Titus' post about racism made me think of this. It is okay to have BET (the Black Entertainment channel), Black Men, Ebony, Black Women, and Black Hair magazines but people would shit bricks if someone made WET (white entertainment), White Men, Ivory, White Women, and White Hair magazines. Typically when I make this argument, people bring up the fact that there are plenty of TV channels and magazines that cater to white people. This may be somewhat true, however in this day and age, I have seen few major publications and networks the cater EXCLUSIVELY to white people and blatantly market their products as such. 

Let's talk about minority history months.  I understand why they exist - I think they are bullshit. At one point in time, minorities were not being recognized for their actions, and as a result, these months were set apart to ensure they get the recognition they deserve. Well, I think we need to get past this. It is time for there to just be "history". People who do great things, regardless of race, get the recognition they deserve. Why? Because, if I talk about somebody and how great of a "white American" they are, then I would be pinned as a racist, but for someone to specify how great of a Black, Hispanic, Asian  what-have-you American, it's okay.

TL;DR: Racism isn't exclusively white. Lets get rid of this self segregation bullshit and just be people. Who gives a damn if someone is black, white, yellow, brown, red, or purple? 

Views: 1176

Replies to This Discussion

It's not a bullshit argument. It assumes that America is not American, but white, because the majority of everything shows the majority of the people--& they arewhite. It's a majority thing--but there is also a minority, & it asserts itself wherever it can, on the model of majority, & to resist it. In short, the minority is not part of a whole together with the majority. The name of that whole which does not exist is America. The implicit denial of that whole can be called many things, but not a 'bullshit argument.'

Have you watched our children's televison shows lately? What about "Telemundo" and the Hispanic channels? There are also channels that are 'mostly' black that only show 'black' entertainment (BET being only ONE of those). AND as far as I remember, Nick Fury in the original comics was white but in the movie was played by Samuel Jackson, not that he did an exceptional job at it either but I blame his acting not his race (he's a far far better actor than is Tom Arnold).

Your argument seems to be that "White Entertainment" is not really necessary. The opinion on this varies - however, does desiring a "White Entertainment Channel" make someone a racist? Why is there a societal viewpoint that suggests as much?

I remember being in the grocery store and seeing a black man wearing a shirt that had famous Black Panther leaders on it, and no one seemed to care. What if I white man walked in with a shirt that had famous Klan members on it? Im not saying either is acceptable, but it was a total double standard that I feel is very wrong. 

On the subject of minority history months, I will share another personal experience with you. My young cousin, who was 6 at the time, had just learned about the civil rights movement, Rosa Parks, and black history month in school. That afternoon when he got on the bus he told a black kid to go to the back, because he thought thats how things were done (he learned about the Rosa Parks incident, but he didn't learn that it was wrong to make someone move). Needless to say my aunt and uncle were not happy, but it brings up an interesting point. These minority months and things can often fuel racism.

NBC maybe?

Quick, name one non-white actor from Cheers, Friends, Seinfeld, Frasier, Mad about you, Will & Grace, and the Golden Girls.

Heck, without a few rare gems like Bill Cosby, NBC would be whiter than bread.

Aren't Jews considered to be sort of non-white in certain circles? Not being snarky (I know it's a departure for me), serious question.

This may be one of those things that cannot be said in polite company--good thing this is TGD, methinks--& therefore there is no answer. But perhaps science will boldly step forth: Think of the breakdowns in polls. Do Jews count as Dem voters on religion or ethnicity?

Does Jewish count, or how about Catholic, or Baptist?

Depends on whether you're discussing religion or ethnicity.

I really don't mind BET, or black-people hair magazines, or Ebony, or whatever.  The fact is, there is a racial difference in entertainment -- particularly in comedies and music.  And, its not just the color of the actors or musicians.  Cultures differ.  Tastes differ based on culture.  That's not to say there's not overlap -- there is -- but, to pretend its all the same is ridiculous.

 

There are channels that cater to white people.  They won't call themselves "White Entertainment" -- which I admit is a double standard -- but they have shows that intentionally attract white people more than black people.  The Kings of Comedy black comedy tour was mirrored by the Blue Collar Comedy Tour full of redneck white guys.  For every Tyler Perry TV show, there are a dozen shows with a primarily white cast doing comedy that plays more to white sensibilities.

 

I think we'd be better off to ditch the double standard on actually calling white entertainment "white entertainment", but, otherwise, I don't see a problem.  There are entertainment, clothing, hairstyle, etc. considerations that differ substantially enough between the races that its worthwhile from a business perspective to have separate magazines or channels.  I don't suspect white women are going to want half of their hair magazines devoted to dealing with specific issues of styling black hair ... and vice versa.

 

Let freedom ring.  Watch BET.  Go see Tyler Perry movies.  Listen to rap or hip-hop.  I don't like most of it ... but I don't need to.  Where culture intersects, let it intersect.  Where its separate, let it be separate.  I don't need black people to want to watch what I watch.

 

I think history months are a stupid idea.  But, I hate "awareness campaigns" generally.  Every dipshit on a crusade thinks they're going to solve it with "education and awareness".  Bleh.  I am starting an Anti-Awareness-Campaign Awareness Campaign.  Get the word out.

 

JB

I nominate July to be Blissfully Ignorant Month wherein we will be aware of nothing, save fruity summer drinks and sun dresses.

+100 

 

Well said, Jack. 

 

I do think there are some things where education and awareness can be helpful, but by and large, you are dead on. 

 

I second Shane's nomination of July.

RSS

Latest Activity

Ian Wilson replied to John Muir's discussion Night Photography in the group AoM PhotoGroup
"those are awesome.  and thanks for the idea on layering. what ISO setting do you use for these type of shots?"
14 minutes ago
B.A. Poskin added a discussion to the group Scotch Connoisseurs
Thumbnail

Hard to find, only find in Scotland.

Hey Gents!Looking for some hard to find stuff. Maybe not so much expensive but good, and only to be found in Scotland. Any ideas? Or any ideas on where I might find such information?Thanks for the help!See More
42 minutes ago
Michael replied to Nathan DeParis's discussion Women: The Infallible Baromoter
"Perhaps so, I included morals to cover my bases, there are areas between the two that get cloudy."
49 minutes ago
Michael replied to Nathan DeParis's discussion Women: The Infallible Baromoter
1 hour ago
Liam S. replied to Alexander Connell's discussion Wolf Blitzer pushes tornado survivor to admit she thanked the lord. She tells him she's an atheist in the group Gentlemen Atheists
"Awesome. "
1 hour ago
Liam S. replied to Nathan DeParis's discussion Women: The Infallible Baromoter
"I disagree that ethics necessarily reflect morals. Virtues, maybe. But manners and ethics are social constructs, not moral ones. Morals *may* come into play, but are not necessarily part of the equation. "
1 hour ago
Michael replied to Nathan DeParis's discussion Women: The Infallible Baromoter
"I would disagree about manners. Manners are a subset of ethics, therefore ultimately morals and virtues will come into play."
1 hour ago
Michael replied to Nathan DeParis's discussion Women: The Infallible Baromoter
"Adam's assertion doesn't require analyzing how a nation treats it's women.  Granted treating women appropriately ought be expected of any civilized nation just as treating any person appropriately is. Adam's assertion…"
1 hour ago

© 2013   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service