I'm beginning to suspect none of you ever understand what I am trying to say. Am I honestly communicating that poorly? (The answer is apparently yes, I suppose that was a rhetorical question)
Whatever, I clearly need to stop participating in this thread since I am clearly incapable of projecting my thoughts correctly. Blegh.
No, actually, this is a worldwide problem, common language or not we have no idea how to talk to each other and so we suck at it, pretty much all of us. We can hardly organize our own thoughts sometimes, how do we expect others to do so?
Also, please don't go, I like you as a friend. I like to imagine this means as an actual friend, and not some head bobbing yesman. I appreciate you arguing with me respectfully.
Problems discussing racism generally:a.) Lots and lots of bad things happened to and from lots and lots of kinds of people
b.) We focus on the modern stuff, cause that's what is going on now
c.) Everyone gets emotional instead of logical, personalizing everything
c1.) People of the same race as the racist in the example personalize and either feel ashamed or insulted from the common logic, "if X is doing bad and I'm X as well then...
.
c2.) People of the same race as the oppressed get mad at the oppressor's entire race.
d.) Everyone is hurt and things blow up.
What we should do:a.) Treat it like any other horrible act and/or crime, "because X did this now or in the past, does not mean I did this and saying X did, does not reflect upon me."
b.) Determine what is racist and if X did something in that category based upon what X knew or should've known would be perceived as racist. Same as any other bad act.
c.) Not personalize.
d.) Learn from it and avoid repeating history, while taking comfort in the fact that you never did anything like what X did.
Present example:Unilever (in one form or another) has been doing this crap for over a century. They did it then, they're doing it now. Yes, their primary motive is to make money, but doing so by making people feel uncomfortable because of their race is horrid and wrong. There are plenty of other strategies they could use to make money that would be more effective and less controversial. While the mere making of a product in and of itself is not bad, the way they have marketed it for over a century and continue to market it, is.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/nivea-pulls-offensive-ad-185220424.html
Famous second to last words, "What? I know what I'm doing, I don't need a lawyer telling me my business."
Famous last words, "Shit, I should've had someone, like maybe a lawyer, look this over."
Would it have been racist if it were a white male throwing a head with an 80's heavy metal haircut?
If yes then I miss the point, if no then the law (read: jury/judges) is racist (for sueing only defamation of black people and not white) and not the ad. There's "taking things too far" and then there's the USA.
The answer is closer than it is too far:The problem is, they never make that add with the white guy being dirty. All of their adds for over a century have the "dirty people" as black.... Many of them have a white person as "clean," but never a black person without reference to them being dirty.
Dating back a century, they never, have the white guy be dirty with comments like this.... Think about that.
This particular corporation has a noted history of being racist and the only thing they have done about it, is continue it....