a TV show has virtually no effect on her well-being (besides being pretty stupid to make that assumption). Were you to assume that a woman was more likely to be, say, wasteful with her money or less likely to be a good mother because she was white, then yes, your prejudice is harmful.

The point is that you are removing agency from the individual when you ascribe certain characteristics to their behavior because of the race, sex, etc. The brain does this naturally, and our prejudices are reinforced strongly through the media, but they are not biological properties of that person. So when you assume that a black woman is angry on account of her blackness then it is problem.

When done from a position as a privileged group, a group that has a disproportionate amount of power than the general population, then those presumptions manifest into real social ills whereby a less privileged group (e.g. black women) are denied access to certain spaces in society. Done over and over and over again, it becomes systematic.

The ones defending the angry black woman stereotype on here are probably not black women and probably lack to courage or strength required to live the life of a black woman in America today.
Click to expand...

OK, so stereotyping based on race is only racist if it is harmful or derogatory? So it's not racist to say that Asians are good at math but it is racist to say that Asians are bad drivers?
 
If observing their race changes the way you treat them or what you expect of them then yes. It's not that hard.
 
simosfrostyone said:
That makes Jessie Jackson an admitted racist.
Click to expand...

Okay.

Look, we all have our biases and prejudices. It's a part of the way we understand the world and allows us to process things quickly. The key is to understand them, deny them their ability to affect your actions, and work to dissolve them. The more time you spend around people that aren't like you, the more you realize how individual people are from their race, sexuality, religion, etc. It's an on-going process.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
If observing their race changes the way you treat them or what you expect of them then yes. It's not that hard.
Click to expand...

but if it doesn't change the way you treat them or what you expect it is not racist. also not that hard.
 
tiltdeac said:
I've always thought the "I'm a jackass" thing was a little strange, especially because people seem proud of it? If you are actually self aware enough to realize it, why not just be nicer? It's not like it's hard.
Click to expand...

people who are too nice are fake. i don't trust somebody if they aren't at least a little bit of an asshole.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
Okay.

Look, we all have our biases and prejudices. It's a part of the way we understand the world and allows us to process things quickly. The key is to understand them, deny them their ability to affect your actions, and work to dissolve them. The more time you spend around people that aren't like you, the more you realize how individual people are from their race, sexuality, religion, etc. It's an on-going process.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with most of that.
 
Back on track, though, after seeing the video, I don't think Dez or his wife handled the situation very well, regardless if they had prior poor treatment.

You can get your point across, and be convincing, persuasive, even demeaning, sarcastic and belittling without yelling, screaming, waving your arms, doing the hold-me-back thing, and making a scene (and rightly or wrongly, playing to stereotype). Having the kid held out of a lip sync contest or having an administrator call your kid a name is not enough to go HAM, get up in someone's face yelling.

All that being said, still not enough to warrant calling the cops. Just a bunch of fail all around. The lesson, as always, is that the midwest's last good days are long gone, and its is now the fucking worst.
 
Last edited:
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I think you are mischaracterizing the stereotype. The stereotype is not that she is angry because she is black; the stereotype is that if/when she becomes angry (which isn't necessarily at a greater or lower likelihood than any other race), that she will respond in a certain cultural way.
Click to expand...

This. A million times, this. I think we have blurred the lines as to what is racist these days. Anything deemed culturally insensitive is now racist. And shit, even half the stuff deemed culturally insensitive really is only labeled insensitive because a vocal and small minority gets offended. It's like expecting me not to buy peanuts because one kid in town has a peanut allergy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top