Is this racist?

[Perotista]

I posted this video on another thread, but I think it deserves its own discussion.

This is a direct, yes-or-no question: Does racism occur in this video?

I don't know if racism is involved as much as stereotyping. Now is that right, no. But Jesse Jackson around 10-15 years when addressing this stereotyping gave a personal example, Jesse was walking the streets at night, either going home or back to his hotel in what ever city he was stay, he heard footsteps and turned around to see two whitemen. Jesse said he breath a sigh of relief. This example from a black man.

I do think the video is very acurate. I probably would have helped the girl myself. I think race does play a part, but if you noticed almost everyone that walked by was white regardless of which actor they chose. I wonder what would have happened if the black guy was doing this in a black neighborhood or the white guy in a predomenently black neighborhood. Would the results have been different? I think so.

 

[sangha]

That's right, the black kid's hat was crooked.

That must be it.

Actually, I liked the posts blaming it on the red shirt better.

You know, because prejudice against the color red is such a big problem in this country, whereas prejudice against blacks is practically non-existent. :shrug:

 

[Arbo]

Of course, you might read the rest of the quote you responded to in order to know better, and it would also explain the previous quote.

You can spin all you want, based on what you said, it appears you do not know what racism is. Period.

 

[Boo Radley]

You can spin all you want, based on what you said, it appears you do not know what racism is. Period.

Only if you ignore the rest of the quote. If you're honest, read it again. If you're not honest, I guess it doesn't matter. :roll:

 

[Phys251]

Actually, I liked the posts blaming it on the red shirt better.

You know, because prejudice against the color red is such a big problem in this country, whereas prejudice against blacks is practically non-existent. :shrug:

It certainly was an interesting dodge, wasn't it?

Had the white male and the black male worn the exact same attire, the excuse probably would have been something to the effect of lighting conditions of the different times of filming.

The racism apologists don't realize that it takes more energy to deny the racism within ourselves than to just come clean, admit it, and start to heal oneself.

 

[JumpinJack]

Both racism AND sexism are in the way the public reacts to the criminals. Actually, the sexism is more apparent. Way more apparent, to the point where several members of hte public HELP her steal the bike, even when one's wife is off to the side explaining to the husband that the girl is stealing the bike.

The racism is not as obvious. Those ARE different members of the public, so it's hard to know for sure if everyone in the public was affected by the criminal's race. There is a tendency not to want to get involved, so it's possible some of that was luck of the draw, that some members of the public in the first instance were that type of person, not wanting to get involved. Still, the cops were called when the criminal was black, no doubt about that.

I also noted that it was mainly white men who had a problem with the black criminal. One even argued with him, raised his voice, and took his tools. It was also mainly white men who were fooled by the pretty female criminal.

Maybe the lesson is this: women are better at judging these things and less likely to be fooled or swayed by prejudice.

I also note that the white male criminal was more attractive than the black criminal. As we saw with the girl, good looks is a factor. Would the reaction have been the same if the white male was unattractive and the black male was handsome? Hard to say how much that affected things.

 

[Arbo]

Only if you ignore the rest of the quote. If you're honest, read it again. If you're not honest, I guess it doesn't matter. :roll:

As I said, you can spin it however you'd like. It appears you want to continue down the alley of attempted personal attack rather than deal with reality. That's all good and fine, but it doesn't change the reality that you do not appear to know what 'racism' is.

 

[Objective Voice]

Yes, it's racism.

The white kid clearly acknowledge he didn't own the bike. He asked the spectator directly if they knew whose bike it was even while he was attempting to cut the chain off. Now, eventually someone did call the authorities (the elderly White couple), but you notice something very different between what took place when the White kid was trying to take the bike versus what happened when the Black kid tried it.

It took some time before anyone asked the White kid if it was his bike. Moreover, fewer people confronted him initially. Going further, few were as eager to get involved or aggressive in their confrontation when the White kid was trying to take the bike. But the moment it was a Black kid doing it suddenly EVERYBODY (who was White) stated asking questions, gathered around, and wanted to call the cops almost immediately!!

The Yale professor made it clear that the attitudes exhibited were, in fact, racially motivated. You can label it stereotyping if you wish, but when you strip all the niceties away, you still come away with racism at its core.

 

[Objective Voice]

No. It's profiling.

Looked to me they were dressed the same, doing the exact same acts, answering with the same language ("it's not your bike is it? It will be mine. Essential stealing it.").

the second guy didn't get to the power saw because they were on him so fast.

This experiment has been done many times, many places, many conditions, and results always the same. That should at least cause pause.

I can understand how some would see the events from the video as racial profiling as opposed to outright racism because a sense of racial superiority wasn't the driving force behind their decisions to either confront, contact police or render assistance. But the difference as I see it is the fact that in each case, particularly between both male participants, both males told everyone who confronted them that the bike wasn't theirs and yet people's attitudes were far more aggressive and immediate concerning the Black kid whereas people tended to give the White kid a pass - again even after he told those who inquired it wasn't his bike.

This is why in this particular case I call it racism as opposed to racial profiling. Even when people instinctively knew both test subjects were wrong, they all fell back on race as a deciding factor to their actions.

 

[Boo Radley]

As I said, you can spin it however you'd like. It appears you want to continue down the alley of attempted personal attack rather than deal with reality. That's all good and fine, but it doesn't change the reality that you do not appear to know what 'racism' is.

And you can spin this any way you want, when you don't read the second half, you're not addressing it.

 

[MaggieD]

I can understand how some would see the events from the video as racial profiling as opposed to outright racism because a sense of racial superiority wasn't the driving force behind their decisions to either confront, contact police or render assistance. But the difference as I see it is the fact that in each case, particularly between both male participants, both males told everyone who confronted them that the bike wasn't theirs and yet people's attitudes were far more aggressive and immediate concerning the Black kid whereas people tended to give the White kid a pass - again even after he told those who inquired it wasn't his bike.

This is why in this particular case I call it racism as opposed to racial profiling. Even when people instinctively knew both test subjects were wrong, they all fell back on race as a deciding factor to their actions.

Good explanation. I like it.

 

[Arbo]

And you can spin this any way you want, when you don't read the second half, you're not addressing it.

Not sure why you continue on with this, it has nothing to do with the thread topic any longer. The post you made, that I responded to was:

Doesn't it? You act against someone based on race, isn't that really racism?

I quoted it in it's entirety. There was no more to read in terms of the post I responded to. Period.

 

[Boo Radley]

Not sure why you continue on with this, it has nothing to do with the thread topic any longer. The post you made, that I responded to was:



I quoted it in it's entirety. There was no more to read in terms of the post I responded to. Period.

Not true. You responded to ths post:

Well, I'm pretty sure I know what racism is, and if it leads to more of a minority being arrested and less whites, I think that would fit any definition. And what we saw could very well lead to that type of injustice.

It explains and is more.

 

[Arbo]

Not true. You responded to ths post:

You can keep clicking on that little double > and go back to the first response to you. You will find it was the post I quoted. Nothing since that time has shown me that you understand what racism is beyond your first post.

 

[Boo Radley]

You can keep clicking on that little double > and go back to the first response to you. You will find it was the post I quoted. Nothing since that time has shown me that you understand what racism is beyond your first post.

It didn't end there. Where you went wrong was when you answered the one we're actually discussing.

 

[Arbo]

It didn't end there. Where you went wrong was when you answered the one we're actually discussing.

At this point (and for quite some time) you are just bickering. If you have something to say about the thread topic you want to discuss, let me know, otherwise we are way past done.

 

[Boo Radley]

At this point (and for quite some time) you are just bickering. If you have something to say about the thread topic you want to discuss, let me know, otherwise we are way past done.

I didn't start down this track, you did. I explained why it's racist, and you chose this track. I suggest you answer what was actually said.

 

[FederalRepublic]

I posted this video on another thread, but I think it deserves its own discussion.

This is a direct, yes-or-no question: Does racism occur in this video?

Yeah. I think so.

 

[johndylan1]

I posted this video on another thread, but I think it deserves its own discussion.

This is a direct, yes-or-no question: Does racism occur in this video?

Obvious racism, but not against the black actor. What happened to him was appropriate. The racism was applied in the form an affirmative bias for the white actors. This may be more of a halo effect, on second thought, than overt racism.