How incredibly complex a subject is racism.
The fanatical, bigoted, passionate beliefs of some people still shocks me.
How incredibly and unfathomably ignorant is it to hate someone you don't know, based on a trait as innocuous as the color of their skin.
Yet here we are, in the age of "enlightenment" arguing over what should or should not be considered offensive.
Consider this recent report from CNN's Political Ticker.
Also, check out this video about the same controversial situation.
I hope you will follow the links above to get a better idea of what I am talking about, but in case you don't have time, I will summarize.
CNN reports:
A Japanese cell phone company has pulled one of its television ads that used a monkey that appears to portray Sen. Barack Obama.
The commercial opens with a crowd rallying behind a well-dressed monkey speaking from a podium. The supporters are cheering and waving signs that say “Change.” In the ad, the monkey was encouraging users to change providers.
CNN adds:
The company behind the ad, eMobile Ltd., insists it had no idea of any racial undertones and says the ad was just a nod at Obama’s worldwide popularity.
Eric Gan, president of eMobile, points out that their company’s mascot is a monkey – an animal revered in Japan — and has been used in previous ads.
“When we saw the idea for the first time, it was ‘Hey, you're copying the idea from the presidential election in the U.S.’ Yes, but, you know, that's how you make a presentation. How you make an impact. We thought it quite was interesting,” he said.
Bloggers immediately voiced their disapproval of the ad and accused the company of being racist.
Gan says the company was unaware of how the ad might be interpreted, but “now, of course, we know.”
You really should visit the article, and look at all the comments about this. It is unbelievable. Comments ranging from, "I don't see what the big deal is" (If you watched the video, most of the Japanese people that saw the ad didn't even connect it with Obama at all.) to "Karl Rove must be behind this".
Here is a snapshot
William Ayers July 2nd, 2008 11:19 am ET
Ironically, the monkey has more executive experience and more solid stances on issues than Obama.
W.H. Thomas July 2nd, 2008 11:20 am ET
After spending 1.5 years in Japan, I can honestly say as an African American, that Japanese citizens know very little about racism. It is good to know that Obama is popular in Japan.
Tom July 2nd, 2008 11:20 am ET
Karl Rove nonsense is baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!
lil July 2nd, 2008 11:21 am ET
Believe me they knew that their were racial undertones they just didnt
care or was trying to make a startment. Either way I dont like it.
not important July 2nd, 2008 11:21 am ET
Maybe they should do an ad about Pearl Harbor? Just rude and stupid ad. Obama should sue them.
joe July 2nd, 2008 11:21 am ET
Karl Rove and republicans must be stooping a new low!
How does something like this get turned into such a big deal? An ad made in Japan, designed for Japanese consumers and aired in Japan accidentally has racial undertones to it. The Japanese company is informed that some people might see it that way. In order to NOT offend anyone, they pull the ad off the air. Done. A little embarrassing, maybe, but does it really call for international finger wagging?
I genuinely think they were paying Obama a compliment. I see nothing in that ad that would suggest that they were trying to subliminally undercut his accomplishments by comparing him to a monkey. Especially when you consider that the monkey is highly revered in that culture.
Now that I have taken the time to "set the stage", I don't have much time to really rant, so I will try to keep it short.
Few things irritate me as much as seeing people that are out there trying to accomplish something take cheap shots from people that apparently have nothing better to do. In this case, it is a cell phone company trying to be creative in their hopes to convince consumers to switch to their company. I am not saying that it is a noble cause or anything, just that they are out there "doing their job" and made a slight misstep. When it was pointed out, they rectified the situation. Why continue to harass them about this?
Some of you may already know where I am going with this.
For those of you still scratching your heads, there is a little website that we talk about here from time to time. It is called Pink Truth. SOME of the people on that site seem to just LOVE to do this very thing. For instance, when Mary Kay donated some items to a holiday gift drive at Christmastime many joined the chorus of criticism suggesting that the gifts were no good, or not genuine enough, or not admissible because they reported the retail value instead of the wholesale value.
So what does the international criticism of this poor Japanese mobile company have to do with Pink Truth and Mary Kay?
Glad you asked.
Today, amidst the usual clatter of unintelligible drivel that is based on conclusions made from bizarre logic, there was this critique from The Scribbler:
Now I am pretty sure that I have seen some very intelligent stuff from "The Scribbler", and in fact would LOVE to have her join the discussion over here. Further, this comment (as with most of her comments) is actually a refreshing shift from the "norm" that you come to expect. Quite well done, really. Quote in italics, picture used for emphasis, makes it clear that pic was not altered, and then makes her point clearly and concisely... something I could even take lessons on.
Nicely done.
But is it necessary? Does it help any of the readers? Does it really accomplish the mission of saving women from the MLM monster? Does it really do anything to demonstrate that MLMs are monsters?
I don't think so. I say if someone wants to appeal to people that share a certain ethnicity by inviting guest speakers OF that ethnicity that is their prerogative. Perhaps a white consultant that is curious about the perspective of a black woman that rose to NSD will want to attend. It does look kind of funny AND it WOULD be deemed racist if it said "and other WHITE NSD's!" Double standard? Maybe. Something to "get up in arms" about? Probably not!
But
It gets better.
"magenta" says:
"OH OH!!!! Is that a RACIAL SLUR or WHAT????!!!!! AHmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I'M TELLING!!!!!!!!!! discrimination!!!!! Does this mean that only her "sistahs" can go to this event??? this is one to send to corp and ask them about their discrimination policies!!! off with her head!!!"
"...off with her head!!!"....??????? WHAT? Are YOU kidding me?
"pinkprisonbreak" adds:
"...Honestly, the double standard just kills me!! So her eyes, black NSD's are better and more desirable than white....unbelievable...why does the race card get pulled?"
You got the sense that she thinks that
"...black NSD's are better and more desirable than white..."
???? From THAT???? Seriously????
And by the way, the "race card" gets "pulled" when someone accuses someone else of being racist or using racism. Which is what you guys are doing. So you should ask yourself... and all your friends... why YOU are pulling the race card over this. Not the other way around.
Queen of Section 2 intones:
"It is reversed discrimination. But white people better not complain or they'll be viewed as a white supremacist. "
Uh, maybe you are right... YOU shouldn't be complaining. It says that there will be other Black NSD's there. It doesn't say "White's not welcome".
"chaine2" (who refers to herself as "AA") says it quite nicely:
"...I think it does matter to AA consultants. I was recruited by a lady that was in several MLM's before she got started in MK (she was recruited by an AA national that was recruited by GMB). She confided to me that she didn't like the other MLM's b/c there wasn't a lot of product and/or advertising geared toward AA and also that there weren't a lot of blacks in 'management' positions. She quoted to me that about 20% of the NSD's in MK are black. To an AA that represents a great opportunity to achieve success..."
I severely summarized her comment there, but I think she makes a good point.
Long post, I know (what else is new), but I really want to know what you guys think about all this.
Obviously, racism is not dead. It probably will not be for a long time.
Why (or how) do people find such hate and contempt for other people? (racism question in general)
Was the Japanese ad offensive?
Should people be wasting their time pointing their fingers at this kind of innocuous stuff? The Japanese ad? The "8 hours of power with GMB - and other Black NSD's" concept?
Should I be wasting my time complaining about people that waste their time pointing their fingers at this kind of stuff?
Posts
I wouldn't say that this post is a waste of time.....However, it may take up a great deal of time, over and over again. Race may never be a dead issue, neither will sexism.
ReplyDeleteYou are right it is the person who yells discrimination that pulls the race card. We do not know who this was mailed out to. It might not have been everybody. It really doesn't matter, because 1. it did not say that one race is better than the other, and 2. (as you pointed out) it didn't say the "other" races couldn't come. Here is a thought, maybe it was sent to motivate people who do not usually attend functions.
I take people for who they are, not the color of their skin, where they come from, or if they are a man or a woman. Do I disagree with racism? Yes, and I know first hand ALL races experience a sort of racism. Would I personally have sent that out? No. Would that have offened me if I received it? No. Do I think that the training could be beneficial? Yes, maybe she sees women of her race struggling, because of PREJUDGING. Or maybe some of these women feel as though they are the minority in Mary Kay and that holds them back from attending training functions.
At any rate this is an argument that cannot be won. At least not by an outsider (someone who did not receive the email directly from the NSD) looking in.
As for the Monkey, how many times do our own comedians compare candidates to animals?
I think before someone yells "RACISM" they need to look at the intent of the comment or action.
ReplyDeleteDon Imus. I don't think he's racist. I think he's stupid. You can't make comments like the one he did and not sound like a moron. But I don't think he sounded racist. He made an ugly comment.
In the case of the Japanese ad, they obviously didn't mean it racially since their mascot is a monkey. I think that is stretching.
As for the NSD comment, I think if the shoe was on the other foot, people would be having fits in the street. So maybe it would have been a better idea to leave that out. Is it enough to get up in arms about? Naw. Who cares? Again, what is the intent? Does GMB want only the black women in MK to succeed? Is she only giving black women a chance to move ahead? Is she trying to alienate the whites or spanish or europeans or other races?
I think when one person gets offended at something and is loud enough about it, then they get others riled up. The others may not take offense to the original something, but they are offended that someone got offended.
And some people just like to be offended. Some people are looking for a fight.
I have seen some division in Mary Kay between ethnic groups. I know that potential recruits and those already in the company have sometimes been told, "you need to be in our unit", simply because that unit was predominantly made up of a certain ethnic group. That really bothers me.
ReplyDeleteI have no desire to build an all anything unit.
I do understand though that different ethnic groups have different benefits and challenges in this business, but I do not think that means that someone of another ethnic group cannot help them navigate the business.
I did have a potential recruit tell me that she thought MK was an "old white lady's makeup." Does that count?? hee hee
ReplyDeleteI don't find the Japanese ad offensive at all. You are taking an ad designed for one culture and applying the standards of another culture to it. If so many Americans (notice I didn't say "all") didn't think the entire world centered around them and had the same ideas that they do, then it would not have been a big deal.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the "Black NSD" thing -
I live in the South. I see a lot of that kind of stuff. It is not meant to be offensive at all.
In this instance, African American ladies have different needs for skin care (from what I have been told), so by putting that "one extra word" in the description, these ladies will know that the products will be relevant.
For an "inspirational" event, the "one extra word" is relevant because ladies of color have different issues in building this or any other business than those of a different race do. There is also a cultural issue - and we often relate to those who share our own culture.
And no one of any race would be turned away from these events, BTW. I have attended events marketed for AA people (because I was invited by a friend) and have found them very enlightening and loved going.
If someone promoted a Hispanic event, I would not think anything of it. I would know I could attend if I wanted to. I just might be listening to a Spanish presentation or something similar.
It isn't about excluding people - it is about making sure those who might not always feel included the majority of time that they have a place in an event.
Getting back to the NSD event -
I love listening to people who have achieved the top levels in their company. (ANY company - not just MK.) I love hearing how they achieved their goals.
However, there are some I have listened to (in person or recorded) that I thought, "This is great, but I cannot relate to him/her. He/She doesn't have the same background/issues/etc."
Then someone tells her story and she is a single mom. Or from the South. Or from a poor background. Or something else that makes me say, "THIS person I can relate to." And I learn more because I can relate to this person on a more personal level.
I see this as the reason behind the one extra word in the flier - a chance to let people know the theme of the event and to attend if they so choose. For some, they might feel they can get more from the event because the speakers will have a similar background.
JMHO
Racism in General: Well, there will always be differences between all of us. Humans seem to like to compartmentalize everything including people. Skin color is just one way to do that, I guess. It is clearly stupid, but I think it stems from historically needing control and power in order to survive as a society. I don’t understand totally discounting a group of people due to physical cosmetic differences. I do understand that groups of people are different in behavior and social mores depending on how they are raised and how they learn to interact with others. Misunderstanding comes when different groups then try to live together. Racism is very complex and can only be changed by one person making a decision for themselves on whether or not people have the same value for simply being a human, not for anything else.
ReplyDeleteThe Japanese Ad: Without seeing anything about it, I was immediately offended by the Japanese ad. But once I realized the culture and where it came from, the intended audience, etc., I was okay with it. Especially since the monkey was their mascot (Aflac, anyone?) Again, as Americans, we immediately place our own cultural references, tastes and beliefs on something for which we have no context to understand (Japanese culture). Still, they were clearly making a play on Obama (an American hero for many), and it wouldn’t have hurt them to check with the American embassy or an American news agency and just say, hey, what do you think of this?
Innocuous Stuff: Okay, so maybe it was a slow news day at PT. ;) I haven’t been over there yet today so I haven’t seen it. And I will stand up for Scribbler—especially one-on-one, she is a great conversationalist, writer and thinker. As you said, Dave. Personally, I do get a wee bit frustrated when something is labeled like GMB’s ad for the very reason Scribs stated. You really can get away with that with any race except Caucasian. I suppose it would work, though, if you said, “Come hang out with other Irish NSDs!” The terms “black” and “white” are so loaded, I’m not sure how long it will take for us to get past them. Especially since “black,” while not being a race, per se, has become a word of pride for, well, Black Americans. I know many who don’t want to be called “African American” because they’re Americans. Not Africans. Myself, I’m just American because I’m such a mix. I don’t even like having to choose a race when asked because it’s impossible to pinpoint.
Wasting Time: Hey, how you waste your time is up to you, buddy boy. ;)
Lord, it took me all the way down to Shaw's post to figure out that AA means African American. I kept thinking "Why are they talking about Alcoholics Anonymous?"
ReplyDeleteOy! :D
Enesvy,
ReplyDeleteI am right there with you on the AA thing. It took me a while to figure it out as well. "chaine2", in the part that I did not copy over, said that she is an AA. That was when it hit me.
I probably should have clarified.
And yes, African American is fast becoming just as offensive as anything else. I was telling someone that our church is very diverse... we have Hispanic, Asian, African American.... He cut me off and let me know that he is not from Africa.
oops.
As far as the event goes, it is an interesting scenario.
On the one hand, it really isn't anything wrong with advertising the ethnic background of the "main attraction". Particularly if it is not used in a "better than" way.
On the other hand, the one exception would probably be "white" which as you point out is not really an ethnicity as much as a generic reference to a lack of any particular ethnicity. As in, someone who is proud of their Irish, British, German, or any other "European" ethnicity would reference THAT and not their "whiteness". Unless it was a tanning contest and then all bets are off.
I suppose that if you were in Africa (in a part where only a small percent of the population was white), you might be able to get away with saying, "other White NSD's will be there", but then you would be selling MK in Africa which apparently is not allowed yet!
It took me a while to get it, too!!
ReplyDeleteI find it ironic how PT has evolved into its own clique. You can tell which posters are used to having their own say and do not like to be questioned or challenged. It's their sandbox, after all. So, unless you fit within their paradigm, forget it. While there are some excellent points brought up on PT (ie, the churn of consultants, etc), the message is fast diluted by drivel.
ReplyDeleteThere must always be room for banter on any website, Objective1. Remember, the folks who come to PT have been majorly burned by MKers. They have a right to be as frustrated and angry and vocal about it as they want. That's the point. To provide a "sandbox" where they are free to be themselves. Anyone is welcome, but not pro-MK opinions. That's our right. The web does the equalizing. Quite frankly, cliques are natural and we all belong to one or the other somewhere/when in our lives.
ReplyDelete'Course that's just my opinion. I wouldn't blame David for banning anyone from this blog who was vitriolic in their opinions and hurtful to other members.
Whoa. That went way off topic. Sorry. And just for the record, I had to look up "vitriolic" to make sure I was using it correctly. Word power! :D
Dave's quote: "I see nothing in that ad that would suggest that they were trying to subliminally undercut his accomplishments by comparing him to a monkey. Especially when you consider that the monkey is highly revered in that culture."
ReplyDeleteI agree. The funny thing is, the people hollering foul and/or 'ignorance' are the ignorant ones by not knowing that the monkey was symbolic of something highly revered in Japan. You have to look at intent. It's one thing to tap somebody on the shoulder and say, "You might not realize this but.." and another to have a knee-jerk reaction and be, well, a jerk about it.
When you advertise something in Italy you should know that if you put a white boarder around your advert it is interpreted as an obit. I learned that when I worked for a global company and they were pulling together an advertising campaign. Different things needed to be done to the same advertisement depending on the country. That stuck with me.
My observation, especially lately, is that being politically correct has evolved to an absurd level. I'm not saying that bigotry doesn't exist or that it's right. I'm talking about hyper-sensitivity to race, color, gender to the point where you can't articulate fact for fear of offending somebody who probably doesn't even belong to the community you're referring to.
I've made this comment before on a different thread. It's really difficult to have an opposing opinion/view without somebody, somehow using "something" to silence you (generally speaking). Especially politically. If you have an opposing political view, well!
Case in point, a friend of mine manages a statistics division. Her unit is resp. for taking all the crime statistics from the police units (nationally) and reporting them quarterly to the media. They are NOT ALLOWED to distinguish a certain community as being problematic because it's deemed as racial profiling. So the problems continue in a specific community in a specific city because they are not allowed to "stereo type". Her unit doesn't do that. It's how the crime statistics are reported that says "that". But God forbid you get the leaders in that community, i.e., political, religious, etc., together with the police force and try to deal with it. That would be pointing the finger. That would be unacceptable.
I have to preamble what I'm about to say because I don't want people to get the wrong idea about my intent or meaning. I'm a live and let live person. It takes 'all kinds' for the world to go 'round. We bleed the same. We feel much the same way about events and experiences, i.e., joy, sadness, etc. I love all people. Period. So...
I went to college with a lesbian. Excellent friend of mine. We always worked together on the same team. We ended up working for the same company. When we went to parties at her place, my husband was the only guy. When she came to parties at our house, her and her girlfriend were the only same sex couple. She spent years harping on equality for gays. How "they" were discriminated against. She was very vocal during class if somebody was, what she viewed to be, chauvinistic, etc. We learned a lot from her.
Okay, so, with all the education and evolution, we still have gay pride parades. In our city, the gay community approaches the municipality every year for funds (support). Fine. But the municipality doesn't support the Irish during St. Paddy's day when they have their parade. They don't support the vets for their parade. They don't support the Santa Claus parade. So when you examine the facts, what does that potentially look like from the outside looking in? Is the municipality motivated to support a small segment of the community for the wrong reasons? i.e., For fear they would be viewed as discriminative? If a community wants to be recognized as equal and contributing (which the gay community certainly is) why do they need special treatment? That always gets me.
I feel the same way about employment equity. We've had official employment equity laws and policies in all industries for the better part of what? No less than 25 years? My opinion is, if any candidate, be they a woman, black, Chinese, disabled, cannot get ahead today, it's because of their personality or lack of credentials. NOT because of who they are. There is not a school in the land you couldn't attend, not a job anywhere, where anybody couldn't work if they wanted to. Not a building anyone couldn't access. So, now, I think employment equity laws discriminate because they provide the advantage to somebody who may not be as qualified scholastically or possess enough experience but they DO fulfill the statistical attribute, i.e, black, Hispanic/Arabic/French (so bilingual), blind, deaf, which in turn makes them the "better candidate".
If you have an under-representation of women in construction, then maybe the law makers should look to how many women populate the trade schools and determine whether the stated statics are representative of the actual pool of women interested in working in construction. If you have policies stating that women should represent 50% of your engineering community, is that fair? How many women actually graduate from engineering? I can tell you it's not half of a graduating class. Why is it wrong to have an "over representation" of women in the clerical fields? Maybe those women chose that field because they want to "turn it off" at 4:00PM. They don't want to travel. They're only working for benefits and vacations... you know. The extras.
In today's world I think it's inappropriate to distinct yourself from a supposed homogeneous community, when you've fought 100+ years to arrive. THAT'S when people become vocal and that's when you get people crying foul. GMB has more than just black women in her unit. Everybody worked hard to "arrive". Grant it, it is nice to see somebody from a minority group in your community make it. It's nice for EVERYBODY to look "up" and see a representation of the whole community and not just one segment of it. But why exclude the majority of the people who got you there because their skin color doesn't match? Let's face it, I think what's hit a nerve here is that the "prize" in Mary Kay is the goal...... like time with your NSD. That's very special.
I think Queen of Section 2 is right. If you're a white NSD, you couldn't have a Caucasian party and you certainly cannot complain about GMB's invitation as being exclusive to the Caucasian MK community. You'd be pummeled. Case in point, every single post you've highlighted from PT, you've held them up as "racist" to one degree or the other. I really don't think any of them are. I just think that they're reflecting the mirror back at the entity/person they find "offensive" and are holding them to the same standard they themselves have been taught to adhere to as being socially acceptable and/or politically correct.
There's so much to say on this subject. How can one be brief?
I think it really comes down to how much you (a generic "you") want to read into such things. I mean, what if I as a republican got offended b/c the rep. party is represented as an elephant? I know it is not the same thing, but come on. WITHIN CONTEXT, the situation is made perfectly clear. Some of those ladies over at PT just really don't think things through, or look at them in context, or consider the other side of the situation. Also, some people just like the drama. They thrive on getting all riled up and bantering and tossing witty words about. It really comes down to plain old gossip, at some points. Women (no discrimination intended LOL) can sometimes be pros at this type of gossip thinly veiled behind "debate," "discussion," and "sharing the truth" or "sharing my experience."
ReplyDeleteIn situations like these, I always think of Mary Kay Ash, and what kind of a person she was. I have never met her personally, but my Director, Sr., and former NSD all have, and i have heard countless stories about her, as well as listening to tapes and reading her books. Mary Kay was not the kind of person to badger other people, or to pick out a person and publicly (or anonymously on a website) make a mockery of her for a mistake or a wording choice, or for anything! Mary Kay handled herself with such grace and dignity. She was always more concerned with the people around her and THEIR feelings. She put herslf last, no matter how important, rich, and famous she became. Being such a public figure, and a woman who was so different than the norm at her time, I'm sure she got tons of scrutiny and was often placed in situations where she could easily get offended. For instance, when she was being interviewed on 60 Minutes and the interviewer asked her if she was really just "using God." She didn't get all huffy and upset and go off into tangents; she simply said "I certainly hope that it is the other way around and HE is using ME." (paraphrase).
Anyway, I think we could all do to pattern ourselves after her a little more and just think about how we affect others with the way we act and speak.
By the way, about the ad thing again--if you ever closely observe ANY commercial or marketing tool, you will see that they ALL use techniques that aren't always the most ethical and politically correct! I have seen many cpommercials that portray women unflatteringly, or put men in a bad light--does anyone remember the Trojan (I think?) commercial about a year ago that portrayed the guy as a donkey?
It just depends on how the viewer takes it. We need people to fight for what is right, but I think we shoudl also pick our battles wisely. This ad (and the GMB pic) I believe are small issues compared to much bigger battles that have not yet been won.
Correction to my post ... the commercial I was talking about portrayed a guy as a PIG, not a donkey.
ReplyDelete=) Same thing right? haha
I said: " It's nice for EVERYBODY to look "up" and see a representation of the whole community and not just one segment of it. But why exclude the majority of the people who got you there because their skin color doesn't match? Let's face it, I think what's hit a nerve here is that the "prize" in Mary Kay is the goal...... like time with your NSD. That's very special. "
ReplyDeleteI have to elaborate. I don't mean that the Caucasian community under GMB was "excluded" in the literal sense. My meaning was that her entire team worked hard for her invitation should be inclusive of everyone.
I think it would be a turn off to anyone NOT the color she is advertising. Insert any race, nationality, sex, etc. Not offended, per se; but a turn off.
ReplyDeleteAnd, Jenna, I am not quite sure what to think of your comment about MKA. I never met her either, but I have also heard stories, and not good ones, from some who knew her personally, not publically. Two women in particular, who were not in MK, but were personal friends of MKA. The stories they have told!! Some in MK have a tendency to idolize her. She was a normal person, more charismatic than some, but had the same prejudices, shortcomings, and faults of any other person.
Friend, I never said I idolize Mary Kay Ash, or that I don't view her as a real person, with faults jut like the rest of us. I was just stating the stark difference between her attitude about people and towards people and that of other certain people who seem to thrive on drama and dissention. I have not heard any negative stories about her from a reliable source. The books I have read--even one by a NON "MK-er" called More Than a Pink Cadillac--the stories I have heard, the interviews I have seen, etc., all show her to be gracious and dignified and kind. I am sure she had her moments and had faults just like the rest of us. I was just pointing out that taking on a little of her manners and gracious way of dealing with touchy topics and situations might do many of us some good. The only "people" I have heard speak ill of her that I can think of are people on Pink Truth.
ReplyDeleteFlybye64 said: "I just think that they're reflecting the mirror back at the entity/person they find "offensive" and are holding them to the same standard they themselves have been taught to adhere to as being socially acceptable and/or politically correct."
ReplyDeleteWow. That's one of the best observations on this issue I've ever read. I never thought about it that way. Thanks, Flybye!
Flybye,
ReplyDeleteI think you said it well,
"There's so much to say on this subject. How can one be brief?"
I just got home (early) because of the 4th.
I am going to start going through and responding to some of the comments here, but for the sake of clarity, I will tackle them in individual comments. Perhaps some will overflow, but hopefully each "thought" will get its own comment.
We will see how this works.
Dave quote: "How does something like this get turned into such a big deal? "
ReplyDeleteI think if people had more time to read more than just the headlines, there would be a lot more said about stuff in general. As it is, we get tons of commentary and outrage about poop scooping (lack of), etc., instead.
SNL, David Letterman, Howard Stern, Conan O'Brien, et al better watch their backs...
Employment Equity.
ReplyDeleteFlybye,
You said:
"My opinion is, if any candidate, be they a woman, black, Chinese, disabled, cannot get ahead today, it's because of their personality or lack of credentials. NOT because of who they are. There is not a school in the land you couldn't attend, not a job anywhere, where anybody couldn't work if they wanted to. Not a building anyone couldn't access."
I am not sure if you meant to be this absolute in your statement, but if you did, I disagree.
There are definitely enough people in this country (still) that hold enough of a position of power and are motivated by hate (fueled by nothing more than some of the things you mentioned) to prevent members of those groups from moving forward despite them being more qualified than applicants that are more "similar" to the person offering the job.
That said, the ideal is obviously that the "best person for the job" get the job regardless of gender, race, etc. As you point out, saying that there needs to be at least 50% of "xyz" group in this position is NOT necessarily the best way to accomplish this.
I do not have much interaction with the employment equity laws that you are referring to, but I imagine that some of them do discriminate unfairly against those that don't fulfill a statistical attribute. I think everyone suffers when something like this happens. However, I am not convinced that this happens as often as some people would like us to believe. These things are very hard to track. Who is to say what perfect combination of traits, personality, skills, education, etc. gave that person an edge in a particular situation. To assume that a black person got the nod for a job over a white person BECAUSE he/she was black is pretty fragile even if the white person had a better education.
To illustrate, I once saw a TV show where people "investigated" offices that were hiring for a clerical role. They used hidden cameras to reveal reactions to the candidates they sent in. The candidates were given "fake" credentials that were essentially identical. Education, experience... the works... they were basically both "equally" qualified. If I recall correctly, they used twins as the candidates. One they "made" ugly with make-up and the other they made attractive. They dressed one very sharp, the other was just slightly less sharp.
The reaction they were looking for (obviously) was that people made hiring decisions based on appearances.
I couldn't help but notice though that the one that was "attractive" acted MUCH more confident than the "ugly" one. The "ugly" candidate slouched more, avoided eye contact and used short one word answers.
The "attractive" candidate, on the other hand, had great posture, smiled often, looked the hiring staff in the eye with confidence and answered the questions very thoroughly and concisely.
Even knowing that the whole thing was rigged, I would have hired the "attractive" girl. I don't think there is anything wrong with that.
I think that complaints about race, gender or other forms of discrimination need to be evaluated on an individual basis.
I also don't feel that every instance of discrimination requires legislation aimed at preventing that discrimination from happening again.
Why can't we say, "You (company xyz) hired this white candidate that was a high school dropout, with no experience - and turned down this Hispanic candidate with a Masters degree, and 20 years of experience. That is discrimination and we don't tolerate that in this country. Here is your fine, and a penalty, and a stiff warning that if you do it again, it will be worse.
Why does something like that have to turn into, "every company must hire at least x% White and y% Black and z% Hispanic"?
It is a trick thing. The most difficult part to understand is what fuels people to hate or disrespect another human being on the basis of race or gender.
Flybye,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that people are making mountains out of mole hills because they aren't well read enough to be aware of the mountains.
But why do SNL, David Letterman, Howard Stern, Conan O'Brien need to watch their backs?
Okay, here comes a three part comment,
ReplyDeletePart 1 of 3
Flybye said,
"In today's world I think it's inappropriate to distinct yourself from a supposed homogeneous community, when you've fought 100+ years to arrive. THAT'S when people become vocal and that's when you get people crying foul. GMB has more than just black women in her unit. Everybody worked hard to "arrive". Grant it, it is nice to see somebody from a minority group in your community make it. It's nice for EVERYBODY to look "up" and see a representation of the whole community and not just one segment of it. But why exclude the majority of the people who got you there because their skin color doesn't match? Let's face it, I think what's hit a nerve here is that the "prize" in Mary Kay is the goal...... like time with your NSD. That's very special."
Part 1 - Distinction from a supposedly homogeneous community.
Not required reading, but to have a VERY enlightening read about this subject, check this out. By Stanley Fish.
I think the conclusion says it all.
"All we can be sure of is that the struggle between the impulse to normalize — to specify a center and then police deviations from it — and the impulse to repel the normalizing gaze and live securely in a community of one’s own will never be resolved."
I do NOT think that it is inappropriate for someone to make a distinction between themselves and the rest of humanity. I don't think it is wrong for someone to identify themselves with a group that they happen to fall into. We all plug ourselves into groups that we identify with. To say that there will be "other Black NSD's" at this event does not undo 100+ years of fighting for equality. It doesn't need to imply any inequality. It is (and I think should be) a matter of pride in ones culture.
Being and fighting to be considered "equal to" is not the same thing as being and fighting to be considered "the same as".
It is not wrong to say that black people are different than white people. Hispanics are different than Spaniards. Asians are different than Australians. Girls are different than boys. Homosexuals are different that Heterosexuals. Dog people are different than cat people.
It is wrong to say that these differences make one or the other better or worse.
The only part of the flier that I saw is the part I posted here. Based on that alone, I can't say whether or not the tone suggests that the NSD's would be better because they are Black. It seems to be a descriptor to me.
Anyone suggesting that there are racial undertones to this, should please explain to me why... because I don't see it.
Okay, here comes a three part comment,
ReplyDeletePart 2 of 3
Flybye said,
"In today's world I think it's inappropriate to distinct yourself from a supposed homogeneous community, when you've fought 100+ years to arrive. THAT'S when people become vocal and that's when you get people crying foul. GMB has more than just black women in her unit. Everybody worked hard to "arrive". Grant it, it is nice to see somebody from a minority group in your community make it. It's nice for EVERYBODY to look "up" and see a representation of the whole community and not just one segment of it. But why exclude the majority of the people who got you there because their skin color doesn't match? Let's face it, I think what's hit a nerve here is that the "prize" in Mary Kay is the goal...... like time with your NSD. That's very special."
Part 2 - Exclusion of others.
Flybye, you suggest that "the majority of people who got GMB there are being excluded because their skin color doesn't match". At least that is how I read this. Am I wrong?
Assuming that is the point you are making here, where do you see that?
Again, I am only going off of a tiny cut-out of a poster. I have not seen the whole thing. But from what I have seen (what you can see on this post) there is no mention that you can't come if you are not black. It doesn't even seem to imply that there will be ONLY Black NSD's. It looks like a selling point to me.
Maybe someone (White or Black) reading that will say, "Wow, I wonder what I could learn from someone that has perhaps battled racism and cultural misunderstanding on her way to a top position in a company. THAT sounds like an event that I would like to go to!" That is kind of the point of a flier like this, isn't it? To drum up interest in attending an event.
If it said, "blacks only", than maybe there would be a case to be made about excluding people.
Anyone seeing this as excluding people based on the color of their skin, please explain... I don't see it.
Okay, here comes a three part comment,
ReplyDeletePart 3 of 3
Flybye said,
"In today's world I think it's inappropriate to distinct yourself from a supposed homogeneous community, when you've fought 100+ years to arrive. THAT'S when people become vocal and that's when you get people crying foul. GMB has more than just black women in her unit. Everybody worked hard to "arrive". Grant it, it is nice to see somebody from a minority group in your community make it. It's nice for EVERYBODY to look "up" and see a representation of the whole community and not just one segment of it. But why exclude the majority of the people who got you there because their skin color doesn't match? Let's face it, I think what's hit a nerve here is that the "prize" in Mary Kay is the goal...... like time with your NSD. That's very special."
Part 3 - The prize IS the goal.
This is the kind of underhanded stuff that I really dislike about how Pink Truth seems to enjoy presenting their version of the truth.
Flybye, I am going to pick on you here a little bit, because you are here and you can defend yourself and we can actually discuss this. I am NOT suggesting that you are the only one that does this. I am NOT suggesting that this doesn't happen on my site here. It just irritates me in general and this is the perfect time to bring it up.
Smack dab in the middle of analyzing whether or not something is racist, you insert one of the chief accusations that anti-mkers love to hurl at Mary Kay. Namely that the prize is the goal in Mary Kay.
There is no lack of agreement (here anyway) that there are plenty of people that create scenarios where, rather than encouraging good business practices and actual selling to customers, ordering is rewarded.
But the prevalence of that behavior is questionable and is certainly not supported by MK's official position.
I personally don't believe that simply offering a prize (whether it seems valuable to ex-mkers or not) is the same thing as placing a higher value on earning the prize than making an income from selling a product with the prize as a side bonus.
It seems that PT (and yourself based on the above quoted comment) would like people to believe that offering a prize as an incentive is grounds to hold the company (or director) guilty of coercing unnecessary orders out of star-struck or prize-crazy consultants.
This is a completely different subject, but the way you weaved it in to that comment forces those of us that disagree with you to either ignore it (thus strengthening your position) or go on a tangent to start discussing it.
It is a good debate that needs to be had. But to sneak it in like that really irritates me. Again, let me emphasize that I am sure that there are instances of it happening on this blog used against PT as well. I am not trying to say that you alone (or PT alone) are/is guilty of this. It just detracts from the conversation and is a real nuisance.
Although this is not in response to any particular comment, the thought came to me while reading STRT comment.
ReplyDeleteWhat about people that pay a compliment to someone BECAUSE of their race.
As in:
"He must be good with money, he is Jewish."
Or
"He must be good at interior decorating, he is gay."
Or
"He is Asian, so he must be good at math."
Those are some of the more obvious ones, but what about:
"I really want to get a few Hispanics on my team because they usually have really big networks of family and friends."
What say all of you about these types of comments?
quote: do NOT think that it is inappropriate for someone to make a distinction between themselves and the rest of humanity.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you to a point. It's one thing to embrace and celebrate your culture and the very thread that binds your "family". Culture and heritage is important. History is important. Remembering is important. Sharing it is important. It's important for everyone to have a sense of familiarity and "being home" so to speak. If I'm black or chinese, I want my doctor to acknowledge my biological differences regarding disease versus my race and a white man's race. Differences ARE important. What I'm talking about is knowing what is socially "unacceptable" for most and yet making it acceptable for "the one" on the basis that they were wronged for so long. When does the pendulum stop swinging? What's wrong with equilibrium? When do we finally move forward? That's what I'm talking about.
quote: Again, I am only going off of a tiny cut-out of a poster. I have not seen the whole thing. But from what I have seen (what you can see on this post) there is no mention that you can't come if you are not black. It doesn't even seem to imply that there will be ONLY Black NSD's. It looks like a selling point to me.
I know. That's not what I meant. I'm just referring to the "public" acknowledgment of only one part of her team. It's such a hard nuance to articulate. The Mary Kay business can motivate people to work on so many different levels. Motivation can be very emotional for some people. I was just trying to make the point that somebody reading that flier would feel excluded by the simple fact that they weren't mentioned. I know, I know, really juvenile. But it's the reality. Being white I couldn't say "Join Your National For 8 Hours Of Power At The Mansion Of FLYBYE And Other WHITE NSDs!" If I did that, I people would be looking for swastikas.
Go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Power
When I read the words "Black Power" used the way she's chosen to use it, I think of suppression. It's not about equality. It's about suppression. This woman is articulate, educated and very, very intelligent. She's chosen to "speak" to one segment of her unit in a language they understand. (Black Power) I don't believe for a moment that she doesn't know what she's saying and the CULTURAL message packed with A LOT of subliminal undertone she's delivering.
Generally speaking, for me, it's a real turn off. Secondly, I feel "emasculated" to defend myself against that kind of messaging for fear that I'll be labeled a racist. That's the reality and that's wrong.
Also, Mary Kay defines itself as being a sorority. I find that type of advertising is counter to how Mary Kay defines itself and counter-productive to moral.
Enesvy,
ReplyDeleteYour comment if very enlightened, if I may say so.
In your "racism in general" paragraph, you touch on a point that I think people are starting to realize, but almost needs to have new words applied to.
You have racism that is hate, disdain, or discrimination because of color or ethnic background.
But you also have things that are characteristic or defining of a group. Facial features like lips, eyes, ears, noses for instance can be "assigned" to certain races. Not saying that ALL Italians have big noses, but that there are more big noses amongst Italians than amongst, say, Chinese. Observing these characteristics can often result in being labeled racist.
Worse than that is just referring to someone by their race.
For instance:
Me: I just met Bill over there and talked to him for a while.
You: There are five guys "over there", which one is Bill.
Me: Oh, he is the black guy.
You: Gotcha.
Anonymous 3rd party: (eavesdropping and only catching the very end of the conversation) You people are SO RACIST!!!
Sometimes, when people are THAT sensitive, I want to respond, "Well, what color would YOU say he is?"
I mean, come on. Right?
**
Moving on - Paragraph 2.
GREAT POINT about how your immediate reaction was to be offended, but kudos for actually taking the time to get the whole picture and realize the intent.
It is too bad that more people don't take the time to get the whole story before they start spouting off about how offensive or disturbing something is. Get the facts, then make a decision about how you feel about something.
Assuming that an ad with a monkey portraying a black man is racist is no less prejudiced than someone assuming anything negative about a person because of the color of their skin!
I don't know that they should have checked w/ American embassy. As you say, couldn't hurt. But, I suspect that they think so highly of their mascot (and the monkey in general) that the idea that this could be offensive would never have even crossed their minds.
and finally - Paragraph 3
I think you nailed it with the "Irish" event concept.
White does not refer to a minority group (yet) the way that Black does.
You say, "we are having an event with NSD's" and people will think what they will think in regards to the race/ethnicity/skin color of the NSD's.
You make the distinction, "we are having an event with Black NSD's" and people will know exactly what to expect.
I think even if you invited an ethnic tapestry of NSD's and referenced them each by their race/color (i.e. Hispanic, Black, Filipino, etc.), you would still find it difficult to say, "...and a White NSD"!!!
It kind of goes back to the mention I made earlier. Heaven forbid someone identify themselves or someone else by the color of their skin. (Which one is Bill again?)
Another possible motivation (however unlikely) for the description of the NSD's at this event is because racism is still an issue among some of the invitees. Perhaps if someone had shown up to this event and found out that Black women were speaking they would have been offended that no one told them that. I highly doubt this is the case, but I do know that there are still some people (even in Mary Kay) that can't get past the race thing.
Just a thought.
Part 3 of 3 - huh?
ReplyDeleteYou so lost me.
I was referring to unit members wanting to be recognized by their NSD... as per Mary Kay Ash waiting in line forever to meet her VP and he barely acknowledged her/viewing everybody with a sign around their neck as being important or however that goes. The hip wader boots as a prize when MKA wanted the purse and there it was 30 years later (or whatever) and a rep from her old company finally presented her with the prize she thought she should've won in the first place...As in an "audience" with the NSD is viewed as a prize and everybody wants to feel important. Especially when they worked their ass off to be there.
My point was excluding or dismissing "somebody" has an affect.
That's all.
??
Flybye,
ReplyDelete"It's such a hard nuance to articulate."
I KNOW THE FEELING!!!! Believe me, and it is very, very, welcome to have people like you and Enesvy that are willing to take the time to go back and forth a few times in order to understand each other. Thank you for the effort you are putting into this. It is truly a testament to the position that you are taking a stand for.
That said, I had not noticed the combination of "power" and "black" until just now when you pointed it out.
"Power" used there made me think of TBN's "hour of power" or "power-ade" or any other positive reference to power. Even though we are discussing race here, it didn't even occur to me that putting those two words in such close proximity to each other would evoke those feelings in some people.
That does not mean that it shouldn't. It doesn't mean that you are being "too sensitive". I am just demonstrating that intelligence (I hope I have demonstrated myself to be moderately intelligent) does not necessarily mean that one will see a connection there.
Maybe she meant it to make white women in her area feel inferior, but I have a hard time believing that. It seems like a stretch. Again, hard to know!
As far as feeling emasculated, I will counter with the equality for women movement.
It is being established that men are not better than women. Still a long way to go, but certainly, we are getting there. It is still not cool for me to hit a woman though. It never should be.
The point of equality between men and women is not to say that women are as strong as men. It is to say that men are not better than women. If a woman asserts that she is better than me BECAUSE she is a woman, I have every right to correct her and (try to) explain why that is just as ignorant as me assuming I am better than her because I am a man.
She might call me a sexist for trying to correct her. That doesn't make her right!
I don't get the feel that GMB was trying to say that she (and the NSD's that are going to be at the event) is better than her white counterpart. If YOU felt that she was (and the invitation had come to you) I think it would be perfectly ok for you to say (to her) that you felt she was implying superiority because of her color without being racist.
She might call you racist. That would not make her right!
However, coming to that conclusion - that she is using this as a form of suppression - without having all the details and information surrounding the event and the poster, seems like a bit of a stretch. Similar to someone assuming that the President of the Japanese mobile company intended to insult Senator Obama's accomplishments with that ad.
I assume that you meant that the racial divisiveness would be counter-productive to morale (as opposed to moral) although I guess both would be appropriate. As such, if the interpretation you had of this was what was intended, yes - extremely counter productive. But, to me, that is just more evidence to suggest that she would NOT intend it that way.
**
Regarding part 3 of 3:
Now you lost me.
Should we start over? Or call it a wash.
Your words:
"As in an "audience" with the NSD is viewed as a prize and everybody wants to feel important. Especially when they worked their ass off to be there.
My point was excluding or dismissing "somebody" has an affect. "
I thought you were making an issue out of the fact that people often treat the prize as being more important than selling the product (buying prizes, recognition, all that - which would have been WAAAAY of topic, and, as I mentioned, "sneaky")
But (if I understand you correctly now) you were just elaborating on the exclusion thing. Particularly that those people in the area/unit that are white should also be able to get excited about their white leaders being key guests?
Am I closer with that?
If so, I think there is way too much about this event/poster that we do not know. This may have been sent out by a director of a small unit with ALL black members. It does not necessarily say who is being invited.
If someone was being excluded or dismissed by this, we are talking about an entirely different thing. But to assume that we are talking about that because a poster says the word "black" on it is a stretch. And that was really the only point I was trying to make by adding it to this post about racism.
To me, the people that are "up in arms" about the Japanese ad need to relax a bit. Point it out to the company and see how they react, yes. Call for a crusade against the company, not so much.
Same with PT being "up in arms" about this small section of a poster that was not even sent to them. Relax a bit. If YOU (generic you) were offended by it, find the person that created it and let them know. See how they react.
But allowing comments like "off with her head" and "...the double standard just kills me..." to just sit there as members get stirred into a frenzy is ridiculous.
My intent behind this post was to express MY opinion about the whole race thing. Everyone needs to take a step back and chill out. Treating people like individuals and getting to know them before passing judgment goes a long way to erasing racism, sexism, ageism, or whateverism you might be susceptible to.
Not sure if that covered it or not, but let me know if it did not!
Dave said: "That does not mean that it shouldn't. It doesn't mean that you are being "too sensitive". I am just demonstrating that intelligence (I hope I have demonstrated myself to be moderately intelligent) does not necessarily mean that one will see a connection there."
ReplyDeleteIntelligence, acceptance and pure honesty. It all boils down to intent, right? As enevsy said, the black/white "thing" is pretty loaded. Things usually roll over my back and for the most part I'm oblivious and give the benefit of the doubt. However, "black power" screamed at me. That had me do a double take and really rubbed me the wrong way.
Dave said: "Maybe she meant it to make white women in her area feel inferior, but I have a hard time believing that. It seems like a stretch. Again, hard to know!"
I don't think she meant to make white women inferior. Again, this is a hard nuance. I think her intent was to motivate a particular segment of her unit. Words are powerful. Saying "black power" to the black community is pretty loaded. And I have no doubt, very motivating.
I just had a vision of chanting Black Power! while shoving my fist up into the air at the end of a meeting to motivate my black unit members. Actually I'm laughing pretty hard at the thought because, being that I'm white, their facial expressions would probably be hilarious.
But say that I did? Would it be appropriate or out of place?
Personally, I think it would be a strong political statement and out of place. Like high heels.
Okay...I'm going to change my handle from "flybye" to "homing pigeon".
LOLOLOL
high heels which are open toe and NO panty hose.
ReplyDeleteVery bad. HAHA...
fb,
ReplyDeleteI don't follow the homing pigeon or the high heels comment... but picturing a white director shouting black power is quite a sight!
Reminiscent of Chris Farley in Black Sheep. When he is at the rock the vote event and gets mistaken for his brother. He starts to get the crowd really excited. Each thing he says draws a stronger and more passionate response. Pretty soon, the whole crowd is on his side, cheering loudly at everything he says. But, he had just spent the last hour or two back stage getting high with some reggae dudes that were all talking about how "the white man" keeps them down. So just as he gets the crowd to a place where they are ready to make HIM the next governor, he shouts, "KILL WHITEY".
You could cut the silence with a knife - then he gets booed of the stage.
**
As far as the conversation we are having...
I am having a hard time understanding what exactly it is about this that you have a problem with.
You don't feel that she was snubbing the white members of her group.
You "think her intent was to motivate a particular segment of her unit". Is THAT what you have a problem with?
If so, what is wrong with that?
If it is something else, what is it?
Dave said: "I thought you were making an issue out of the fact that people often treat the prize as being more important than selling the product (buying prizes, recognition, all that - which would have been WAAAAY of topic, and, as I mentioned, "sneaky")"
ReplyDeleteNo. That's not what I was saying at all. :) Didn't even cross my mind.
Dave said: "But (if I understand you correctly now) you were just elaborating on the exclusion thing. Particularly that those people in the area/unit that are white should also be able to get excited about their white leaders being key guests?
Am I closer with that?"
No. haha...
Put it this way, I wouldn't vote for Clinton or Obama because of the segment of the population they represent. I would vote for one or the other based on policy. That's my point. It's not about the color of the leader. It's about make-up!
Dave said: " My intent behind this post was to express MY opinion about the whole race thing. Everyone needs to take a step back and chill out."
Yes, it's made for interesting, thought provoking conversation. However, I'm not sure it'll ever be a topic for light conversation.
Ok, I am still making my way through various comments that came in throughout the day, so don't confuse this with anything recently said.
ReplyDeleteFlybye said:
"Case in point, every single post you've highlighted from PT, you've held them up as "racist" to one degree or the other. I really don't think any of them are. I just think that they're reflecting the mirror back at the entity/person they find "offensive" and are holding them to the same standard they themselves have been taught to adhere to as being socially acceptable and/or politically correct."
I would like to take exception to that statement.
Unless I misunderstood you.
It seems like you are saying that every time that I have talked on this blog about PT I have called them racist. I really don't think that is true.
If you are referring to this post specifically, than let me refresh my comments.
Speaking of "the Scribbler", I said that she makes a solid point, but question (as I have again recently) whether she should really be getting up in arms about it. Same as I am with you. Kind of like a, "what's your beef with this?"
Speaking of "magenta", I expressed shock at her "off with her head" comment. Again, seems a little severe. Not racist, just severe!
Speaking of "pinkprisonbreak", SHE asked why the race card got pulled. SHE suggested that this poster/flier intones that Blacks are better than Whites. SHE is basically accusing the creator of this poster (sight unseen) of racism. THAT is what I consider "pulling the race card".
And I suggested in reference to Qof2's comment that maybe she shouldn't complain. It doesn't say "white's not welcome". Sort of suggested that she mind her own business - to put it more bluntly.
I don't really think that I held any of them up as racist. I did suggest that perhaps they are pulling a race card of their own... as in, "oh, look at us poor defenseless white people... see how the condescend to us..."
If you have not seen the vile hatred that comes from the kind of racism that black people have endured in the past (and some still do) then this may be difficult to grasp. And yes, SOME people (any race) do respond in an overly sensitive way. But responding BACK in an overly sensitive way (as I feel is being done here) does not "right" that wrong.
To read some of these comments, you would think that the poster said, "crackers not allowed".
Ironically, I think most of the people that "pull" the race card are white people that are "acting on behalf" of the race that they are pulling the card for.
Like my story about Bill. Typically the person saying that I was racist for saying, "oh, he is the black guy over there." will be a white guy. And anyone around that happens to be black will be astonished that it was seen that way! (not always, just sayin' that it happens)
Wow, we're posting at the same time and things are vewy confusing. I need wine LOLOL!
ReplyDeleteDave said:
"You don't feel that she was snubbing the white members of her group."
yes and no - I feel her choice of words in order to reach a specific demographic in her group in order to be heard was over the top. Kinda like using a mega phone to wake hubby up in the middle of the night when you hear a noise.
"You "think her intent was to motivate a particular segment of her unit". Is THAT what you have a problem with?""
Yes and no -- again I base my opinion on how "black power" was used to convey a certain message in the 60's and 70's. And really, it's never been used any other way. It's very political.
Dave said; "So just as he gets the crowd to a place where they are ready to make HIM the next governor, he shouts, "KILL WHITEY". "
LMAO!
Going to bed, now.
Lastly, Dave said: "It seems like you are saying that every time that I have talked on this blog about PT I have called them racist. I really don't think that is true."
ReplyDeleteNo. Just that you were coming across as the pot calling the kettle black. Pardon the pun, bwah-ha-ha! Seriously, if/when anybody wants to comment on racism, it's like a ping=pong ball. It's really difficult NOT to sound like you're drawing the racism card yourself. In all honesty, I see your point. Very clearly. You're not a racist. Neither am I. You (generally speaking) just never know where the recipient of your message is coming from.
So I'll end with how I view what went down on PT:
"I just think that they're reflecting the mirror back at the entity/person they find "offensive" and are holding them to the same standard they themselves have been taught to adhere to as being socially acceptable and/or politically correct."
Very confusing indeed. just what we need with such an otherwise simple and straightforward subject!
ReplyDeleteHave a good night. It has been a pleasure. Hopefully we can pick up again sometime.
Dave said: " don't follow the homing pigeon or the high heels comment... "
ReplyDeleteYou're not allowed to wear open toe shoes in Mary Kay. (Not necessarily high heels) Panty hose is a must even if it's 110 or minus 40.
Flybye -- as in passing through. But I seem to be spending a lot of time in this one spot lately. Like a homing pigeon.
Okay, now I'm really signing off.
Right, I meant to comment on this:
ReplyDelete"I just think that they're reflecting the mirror back at the entity/person they find "offensive" and are holding them to the same standard they themselves have been taught to adhere to as being socially acceptable and/or politically correct."
But got sidetracked because I was being all defensive of my own words.
Just because they have been taught that referencing someone by the race that they are is wrong does not mean that it is wrong.
Lets say that a vegetarian (an extreme vegetarian) that happened to be a woman told me that eating meat was evil.
Lets say that I later saw a different woman eating a steak.
(I am creating an overly simplified version here - I hope it carries!)
Just because a woman had taught me that it was wrong to eat steak (whether you agree with that or not) does not mean that I can "hold her to the same standard that I had been taught.
I guess what I am saying, in regards to this statement that you have now made twice, is that if THIS little snippet goes against the standard of political correctness they have been taught, perhaps they need to revisit their standard of what political correctness is and is not.
Also, I am not really convinced that they find this offensive. Not in and of itself anyway. It feels more like when we were kids and the younger one always got away with everything and we were "offended" by the fact that we didn't get away with it.
This kind of offense is not really holding a mirror up to anything. It is offense for the sake of offense. To me, it is ugly.
Neither of those are rules anymore.
ReplyDeleteJust double checked with my wife.
(thought you were saying those were an explanation of the pigeon comment!)
The homing pigeon thing is GREAT in my opinion. I have told enesvy, and I will tell you, I LOVE good discussion. The conflict of race, gender, and others fascinates me. I am glad that you have stuck around, and hope that you will continue to add your unique perspective to the mix.
Happy 4th. and good night (for real this time)!
PS. This is something I meant to point out in my comment a looong time ago, but kind of in regards to David's point about a person identifying a man by his color, and a white person getting offended, and another black person being surprised at the reaction, I found it interesting on the whole post at PT, the only "AA" person (that I saw who identified herself as black ... there might have been more; I did not read the whole thing) was the only one who somewhat explained/justified/accepted the GMB ad! Some of the girls ("Scribbler," "Magenta," etc.) MIGHT be black, but this lady ("chaine"?) was the only one who clearly stated she is black. Just thought it was interesting.
ReplyDeleteRacism sucks and I'm totally against it but..
ReplyDeletePLEASE..
let's stop this political correctness rubbish that makes it difficult to say/do just about anything these days without running into trouble.
A monkey is only a racist image if someone is determined to believe that it is.
I said: "I just think that they're reflecting the mirror back at the entity/person they find "offensive" and are holding them to the same standard they themselves have been taught to adhere to as being socially acceptable and/or politically correct."
ReplyDeleteDave said: "Just because they have been taught that referencing someone by the race that they are is wrong does not mean that it is wrong. ,,, This kind of offense is not really holding a mirror up to anything. It is offense for the sake of offense. To me, it is ugly."
That's not what I meant. ... I was talking about the impact of the "sign". The residual feelings it leaves based on the political undertone. And I absolutely will always respect the feelings of one based on the impact of another. Who am I to dismiss one's feelings based on what "I" think is right or wrong? People feel what they feel for a lot of reasons we'll never know. I don't think it's right that somebody should have to justify their reaction so that somebody can judge if it's worthy.
Do you know about the song, "Signs" by the Five Man Electric Band? The lyrics are awesome and resonate through decades of societal struggle on many, many levels by people of color, sex, sexual orientation, you name it. It's worth downloading and listening to it. It's a great tune.
Signs
And the sign said long haired freaky people need not apply
So I tucked my hair up under my hat and I went in to ask him why
He said you look like a fine upstanding young man, I think you'll do
So I took off my hat I said imagine that, huh, me working for you
woah!
Chorus:
Sign Sign everywhere a sign
Blocking out the scenery breaking my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign
V2
And the sign said anybody caught trespassing would be shot on sight
So I jumped on the fence and yelled at the house, Hey! what gives you the right
To put up a fence to keep me out or to keep mother nature in
If God was here, he'd tell you to your face, man you're some kinda sinner
Repeat Chorus:
Bridge:
Now, hey you Mister! can't you read, you got to have a shirt and tie to get a seat
You can't even watch, no you can't eat, you ain't suppose to be here
Sign said you got to have a membership card to get inside Uh!
V3
And the sign said everybody welcome, come in, kneel down and pray
But when they passed around the plate at the end of it all,
I didn't have a penny to pay, so I got me a pen and a paper and I made up my own little sign
I said thank you Lord for thinking about me, I'm alive and doing fine
Repeat Chorus
Repeat Chorus
© 1970, 2002 Five Man Electrical Band
scam said: "let's stop this political correctness rubbish that makes it difficult to say/do just about anything these days without running into trouble.
ReplyDelete"
Yup, you nailed it! "...makes it difficult (impossible!) to say/do just about anything without running into trouble."
Jenna, Scam, thanks.
ReplyDeleteFlybye,
This is REALLY fascinating. I hope I can word it correctly.
I think that "It's such a hard nuance to articulate." is still the rallying cry for both of us, so bear with me.
We seem to be looking at this "sign" from different perspectives.
I from the, "She ought to be able to advertise to her team in whatever way she feels fit".
You from the, "Somebody needs to speak up on behalf of the people that may have been offended by this".
I think that you are seeing her poster/flier as a sign that is out of place.
I see your complaint about her poster as a sign prohibiting her from being herself.
You say:
"I don't think it's right that somebody should have to justify their REACTION so that somebody can judge if it's worthy. "
I say:
"I don't think it's right that somebody should have to justify their ACTION so that somebody can judge if it's worthy."
Lets take the "long haired freaky people" sign.
If someone with long hair takes offense to that, they should be allowed to express their offense to it. They MAY need to seek out someone that doesn't have long hair (but with sympathies to those with long hair) to make their case for them.
BUT, when someone with SHORT hair takes offense to the sign because people with long hair MIGHT be offended by it, it just seems silly.
It is possible that the long haired people in the community really don't want to apply anyway. (as you mentioned earlier with the job equality discussion)
So, in this case, what it seems to boil down to is whether or not a director offering an event featuring Black NSD's offends YOU.
If it does, why?
Now, here is why I said that this whole thing is REALLY fascinating.
Scam said,
"let's stop this political correctness rubbish that makes it difficult to say/do just about anything these days without running into trouble."
I took that to mean that it is difficult for this poor director to put together an event that features Black NSD's as guest speakers without the "anti-mk" community getting all up in arms and accusing her of reverse discrimination (among other things).
You took it to mean that it is difficult for you to point out the hypocrisy of the situation without being called racist.
I don't think there is any hypocrisy here. I think that, if we were to explore all the details, no one this flier was intended to be viewed by was offended.
Similar to the way that many on PT criticized Mary Kay's donation to the gift drive on behalf of the recipients, I feel that judging this director on behalf of her unit is like putting up a sign forbidding something that really does not need to be forbidden.
Scam said:
"A monkey is only a racist image if someone is determined to believe that it is. "
Regarding the flier, I would say:
"The words "Power" and "Black" in this context only form a racist image if someone is determined to believe that it is.
We don't know who the intended recipients were. But we do know that WE were NOT the intended recipients. Just as the Japanese ad was not intended to be viewed in the U.S.!
First, I never used the word hypocrite. In fact, I rarely, if ever do.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, you said: "So, in this case, what it seems to boil down to is whether or not a director offering an event featuring Black NSD's offends YOU."
No! No! No!
You've completely ignored what I've said and instead have projected your own thoughts (I won't even call them interpretations) as "mine". Thoughts which I haven't even come close to conveying. You're reading into passages meanings that don't even exist.
No where have I EVER said that a director offering an event, any where, any way is offensive to me.
It's one thing for verbal messages to get lost in translation. You need to go back over my posts and read the words I've posted and take them in for they are in the context which I have printed them. There's no "hidden message" or agenda. I think I was pretty clear.
Incase I haven't been clear, let me spell it out in black and white, a director offering an event featuring Black NSD's [b]DOES NOT offend ME[/b].
What I have been saying, though, is that it isn't fair that GMB is allowed to advertise in the manner she does when "the rest of us", (meaning of a different ethnic persuasion) would be held to a HIGHER SOCIETAL STANDARD.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, we would be severely reproached for doing so.
That's pretty plain English. Hope that's direct enough!
Flybye,
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, please forgive me for any misunderstanding I have had. I am really just trying to figure this out. If I put words in your mouth (as I seem to have) please feel free (as you have) to point it out. It is really not my intent. Again, sorry for that.
You may not have used the word hypocrite, but isn't saying:
"What I have been saying, though, is that it isn't fair that GMB is allowed to advertise in the manner she does when "the rest of us", (meaning of a different ethnic persuasion) would be held to a HIGHER SOCIETAL STANDARD."
Sort of accusing or complaining about hypocrisy? Aren't you saying it is hypocritical for her to be able to advertise that way while you can't? That was the impression I got.
When I said:
"So, in this case, what it seems to boil down to is whether or not a director offering an event featuring Black NSD's offends YOU."
I meant that this should only matter to you if the message itself bothers you.
The fact that you have NOT said that it is offensive you (and in fact have now emphasized that the event and the wording do NOT offend you) strengthens my point.
I believe that I understand what you are saying. You have put it quite well:
"...it isn't fair that GMB is allowed to advertise in the manner she does when "the rest of us", (meaning of a different ethnic persuasion) would be held to a HIGHER SOCIETAL STANDARD."
My point is that this attitude is childish and very unnecessary.
You are in essence saying, "If I can't do it, you can't either."
I am not sure if this illustration will work, but it seems like the closest thing that I can think of.
When we go to the beach (my wife and I) I usually take my shirt off right away. I get a nice even tan on my entire upper body. No need to worry about annoying tan lines in awkward places.
If my wife were to say, "It's not fair!!! If I can't take my top off, you should not be allowed to either."
Just as it is appropriate for me but inappropriate for my wife, I feel that what MAY be (I still leave room for the fact that it MAY not be) appropriate for the director in question will still be inappropriate for you.
I feel that you can't say that she should not be allowed to JUST because you are not allowed to!
That of course is not to say that she is right, or that she should be allowed to, just that the reason you are using to suggest that she should not is not valid.
Not to speak for Fly, but that seems to be a stretch, Dave.
ReplyDeleteThat would be like me telling my husband he could not drink while I was pregnant, simply because I couldn't.
GMB did what she did because she could.
Well, my eyes are crossing from reading all of this. :p
ReplyDeleteAs far as GMB having an event that "excludes" part of her team -
Sometimes it is nice to have several events that cater to different segments of a group.
For example, let's say she had an event with Mom NSD's. The event caters to IBO's that are Moms.
Can IBO's that have no children go? Sure! Nothing says they can't. But the issues being discussed are, most likely, going to cater to the particular culture of those who are building a business while raising children.
Events such as these can actually help with a team because different sub-groups are singled out at different times.
JMHO
hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform;
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying SHE'S a hypocrite. I don't know her to claim to be "something" one way or the other (or not!). Who knows, she honestly may not see one thing "wrong" with her invitation. Yet nobody says anything because that would inevitably make them appear to be "racist". Don't believe me? Read back to your post directed at me today, at 12:20PM.
Oh and you said:
"You from the, "Somebody needs to speak up on behalf of the people that may have been offended by this"."
I don't feel the need to speak "on behalf" of anybody. I was offering the interpretation of "Black Power" because you asked for it, and why I believed it to be inflammatory. It's MY OPINION. I wasn't projecting myself onto "others". I was just offering up MY OPINION as to why the invitation was viewed as INFLAMMATORY to some at PT. And you know what? I see their point! Does that make me a racist! Hell no! I just acknowledge that the style in which the invitation was written could be viewed as provocative (definition: causing annoyance, anger, or another strong reaction, esp. deliberate) or INFLAMMATORY. (definition: (esp. of speech or writing) arousing OR intended to arouse angry or violent feelings : inflammatory slogans.) How? "Black Power".
You said: "You are in essence saying, "If I can't do it, you can't either."
No, I'm saying, if you can do it, then so can I!!! See the difference? But I wouldn't because I wouldn't be provocative just to be challenging. THAT make me immature and a whole nasty 'otherness' (made up!) I can't even begin to describe.
See the difference?
You know, Dave, civilizations have code that we live by which enables us to get along and keeps chaos at bay. (Lord of the Flies?) Very high level I'm illustrating there. That code keeps things, "civil". More specifically on a micro level, I'm referring to MORAL DEVELOPMENT. My observation after reading that invitation is:
some of us are placed here: - some here: _
Note the difference in height.
You said: "If my wife were to say, "It's not fair!!! If I can't take my top off, you should not be allowed to either.""
Wow, awesome example, because .. your wife could fight, publicly, for the EQUALITY to be "allowed" to take her top off and she wouldn't be persecuted for wanting to.... And you know what? She'd probably win. There'd be a lot of debate, that's for sure. But in the end, the SAME standard would apply to ALL women. Not just some.
:) She should go for it. :)
Dave, I'm exhausted. I'm not leaving mad. I'm just signing off. I'll look forward to reading your posts later.
l8r!
Flybye,
ReplyDeleteI thank you for taking the time to emphasize that you are not leaving mad! (sometimes the caps lock can give the impression of shouting rather than emPHAsis!)
I am grateful that we can discus this and remain civil!
I think we are coming to the root of the difference between our opinions. (I have thought that before and was wrong, so who knows, but if you will continue with me, hopefully we will see)
I think the confusion is between equality and sameness.
I think that men are not better than women and women are not better than men.
But I do NOT think that they are the same!
I think that the provocative nature of a woman's chest is what causes our society to continue to hold a different standard. (Why it seems to draw a different reaction in that way is admittedly perplexing, but it does, so we hold a different standard)
I recently read an article about women trying to be firefighters here in Los Angeles. It turns out that (generally speaking) men are better firefighters than women. That does not mean that men are better than women.
I think that people with any color skin are all equal to each other. But we are not all the same. We are all different. It is a different kind of different that the difference between men and women, but there are still things that make us different.
As Shay pointed out:
"Sometimes it is nice to have several events that cater to different segments of a group.
For example, let's say she had an event with Mom NSD's. The event caters to IBO's that are Moms.
Can IBO's that have no children go? Sure! Nothing says they can't. But the issues being discussed are, most likely, going to cater to the particular culture of those who are building a business while raising children.
Events such as these can actually help with a team because different sub-groups are singled out at different times."
(I think she meant IBC instead of IBO, but you get the drift)
I think that the point you made that my wife "could" make a case and possibly win is equally applicable here. You COULD make an argument for having an event that was specifically catered to white unit members with white NSD's coming. And if you lived in, say, Mexico, might even be seen as a good idea.
We can only speculate, but based on the demographics of this country, the black women being invited to this event MAY be a minority in their area, and as Shay points out, an event catered specifically to them could be a very cool thing.
My suggestion is that they are not getting a special privilege because of their ethnicity.
Yes, I did mean IBC instead of IBO. Sorry. I am still sick and under the influence of cold medication. :D
ReplyDeleteFamous quote (Abraham Lincoln?), "You can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time."
ReplyDeleteNo matter who says what, or how they say it, there will be someone somewhere who gets offended. IMO it is IMPOSSIBLE (emphasis, not shouting :)) to not offend someone at sometime about something in some way.
GOOD MORNGING!!! I have been reading all of this stuff. I just want to comment. The thing with racism is that it doesn't belong anywhere really. Saying that I will say that I am a white women and I can see that if in the area of the Country that I live in being a different color would make a difference in getting scholarships, jobs...
ReplyDeleteI don't believe in affirmative action. I think that a person should be judge on their ability. That is just the way that I feel.
Ok let's look at this...In the area of the Country that I live South Texas there is a Hispanic Chammber of Commerce...well if someone where to start a White Chamber of Commerce that would not be tolerated. These are the kinds of things that make me mad.
Ok now let's look at when you fill out anything kind of application or register for school. There are those little boxes you have to check. White (not of hispanic origin), Hispanic, Black, American Indian, Eskemo..... Well, why don't they just put American. I don't care what color you are if you are born in the United States you are American PERIOD!!! Just like me I am American of German, English, Jew, Indian decent. I do get upset and this has been a big conversation with me you are AMERICAN of African decent, or you are American of Mexican decent. You have the same opportunity as I do (well really you have more opportunity because of affirmative action). If you want to make it in this Country it takes hard work and honesty.
The monkey thing it is China's right to do whatever they want too. I think that people take things so literally that it makes me sick to my stomach. Why is it that when the Clintons (and I don't like them to much) mentioned race it was not alright, however when barrack mentioned it nothing was said. He is playing the race card. He plays it to the black community and then he turns and tries to play it to the white community. He also played the gender card against Hillary. Was that right NO it wasn't. I think that he should be held to the same standard as everyone else. We have to look at his record ok he votes present more than he does really vote so that tells me that he doesn't go to work. So instead of everyone looking at the color of his skin look at his record. OK I will stop I am getting politcal however this race thing is every politcal and our government I believe wants to keep it in there because that is their job security. If they can keep some down then those that they keep down will have to rely on them for their food, and their housing and yada yada yada.
This is just one women's opinion.
Have a GREAT DAY!!!!
"As Shay pointed out:
ReplyDelete"Sometimes it is nice to have several events that cater to different segments of a group"
Yes and now I'm left thinking that we don't know if there were other invitations for different segments, i.e., red jackets, contemplating DIQ, etc. and this was the only one "plucked". It doesn't negate the discussion on this thread. I'm just wondering, now, if there weren't other sessions available to her unit.
Pink Bren, I have the same thing going on where I am. And your impression of the Clinton/Obama race is right on in my books.
Dave said: "I think that the provocative nature of a woman's chest is what causes our society to continue to hold a different standard. (Why it seems to draw a different reaction in that way is admittedly perplexing, but it does, so we hold a different standard)"
That's because only mammals' breasts "expand" in order to feed their young. Once they're done, they disappear and male/female chests appear the same way. Except for the homosapien (us) thereby making breasts, on the most primal level, sexual in nature.
It's all about procreation, right? Most species have smell (pheromones) to help their species along. Imagery isn't exclusive to us, or I don't say that it is, because male birds (as an example) are usually very beautiful in comparison to the "dowdy female" as my husband loves to point out. LOLOLOLOL... There is a university study, somewhere, about this. I'll see if I can dig it up.
Firemen: There is a limit where you have to draw the line in the name of "equality". I would rather there be a strong, strapping lad, age and looks not important, just very strong, at my window to carry me out in order that I don't get dropped on the way down! LOLOL!!!
Flybye,
ReplyDelete"Yes and now I'm left thinking that we don't know if there were other invitations for different segments, i.e., red jackets, contemplating DIQ, etc. and this was the only one "plucked". It doesn't negate the discussion on this thread. I'm just wondering, now, if there weren't other sessions available to her unit."
I think this is my major contention here. (from the beginning).
It is like those questions in math class. If x+y=z and x=5, what is the value of z?
The answer of course is "not enough information".
I feel that for anyone to pass judgment on this event, they should really have all the information. Information that I don't have. That is why I have tried to be very careful to post that I am NOT saying she is right. Just that she may not be wrong.
You say that this doesn't negate the discussion on this thread, and I think that I will be "getting back into that" when I start discussing Pink Bren's comment.
My understanding of the comparative beauty of certain male (birds in this case) animals was a self-defense thing. If a family of mallards is being attacked, the mother will keep the young with her while the male diverts the attention of the would be attackers. The bright, pretty colors cause him to be the attention getter. Of course that was what I was taught when I was in science class, the science community may have discovered something else to be more true by now!
RE: firemen, I also want someone strong enough to do some heavy lifting. That is more important to me than a gender neutral fire department!
Pink Bren,
ReplyDeleteA couple of thoughts.
"I don't believe in affirmative action. I think that a person should be judge on their ability. That is just the way that I feel."
I believe that the INTENT of affirmative action is to allow a person to be judged on their ability. It is supposed to be designed so that someone that may have never gotten an opportunity (even though they were qualified) will get an opportunity.
I think it often goes to far and (as you suggest) affords people an opportunity simply because of their minority status.
However, I don't think that because there are flaws with the execution of the concept that the concept is bad.
Just like I don't believe that the flaws with Mary Kay's execution of their distribution plan make the plan itself bad.
In both cases, work needs to be done to make the concept/system better. But, it should not be abandoned altogether.
**
You said:
"Ok let's look at this...In the area of the Country that I live South Texas there is a Hispanic Chammber of Commerce...well if someone where to start a White Chamber of Commerce that would not be tolerated. These are the kinds of things that make me mad."
- from wikipedia -
A chamber of commerce (also referred to in some circles as a board of trade) is a form of business network. Business owners in towns and cities form these local societies to advocate on behalf of the business community. Local businesses are members, and they elect a board of directors or executive council to set policy for the chamber. The board or council then hires a President, CEO or Executive Director to run the organization.
Generally, chambers of commerce serve the following purposes:
* Creating a Strong Local Economy
* Promoting the Community
* Providing Networking Opportunities
* Speaking with Government on behalf of Business
* Political Action, such as getting pro-business candidates elected to office
I think the formation of a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce has merits. I can think of issues that Hispanic run businesses may face that would create the necessity to form such a network.
If you are a white business owner, you most likely have a chamber of commerce that you can join. It is just not called the "white" chamber of commerce. Also, it seems likely that the Hispanic chamber of commerce would be thrilled to have white members. Perhaps you are a white business owner operating in a Hispanic neighborhood. I don't know the rules of membership for the one that you are referring to, but (as with the MK event featuring Black NSD's) it does not seem likely that such a chamber of commerce would be Hispanic exclusive.
Many times, those check boxes are for statistical use only. I work in advertising (multicultural to be specific), and having solid information about what kinds of activities people with different ethnic backgrounds participate in or prefer is very valuable.
If a school for instance is in the middle of a very diverse neighborhood (and the way colleges/universities are these days, one could argue that the whole USA is their "neighborhood") and they find that no one with Hispanic roots is applying, they will probably want to know why. The only way that they can know that they are not applying is if they ask everyone that applies what their ethnicity or origin is.
***
You said:
"Why is it that when the Clintons (and I don't like them to much) mentioned race it was not alright, however when barrack mentioned it nothing was said."
You would have to give specific examples.
Where the Clintons mentioned race.
Who said it was NOT alright.
Where Mr. Obama mentioned race.
Who it was that you were hoping would say something.
Personally, I have seen that both candidates (Hillary and Barack) showed considerable restraint and were both very careful not to mention race or gender as an issue. They both had to deal with supporters that could not seem to control their feelings about those subjects, but I didn't see either of them "pulling" any cards. In fact, they seemed to work together quite well to keep the "cards" in the pockets.
That is why I would need you to give some more specific details of what you were upset by.
David...Why do we need stats to show us that mexicans and blacks are in the minority? Are they really? Where I live the white people are in the minority however you will never see us getting any affirmative action. Well, I live in Sinton Texas I tell people that I live 2 hours from the ends of the earth. Anyway, I don't want to fill those out and usually I tell them that it is none of their D*** business. If I wanted to I could pull the Indian card however I do not.
ReplyDeleteThe hispanic chamber of commerce should not be allow for the simple fact that it mentions race PERIOD!! I am going to tell you that I live here I know what happens I am a business owner. Our family also has a different business here and let me tell you we had to start a 'WOMEN OWNED COMPANY" Why you ask because the minorites were getting all the governmental contracts did they finish the job sometimes however a lot of the time our business was called by the governement agency and asked to finish it. Tell me what is fair about that. Just because the color of the skin the best company doesn't get the job.
About this Presidential campaign I don't recall Hillary ever using the race card I was talking Bill and yes he was speaking for her campaign. obama has a will continue using whatever means that he can to get into the White House. he is not qualified. I don't care what his skin color is however he does. I know that on some commercials that they are running in our area you hear him talking about being raised by his grandparents and his single welfare mom. Well let me tell you I come from a divorced home and mom my WORKED her butt off to provide for us. Where we never on welfare NO. Did my mom have a college education NO. My point is I don't even know I am just so sick and tired of hearing because I am this I deserve this and because I am that I deserve that. You know what you don't deserve anything unless you get your butt out there and work to get it. You know the Bible says that if you don't work you don't eat.
Well I will quick rambling but please don't try and give the the left side of this issue cause I surely don't want it. Let's take everything at face value and leave it at that.
Have a GOOD EVENING!!!!
Pink Bren,
ReplyDeleteYou said:
"David...Why do we need stats to show us that mexicans and blacks are in the minority? Are they really? Where I live the white people are in the minority"
It is not just to determine who is in the minority. When compiled with other reports it offers a wealth of information about who is doing what and when.
Additionally, by asking the question, "are they really", you are demonstrating the need for such statistical analysis. There is only one way to get that information... by collecting it.
Further, when you assert that people with white skin are a minority where you live, you can only know that by statistical analysis of information collected in the manner you are complaining about.
Most surveys simply want to know about you, they have no intention of offering or rescinding an offer based on the information they are providing. (in most cases that would be illegal and if they were caught there would be big problems for them.)
You are also usually not required to provide that information if it makes you uncomfortable, so telling them to mind their business is entirely your choice.
Your accusation... "Just because the color of the skin the best company doesn't get the job." is very difficult to prove (or disprove), so I am not even going to touch that. But I also recommend that you either pursue proof that is happening and the appropriate legal channels to end it, or leave it alone. You are accusing your government of racism. If it is true, you should seek to put an end to it. If not, leave it alone.
I am not sure I understand your point about deserving/undeserving, but I am pretty sure that the line "if you don't work you don't eat" is not in the Bible. It came from one of the early settlers (some guy with James in his name if I recall... have to look that up later I guess).
Finally, just because something is not as "right" as you would like it, it does not mean that it is "left".
To me, "left" and "right" are just more "groups" that everyone wants people to fit into. I think that breaking down these absolute positions and specifying what exactly it is that an individual believes is where we are heading.... and why there is so much controversy amongst the two major parties.
This will be a very interesting election year.
David... I don't know the stats. You know what I see with my own eyes, when I walk into my childs class room and she is the only white person there that is where I get my stats. We my girls and I were eating today in a resturant in Corpus Christi and you know well eating I never really paid much attention to it however today I looked around and I think that their were maybe 6 people not of hispanic origin and only one AA.
ReplyDeleteAbout the government they know what they are doing. Oh my goodness they know.
Ok about the no work no eat. II Thessalonians 3-10 For even when we were with you, this we command you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. So yes it is in the Bible.
I am not trying to be ugly I am just sick and tired of people coming against any race period. That is my point. If you were born in American than you are American. You should be American before anything else. That is just like the flag flying...The American flag flies above the state flags or any others countries flag.
The thing is that some seem to think that they are entitled to things...No one is entitled to anything. Hard work and honesty is what works...well sometimes.
About the left thing. I do believe that people are out there on both sides. I am conservitive as the come however I am also a Christian and I tolerate a lot of things because of that. I think that all men are created equal and it should be on equal ground that we all stand.
One of my best friends is a black woman and I have told her how I feel about all of this and she agrees. She wants to get that job on her merit not because she is black.
So I am not trying to agrue with you just stating my point that we need to stop the race stuff. This all started because of a monkey and the said they were trying to portay obama...well how stupid is that. Just think people take things and run with it in either direction left or right.
Have a GOOD EVENING!!
2 Thessalonians 3:10
ReplyDeleteAagh, you beat me to it, Pink Bren.
ReplyDeletePB,
ReplyDeleteI understand that you can perceive a lot just by looking around. I live in So Cal, and I can easily see which communities are primarily Korean, which are heavily Chinese, where the clusters of Filipino's are... and so on. But statistical analysis goes much beyond that. When a marketer (say the local Dodge dealer) decides that they want to market to people in their area, they want to know EVERYthing they can about the demographics of their area. They don't want to simply know that there are more Hispanics than Chinese. They want to know what the percentages are. They want to know what the income ratios are. They want to know what the spending habits are. They want to know whether certain people are more inclined to pay cash for a car or to take out a loan.
Some of this information is impossible to know. But a marketers job is to look at all the information available and use it to present the best possible picture of the community they are operating in. This is just one application.
Perhaps it turns out that first and second generation Korean's and Chinese prefer to pay cash while third generation and on prefer to use credit. The community that this (fictitious) dealership operates in is made up primarily of third generation Korean and Chinese people. Based on this, that dealership would be wiser to start a campaign saying we offer a great financing program... as opposed to "cash today, drive today".
Everyone is marketing themselves. Whether it is Obama and McCain, your local hair salon or car dealership, Pepsi and Coke, McD's and BK, local or national schools, federal or local government, or just about anyone else you can think of. How aware they are of their audience and what their audience wants to hear and what the best ways are to reach their audience (as well as how much money they have to reach them) all play a part in how successful they are in motivating their audience to take the action that they desire.
Regarding the government. You say, "they know what they are doing"... By that you mean they know that they are intentionally hiring contractors of a certain color skin BECAUSE of the color of their skin???
Not because they came in with a lower bid? Or some other factor that you may not be privy to?
If it is DEFINITELY that, than you are dealing with racism (albeit the reverse discrimination type) and you should present the evidence you have to whichever authority has jurisdiction over that sort of illegal activity.
Your local government can no more hire Hispanic contractors BECAUSE they are Hispanic than they can hire White contractors BECAUSE they are White. Either one is discrimination and (if provable) would easily stand on its own two legs in court. The trouble is proving it. Most likely there is something (legitimate or otherwise) that they can cite as the "real reason" that they hired the other.... same as often happens in the other version of discrimination.
If you have proof, you should pursue it. Through legal channels.
If you are speculating, you should stop.
Regarding the verse in II Thessalonians, good job... I was quite wrong on that one wasn't I!!! I do believe that someone in the early settler days of this country used (now that I know) that verse as a motivation to keep everyone working together, but obviously the Bible came first!!! Nicely done.
I most definitely agree with you that nobody should be entitled to anything based on things they themselves didn't work for. Although, we have freedom in this country we didn't fight for (ourselves.. it was inherited!) and for those of us (you, me and several others here) that believe in the work of salvation Christ did on the cross, we did nothing to earn that... and so we are kind of entitled to something really amazing that we didn't (could never have anyway) have to work for.
Those kind of things aside, I do not think that a lazy, white person should be entitled to a job just because he is white... and with the same stroke, neither should someone with ANY other color skin.
Unfortunately, as you point out, hard work and honesty is what works... only sometimes. Other times, people "get" stuff handed to them because of the dumbest things... and the ones working hard all groan. I live in Los Angeles.... trust me, I see it all the time.
Case in point. I see a beautiful, brand new, Bentley at least daily. (not the same one either) I always point them out to my wife and remark, "see that, that is a house payment rolling down the street".
It would be easy for me to see a young guy (or gal) driving one of those and assume that mommy and/or daddy bought it for him/her.
I would also most likely be right.
Pulling together the kind of scratch that allows you to blow at least 175K on a CAR>>> well, lets just say that doing that before you turn 20 would be no small feat.
Or I could assume they are a drug dealer. Or both.
Either way, the point is that doing that is of no benefit to anyone. Maybe they were handed something on a silver platter. Maybe they haven't worked a hard day in their life. Maybe I haven't "caught a single break" yet...
I would much rather spend my day appreciating what I have, and as you say, working my absolute hardest, to accomplish the things that I want to accomplish.
I think that most people (be they white, black, or whatever) want to earn things... not just be handed something because of the color of their skin or something else like it. But there are also a lot of people that get that the other way around. They want to be handed something and will get it whatever way takes the least work.
Regarding the monkey thing.
They were trying to portray Obama. They say they were trying to compliment him and compare his success with the greatness of their company. Opponents (of the ad) say they were trying to undermine what he is accomplishing.
Judi,
Good job... just 5 minutes quicker...
:)
David...My point to all this I guess is that race plays to big a roll in everything. I do own a hair salon... I do white, brown or whatever color I don't care. Actually our constable of our town told my sister-in-law that I better take down the whites only sign in my window. Well the only sign in my window was no shoes no shirt no service. I told my sister in law that if he doesn't want a liable suit against him that he better be quiet. I told her to tell him that the only color I care about is green and if you have that come on in. So there you go.
ReplyDeleteAbout the government thing well have proof did say something and nothing happened so there you go...that is just the way the cookie crumbles.
Our freedom was a gift from Americans all Americans no matter the color that have fought and are still fighting so that we have the right to this discussion.
My gift of salvation was just that a gift from my Lord. Was I entitled to it...not really because if the Jews would not have turned their backs on Christ we wouldn't have a snowballs chance. Saying that I have accepted that gift from my Lord.
Wealthy people...someone had to earn that money at some point in time. There is a family that lives here and all of the great grand kids were brought in when the great grandma was dying and she left each one 2 million...Now let me say this each and everyone of them have jobs. They still work...they don't have to however they do.
My point is no one is entitled to anything. You are not promised this and that. If you are one of those that has a wealthy family that is great are you entitled to that inheritance...well that depends on the one giving the cash.
Our freedom was not free and it is not an entitlement many men and women of all colors have fought and lost their lives for this country that is what makes it so GREAT.
My husband is working in Iraq...he told me he was ready to come home and then he called the next day and said you know I just don't want to leave these men and women that are fighting for our freedom...Yes he is making a living and yes he also feels that this is a mission field. He wants to make a difference...He shares the Word with those that he comes in contact with and guess what they are Americans and Iraqi, and Indian from India, and from Peru from everywhere. What a mission field. OK got off topic a little my point is that we need to stop all the racial stuff. I don't care what color people are all created by the Creator and He loves us just the same. I don't believe that He sees color. However he did make us different colors for different reasons I don't know His reasons however He knows what He is doing.
HAVE A GOOD EVENING
Judy...In all my ramblings I forgot to say thank you for putting the verse up. So thank you.
ReplyDeleteHave a GOOD EVENING
PB,
ReplyDelete"My point to all this I guess is that race plays to big a roll in everything. I do own a hair salon... I do white, brown or whatever color I don't care. Actually our constable of our town told my sister-in-law that I better take down the whites only sign in my window. Well the only sign in my window was no shoes no shirt no service. I told my sister in law that if he doesn't want a liable suit against him that he better be quiet. I told her to tell him that the only color I care about is green and if you have that come on in. So there you go."
I don't understand this.
I understand that you serve any customer, regardless of skin color.
What I don't understand is the bit about the constable and all that... can you elaborate on that?
**
RE: the government,
"About the government thing well have proof did say something and nothing happened so there you go...that is just the way the cookie crumbles."
What do you mean?
You had proof of what?
You said something to who (whom?)?
What turnout were you looking for that did not happen?
**
Freedom, salvation and wealth...
My point is that some people (all of us) have gotten things that we did not deserve and did NOT get some things that we did deserve.
As such, if we see someone else get something they did not work for (or don't deserve), there is little point in getting all worked up about it. Just do what you do. And let them do what they do.
**
"My point is no one is entitled to anything."
True, but again, sometimes we all get things that we are not entitled to. So, again, live and let live... C'est la vie
**
David...All salons are suppose to have a sign in their window saying no shoes no shirt no service...The constable of our county told my sister in law that I had a sign in my window that said whites only. There was no such sign only the no shoes no shirt no service period. I don't know where he got that idea he would eat at the resturant that is beside my shop and he saw what was in my window....So I don't really understand it either...don't know why he would say that at all. However he did. Maybe he was upset that a white women opened a business I don't know what was in his mind. I couldn't tell you. My sister-in-law was upset about it and she called and told me. She told him Gonzalo you know that she doesn't have that in her window and he said yes she does. So I really couldn't tell you why he said it.
ReplyDeleteIt was taking up with the agency that the work was being done for and they said "affirmative action" we have to allow this because we have to try and put everyone on a level playing field...You know David that these things happen...do you think that people always play fair no they don't. OK enough about this we know what was done and don't want to put all of it on the net.
I agree that sometimes we do all get things that we don't deserve my point in responding to this was that the race thing should NOT play a role in anything. It should be based on merit can you do the job? Can you make the grade? That is it.
There are jobs that I think that men are better at than women. You know the men are supposed to be the leaders this is coming to from the Bible. The Lord first made Adam and then out of Adams rib he made Eve to be Adams help mate. I am not a womens libber...Oh this will probably stir something up...but I don't think that women should get jobs based on their sex...can they do the job yes or no? I think that people should be judged on the merit period.
I do let a lot of this go...I know that life is not fair and never will be. I try and live my life the way that the Bible instucts and I raise my girls this way too. We all have things that have been done to us we have to forgive it and move on or it will eat us up. I do this. I am just telling you things that have happened to our family.
Have a GREAT DAY!!
PB,
ReplyDeleteI am still having a hard time picturing the whole scenario... and as you say, putting it all on the net is not going to solve anything. I will say it sounds like you are up against a lot.
I most definitely agree that people should be judged on their merit, not the color of their skin or their gender... positively or negatively.
Affirmative action (or something similar to it) is necessary, because for years (and to this day) there are people that will say, "Oh, you are a Mexican, you definitely can't do this." Substitute any nationality or ethnicity there. It is sad, but for some reason, it took legislation saying, "you HAVE to give everyone a fair chance" in order for some people to do that.
Of course, it does seem that in some cases it has gone too far the other way.
Instead of, "you need to consider everyone", it has become, "you need to hire a racially diverse team... regardless of merits.
Both extremes are wrong, but I think it is like a pendulum that is (hopefully) running out of momentum.
Imagine the poor HR team or college recruits that have to walk the balance out in addition to considering what is best for the company and their school!
"We all have things that have been done to us we have to forgive it and move on or it will eat us up."
ReplyDeleteEXACTLY, Pink Bren! Excellent point.
Unfair, unjust things happen. Horrible things happen. We have to deal with them and move on, as you said, Pink Bren.
I haven't had the time to finish reading this thread (very late where I am).
ReplyDeleteDavid said to PB: Regarding the government. You say, "they know what they are doing"... By that you mean they know that they are intentionally hiring contractors of a certain color skin BECAUSE of the color of their skin???
Not because they came in with a lower bid? Or some other factor that you may not be privy to? "
Employment equity statistics run from top to bottom. To NOT accept their bid, I hate to say it, but given their majority representation, they could pull "the race card" and cause a whole lot of b.s.
Seen it happen! I'm serious. It's rampant b.s. with the pendulum having swung completely polar to where it was with a severe need to have it hit an equilibrium. The only thing is, who's going t speak up?
Pink Bren, you and I could sit through a month of Sundays and commiserate our own (probably similar experiences) the entire time.
I worked in an employment equity office once (Hence my vocalness on the subject!). We had "one" AA young lady work for us. Our division won this award. We were all white and she was the only AA. Guess who got to hold the award for the photo op (as per the direction of our chief.) The chief should've been front and centre, but she directed the only AA person in unit to hold it for some affirmative action awareness event we did.
I don't even think it was a month after that she left.
Sick.
When it comes to bidding, the highest and lowest bids should be thrown out. The averages of the rest should be made and the one closest to the average wins. That way you get the fairest bid. And guess what? They'll all come within a couple of thousand of one another when you do it like that.
Just like when you have two kids and one piece of cake. One cuts, the other gets to picks first. It's amazing how even the pieces are. LOLOLOL...