-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Racism, prejudice and bigotry
- Thread starter lunakilo
- Start date
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
As with bullying, if the person on the receiving end perceives statements or behaviour as offensive - then they are offensive.
lunakilo
Well-Known Member
But are they racistic, prejudiced or bigot?
EDIT: if for example someone tells me I have blue eyes and I am offended, does that make the person who says it a racist?
Last edited:
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
To that person perhaps.
But then, there are loads of people who go to great lengths to be offended.
Otherright
Otherright
Statement 1 is all three. Statement two is racist, although not negatively racist.
lunakilo
Well-Known Member
But WHY?
While noting that the word 'race' is problematic:
- Racist: I know of no scholarship to suggest the 'stupidity' is a racial trait.
- Factual: dark skin is clearly a heritable characteristic.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
Stupidity would generally be considered a negative characteristic while having dark eyes would generaly be considered a neutral one.
As written, it is a bigoted (and possibly racist) generalization.
lunakilo
Well-Known Member
What if we assume I have met many Romas, and all the Romas I have ever met where thiefs, would it then be ok for me to say "Romas steal"?
OK or accurate? Possibly the former; clearly the latter.
gnomon
Well-Known Member
That would still be prejudicial and........oh, I know what thread you are talking about.
If Romas generally steal, & this is backed up by evidence, then it's not prejudicial.
But to say all of them steal, that would be prejudicial.
Lame analogy time:
It is fair to say that black folk are darker skinned than white folk.
But it is not true for all of them.
Language is certainly an imprecise thing. So, when it matters, I'd say that most black folk are darker skinned than white folk in general.
When it doesn't matter, I'd state the briefer & less precise version.
Last edited:
lunakilo
Well-Known Member
But why?
When is it ok to say 'things' about a group of people?
Can I say nazis are evil?
Can I say China has a problem with human rights?
Can I say teenagers are self centered?
Can I say Germans have no sense of humor?
I've heard that Germans aren't very tolerant of children.
But they do have a sense of humor.
[youtube]lKpOWj8LkaQ[/youtube]
YouTube - ‪german humor‬‏
But they do have a sense of humor.
[youtube]lKpOWj8LkaQ[/youtube]
YouTube - ‪german humor‬‏
Klaufi_Wodensson
Vinlandic Warrior
By definition, both statements are "racial". You are taking a person's race into consideration when making both statements. However, the former is offensive, and the latter isn't. That's the difference.
After decades of landlording over thousands of tenants, I have some general observations:
Bad tenants:
- People from NY & NJ....tis known as "area code 212 syndrome"
- Varsity athletes in football, baseball, & hockey
- Middle Eastern commercial tenants
Good tenants
- People from rural communities
- Varsity athletes in gymnastics & track varsity athletes
- Law school students....I know, whooda thunk lawyers-to-be would be good. They tend to be responsible, driven, & they understand what they agree to.
- Engineers (of course)....with one significant exception
One must keep an open mind though, since individuals will confound our expectations.
Bad tenants:
- People from NY & NJ....tis known as "area code 212 syndrome"
- Varsity athletes in football, baseball, & hockey
- Middle Eastern commercial tenants
Good tenants
- People from rural communities
- Varsity athletes in gymnastics & track varsity athletes
- Law school students....I know, whooda thunk lawyers-to-be would be good. They tend to be responsible, driven, & they understand what they agree to.
- Engineers (of course)....with one significant exception
One must keep an open mind though, since individuals will confound our expectations.
gnomon
Well-Known Member
The statement "Romas generally" still implies all.
The statement that theft is rampant among the Roma does not.
Just like the statement blacks commit more crime in America as opposed to the statement blacks comprise a disproportionate number of inmates in the system.
Here are my problems with these types of statements.
1) The improbability that anyone can accurately state how many Roma steal
2) The Roma, as a concept, is not a singular ethnic identity. There are subgroups. So what someone might experience in Italy after meeting a small group of Roma portrays nothing of the rest of Roma in Italy nor the separate Hungarian Roma.
3) The European nations have a historical bias they exhibit to this day in regards to the Roma. Here in the States we have a similar thing. Here it's the concept that blacks commit more crimes. You take a very short time frame and look at the numbers and one can say yes, "Blacks are being arrested for more violent crimes than any other ethnic group.". However, that is not equivalent to saying that blacks commit more violent crimes or even close to the more popular blacks are more prone to commit violence.
So, one could make the case that say in Italy individuals of the Roma are recorded for arrests regarding theft at a disproportionate rate but that does not lead to the conclusion that they are actually committing more thefts or that they are more prone to stealing.
4) Ignoring the rest of the data. In America minorities are considered to comprise the majority of drug users. The actual survey data shows that drug use, illicit drug use, is the same across all ethnic or so called racial lines. But media portrayal of drug use tends to focus on minorities which leads to a biased social perception.
The statement that theft is rampant among the Roma does not.
Just like the statement blacks commit more crime in America as opposed to the statement blacks comprise a disproportionate number of inmates in the system.
Here are my problems with these types of statements.
1) The improbability that anyone can accurately state how many Roma steal
2) The Roma, as a concept, is not a singular ethnic identity. There are subgroups. So what someone might experience in Italy after meeting a small group of Roma portrays nothing of the rest of Roma in Italy nor the separate Hungarian Roma.
3) The European nations have a historical bias they exhibit to this day in regards to the Roma. Here in the States we have a similar thing. Here it's the concept that blacks commit more crimes. You take a very short time frame and look at the numbers and one can say yes, "Blacks are being arrested for more violent crimes than any other ethnic group.". However, that is not equivalent to saying that blacks commit more violent crimes or even close to the more popular blacks are more prone to commit violence.
So, one could make the case that say in Italy individuals of the Roma are recorded for arrests regarding theft at a disproportionate rate but that does not lead to the conclusion that they are actually committing more thefts or that they are more prone to stealing.
4) Ignoring the rest of the data. In America minorities are considered to comprise the majority of drug users. The actual survey data shows that drug use, illicit drug use, is the same across all ethnic or so called racial lines. But media portrayal of drug use tends to focus on minorities which leads to a biased social perception.
No, it is not, unless the intention is to suggest an inheritable trait.