OK, I'll say it... we are too sensitive

[Scifidiner]

The shoe fits line is just a stereotype, and it's being used negatively against white males...
And I thought that "type casting" individuls/groups only perpetuates the hate?

I'm a white, college educated, white collar, straight, Christian male that drives a Ford F150 FX2 and was in a Fraternity. I have 2 federally funded groups dedicated to hating just me.

 

[skyblue17]

The shoe fits line is just a stereotype, and it's being used negatively against white males...
And I thought that "type casting" individuls/groups only perpetuates the hate?

You missed my point. Those words are only used to describe people who represent themselves in a way that align with those adjectives. White men are not called racist or homophobic by default. If they don't represent themselves in a way that aligns with those adjectives, they won't be called those adjectives. It's not assumed that a white man is one of those things without evidence. Now, if you're finding that people are using those adjectives towards certain white men, perhaps consider that the reason those adjectives are being used are not because of the people USING the adjectives, but the people representing themselves in a way that those adjectives are accurate!

 

[luvsJack]

This is a lie.

People knew darn well those songs we wrong, vile, degrading... But they did not give a damn because they were not the ones being demeaned.

How do you know what they knew or didn't know?

Here is the thing, as ugly and as vile as it sounds, people of color back then were thought of as less than. Less than whatever or whoever. And because of that, white people thought they could say or do whatever and it was acceptable. And to society at large it was seen that way because the people of color didn't speak out or couldn't speak our or weren't listened to anyway. That doesn't make what was said or done ok. But as people were enlightened to the fact that people of all races are the same. No one is "less than", their thoughts, words, songs, feelings, etc. changed. I would venture to guess that 50 years later, Kate Smith had a very different view on the world and the people in it when she sang those songs.

 

[J'aime Paris]

You missed my point. Those words are only used to describe people who represent themselves in a way that align with those adjectives. White men are not called racist or homophobic by default. If they don't represent themselves in a way that aligns with those adjectives, they won't be called those adjectives. It's not assumed that a white man is one of those things without evidence. Now, if you're finding that people are using those adjectives towards certain white men, perhaps consider that the reason those adjectives are being used are not because of the people USING the adjectives, but the people representing themselves in a way that those adjectives are accurate!

Nope!
I understand your tainted POV perfectly well! And I don't need an explanation of the word stereotype, thx!
Have a nice life.

 

[skyblue17]

Nope!
I understand your tainted POV perfectly well! And I don't need an explanation of the word stereotype, thx!
Have a nice life.

Well, at least I understand why you feel like such a victim. Talk about sensitive.

 

[DeniseJH]

I’m curious, have you or your family members been directly affected by racism? You seem to be extremely offended.

Frankly I'm surprised more here aren't just as offended. Do you watch the news? Young black men being shot by the cops for no good reason. Voting districts being realigned so that their votes have no weight. Having their churches burned. Being told they won't be employed at certain businesses if they don't change their hair. Their natural hair! And then there's having the cops called on them for the crimes of having a barbecue, napping in their college dorm lounge, staying in a nice hotel, living in a nice apartment building, driving a nice car and on and on. And it was WORSE back then. How can anyone not be terribly offended?

 

[luvsJack]

You missed my point. Those words are only used to describe people who represent themselves in a way that align with those adjectives. White men are not called racist or homophobic by default. If they don't represent themselves in a way that aligns with those adjectives, they won't be called those adjectives. It's not assumed that a white man is one of those things without evidence. Now, if you're finding that people are using those adjectives towards certain white men, perhaps consider that the reason those adjectives are being used are not because of the people USING the adjectives, but the people representing themselves in a way that those adjectives are accurate!

You need to get out more. White men are assumed to racist and/or homophobic just because they are white and male many times. By everyone? No of course not. By some? Yep.

 

[DeniseJH]

You need to get out more. White men are assumed to racist and/or homophobic just because they are white and male many times. By everyone? No of course not. By some? Yep.

I've literally never heard this.

 

[skyblue17]

You need to get out more. White men are assumed to racist and/or homophobic just because they are white and male many times. By everyone? No of course not. By some? Yep.

Yeah, see, I don't think this is about whether or not I get "out" or not. Perhaps this is the case in some places. I can promise you that it's not the case everywhere, and again, if you find those words tossed around in a way you think to be is too casually, perhaps it's a reflection of actions and language that is common? It might require a little more reflection than some are willing to put in, though.

And just as a side note, it kinda bums me out when people first question why someone dare call them out as such, instead of considering what they are doing or saying that might cause someone to call them such. A little self-examination can go a long way, but so long as people think they can never be in the wrong, they will continue to think it's worse to be called racist or homophobic than to act in a way that causes them to be called such.

 

[dadtoagirl03]

No it's not ok to slam white males, or anyone. I just find it funny that a white man comes to a thread about racism and feels offended because others are offended. White men...the most privileged demographic in American history complaining about racism. Do you not find that a bit ironic?

Who says I'm offended. I was simply stating the issue with PC in the world today.

PS: Thanks for proving my point and telling me what I should or shouldn't feel.

 

[luvsJack]

Yeah, see, I don't think this is about whether or not I get "out" or not. Perhaps this is the case in some places. I can promise you that it's not the case everywhere, and again, if you find those words tossed around in a way you think to be is too casually, perhaps it's a reflection of actions and language that is common? It might require a little more reflection than some are willing to put in, though.

And just as a side note, it kinda bums me out when people first question why someone dare call them out as such, instead of considering what they are doing or saying that might cause someone to call them such. A little self-examination can go a long way, but so long as people think they can never be in the wrong, they will continue to think it's worse to be called racist or homophobic than to act in a way that causes them to be called such.

Why is it assumed that it can't possibly be just because of their gender and their race? When, yes, it most certainly can. I said it wasn't by everyone so I am sure "in some places" its not. Although, DH goes all over the country and yes it is pretty much over the country. Again, not by everyone, not even by a lot but its there. He gets frustrated at someone in a business and their lack of doing their job and complains, nothing said about race or sexual orientation and he is accused of only complaining for those reasons. But it has to be him, right? Oh, and the best is when its also because of his religious beliefs that are assumed since he doesn't go around with a banner stating these.

 

[Soldier's*Sweeties]

Frankly I'm surprised more here aren't just as offended. Do you watch the news? Young black men being shot by the cops for no good reason. Voting districts being realigned so that their votes have no weight. Having their churches burned. Being told they won't be employed at certain businesses if they don't change their hair. Their natural hair! And then there's having the cops called on them for the crimes of having a barbecue, napping in their college dorm lounge, staying in a nice hotel, living in a nice apartment building, driving a nice car and on and on. And it was WORSE back then. How can anyone not be terribly offended?

Because they could ignore it then and remain ignorant regarding both the racial overtones, and undertones of a different time.

Now it’s in our faces, as it should be.

 

[cabanafrau]

I've literally never heard this.

It's entirely acceptable today to point the finger and assume when it comes to while males. Somehow it's seen as a balancing of the scales by many. Unfortunately that kind of thinking, about anyone, simply perpetuates hate and benefits absolutely no one.

People are people. Individuals are good or bad, most of the time a mix of both. Labeling, demeaning, targeting, pointing fingers is nothing but destructive to all people.

 

[Soldier's*Sweeties]

It's entirely acceptable today to point the finger and assume when it comes to while males. Somehow it's seen as a balancing of the scales by many. Unfortunately that kind of thinking, about anyone, simply perpetuates hate and benefits absolutely no one.

People are people. Individuals are good or bad, most of the time a mix of both. Labeling, demeaning, targeting, pointing fingers is nothing but destructive to all people.

100% agree.

 

[skyblue17]

Why is it assumed that it can't possibly be just because of their gender and their race? When, yes, it most certainly can. I said it wasn't by everyone so I am sure "in some places" its not. Although, DH goes all over the country and yes it is pretty much over the country. Again, not by everyone, not even by a lot but its there. He gets frustrated at someone in a business and their lack of doing their job and complains, nothing said about race or sexual orientation and he is accused of only complaining for those reasons. But it has to be him, right? Oh, and the best is when its also because of his religious beliefs that are assumed since he doesn't go around with a banner stating these.

Sounds like your husband is experiencing what POC and those of minority religions have experienced for a long time. That's too bad for him, as it shouldn't be happening to anyone but perhaps experiences like these will ultimately help others put themselves in the shoes of others for whom this happens often.

Anyway, I am genuine when I say that I have never experienced, nor know anyone who has. And I do wish that people were not so angered by the label and instead seeked to understand why it might be used.

 

[DeniseJH]

Because they could ignore it then and remain ignorant regarding both the racial overtones, and undertones of a different time.

Now it’s in our faces, as it should be.

I agree, but I was saying that more people should be offended now about both current and past racism.

 

[gina2000]

Frankly I'm surprised more here aren't just as offended. Do you watch the news? Young black men being shot by the cops for no good reason. Voting districts being realigned so that their votes have no weight. Having their churches burned. Being told they won't be employed at certain businesses if they don't change their hair. Their natural hair! And then there's having the cops called on them for the crimes of having a barbecue, napping in their college dorm lounge, staying in a nice hotel, living in a nice apartment building, driving a nice car and on and on. And it was WORSE back then. How can anyone not be terribly offended?

I am terrible angry about all of this behavior in 2019. I am also angry about every incident I read about that occurred in our past. But I don't pretend it didn't happen and I put history in the context of the time in which incidents occurred. I guarantee people 80 years from now will look back at the behavior of this nation post Civil Rights and post 9/11 and wonder what in the world the public was thinking. If I didn't live during it, I wouldn't really understand it.

(And as an aside, I was asked to participate in a focus group post 9/11 at WDW that specifically targeted my reaction to people who wore beards and religious headdress. Was WDW trying to ascertain public emotion to employees who looked different? Absolutely. Was it morally or ethically right? You tell me. They were protecting their brand. Who was protecting these people?)

 

[cabanafrau]

Sounds like your husband is experiencing what POC and those of minority religions have experienced for a long time. That's too bad for him, as it shouldn't be happening to anyone but perhaps experiences like these will ultimately help others put themselves in the shoes of others for whom this happens often.

Anyway, I am genuine when I say that I have never experienced, nor know anyone who has. And I do wish that people were not so angered by the label and instead seeked to understand why it might be used.

Ah yes, the balancing of the scales. Simply leads to more anger and resentment more often than not -- why on earth would anyone want to fuel more, haven't we got more than enough already?

 

[DeniseJH]

I am terrible angry about all of this behavior in 2019. I am also angry about every incident I read about that occurred in our past. But I don't pretend it didn't happen and I put history in the context of the time in which incidents occurred. I guarantee people 80 years from now will look back at the behavior of this nation post Civil Rights and post 9/11 and wonder what in the world the public was thinking. If I didn't live during it, I wouldn't really understand it.

(And as an aside, I was asked to participate in a focus group post 9/11 at WDW that specifically targeted my reaction to people who wore beards and religious headdress. Was WDW trying to ascertain public emotion to employees who looked different? Absolutely. Was it morally or ethically right? You tell me. They were protecting their brand. Who was protecting these people?)

No one is trying to pretend it didn't happen.

 

[skyblue17]

Ah yes, the balancing of the scales. Simply leads to more anger and resentment more often than not -- why on earth would anyone want to fuel more, haven't we got more than enough already?

I certainly don't want to fuel more. That's why I said that I don't think it should be happening to him, or to anyone. Assuming and judging without evidence is not the way to go. However, let's not pretend that everyone person who has been called out for offensive language or actions is actually innocent. Sometimes they are, sometimes people do not realize they did something that might offend someone, sometimes they do not consider what they tend to be as offensive as taken, sometimes people simply do not care. It can be a nuanced thing, as most things are. I simply stated that perhaps more empathy can come from experience.