Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 12:49 AM Feb 2015

This message was self-deleted by its author

This message was self-deleted by its author (Bonobo) on Mon Jul 27, 2015, 08:48 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Behind the Aegis

(54,852 posts)
1. Interesting.
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 02:01 AM
Feb 2015

While I find some things relevant, there are situations which do call for reflection and understanding. That said, I also find it interesting how, when it comes to Jews, suddenly those who preach the above throw it out the window and relish telling Jews what is and isn't anti-Semitism.

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)
2. What would be the motivation for caucasian people to just listen and not speak their minds?
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 02:43 AM
Feb 2015

If you want to convince someone to change their behavior, then they should be offered some benefit, right? I agree with the message to an extent because that is how I learn, but those who don't agree aren't going to suddenly agree when they hear this. Are they? Is this not just preaching to the choir?

Major Nikon

(36,900 posts)
3. If the topic is beyond explanation, what is the point in listening?
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 01:29 PM
Feb 2015

Seems like a catch 22

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)
4. People who are going to agree with the OP on any level most likely already agree with the OP on some
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 05:39 PM
Feb 2015

level. I think we need to give people a reason to change their behavior and beliefs. Saying "don't be an asshole" will work for some people, but how do we reach other people?

 

lumberjack_jeff

(33,224 posts)
13. The other catch 22
Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:30 AM
Jul 2015

Is the fact that whites/men/straights/cis people who are sympathetic to the view expressed in the OP are the ones most likely to have a salient opinion on the topic. This effectively leaves the conversation to those who don't give a shit what you think.

Personally, I think white is a race, and male is a sex - the minority sex at that, so I participate. Given the range of choices available to me; 1) participate in the dialog, 2) walk away or 3) passive acquiescence, the third option isn't appealing at all.

Major Nikon

(36,900 posts)
14. If one has to think up ways to silence dissenting voices...
Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:25 PM
Jul 2015

They probably have no interest in substantive discussion in the first place and they are oblivious to the reality that most people don't take too well to being lectured.

 

lumberjack_jeff

(33,224 posts)
5. When I encounter this, I change the channel.
Fri Feb 27, 2015, 12:21 AM
Feb 2015

Demanding that I don't hold or form an opinion is a bridge too far.

To those for whom suppression is the desired outcome, I'm not an ally.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
6. anyone who declares that other people have to remain silent on some topic
Fri Feb 27, 2015, 09:55 PM
Feb 2015

is an authoritarian and should be ignored. There is a great deal of such behavior at du, and there is really no way to deal with such people they are convinced a priori that no (man/white/breeder/childless person) can possibly know anything about their lives. Counterproductive, but guaranteed to arouse outrage and lots of recs

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
7. I agree. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy
Fri Feb 27, 2015, 10:58 PM
Feb 2015

When I see women who make a habit of lecturing about mansplaining go hog-wild with the whitesplaining, it makes me laugh.

NaturalHigh

(12,778 posts)
8. Yeah, I got told in GD recently...
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:22 PM
Mar 2015

that it was my job to listen and not speak on racial topics. I thanked the fellow kindly and moved on. No need to even deal with people like that.

Shankapotomus

(4,840 posts)
9. Abuse and oppression
Wed Jul 15, 2015, 10:37 PM
Jul 2015

happens to humans not just PoC, women or LBTG's.

There are liberals on this boards - even white males - who understand what it means to be abused, oppressed, socially powerless and culturally invisible...

What about the disabled? The comments do nothing but make them even more culturally invisible if they happen to be white and male. I guess they can be punished two-fold for being disabled and also white men?

The article talks about only the suffering of PoC, women and LGBT's.

I dare them to tell the disabled of ANY FUCKING COLOR they don't understand discrimination, cultural invisibility, suffering and social powerlessness, not to mention isolation, etc...and that they can't speak of it because they are white or male.

I'll speak about discrimination any fucking time I want. And no one is EVER, EVER going to tell me I haven't suffered enough.

They can FUCK OFF!

 

jtuck004

(15,882 posts)
10. To the author: This reminds me of Plessy vs Ferguson - except here, if you haven't got a drop of
Thu Jul 16, 2015, 10:46 AM
Jul 2015

the right blood you can't possibly understand anything.

"PLESSY VS. FERGUSON: THE MEANING OF THE “ONE-DROP” RULE

...
Homer Adolf Plessy purchased a ticket from New Orleans to Covington and took a seat in the “white” section of the East Louisiana Railroad Company train. Railroad officials ordered Plessy to the “colored” car. When he refused, a police officer forcibly ejected Plessy and hurried him off to the parish jail in New Orleans. Officials charged Plessy with violating a recently enacted state law—one of many Jim Crow laws enacted in the late 1800s as whites moved to entrench their power in state governments–that barred persons from occupying rail cars other than those to which their race had been assigned.

Had railroad officials not been notified in advance that Homer Plessy was one-eighth black, he undoubtedly could have taken his seat in the “white” section of the train. Plessy appeared to be white. Louisiana, however, applied “the one drop rule”: anyone with one drop of non-white blood was classified as “colored” under the Louisiana code. Plessy gave up the privilege that he might have enjoyed as the result of his light pigmentation because he shared the goals of the Citizens’ Committee to Test the Constitutionality of the Separate Car Law, a New Orleans group of blacks and Creoles. The Committee believed that a white-appearing plaintiff such as Plessy might be more likely to obtain the sympathy of a court reviewing the Louisiana law.

If found guilty, Plessy faced a possible fine of $25 and a sentence of up to twenty days in jail. Plessy challenged the Louisiana Separate Car Law, arguing that it violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection of the laws. In October of 1895, the United States Supreme Court heard Plessy’s arguments.

The Court upheld Louisiana’s Separate Car Law in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson. In so doing, it announced the legal principle, “separate but equal,” that would guide American race relations for over half a century. Justice Henry Brown’s opinion, reflecting no understanding of racial realities in America, reads as though written by a Martian: “The underlying fallacy of plaintiff’s argument consists of the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority. If this be so, it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction on it.” John Marshall Harlan offered a lone dissent. Justice Harlan, in a ringing passage—one suggested in a brief filed by Plessy’s lawyer, Albion Tourgee–argued “our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.”
...

http://www.africaresource.com/rasta/sesostris-the-great-the-egyptian-hercules/plessy-vs-ferguson-the-meaning-of-one-drop-rule/

A phony separation enforced by the label "caucasion" isn't any different from putting people in another train car because you think they are less than you.

lpbk2713

(43,201 posts)
11. The author, Bonobo, will be involuntarily incommunicado for a while.
Thu Jul 16, 2015, 11:19 AM
Jul 2015





 

jtuck004

(15,882 posts)
12. Dang. Hate it when dialogue ceases.
Thu Jul 16, 2015, 03:01 PM
Jul 2015

And it's not that there aren't some good points, but it sure doesn't seem to leave much room to work with others.

westerebus

(2,977 posts)
15. This old meme still kicking around.
Sun Jul 19, 2015, 10:01 AM
Jul 2015

Simple enough reasoning, if one wants participation, one participates and accepts other will also.

Conversely, to shut down or narrow the conversation into dullard conformity, what would be the point of engaging?

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Men's Group»This message was self-del...