Do Americans and Canadians Have Different Ideas on Racism?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
I'm going to agree to disagree here, Chemgal. American racists are generally too dumb to switch to polite.
 
BetteTheRed said:
I'm going to agree to disagree here, Chemgal. American racists are generally too dumb to switch to polite.
Click to expand...
It's hard to get that to switch - American or otherwise. I'm just saying that when it does, it typically doesn't mean fewer racists, just a different form or racism.
 
What we see today as racism, was not always seen that way. I think what we're looking at are thoughts and ideas that used to be the norm, and are slow to die off. What we're expecting is that people change, and people resist change. If they don't see the problem, then they will think this form of change is robbing them of their rights and their culture.

I think the demand to conform and be PC can go too far as well. There needs to be a balance. The protective instinct many non-Muslims have toward Muslims is understandable. But sometimes that protective instinct extends to Islam, and that's where it goes too far. There is an important distinction between criticizing Muslims and criticizing Islam that both sides fail to see at times.
 
I have never heard of a country that isn't racist. Western empires of the past 5 centuries have been based on the belief that the empires are made up of inferior peoples who exist simply to be used - and killed or starved whenever necessary. Winston Churchill was a fervent racist. I should have realized that when, as a teen, I read his "History of the English-Speaking Peoples". For the aristocracy of Britain (and Churchill came from such a family) as for the very wealthy of this world, there is a class-racism which justifies their wealth, political influence, and their abuse of others.
Canadians are racist. In their minds, their genetic superiority is what justified the killing of native peoples and taking their land - and that racism is still there. Our politicians and news media of today harp on the "Evil" of Muslims. They harp on such things as beheadings as prove of their evil. And we buy it. Our side has murdered millions, tortured (and still tortures) unkown thousands, has poisoned whole countries, slaughtered and raped all over the world. Compared to us, Muslims are angels. But our politicians and news media can get away with their bigotry because so many of us believe we are genetically superior to the people we kill.
 
Canada’s Indigenous population experiences poverty at alarming rates ... linked to the traumatic history of colonization, residential schools and an over-representation within the child welfare system experienced by current and past generations ... Indigenous education, child welfare and housing infrastructure, to name a few, are grossly underfunded despite this historical discrimination. Racialized groups and recent newcomers face specific barriers due to racism and social exclusion, still very apparent in Canadian society. Acts of legislation, such as employment equity, provide more employment opportunities for historically disadvantaged groups. Many newcomers to Canada are highly skilled and educated but employers here do not recognize their foreign credentials.
 
There seems to be a rise in these kinds of sentiments and I find that painful. To me, there is a tension between changing people's hearts and changing harmful behaviour. It would be optimal to soften people's heart so that they can put themselves in the others' shoes and thus, reduce or eliminate racist, sexist, homophobic or other attitudes. However, using human rights codes, legislation and workplace regulation is completely legitimate in an effort to keep people safe. Quiet racism (or any other bias) is difficult to address because its often hidden however, as a woman in a sexist society, I would rather that someone with sexist attitudes keep silent about them. In a former workplace, in order to be safe, I had to be vigilant about the extreme sexism I encountered and this took away from my ability to give my full attention to my job.
 
I've seen that very meme posted on facebook. It's sad that there remains as much racism as there is. Obviously no where close to everyone holds those hateful views but in the 21st century they're still around. While traditionally it's been black and white lately there has been more animosity towards anyone Hispanic driven by an animosity towards "illegal" immigrants and anyone middle eastern.
 
crazyheart said:
I think, and of course I have been known to be wrong many times in my life,
that posting a racist picture or comment, to generate conversation is different than posting
it because this is how you really feel.
Click to expand...

The motivation for posting may very well be different.

That doesn't mean that what is posted is any less racist. It certainly makes it more difficult to make the "we" and "they" distinctions.

I suspect most of us know what racism is without needing a refresher. I mean if we were going to have a thread on child pornography would I need to post an example of it?

And what of the people who are the particular target of that ethnic slur? Do they smile when non-racists refer to them use the slur because it magically becomes less hurtful?

The real difference between "we" and "they" isn't in the difference between what is said or done but rather in how we attempt to justify what we have said and done.
 
It seems to me that a great many people in the 'majority class' be that racial, ethic, religious etc. develop a culture of entitlement. They have had it their way for sometimes centuries and any effort to extend rights and/or privileges to minority groups is seen as a threat to their established position. We see this very clearly in the homosexual marriage debates where some religious people argue that there is a threat to traditional marriage.
 
JRT said:
It seems to me that a great many people in the 'majority class' be that racial, ethic, religious etc. develop a culture of entitlement. They have had it their way for sometimes centuries and any effort to extend rights and/or privileges to minority groups is seen as a threat to their established position. We see this very clearly in the homosexual marriage debates where some religious people argue that there is a threat to traditional marriage.
Click to expand...
I'm just going to quote this. I can't improve upon it.
 
@chansen It was always racism. Being the norm never made it not racism. It just meant that overt racism was more common. What is more common now would be 'aversive racism' as opposed to overt racism that this type of thing displays.

There are lots of types of racism - from the overt to the subtle to the systemic - the last two types are still going strong, unfortunately. And everybody is a little bit racist or prejudiced. Even if not everybody treats somebody of a different race or minority person badly - we are all a little xenophobic about some 'others'. Never trust somebody who says they're not! It's just that some people know that when they feel discomfort around an 'other' it's their problem to resolve, not the 'other's' - but someone who's really bigotted just blames it on the 'other' for being different.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aversive_racism
 
Last edited:
Motheroffive said:
There seems to be a rise in these kinds of sentiments and I find that painful. To me, there is a tension between changing people's hearts and changing harmful behaviour. It would be optimal to soften people's heart so that they can put themselves in the others' shoes and thus, reduce or eliminate racist, sexist, homophobic or other attitudes. However, using human rights codes, legislation and workplace regulation is completely legitimate in an effort to keep people safe. Quiet racism (or any other bias) is difficult to address because its often hidden however, as a woman in a sexist society, I would rather that someone with sexist attitudes keep silent about them. In a former workplace, in order to be safe, I had to be vigilant about the extreme sexism I encountered and this took away from my ability to give my full attention to my job.
Click to expand...

Hi Motheroffive. Welcome to wonderCafe2!

Yes, equality can be and is being legislated, and happens with the stroke of a pen, but changing people's minds, hearts, attitudes, and behaviour takes time. Legislation happens first, everything else follows, and sometimes it takes a long time for legislation to take effect, and the discriminated become impatient.

I have, at times, been at the other end of an extremist attitude. I have encountered women who were so sensitive and vigilant about sexism that they acted defensively/aggressively toward all males, right at the first encounter, just to forestall any displays of male superiority, even if the man they encounter does not act superior, at least not intentionally. I often thought, perplexed and taken aback: "Whatever have I done to you to warrant such an attitude?"

But then maybe attitudes of male superiority are so endemic in our culture that boys and men take them in without being consciously aware of it? So, what it takes is women openly talking to men, and informing them about what is offensive to them, and men listening to women with an open mind and heart. And it is important for women to realize that many men do not intentionally act superior. That this male superiority game is just learned behaviour of which they are not consciously aware.
 
It seems to me that as humans we always find a reason to segregate into groups. Somehow there is a draw to that.
Where I grew up ..... we had the french/english divide. At school we had our groups that discriminated against each other.
Then there are sports where such divisions are celebrated and encouraged....
I am just pointing these out ... not as a judgement on what is appropriate or not.
I feel this need to form groups and groups within groups is a major factor in racism.
Maybe work needs to be done at that level.....
 
Yes Rita, of course: work needs to be done on other levels or discrimination as well. I just responded to Motheroffive's post about extreme sexism. Whatever I said about sexism also applies to other forms of discrimination.
 
Hermann said:
I have, at times, been at the other end of an extremist attitude. I have encountered women who were so sensitive and vigilant about sexism that they acted defensively/aggressively toward all males, right at the first encounter, just to forestall any displays of male superiority, even if the man they encounter does not act superior, at least not intentionally. I often thought, perplexed and taken aback: "Whatever have I done to you to warrant such an attitude?"
Click to expand...
That's sexism too.
 
It is...but if there weren't women like that 40 years ago we wouldn't have the equality we have today I don't think. We have those radical feminists to thank. They had to take a very strong stand just to get things moving. Now - we need to strike a better balance.

As with racism - but I don't really believe in reverse racism or sexism if the majority is still discriminating or holds the power balance that oppresses others. I learned in school, and still believe, it's a fallacy unless the complainant party is the oppressed party. At least, systemically. Individually there is no need for anyone to be rude or blatantly discriminatory - but things like equal opportunity hiring may seem racist or sexist in the other direction, on the face of it - but it is about evening the playing field.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
It is...but if there weren't women like that 40 years ago we wouldn't have the equality we have today I don't think. We have those radical feminists to thank. They had to take a very strong stand to get things moving. Now - we need to strike a better balance.

As with racism - but I don't really believe in reverse racism or sexism if the majority is still discriminating or holds the power balance that oppresses others. I learned in school, and still believe, it's a fallacy unless the complainant party is the oppressed party.
Click to expand...
I don't equate discrimination/prejudice to be the same for the groups that have the power. It still occurs though, and if it isn't called by the same terms - racism, sexism, etc. you do get ridiculous terms like reverse racism and also give ammunition to groups like MRA groups. I think it's better to just call it what it is - in this case sexism, even if it isn't the same as what women face.

I don't think it was necessary for women back then to treat all men in a similar manner to get the movement going. With those who disagreed? Sure.
 
ChemGal said:
I don't equate discrimination/prejudice to be the same for the groups that have the power. It still occurs though, and if it isn't called by the same terms - racism, sexism, etc. you do get ridiculous terms like reverse racism and also give ammunition to groups like MRA groups. I think it's better to just call it what it is - in this case sexism, even if it isn't the same as what women face.

I don't think it was necessary for women back then to treat all men in a similar manner to get the movement going. With those who disagreed? Sure.
Click to expand...
I disagree. 40-60 years ago sexism was so strong and entrenched I think they had to get the issues noticed. Women had little power to speak out.

I also don't think it's sexist to say that middle aged white men still run the world for the most part. It's still unfortunately true. Obama's an exception but most CEOs, politicians, and western army generals who run the world are still middle aged men - in the western world, white men. What's wrong is to hate all middle aged white men.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top