Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Well, this is an example of what I think is eel-like behavior, John. You wax on about something and then deny you have any intent behind it because you conveniently threw in a the wee word ‘if’ or the like. The remark I called out was leading. Did YOU mean it to apply? You, after all, were the one who wrote it.
If might be a wee two-letter word, but I have to assume most people are aware of how it functions in a sentence.
John, I’ll iterate: “The remark I called out was leading. Did YOU mean it to apply? You, after all, were the one who wrote it.”
If you are unwilling to answer that question, let me know so I won’t have to reiterate.
If I misunderstood you the first time, then reiteration won't help. Expand and clarify what you are asking.
“If” you misunderstood the question....
Yeah, you reiterated without telling me the reasons for doing so. I thought I answered appropriately the first time.
So Breezy, when should we expect you to issue a retraction on all the non-sense you said about evolution before you got an education; you know like when you told us creatures evolve towards the best and brightest or that evolution has goals? Or perhaps an apology to the people you insulted who pointed out those mistakes?
Unfortunately, I have to stand by my comments, becase even though the mutational aspects of evolution do not have goals, natural selection does act as a filter that permits the best and brightest to pass through.
"I don't want to toot my own horn, but I am educated in everything we've discussed so far."
Yeah despite your confidence in your education and superstitious beliefs, I'm still sticking with the entire scientific world, until you produce something more tangible than hubris.
Can you link any papers you have had published denying species evolution in anything approaching a worthy scientific journal?
Also can you name 3 scientific facts that you deny that don't in any way contradict any part of your religious beliefs?
"I think our understanding of fear isn't syncing up. What I'm trying to suggest is not that fear of the unknown is a perfect solution to the issue. It doesn't even work in all cases. But it's effective enough to keep us alive long enough to propagate in most cases."
And of course as with vestigial organs that once had a purpose and now do not, or have a different purpose, behaviours that helped us survive and evolve may no longer be of any use, they may even be detrimental. Our tribal mentality and superstitious natures may have been a good way to band together in small groups for defence against all manner of threats for instance, but in a post industrialised world with nuclear weapons this can be an altogether more dangerous trait. Luckily we have also evolved brains capable of reasoning rationally, so all is not lost.
Just because you choose to deny scientific facts like evolution in favour of hokum superstition doesn't stop it being a fact. I have asked you before and of course you ignored me as you probably will here again, but could you list three scientific facts you deny that don't in any way refute some part of your religious beliefs?
Oh and you keep implying this is a personal choice to accept the fact of evolution, it isn't, as it is science that claims sufficient evidence has been demonstrated to establish species evolution as scientific fact. How any of us as individuals 'feels' about that is irrelevant, that is what makes it an objective fact.
However by all means publish evidence for your denials and falsify it, then we can all move on. Until then your denials mean no more than the ravings of flat earthers.
You don't think that asserting offensive negative stereotypes based on skin colour is racist? Well you're very wrong. As usual I'm not confident I know whether it's deliberate or not.
Stereotypes should not be seen as racist until they cross over into the land of prejudice and discrimination, with the exception of stereotypes which are learned from a racist society.
John 6IX Breezy "Stereotypes should not be seen as racist until they cross over into the land of prejudice"
------------------------------------------------
Well then he was right to claim that hypothetical statement (below) would be racist, as it is clearly a detestable and prejudiced claim based on skin colour.
Mon, 04/02/2018 - 14:55
Jared Alesi "If I were to say that black people are criminals"
---------------------------------------------
Yet you responded with the claim:
Mon, 04/02/2018 - 19:23
John 6IX Breezy "I wouldn't call the first paragraph racist nor detestable."
The claim as the OP asserted would be both detestable and prejudiced, it would also most certainly be racist. I'm stunned anyone would even try to argue otherwise.
Believing that black people are criminals is ignorant but not racist, and I cannot ascribe malice to ignorance. If the person feels all black people should be put in jail because they're all criminals, that would describe a racist, prejudiced attitude. If the same person refuses to let blacks into their shop for fear of theft, that would describe a racist discriminatory behavior.
You have stereotypes about blacks whether you want to admit it or not. They may be negative or positive stereotypes; and they may be stereotypes unique to you, as opposed of the commonly known cultural stereotypes. If having stereotypes based on race, age, and gender, makes one racist, ageist, and sexist, then we are all racist, ageist, and sexist.
"Believing that black people are criminals is ignorant but not racist, "
Now you're being disingenuous as he didn't say belief, here is what he said verbatim:
"If I were to say that black people are criminals, Asians are math whizzes, Hispanics are only good at farming, and all Germans are Nazis,"
If anyone said that then it would be racist, by definition. Your claims are just straw man arguments, obfuscation?
--------------------------------------------------------
"You have stereotypes about blacks whether you want to admit it or not."
Nope, I find stereotypes based on skin pigment to be absurd, and I'll thank you to stop telling me what I think, you're never right anyway.
----------------------------------------------------
" If having stereotypes based on race, age, and gender, makes one racist, ageist, and sexist, then we are all racist, ageist, and sexist."
Once again then since you seem now to be twisting again what was posted:
""If I were to **say that black people are criminals, Asians are math whizzes, Hispanics are only good at farming, and all Germans are Nazis,"
Are we really going to delve into semantics now arguing about the difference between a racist thought, a racist statement, a racist act? This is silly John. The OP offered a blatantly racist statement, and again i am stunned anyone would even try to argue otherwise.
The heck? So you can have a belief and be totally fine, but the moment you say it verbally its racist?
If you keep it to yourself then it is just a racist belief, though when you say it out loud as the OP suggested, then it is a racist statement, well done I knew you'd get there with your impressive academic credentials.
So you were wrong to describe the opening paragraph of the OP as neither "racist nor detestable" then? I wonder if your education has encompassed the essential ability to admit it when you are demonstrably wrong?
Yes. We're all racist, ageist and sexist.
Definition: Racist
"Showing or feeling discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or believing that a particular race is superior to another."
Definition: Prejudice
"Preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience."
Synonyms: preconceived idea, preconception, prejudgment
Neither of these things requires malice. Believing that black people are criminals surely implies that white people are superior (because, of course, they are not all criminals) and is therefore racist. It sounds like you just don't want to admit that racism is pervasive. It's everywhere. We're steeped in it and at least American culture was built on it. I'd say that it's our job to counteract the stereotypes we carry. And it's totally possible to do so.
Edited to add: So many of these stereotypes are subconscious and not intentional. That doesn't mean we should take any less responsibility for them.
Well just to clarify, ironically enough, believing blacks are criminals does not imply that whites are superior. We associate racism with white people, because that's the stereotype. However, clearly it would depend on who made that comment, if it was someone Hispanic, then they would perhaps see Hispanics as superior.
This goes into probably the more important factor of all, and that is how easily we form ingroups and outgroups; plus our tendency to treat the group we belong to better than the groups we don't.
I do believe there is a solution to racism, but that solution isn't found in stigmatizing stereotypes, nor our biases, its a solution found in understanding how they work, and why they occur. For example, generally speaking Hispanics are multicultural, but they don't classify themselves by race, they do so by nationality. A black Cuban and a white Cuban, feel they are both Cuban alike. In fact I've seen black Hispanics distance themselves from black Americans. By eliminating the white/black classification, you eliminate the possibility of forming black/white stereotypes.
Sure, it would also be racist to say that Hispanics are superior to black people. And we agree that forming ingroups and outgroups can be problematic.
Stigmatizing stereotypes and biases seems to me like exactly what we need to do. When I came out as bisexual, my mother told me that I should never drink alcohol when I was around a lesbian because it's likely that she would try to sexually assault me. Straight men are far more statistically likely to sexually assault me, but that didn't matter to my mom's view of lesbians that had been given to her through her church, family, media, etc. and it was completely inaccurate and misguided. If I had believed her assertion that lesbians were far more dangerous than straight men, I can only imagine how that would have affected my future. I'm so proud of her that she has since apologized for her homophobia. Understanding how and why she had those stereotypes did not help. She had to see that her thoughts were harmful and choose to change them.
Also, I can't possibly see a future in which we eliminate the white/black classification unless we first rid ourselves of our racism. Racism reinforces that division.
Right, the thing I want you to notice is that saying that straight men are far more likely to sexual assault you, is itself a stereotype. A stereotype doesn't stop being a stereotype for the sake of being accurate. That's the first problem with stigmatizing stereotypes, it makes us focus on the stereotypes we deem negative and inaccurate, while giving a pass to stereotypes we like and think are true.
Eliminating classification, if possible, is a sure way to eliminate stereotypes. But stereotypes also change as information is gained, precisely because stereotypes are attempts to classify information. Regardless of why your mother originally thought lesbians would sexually assault you, as more information became available, as she encountered examples which contradicted her beliefs, her stereotypes changed.
I'm sure she did see her thoughts as harmful, but the mechanism by which she arrived at that conclusion probably involved coming across experiences which undermined her stereotypes. So I still think that knowing how and why stereotypes emerge (an attempt to classify information) can help us change our stereotypes (by exposure to more information). Her stereotypes are still there, it just shifting from a negative one into a positive one.
It would be silly to pretend that all stereotypes are equally harmful (or even harmful at all). They're not. And some stereotypes are more accurate than others. The fact that straight men commit sexual assault at higher rates than lesbians is not a stereotype. Statistics have demonstrated this. The way that this affects my view of men could be called a stereotype. I'm not saying all stereotypes are bad. But I am saying that there are stereotypes that perpetuate racism, sexism, ableism, ageism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. that are not innocuous. These have real-world consequences and it is worth combating these biases.
It's similar to the notion that, It's not racist if it's true. Which is wrong, stereotypes are still stereotypes even if they're true.
I have no issue with combating stereotypes, only that I think they should combated with information, and not stigmatization.
@John 6IX Breezy;
"For example, generally speaking Hispanics are multicultural, but they don't classify themselves by race, they do so by nationality. A black Cuban and a white Cuban, feel they are both Cuban alike. In fact I've seen black Hispanics distance themselves from black Americans"
Sorry, you are wrong and simplistic about Hispanics. Cubans see all others as Cubans, but a black Cuban is thought less than a white Cuban and have a much harder time finding jobs or posts of influence. Cubans are pretty racists. It si so much so that in Cuba, when white (and even some black) people talk about a person, they will refer to a white woman or man as "a woman" or "a man" while, they will call a black woman or man "a negra" or "a a negro".
Then, If you go Mexico, a white Mexican is a king, women run after you and you land the best jobs while if you have darker skin and "indian" features, you are looked as low class. Interestingly, in Cuba and Dominican Republic if you have kinky hair, you are suspect of being black so mothers pray for their children to have straight hair. However, in México kinky hair (called "chino"?!) is desired as straight black hair is associated with "indians" (native aztecs and other ethnias) while wavy hair and body hair is associated with white Europeans...
Things are nor simple.
I'm going to assume you're Hispanic, and if so I'm also going to assume you know how misleading it is to suggest that the "mi negra" comment is racist. It is literally a term of endearment, that hardly anyone views as racist.
I can't speak on the jobs because I don't know anyone who has had trouble finding them for racial reasons. I also don't know any Dominicans that make such prayers, but I'm willing to bet it's not as serious as you made it seem. Hispanics have a sense of humor and way of speaking that just doesn't translate into English.
I dont think pepple believe in astrology in the first place. Do a good amount of people actually believe in that stuff? Or am I missing the point maybe
The point was that astrology is fundamentally similar to racism, and should be treated as such. It's vile, ignorant rubbish, and an educated society would do away with it.
Jared Alesi,
"The point was that astrology is fundamentally similar to racism, and should be treated as such. It's vile, ignorant rubbish, and an educated society would do away with it."
The Old Testament prohibits fortune telling.
According to the hadiths Mohammed said that fortune tellers were nothing but liars.
We barely have legalization on hate speech on the basis of gender, nevermind based on something like star sign or hair color. In addition, religions can carry on printing hate speech in the form of their foundation texts & telling people they are going to burn in hell, and it generally goes unpunished.
Pages