CS and "race card" threads

[The Shadow]

I thought I'd start a new topic as it's been something I've been thinking about lately.

I've been reading CS in it's various incarnations for about seven years now and one topic I notice that seems to come up very frequently is SC's who "play the race card". Typically they go like this...person recounts story of dealing with customer of a particular race/ethnicity. Customer complains, about something, doesn't like they way they're being treated and says "you're treating me this way because I'm...(insert race/ethnicity here)". Other people chime in with similar experiences, and the response is one of general outrage and how often it happens, and how mad it makes them when SC's use this tactic etc.

Now I'm not saying this doesn't happen. I'm sure it does and I'm grateful that I haven't had to deal with this myself (at least not yet) and I don't blame people for being furious about it when it happens.

But I can also see another possible side to these "race card" stories...

Even though we collectively strive to be free of it, we all know that racism (and sexism) is still alive and well and often manifests itself in subtle ways that we're not always conscious of, and this can affect how we treat others. Case in point, -- and I'm going to use an example of gender bias in this instance because it's one I've heard recently and I think it demonstrates my point effectively...a female acquaintance of mine was recounting a story about how she was passed over for a promotion at work because she was deemed "too aggressive". Now one explaination for this would be that here we have the gender double standard at work...that when men behave aggressively, they are praised and encouraged, whereas when women exhibit the same traits, they often get labled 'bitches' or 'ball-busters'. On the other hand, I can also see another possibility...that maybe this particular position required someone who is co-operative, good with people and therefore a genuinely aggressive person of either sex would be unsuited to it, hence this is not a case of sexism. Not knowing too much about her or where she works, I can't say which one it is, but both explanations sound equally plausible. I think you see my point

So it did get me thinking with regards to CS "race card" threads...might the accusation be justified, at least in SOME cases?

[crazylegs]

So it did get me thinking with regards to CS "race card" threads...might the accusation be justified, at least in SOME cases?

Each individual case would have to be looked at in quite significant detail to asertain whether or not a particular poster is acting in such a way, however the general feeling is that when an employee is following The Rules (whatever they may be) to the letter as they do day in day out (under punishment of firing) then for one person of <whatever ethnicity> to play the race card is quite clearly unacceptable.

Yes rasicm is prevalent in todays society, it's certainly not nearly as overt as it has been in the past with segregation or apartheid but people who thought that both of these things was A Good Idea still live, as they did when such systems were in place. Education has come a long way in opening our eyes to different cultures but there is a strong underlying current of racism within out society, I've dealt with it recently at work (I'm white btw) and I'm sure every poster here can come up with an example from some point in the last five years or so.

However, I'm going to stop rambling and get back to my point, I would suggest that if the poster (whoever they may be) is doing as they *always* do irrespective of race then they are justified in their indignation of the race card being played, if however they do change their attitudes or actions according to race then the complaint stands; however we are not there at the time and have to take each complaint as it stands from merely one party involved.

[BlaqueKatt]

Yes rasicm is prevalent in todays society

take a lesson from Avenue Q-"everyone's a little bit Racist"


sadly some people believe that due to past racism in the world the world owes them something-the world owes you nothing, it was here first.

[MadMike]

So it did get me thinking with regards to CS "race card" threads...might the accusation be justified, at least in SOME cases?

In a few extremely rare cases, yes.

A local restaurant got busted a few years back for denying tables to black people. They got them by doing what they call a "sandwich." They sent a black person in, who was told there were no tables. Then they sent a white person in, who was seated without a problem. Then they sent another black person in, who was again told there were no tables.

Surprisingly, they're still in business.

[Saydrah]

sadly some people believe that due to past racism in the world the world owes them something-the world owes you nothing, it was here first.

If I let you step on my shoulders to get onto a high ledge, shouldn't you extend a hand to help me up next?

This country could not have become so wealthy and powerful so fast without slavery, and people are still alive today who suffered from Jim Crow laws when they tried to get an education, a job, and a life that allowed them to take advantage of that wealth and power.

So I do think some affirmative action is a good idea in order to extend the benefits of a country built on the backs of racial minorities to those same racial minorities today. Do I know exactly what that should look like? No. I'm not an expert on the subject. However, when the people who are put forth plans-- for example, a plan to help minorities start a business-- I'll support them.

[Lace Neil Singer]

The only time I ever had someone pull the race card on me, it was a black girl doing so after I carded her. She claimed I only carded her cuz she was black; in reality, she did not look old enough to buy alcohol and as far as I'm concerned, I don't care if you're black, white or bloody rainbow coloured; if you look underage, you either produce ID or you don't buy the booze. I'm sure that in most people's stories, it's pretty much the same thing; someone wants you to bend the rules in a case where it's just not possible to do so and they cry racism when you refuse.

[Jadedcarguy]

However, when the people who are put forth plans-- for example, a plan to help minorities start a business-- I'll support them.

Plenty of programs are in place right now that help minorities, blacks especially, get ahead. Organizations exist right now that help minorities get ahead. If someone were to try to start a program or organization to help white people at the exclusion of all others get ahead, it would be branded racist.

I have no issue with the NAACP or UNCF, they do good work. The problem I have is that these groups and laws like AA are designed to even the playing field, not skew it in advantage of a person of color. When it comes to assistance programs, whitey takes second place right now. Think about it: any program that helps white folks will also help blacks, mexicans, asians, whoever. If I took a grievance to the NAACP, they'd laugh me away. If I told Jackson or Sharpton that I'd been discriminated against, they'd tell me I "deserved" it.

As an HWM(heterosexual white man) I have to rely on myself to get a job, a college grant, a scholarship, a lawyer, a home loan(that difference is fading fast), or many other things that help me "get ahead" in life. The current financial crisis and piss-poor housing market are due almost entirely to giving home loans to the "underprivileged"(a bullshit PC term. I can't afford a Lamborghini, but I want one. Boo-hoo, I'm underprivileged), minorities and otherwise who simply couldn't afford to buy a house. So a loan program was forced down the throats of financial institutions telling them to give loans to these folks even if they didn't look like they would pay them back or had the credit history to indicate they would pay them back. Many of these loan recipients were minorities who would not have been given the home loans if the market hadn't been deregulated in the late '90's specifically for the purpose of "housing" the "underprivileged". Damn I hate that word.

If I were a black man, I wouldn't need to worry as much if at all because my skin color would entitle me to assistance from the groups I mentioned earlier. Would it be detrimental if I had a large income and family money behind me? Nope. If I wanted to go to college the UNCF would help me. If I felt like I didn't get a job because I was black the NAACP would have my back.

As a white boy, I don't have those options. If I want to go to college on someone else's dime, I better work my ass off in HS. If I don't get a job due to AA, tough shit. I better get a good lawyer to fight that one, on my own dime.

As a country we need to stop worrying so much about skin color. Obama winning the presidency is a step in that direction, yet I fear it will empower blacks to "rub whiteys nose in it".

A person of color can succeed in the US without assistance from anyone if they just put their mind to it. Stay the course in HS, go to college and get a good job. You may not be a millionaire, but then most white folks aren't either.

[Saydrah]

Jaded, that post sounded pretty racist, I have to say. Do you really think your life would be easier if you were a black man? Oh, boo hoo, you're a heterosexual white male. Lord knows heterosexual white males have no power or privilege in this world! Why, only the vast majority of elected representatives in all states, 43 out of 44 presidents, the vast majority of CEOs and CFOs, and most of the top 1% of earners, are heterosexual white males! Gee, what an underprivileged group you represent. Quick, let me get my picket signs! We'll protest this horrific discrimination!

The ACLU will help a person of any race who feels they have been discriminated against. Yes, you too, you poor long-suffering HWM. And if you really want an organization to protect you because of your race, there are plenty of white power groups out there-- you might have to shave your head, though.

This country was built by unpaid and underpaid labor by racial minorities, and up until less than half a century ago, it was okay to discriminate openly against people with dark skin, up to and including violence. Just because you weren't born doesn't mean it didn't happen, or that this discrimination isn't still responsible for a great deal of poverty and disadvantages. And racism still exists today, believe me-- didn't you see all the videos where people, including Democrats, openly admitted they wouldn't vote for Obama because of his race?

Barack Obama has said that affirmative action is probably not necessary for families like his own and children like his daughters who enjoy a fairly easy life and are not suffering from the lasting effects of institutionalized racism, and that it probably IS necessary to create AA-like programs that help people of all races who started life at a disadvantage due to poverty or other factors. I agree with that. But that doesn't mean that racism is dead, our society is perfect, and we can end all programs that help minorities get a leg up.

When our Congress, our corporate boardrooms, our universities, our Senate, all look like America, rather than a good old boys' club, then we can end affirmative action once and for all. For now, we still do need to tip the scales a little bit in favor of qualified, hard-working minorities who started out at a disadvantage, as well as in favor of white people who have worked hard to lift themselves out of poverty, rather than being born into the middle class or above.

If you don't believe that discrimination against minorities still exists today, I challenge you to experiment: You can't turn black for a week, but you can go to your nearest Pride shop and buy yourself some rainbow and pink shirts and jewelry. Live as a gay man for a week. Working at a car shop, I bet you'll see some discrimination within a day. My best friend is gay and when he managed a movie theater, he very regularly had customers refuse to speak to him or acknowledge that he as MOD was the sole person capable of handling their complaint. I quote one real asshole: "He can't be the manager. I want to talk to a PERSON who is a manager here, not a fag."

Yes, you have to rely on yourself to get all the things you mentioned-- but you can do it without being told that because of your race or sexual orientation, not only will you not be getting those things, you are not even a PERSON.

[Jadedcarguy]

Saydrah, you're seeing racism where there isn't any. My point is that we will never be truly equal until we stop using skin color as a qualifier or disqualifier.

[The Shadow]

Saydrah, I don't necessarily agree with everything Jadedcarguy said. In fact, I thought his post sounded pretty knee-jerk and reactionary in a lot of ways. But I wanted to make a few points on some of the things you said.

First off, I'm also a white heterosexual male and I also come from a pretty affluent, upper middle-class family background. Now I don't deny that these things definitely gave me certain advantages in life -- advantages that others didn't for pretty much the same reason -- simple fate and circumstances of birth.

But I'm also legally disabled. I am both physically *and* cognitively disabled. My physical disability is a rare muscular condition that makes my muscles weak to the effect that I tire more easily from routine physical day to day activities than most people. This, as you can imagine, rules out a significant number of jobs that I can do. I also have ADD accompanied with learning disabilities which narrows things down even more. It's also a huge reason why in spite of a high IQ, I only have two years of university and it doesn't look at this point that I'm ever going to complete it. These factors play a huge role in my life, meaning whatever advantages privileges in life I have simply by virtue of the fact that I'm a white heterosexual male, the overall quality of my life is significantly negated due to my disabilities. I have my own business, but the money I make from this is merely just enough to supplement my monthly disability allowance (I'm allowed earn a certain amount of my own income each month without deductions). I'm probably going to have to rely on this for the rest of my life and if I ever do any other work it would have to be part-time, as I will probably never be able to work full-time. In other words, I'm never going to be one of those rich white male fortune 500 CEOs you're talking about. I'm always going to struggle to make ends meet. I don't deny the "old boys network" you're talking about exists, but I think it's fair to say that I personally will never benefit from it.

Why, only the vast majority of elected representatives in all states, 43 out of 44 presidents, the vast majority of CEOs and CFOs, and most of the top 1% of earners, are heterosexual white males! Gee, what an underprivileged group you represent.

Yes, it's true that the vast majority of people in these postions are white males (although I would question your assertion that the majority of them are necessarily heterosexual simply due to privilege when it's probably because it's just that there are more of them than gay men). But as Warren Farrell said, why is it that when we look at the status of men, we only tend to look UP and not DOWN? Men make also make up the vast majority of people in prisons, and victims of violent crime. And yes I know that miniorities are disproporitionately represented in prison populations. But consider also that the vast majority of homeless people are white males interestingly enough. At least this has been my observation of the two major cities I've lived in (Toronto and Vancouver) for most of my life, as well as every other major city I've visited in North America.

When our Congress, our corporate boardrooms, our universities, our Senate, all look like America, rather than a good old boys' club, then we can end affirmative action once and for all.

Guess what...things may be a lot closer to that ideal now than you realize...

In terms of academic achievement, females are surpassing males at every level. Some things to consider...

57% of college populations are now female. They make up the majority of populations on most camupuses and for every 100 women who earn a bachelor's degree, only 73 men get one. Another article which highlights some interesting facts:

http://www.reason.com/news/show/124402.html

According to projections by the National Center for Education Statistics, in 2017 half again as many women as men will earn bachelor's degrees. In the early 1990s, six women graduated from college for every five men who did so; today, the ratio is about 4-to-3. A decade from now, it will be 3-to-2—and rising, on current trends...

And:

the result was a new educational gender gap, this time favoring women. There is little sign that it will close: Projections by the National Center for Education Statistics show a 22 percent increase in female college enrollment between 2005 and 2016, compared with only a 10 percent increase for men...

And:

what we are talking about, in all likelihood, is an America where women are better educated than men and where education matters more than ever. Put those facts together, and you get some implications worth pondering....

And:

Look for that gap to widen. A generation from now, the female lawyer with her male assistant will be the cliché. Look for women to outnumber men in many elite professions, and potentially in the political system that the professions feed. (The election of a female president is a question of when, not whether.)

OK I selected the quotes from article which I felt were most relevant and for the sake of brevity, but I was very careful not to take anything out of context. You can read the entire article for yourself at the link I provided if you want. And to be fair, the article does make a point of saying that these things don't necessarily mean that men will vanish into underclass status. My point was simply the overall picuture of those who are privileged and those who aren't has many variables and factors at work, and thus may be a lot more complex than some people would have us believe.

[Jadedcarguy]

........knee-jerk and reactionary..........

Maybe a little. I think that illustrates my frustration with this subject though.

[The Shadow]

Well I think this thread has strayed a little bit from what "this subject" originally was about. But that's OK, I probably shouldn't have expected to get a whole lot of mileage out of the original topic anyway, so I don't mind if it takes a different direction. I do see your point though.

[Saydrah]

Shadow, just FYI, I do count people with disabilities as an underprivileged minority deserving affirmative action programs-- possibly much MORE so than racial minorities. I presumed that was implied in my post, but if not: I actually work in a disability-related field, and I've also been an active ally to the disability community since childhood. One of my father's closest friends and sort of an extra uncle to me is a man with post-polio syndrome who's the chairman of the board of my state's largest disability rights advocacy organization. I have memories of being six years old on Joe's lap on his powerchair scolding a Congressman for voting against a measure that would have helped people with disabilities leave institutions to live independently.

In my office we have a full-time wheelchair user with a spinal cord injury who's also an MD (he's the founder of the company), two people with MS, and another full-time wheelchair user due to SCI who comes to work with his service dog. We were hoping to hire a girl who has Autism recently, but she accepted another offer-- bummer

[anriana]

The "race card" threads annoy me - luckily most people label them so I can just avoid them!

[Jadedcarguy]

I do see your point though.

Thanks. I can sometimes get ranty.

And Saydrah, my post that you took offense to is not coming from a racist point of view. If there's any particular part of it you'd like me to clarify I'd be more than happy to.