"The assertion that recognizing potential racism"
Oh, it's "potential" racism now? The OP stated, as a fact, that the old lady had been racist toward his daughter. Your tacit request to move the goalpost is denied.
Also, most anything could be construed as "potential racism." The problem is: there's utterly no basis for it in the OP's story (i.e., nothing that the old lady did fits the definition of racism), so it's just pure imagination or an attempted mind-reading.
"Understanding racism requires acknowledging how it can manifest in subtle ways"
There's no such thing as something manifesting in subtle ways. See below.
"including in assumptions about what is considered 'normal' or 'ideal,' even regarding mythical figures like angels."
You have no idea why she believes that angels have blonde hair and blue eyes (because you are not a mind-reader), therefore your idea that it's due to racism is a leap of logic, which is a specific form of "making shit up." Furthermore, even if it were due to racism, it wouldn't be specifically directed at the OP's daughter, it would be directed at most people in general, including most white people, and probably even directed at herself (most people don't have blonde hair and blue eyes, and most people in their 70s like she is have gray hair, which obviously isn't blonde).
"It has nothing to do with 'mind-reading"
Yes, it does, because the only way anyone in this thread could state as a fact that the old lady is a racist is if they were legitimately a mind-reader (given that she didn't actually do anything that fits the definition of racism), and legitimate mind-readers aren't known to exist.
"it's about understanding the implications of certain statements and their impact, especially on young minds."
There are no racist implications in the OP's story. You're merely making shit up.
"Racism doesn’t always manifest in overt actions or explicitly stated beliefs"
Yes, it does. If there are no overt actions or explicitly stated beliefs then racism didn't manifest, obviously. Do you know what "manifest" means?
manifest
adjective
1: readily perceived by the senses and especially by the sense of sight
2: easily understood or recognized by the mind : obvious
transitive verb
: to make evident or certain by showing or displaying
"Moreover, calling out the
potential racial bias in these actions"
Again with the attempt to move the goalpost. See above.
"doesn't stem from an attempt to 'conjure up' racism"
Yes, it does, since there is literally zero evidence of racism in the OP's story.
"but from a well-documented understanding of oppressive societal mechanisms and of how racial biases can be perpetuated through various forms of communication, including those that might initially appear innocuous and may have been made in ignorance and not in malice."
This is a non sequitur, given that there's absolutely nothing inherently racist about a belief that angels have blonde hair and blue eyes. It's a dumb belief, but not because it has anything to do with racism, but rather, because it suggests that she gets her "information" from pop culture depictions of angels rather than, e.g., the Bible. In the Bible there are angels that aren't even remotely human in appearance. For example, some of them have four faces; some of them are covered with eyes (this is a drawing based on a description of a type of angel from the Bible -
https://media.swncdn.com/via/images/2023/08/11/32042/32042-seraphim_source_file.jpg).
"The way racism manifests in society is complex and requires an analysis that goes beyond a literal 'by-definition' view to consider the contextual, historical, and societal contexts in which it takes shape."
If you accuse someone of racism without them actually doing anything that fits the definition of racism, then you've made an unfounded accusation, and people who make unfounded accusations are firmly in the "bad person" category.
reply
share
VinceD (10408)
a year ago
Your insistence on a strictly literal interpretation of racism overlooks the nuanced, systemic, and often subtle ways in which racism permeates society. The term 'potential racism' acknowledges that racism is not always overt but can be embedded in cultural norms, stereotypes, and even in how we envision mythical beings. This isn't about moving goalposts but recognizing the complex reality of how racism operates.
The belief that manifestations of racism are limited to overt actions or explicit beliefs is a misunderstanding. Racism, as understood through decades of scholarly research and lived experiences, often functions through implicit biases and systemic inequalities that are not always immediately visible or conscious. These forms of racism are well-documented and recognized in the fields of sociology, psychology, and the various social sciences.
Your reliance on the definition of 'manifest' to argue that racism must be overt to be real is a reductionist view that fails to account for how deeply ingrained racial biases can influence perceptions and actions in ways that are not immediately obvious. Importantly: The impact of suggesting angels can only look a certain way--blonde hair and blue eyes--reinforces a narrow, exclusive standard of beauty and divinity that mirrors some of the most horrific historical and contemporary racial hierarchies.
While it's true that the Scout leader's belief about angels may stem from pop culture rather than explicit racial animus, the effect of her comment, especially on a child of a different racial background, cannot be dismissed. It's about the broader implications of such beliefs and how they contribute to a culture that privileges certain racial characteristics over others, which is a component of systemic racism.
If you accuse someone of racism without them actually doing anything that fits the definition of racism, then you've made an unfounded accusation, and people who make unfounded accusations are firmly in the "bad person" category.
Yes, it is I who is in the "bad person" category, not the grown adult woman--in a position of power--who told a 10-year-old child of a different racial background that all angels must have blonde hair and blue eyes. She's definitely not the bad person here…
We're obviously not going to change each other's minds here, so with that, I bid you a good day.
reply
share
MaximRecoil (4850)
a year ago
"Your insistence on a strictly literal interpretation of racism"
That's the only thing that matters if you're going to be accusing someone of racism, like the OP did.
"overlooks the nuanced, systemic, and often subtle ways in which racism permeates society."
That sort of theorizing is irrelevant with regard to accusing someone of racism. If someone hasn't done anything that fits the definition of racism and you accuse them of racism, you've made an unfounded accusation.
"The term 'potential racism' acknowledges that racism is not always overt but can be embedded in cultural norms, stereotypes, and even in how we envision mythical beings. This isn't about moving goalposts but recognizing the complex reality of how racism operates."
You did move the goalpost, because I replied to the OP who accused someone of racism, not "potential racism." That also amounts to a concession on your part, since, by claiming that it's potential racism you're inherently saying it's not racism (potential racism ≠ racism), which is in agreement with what I said in the first place.
"The belief that manifestations of racism are limited to overt actions or explicit beliefs is a misunderstanding."
No, it isn't. The misunderstanding is on your part, with regard to the meaning of the word "manifest."
"Your reliance on the definition of 'manifest' to argue that racism must be overt to be real is a reductionist view that fails to account for how deeply ingrained racial biases can influence perceptions and actions in ways that are not immediately obvious."
No, you're the one who chose to use the word "manifest," and that choice made your assertions wrong, by definition. You can look for different words to express what you were trying to say if you want, though it's irrelevant, as it has nothing to do with the point of contention (and you've already conceded the point of contention anyway [see above]).
"While it's true that the Scout leader's belief about angels may stem from pop culture rather than explicit racial animus, the effect of her comment, especially on a child of a different racial background, cannot be dismissed. It's about the broader implications of such beliefs and how they contribute to a culture that privileges certain racial characteristics over others, which is a component of systemic racism."
That's more irrelevant theorizing, and not in the scientific sense either, but rather, in the pseudoscientific sense, given that it's the sort of theorizing which is unfalsifiable due to consisting of untestable assertions, such those regarding "the effect of her comment" and "broader implications."
"Yes, it is I who is in the "bad person" category"
You've made an unfounded accusation, so that's correct. Unfounded/false accusations can ruin people's lives in a tangible/demonstrable/direct-cause-and-effect way. People who make such accusations can also be held legally liable due to slander and libel laws.
"not the grown adult woman--in a position of power--who told a 10-year-old child of a different racial background that all angels must have blonde hair and blue eyes."
Since that's a description of something which is utterly innocuous, What of it?
reply
share