Wow, now THIS is poor judgment!

That's one of the more interesting things I've read in a while. Do you always discuss matters on this board this way, or just on particular issues?

Probably a much more constructive way of looking at bbs disputes. Whenever I think I've scored a "point," I just get furious if the other person doesn't seem to realize it... pretty futile .

 

That is an extremely interesting site. Thanks for providing the link. The site has several artivles on the "mammie" caricture, the "picaninny" caricture, and others.

The front page is here, the Jim Crow Museum. Anyone interested in the history of Jim Crow laws and the evolution of racism in America should check this site out sometime...

 

I like the cartoon. I find it in no way offensive to blacks or any other minority (in all truth, the airport security workers should be offended). I believe the editor had every right to print it. It was a cartoon about the lack of education in airport security, which is a very real and big problem in America today.

Saturday Night Live has made fun of the lack of ariport security on several occasions. They even use white women to portray the ignorant black women with 12" fingernails gossiping and talking in slang while and armed and dangerous man proceeds to get on the airplane. I find it hilarious and know of many others who do as well! As a woman, I do not find it offensive. I even know of woman who works in an airport who does not find it offensive.

The problem we are all facing does not lie in this cartoon. It lies in our attitudes. Being a woman, I could take any cartoon written about a woman and her lack of driving ability, for example, to be offensive to me. Not all women are bad drivers and I personally have never received a ticket or even a warning. People make jokes all the time about a woman's place being in the kitchen. But it's funny. I laugh. I go to school and I'm going to get a good job, so why should I let a joke bother me. By growing up in a small town in Texas, I could take every cartoon written about hicks or cowboys to be offensive, but I don't.

I could cry and scream for equality just as much and as loud and as any black person. In case everyone has forgotten, women in America have been oppressed longer than blacks have. Blacks could vote in American before women could. Blacks were given higher levels of education before women were. The United States Congress is only 18% female, while the actual American population is 52% female. I'm not complaining. I went to school. I made good grades and graduated in the top 1% of my high school class. It's not because I'm white and it's not because I'm a woman. It's because I worked hard and got my rewards.

There is a very real truth behind this cartoon. Instead of bickering about the racism and bigotry in it, how about do something about it? As long as any one race or sex plays the victim to "acheive equality," segregation will exist in one form or another. The Japanese Americans were held in detainment camps during World War II and a few decades later, many are working and thriving in America. Why? Because they sucked it up, went to school, and got good jobs. (Please note that I am aware that not all Japanese or Asians are rich and intelligent. Just an example. I also know that not all blacks are poorly educated and living on welfare. I have black friends at Rice, Stanford, and UT Law School.)

This is America. We have free speech and free press. I am not ignoring the fact that everyone on this board who has posted is entitled to his/her own opinion. This is mine and several of my friends' opinion.

I do not hate black people or Asian people or white people. I do have a problem, however, with uneducated people, of any race. There is no excuse for it.

I gladly welcome all criticism for my beleifs.

 

I can think of at least one person. I know no one would believe it either, but I'm really trying hard like Kagy is to actually debate and actually practice what I preach in respecting the other guy's views. I will admit, I'm not nearly as far along as Brian is.

 

I'm starting to agree more with BK in this thread...

---------------------
kbm,

I don't agree with some of the stuff you've said in this thread.

I think intent is the key to whether something is offensive. If it turns out that the artist were black, most everyone would just say, "Oh". That would still only give us the assurance (most likely, unless he hated blacks) that it wasn't meant to be offensive to black people. However, the cartoon would still be inappropriate, it just would lost some of it's racial tone. It would still be inappropriate because of the reaction it would bring out in different people... ie, disgust by most blacks, and a sense of self righteousness/superiority from most bigots.

The problem with intent is that it's nearly impossible to prove, unless a person is a card-carrying member of the Klan or something. But, it's not impossible to get a fairly good idea of what a person's intent is, especially when you know a little more about the person in question.

---------------------
Princess,

*sigh....

 

While it's nobel to focus on intent, the problem with intent is perception. You may be able to look past what would otherwise be considered racist to the person behind the work. Many people can't. Therefore, you shouldn't attempt something like this unless you have an uncommon respect for your subject. You have to respect your subject; it's critical. In fact, I would even go so far as to say that people who label works like this racist really are just saying you don't respect me or you don't respect something I feel strong about. No one I think would really place this work on the level of slavery, yet both slavery and this work have been loosely labeled racist, though slavery is clearly deserves the label more than a this simple work of art. On the other side, the word racism itself holds, for the artist and others on his side, the connotation of lynchings, segregartion, etc. They begin to say how could you believe this work on the level of such a powerful word. Well, in truth, the word is just the only way the disrespected can show the gravity of their discontent. What everbody fails to see is that the word itself has silently worked to sabotage what could have been an honest discussion of the discontent. So if you ask me about intent, I'll say if you can't shape THAT intent into a benign act of respect, leaving no room for misintepretation, you should not attempt to try!

 

I was going to stay away from this thread, until I read this post. Excellent points, and excellent post in general.

This is great:
"In fact, I would even go so far as to say that people who label works like this racist really are just saying you don't respect me or you don't respect something I feel strong about."

I still think its a shame that no one can make fun of anyone anymore without offending people. I hate how it is accepted to make fun of whites, but anyone else is taboo. I hate political correctness. All racial crap aside, I still believe that it is the people who hire such ignorant people to be airport security guards who should be flat-out ashamed of themselves.

Oh well. I'm done now.

 

great post, kbm.

 

Dreamer-

I understand why people find it offensive and how it could be viewed by some as wrong.

The reason I don't find this cartoon offensive to blacks is because it is not about blacks. The cartoon is about the lack of education in airport security workers. I agree with Lynus. The real people who should be offended are the REAL airport security workers.

People like having something to complain about.

 

Again, I ask, where is it acceptable to make fun of whites? If it is acceptable, it's because we don't b**** about it...probably because we don't have a recent history like other minorites do.

Again, I ask, why does it have to offend someone for it to be funny?

 

Good point. Now I'm going to suggest something rather un-PC: could it be true that such a carriacature is to some extent accurate? After all, the nation is still something like 70% white, while the NBA seems 70% black. I play pick-up games in our rec center quite a bit. The best players do tend to be black, and the worst, white. There are exceptions ,but it does seem to be generally true.

If a carriacature is somewhat accurate, does that make it acceptable? Or not? How does one determine this? I'm genuinly confused here.

After all, more blacks do have trouble in education than whites. But that doesn't make me feel like the carriacature in the cartoon was acceptable. However, I don't have a problem with the ESPN commercials.

I hope this is because I feel that education is very important, while basketball is a leisure activity. However, I might be letting societal PC conventions govern my thinking...

 

But is not playing basketball well, and being stupid really comparable?

I see your point, it just doesn't seem as bad as what minorities in this country have had said to them. I think I'd hate it more if someone called me the N-word, rather than saying I sucked at basketball (which I do).

BTW, when are you going to come hangout with us?

 

Where is it acceptable to make fun of Whites? C'mon....you don't have to look far:

How about every act ever done by black stand-up comedians? Okay, I exaggerated a bit with "every act ever done", but I've heard it from Chris Rock, Chris Tucker, Richard Pryor, Eddie Murphy, and the list goes on, including by comics of other races like Paul Rodriguez. I actually happen to think all those guys a hilarious, and I have never been offended by any of their acts, but I am offended by the fact that no white guy could ever get up and say virtually the same things about blacks (or Hispanics).

Even our beloved Charles Barkley says crap that no white dude could ever get away with. And I love Charles.

It seems to me that we must learn to laugh at ourselves, and let others laugh at ourselves, if we're ever going to make any progress. People b****ing all the time over something like this is, and having to worry about offending people for fear of being called racist, seems detrimental to the whole cause.

Actual racial slurs and depictions of hate are what we need to be concerned with.

 

Very long article in today's Chronicle.

Texas A&M dogged by racist image
Some black students question motives in effort for tolerance
By RON NISSIMOV
Feb. 17, 2002
Copyright 2002 Houston Chronicle

COLLEGE STATION -- At a recent rally described as the largest demonstration over race relations in the 125-year history of Texas A&M University, some students were skeptical about the administration's show of solidarity.

Three of the school's most recognized leaders, President Ray Bowen, football coach R.C. Slocum and men's basketball coach Melvin Watkins, spoke to several hundred students about the need for more racial tolerance on campus.

"The only reason Slocum spoke is because he didn't want the African-American Student Coalition messing with his recruits," said Samecia Bloomfield, a black senior from Forestville, Md. "It all comes down to money. This university will not give a poppycock about the racial climate on campus until it starts hurting their pocketbooks."

Her doubts about the motivations of the coaches illustrate the difficult task A&M faces in overcoming its image as being inhospitable to minorities.

While other observers shared those doubts, Bloomfield knew something that most students at the rally did not.

Four days before the Jan. 28 demonstration, a group of black student leaders met in private and proposed writing black high school football recruits about the perceived racial hostilities at A&M if the athletic department did not take a public stand on a brewing controversy.

On Jan. 14, the student newspaper, the Battalion, published an editorial cartoon that was perceived by many as racist. Bowen publicly denounced it a few days later and asked the newspaper to apologize. Slocum and Watkins had not spoken out about the cartoon, even though most of their star athletes are black.

The proposal to write the recruits was discussed about two weeks before national signing day, when sought-after high school athletes decide where to play college football.

"We thought it would be unconscionable to allow the athletes to come here without knowing what the racial climate would be like," said Bereket Bisrat, a Houston sophomore who is the spokesman for A&M's African-American Student Coalition.

On Jan. 25, Slocum got wind of the proposal and called Bisrat.

Bisrat, who said he disagreed with the proposal because he thought it would be divisive, said it was the first thing Slocum brought up.

"He said it would be devastating for athletic recruiting and would set the university back for years," Bisrat recalled in a recent interview. "He said, `Don't do that; let's work together to speak out.' "

About an hour later, Bisrat said, he received a call from Watkins. "He didn't sound informed about the cartoon," Bisrat said. "He was asking what was in the cartoon and when did it run. He was even shocked to discover the newspaper hadn't apologized."

The coaches agreed to speak at the rally, and the letters were never written. The editor of the Battalion apologized hours before the planned demonstration, which was turned into a rally for racial tolerance.

"Red, yellow, black or brown, Jesus loves everybody," Slocum said at the rally, pointing out that he has filled the last three openings for assistant coaches with blacks and has four black assistant coaches.

Watkins, the first black head coach in A&M's history, said racial intolerance "will not have a place on campus."

Bisrat said he believed the coaches would have eventually spoken out because they were outraged. But he added, "Once it threatened recruiting, I can't conceive of them not saying anything after that."

Slocum and Watkins last week said the proposed letter played no role in their decisions to speak out. They said A&M's perceived racial climate has never affected their recruiting.

"As one of the most visible leaders on campus, I felt like it would have been cowardice on my part not to take a public stand," Slocum said.

Watkins said he heard about the proposal to contact recruits only after he talked to black student leaders about the rally. He said he did not know much about the cartoon controversy until shortly before the rally because he was busy with basketball season.

Bloomfield called the choice of speakers hypocritical.

"They want blacks to come here and run and throw and pitch and bring national recognition, but they don't necessarily want to see you on campus," she said.

Bloomfield said she has experienced racial hostilities on campus firsthand.

She organized a weeklong series of events to celebrate Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday this year. Last month, she sent a university-approved e-mail to tens of thousands of students asking them to participate. Although she was heartened that hundreds of students of various ethnic groups participated, she was shocked to receive 10 hostile responses.

One response was clearly racially offensive. Another read, "Frankly, I don't care about MLK. He was a great guy and all that, but even if he hadn't given all those nice speeches racism would have died off anyway, and he certainly doesn't merit a Federal holiday or all this apotheosizing."

Bloomfield spent four years in A&M's Corps of Cadets military training program, which she said has pockets of racism. She said that as an upperclassman, she had to stop some white Corps members from slipping a racially offensive note under the door of a black member saying, "Get out."

Although black students interviewed for this story said there were some racial tensions, most said the problems at A&M are not fundamentally different from those at other universities. All the students praised the Bowen administration for trying to address the issue.

"Because of our history, we get our dirty laundry aired a lot more," said Shannon Davis, a black senior from Houston. "Pointing out problems at A&M is easier than looking internally to solve racial problems everywhere else."

Bisrat said A&M could probably be equated to other Southern universities in terms of racial tensions but that it would be "absolutely preposterous" to say A&M doesn't face more racial problems than East and West Coast universities or the University of Texas.

Observers say a conflation of factors has led to A&M's image. These include a high percentage of conservative, white students and a low percentage of minority students, as well as traditions stemming from its history as an all-male, overwhelmingly white institution that provided technical and military training for rural youths.

This year, 82 percent of the 44,000 students at A&M are white, 10 percent are Hispanic, 3 percent black and 3 percent Asian-American.

Other universities in the South have ethnic enrollment figures comparable to A&M's. UT's enrollment this year is 61 percent white, 13 percent Hispanic, 3 percent black and 20 percent Asian-American.

A study completed in December by A&M's Race and Ethnic Studies Institute revealed that 97 percent of white students have a positive image of the school, while 65 percent of minorities have a negative view. A 1997 study completed by University of Michigan researchers commissioned by A&M showed that 53 percent of white students felt A&M was not racist, but only 18 percent of blacks felt the same way. Forty percent of Hispanics and 36 percent of Asian-Americans said the university was not racist.

The December study concluded that minorities become increasingly alienated the longer they stay at the school, describing the typical four-year experience for minorities as, "Freshmen: Frustrated with a lack of diversity. Culture shock. Sophomore: Decision to stay or leave. Junior: Learn coping mechanisms. Form cliques. Seniors: Eager to leave. In general, not a good spokesperson for Texas A&M University."

Like at A&M, Confederate flags dot the landscape at many Southern institutions, a frequent source of irritation for blacks.

The Corps of Cadets a few years ago banned the display of Confederate flags at Corps facilities. A student sued, but the lawsuit was withdrawn before it went to trial, said A&M spokesman Lane Stephenson.

One thing that sets A&M apart, even from the Southern schools, is a variety of revered, high-profile traditions. The traditions, which included the Bonfire before it was canceled after a 1999 accident that killed 12, were developed while A&M required all students to undergo military training and before it admitted blacks and women in the 1960s.

The fervor that many white students and alumni still have about the school's traditions tends to exacerbate the feeling of isolation among minorities at A&M, said the students interviewed for this story. The students said minorities rarely participate in the traditions, which are regularly attended by thousands of white students.

"Before Bonfire fell, my black friends used to tell me, `You better watch yourself going out in the dark with white guys with ropes,' " Bloomfield said.

She said she enjoys Aggie traditions but that she could count "on one hand the number of blacks who participated in Bonfire." Before Bowen recently decided not to hold Bonfire next fall, the university proposed making the tradition friendlier for black students.

Christine Randolph, a senior from Austin, said she went to "Fish Camp" as a freshman because she wanted to learn about Aggie traditions. (In Aggie lexicon, fish are freshmen students.)

"It was so boring," she said. "It's not geared for people of other cultures. It didn't pique my interest."

Randolph said she was one of "two or three" blacks out of 700 students who attended her camp.

The university has actively attempted to attract more minorities since the early 1980s, when Texas entered into an agreement with the federal government to try to end segregation in higher education. That decade, A&M established a Multicultural Services Center to help educate students on minority issues and significantly increased minority enrollment by offering race-based admissions preferences and scholarships.

University officials say the 1996 Hopwood decision banning racial preferences in admissions and scholarships has made the task of attracting students more difficult. But even in 1996, the last year before Hopwood went into effect, enrollment was 80 percent white, 11 percent Hispanic, 4 percent black and 3 percent Asian-American.

In the wake of Hopwood, the university has significantly expanded its outreach programs to predominantly minority high schools, increased the percentage of minority faculty and, despite resistance from alumni, implemented multicultural educational programs in 2000.

The A&M System Board of Regents has proposed automatically admitting seniors graduating in the top 20 percent of their classes from 250 Texas high schools with predominantly minority enrollments. Only the top 10 percent would be admitted from other schools. Regents are waiting on Texas Attorney General John Cornyn to rule on the constitutionality of the proposal.

Finney Coleman, one of three African-American studies professors hired as a group two years ago, said A&M is the largest university in the country without an African-American studies degree program. He said A&M could create a new type of African-American studies "free of the political baggage" often associated with such programs at other universities.

Last year, Coleman said, he received hostile e-mails for starting a popular class on hip-hop culture.

He said he and a fellow black instructor were harassed while driving in the College Station area a couple of years ago by young white men who had "A&M stickers and Confederate flags on their car." The men were loudly playing a song with racial epithets and saying to the black teachers, "You got a problem?"

"I love the spirit of this place, but I wish I could be in love with the spirit of this place," Coleman said. "I can't do that just yet."

But some white students say the increased focus on race is eroding the sense of unity that makes A&M unique among the nation's large universities. They see A&M as a haven from the political correctness they believe dominates most U.S. colleges. They argue that the administration is helping to fracture the campus along ethnic lines like at other universities by caving in to the demands of minorities.

"Since the Bonfire fell and the push for diversity started, this campus has become much more divided," said James Drew, a white senior from Round Rock who last year founded the Southern Heritage Society student organization to defend Southern culture and such symbols as the Confederate flag.

The organization was founded after a Texas transportation office near A&M removed a prominently displayed painting of former Chancellor Gilbert "Gibb" Gilchrist because of complaints from some students and faculty members. The portrait had a small, embedded portrait of Gilchrist's hero, Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee. A new portrait of Gilchrist was put up in the foyer, and the controversial portrait was displayed in a less prominent location.

Drew said he went through "every professor in the history and political science departments" before finally finding a mathematics professor willing to sponsor his organization so the university could sanction it. "I think we're seeing the reverse effect of what they (minorities) claim they want," Drew said. "This campus was extremely united, but now tensions are dividing us up."

Bloomfield scoffed at the claim.

"They want black people to be happy, and they want us to stop making it a black-and-white issue," she said. "It's not us who's doing it."

link

 

I wonder how white kids feel at Howard.