I don't understand racism or homophobia

[Faustus]

I disagree, I think we're blurring lines some what if we try to explain mindless discrimination with natural/historic instinct of survival. It's not arrogant to acknowledge that humans have developed self awareness and an understanding of right from wrong, we are conscious beings. I think it's derogatory to not acknowledge that racism is a more recent phenomenon that men essentially created by dividing people based solely on skin colour. It was simply a control method of pretending one race was inferior to another, and then enslaving it (and yes, I understand this didn't just occur with whites enslaving blacks but also the opposite way round). This irrational consideration of other colours is much more likely to have been passed down from recent slavery than ancient instinct.

There were many different coloured tribes of man long before there was slavery etc. Man has been fighting other tribes as long as man has roamed the earth. To imply this is a recent phenomenon is to deny history.

We have always been suspicious of anyone not exactly like ourselves i.e. not of our tribe. My point being, that in order to accept someone from another tribe you have to suppress the instinct of suspicion that is inbuilt into our psyche.

Fears are often irrational, but they remain fears nonetheless.

This idea what black people cannot be racist makes me literally laugh my arse off.

Wow! literally? You must be a medical marvel in that laughing gives you the ability to detach parts of your body.

 

[Orionaut]

Heh, straight copy n paste job:

Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Clade: Synapsida
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Suborder: Haplorhini
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae

Thats just Us Humans thinking we are special.

(Remember, In captain Cooks day, Africans were wildly considered to be a different species, to such an extent that sex starved Sailors were uncomfortable about having Sex with them, so this is nothing new)

I believe it is generally accepted that Modern Humans and Modern Chimps shared a common ancestor around 6 million years ago

(Some argue less time around 3 million, some a longer period, up to 12 million)

This seems like a long time ago, but to put the time-scales in perspective. It is worth noting that Modern African Humans and Modern Non-African Humans are actually separated by some 1-200,000 years of separate yet parallel evolution.

Ie our own local common ancestor was some 1-200,000 years ago. and yet despite all that time, the only significant genetic differencees between African and Non-African humans are minor survival adaptations to different local environments.

Chimps and humans may not be brothers, but we are definitely cousins.

 

[Billies Bangers]

Wow! literally? You must be a medical marvel in that laughing gives you the ability to detach parts of your body.

Nice one.

 

[DAIR]

There were many different coloured tribes of man long before there was slavery etc. Man has been fighting other tribes as long as man has roamed the earth. To imply this is a recent phenomenon is to deny history.

We have always been suspicious of anyone not exactly like ourselves i.e. not of our tribe. My point being, that in order to accept someone from another tribe you have to suppress the instinct of suspicion that is inbuilt into our psyche.

Fears are often irrational, but they remain fears nonetheless.

Exactly.

All these feelings and prejudgements are natural. Right or wrong, that is life. So because of this most of today's 'isms will never disappear. Fact.

 

[twist3d0n3]

There were many different coloured tribes of man long before there was slavery etc. Man has been fighting other tribes as long as man has roamed the earth. To imply this is a recent phenomenon is to deny history.

We have always been suspicious of anyone not exactly like ourselves i.e. not of our tribe. My point being, that in order to accept someone from another tribe you have to suppress the instinct of suspicion that is inbuilt into our psyche.

Fears are often irrational, but they remain fears nonetheless.

good post!

 

[DAIR]

Wow! literally? You must be a medical marvel in that laughing gives you the ability to detach parts of your body.

I know right.... Madness I tell ya.

 

[deuse]

Would you call them racist?

I've just read the article and stand by what I've said. If this were the other way around this would be a huge racial story.

I agree with you in above.(maybe I got confused with your other post?)

Police Commander Kevin Duffin has said

""They're young adults, and they make stupid decisions," he said, and, in reference to the language used, investigators would seek to "determine whether or not this is sincere or just stupid ranting and raving", he said"

In the US he is saying "it's not a big deal"

I bet the black people who done this won't be charged with a racist assault. But I hope I'm wrong.

Better info here (it contains swearing)
http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/chica...ime-police-stupid-mistake-kids-eddie-johnson/

 

[p4radox]

Must have been a lot of soul searching at the BBC before that story was put out.
Already heard people on the radio saying race wasn't an issue.

And yet there it is on the BBC website. Despite claims of liberal lefty bias or whatever, the BBC actually reports this stuff in a pretty neutral way.

 

[DAIR]

I agree with you in above.(maybe I got confused with your other post?)

Police Commander Kevin Duffin has said

""They're young adults, and they make stupid decisions," he said, and, in reference to the language used, investigators would seek to "determine whether or not this is sincere or just stupid ranting and raving", he said"

In the US he is saying "it's not a big deal"

I bet the black people who done this won't be charged with a racist assault. But I hope I'm wrong.

Better info here (it contains swearing)
http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/chica...ime-police-stupid-mistake-kids-eddie-johnson/

I seriously don't understand that way of thinking. If things continue like this. We'll soon see larger groups of white people kicking up a fuss. In the same way we have groups of black people kicking up a fuss.

To be honest I want nothing to do with it lol.

 

[deuse]

And yet there it is on the BBC website. Despite claims of liberal lefty bias or whatever, the BBC actually reports this stuff in a pretty neutral way.

The BBC did leave out a lot of what the police said.

 

[Junglist]

Of course they are living in denial, how many times do we hear blacks say that only whites are racist as it's simply not possible for blacks to be racist, just impossible.

I don't think blacks say only whites are able to be racists. Uneducated/idiots however do say that. We don't have a hive mind and all think the same

I saw the video and it was disgusting. But black people can't be racist

Those kind of comments don't really do much to help the situation, do they. Obviously it's tongue in cheek but the more you say it the more people will think it's actually true

 

[Dis86]

The BBC did leave out a lot of what the police said.

And the race of the perpetrators!

 

[p4radox]

And the race of the perpetrators!

It clearly says "An African American woman talks to the camera, sometimes with slurred speech. At least two male African-Americans are also visible in the footage."

And they mention that the perps were "making derogatory statements against white people".

And in a meta-news twist the article even mentions the very discussion we are having right now.
"They say the mainstream media has been slower to react, and the police slower to label it a hate crime - than if a black person had been assaulted by white people"

I don't see how anyone can read that article and claim the BBC are under-reporting the seriousness of the crime.

edit: Probably the article is being updated in real-time with more details added as they are verified. You can't look at a BBC "breaking news" article and assume they are deliberately missing out key information. It typically takes them longer than the more "kneejerk" news organisations to report stuff because they are aiming for accuracy - which necessarily means it takes some time.

 

[cheesyboy]

It clearly says "An African American woman talks to the camera, sometimes with slurred speech. At least two male African-Americans are also visible in the footage."

And they mention that the perps were "making derogatory statements against white people".

And in a meta-news twist the article even mentions the very discussion we are having right now.
"They say the mainstream media has been slower to react, and the police slower to label it a hate crime - than if a black person had been assaulted by white people"

I don't see how anyone can read that article and claim the BBC are under-reporting the seriousness of the crime.

Post truth mate. Get out with that nonsense.

Vomiting (which is what the OP was talking about) is an extreme reaction to an idea you disagree with. It's certainly not rational.

They probably didn't mean it, which is why some people (myself included) think it's likely that they were exaggerating to overtly signal their extreme virtue.

They said it was 'sickening', which in context doesn't mean 'making one physically sick', unless you're deliberately using the wrong meaning of the word.

 

[gandhi]

This attitude is completely nonconstructive and just leads to greater gulfs in society between those that have and those that have less and feel what they do have is being taken away.

That's because what little they have is being taken away! However, it's not being taken away by economic and social migrants from both Europe and further afield. It's being taken away due the reckless behaviour and selfishness of the governments and banking systems of several western countries. And whipping up racism, xenophobia and war are great ways of distracting/redirecting peoples attention.

To be honest, I'm quite surprised they haven't tried to blame the gays as well.

 

[Dis86]

It clearly says "An African American woman talks to the camera, sometimes with slurred speech. At least two male African-Americans are also visible in the footage."

And they mention that the perps were "making derogatory statements against white people".

And in a meta-news twist the article even mentions the very discussion we are having right now.
"They say the mainstream media has been slower to react, and the police slower to label it a hate crime - than if a black person had been assaulted by white people"

I don't see how anyone can read that article and claim the BBC are under-reporting the seriousness of the crime.

edit: Probably the article is being updated in real-time with more details added as they are verified. You can't look at a BBC "breaking news" article and assume they are deliberately missing out key information. It typically takes them longer than the more "kneejerk" news organisations to report stuff because they are aiming for accuracy - which necessarily means it takes some time.

It's been updated several times. The first version didn't give the race even though it's clear from the video

 

[Roar87]

I know for a fact that if 4 white people had tortured a black person and streamed it that UK Car Sales being high wouldn't be the main story on the BBC front page.

 

[DAIR]

Lol

 

[FishFluff]

Exactly.

All these feelings and prejudgements are natural. Right or wrong, that is life. So because of this most of today's 'isms will never disappear. Fact.

Humans not being able to fly is natural. Thankfully we powered through that and our species is better off because of it. Maybe we could do the same with being judgmental if we really tried instead of just shrugging our shoulders.

 

[DAIR]

Humans not being able to fly is natural. Thankfully we powered through that and our species is better off because of it. Maybe we could do the same with being judgmental if we really tried instead of just shrugging our shoulders.

Sorry.... Youve lost me. Are you suggesting prejudice isn't natural?