Mini-rant: Be Less White?

Page 3 of 6 [ 82 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

25 Feb 2021, 7:28 pm

It's the context, really.

Obviously, "all lives matter."

But some people use "all lives matter" as a criticism of "black lives matter."

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

25 Feb 2021, 7:31 pm

Aspiegaming wrote:

Be less white...
I thank my lucky stars I'm not employed. I can just imagine being shown a new employee training program telling me to combat racism by being less white. Okay, how do I be less white? Because I don't think my skin color has anything to do with who I am on the inside. Do they expect me to walk up to African Americans and start speaking their lingo or something? I think that annoys them. Do I have to give up listening to Rock music and start taking in Hip Hop? To Hell with that. Hip Hop does to me what any mouth sounds does to my ears. Maybe I should just burn off all my skin and call it a day. Nobody will be able to tell if I'm white if I HAVE NO SKIN. *sigh* I hate wokeness.

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

25 Feb 2021, 7:36 pm

slam_thunderhide wrote:

babybird wrote:

Is that actually a thing; being told to be "less white"?

Yes, Coca-cola have recently been in the news for telling their employees to "be less white" in one of their training courses.

https://www.newsweek.com/coca-cola-faci ... on-1570875

https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/econ ... less-white

Quote:

The slides included tips to learners on how to be "less white, less arrogant, less certain, less defensive, less ignorant and more humble."

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

25 Feb 2021, 7:38 pm

madbutnotmad wrote:

dam honky's... (only joking, I have white skin myself, although we all the same colour on the inside)...

You are not allowed to use the term "Honky".
I got reprimanded for that.

Perhaps only skunks are not allowed? :scratch:

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

25 Feb 2021, 7:39 pm

Fnord wrote:

babybird wrote:

Is that actually a thing; being told to be "less white"?

Not in any Employee's Handbook I have ever read or in and Sensitivity Training I have ever attended.

Coca-Cola's racism be damned, however. It is as offensive as:

• "Have you tried being less gay?"

• "Have you tried being less religious?"

• Have you tried being less intellectual?"

• Have you tried being less autistic?"

Equivalency?

Tim_Tex wrote:

Fnord wrote:

babybird wrote:

Is that actually a thing; being told to be "less white"?

In the South and Utah, being less religious would work wonders. There’s no culture, the women (and probably most of the men) are sexually frigid, and anything even remotely amusing is considered evil.

The hell you say!

Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

25 Feb 2021, 8:14 pm

shlaifu wrote:

Brictoria wrote:

madbutnotmad wrote:

shlaifu wrote:

madbutnotmad wrote:

Personally
I wish people would get over the skin colour issue.
As Ras Tafari aka Haile Selassie put it

"until there are no longer first-class and second-class citizens of any nation, until the colour of a man's skin is of no more significance than the colour of his eyes. And until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard to race"

For me, its not "Black Lives Matter"
Not because I am racist, quiet the opposite. I am not into white power, black power or any other colour power.

For me, its not "Black Lives Matter" as that carries with it hate and provokes anger, even self righteous anger.

For clean transformation without hate, knowledge overpowering hate
we need "ALL LIVES MATTER!"

Following the words of the real Ras Tafari!
Now that's true Ras Tafari!

The problem is that "ALL LIVES MATTER" is unspecific. Who's "all"?
"WE THE PEOPLE" used to refer to a few white male slave owners, and had to be extended, group by group, in sometimes bloody conflict.

I like the Solution the Haitian Revolutionaries came up with: Haiti was a French colony, but when the French decapitated gheur king, the Haitians too thought they were now free. Much to the confusion of the French Revolutionaries, I might add, because they hadn't thought of the colonized people when they talked about equality, freedom, and brotherhood.

So the Haitians had their own revolution and founded their own, free state,and declared it a "black nation". To get around the problem of white people on Haiti, they also declared, that from now on, on Haiti, everyone will be considered black.

That's what "Black lives mattee" means, it's specifically mentioning that even Black lives matter, not just ALL LIVES*

*Definition of "ALL" might vary

sounds like you are twisting what I wrote.
Perhaps you should ask ME what I mean by the definition of ALL
instead of referencing someone else who was a bigot

i am not hear to debate with people who are so ignorant
if you spoke to me face to face
you would know that you couldn't take the mick

and you would know that ALL means ALL

Here is the new version
"ALL LIFE MATTERS"*

note* for bigots who want to twist what has been written,
please note that in all instances that I use the word "ALL" in the above "ALL LIFE MATTERS"
refers to literally "ALL" sentient life in the universe. I have done this intentionally,
as it is my intentions to be ALL inclusive and not to exclude anyone.

Please do not twist what I have written to suit your political derangement.
Regards!

I have never understood the "logic" behind certain people's claims that "all lives matter" (which by definition includes people of every race, with no exclusions) is "racist", while "black lives matter" (which by definition only applies to the lives of "black" people,and specifically excludes all other "races" so implying they don't matter) isn't...

Because "all" is open to interpretation.

Really...

Can you point out which part of the definition of "all" provides room for the exclusion of any part of the "whole"? Or, for that matter, room for "interpretation"?

Quote:

all
predeterminer · determiner · pronoun
determiner: all; pronoun: all

used to refer to the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing.

adverb
adverb: all
1. completely.
2. (in games) used after a number to indicate an equal score.

Definition courtesy of the Oxford dictionary through Google: https://www.google.com/search?q=all+definition

To claim an inclusive term is "racist" while denying any racial\"racist" overtones exist in a phrase specifically designed to promote one race as being more important than others seems a deliberately racist approach to be taking.

If you feel "Black lives matter" is not racist, while "all lives mater" is, would you also consider the following equally "non-racist"?
- "Asian lives matter"
- "Hispanic lives matter"
- "White lives matter"

Any claim that a statement regarding a certain race is not "racist" while the same statement with a different race substituted is "racist" demonstrates an inherently racist attitude from the person doing so - Either a person considers all people equal, regardless of race, or they demonstrate racism by "favouring" a given race\set of races (even if not their own) over others.

Feyokien
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Dec 2014
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,303
Location: The Northern Waste

25 Feb 2021, 10:00 pm

Brictoria wrote:

Really...

Can you point out which part of the definition of "all" provides room for the exclusion of any part of the "whole"? Or, for that matter, room for "interpretation"?

Quote:

Are we still having this silly conversation. It got explained to you months ago Brictoria.

Black lives matter ... as much as other lives. That's the movement. To suggest otherwise that its a black supremacist movement is just disingenuous at this point.

shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,659

25 Feb 2021, 11:05 pm

Brictoria wrote:

shlaifu wrote:

Brictoria wrote:

madbutnotmad wrote:

shlaifu wrote:

madbutnotmad wrote:

Because "all" is open to interpretation.

Really...

Can you point out which part of the definition of "all" provides room for the exclusion of any part of the "whole"? Or, for that matter, room for "interpretation"?

Quote:

This isn't about the definition of the word "all".
Logic doesn't work on the real world use of language.

In practice, Black people picked a phrase that would highlight their specific grievance.
And white supremacist used a different phrase to let them know that their specific grievance was not worth highlighting.

_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.

Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

26 Feb 2021, 12:59 am

Feyokien wrote:

Brictoria wrote:

Really...

Can you point out which part of the definition of "all" provides room for the exclusion of any part of the "whole"? Or, for that matter, room for "interpretation"?

Quote:

{redacted}

Let's look at what was "replied to" in context:

Brictoria wrote:

shlaifu wrote:

Brictoria wrote:

madbutnotmad wrote:

shlaifu wrote:

*Definition of "ALL" might vary

Because "all" is open to interpretation.

Really...

Can you point out which part of the definition of "all" provides room for the exclusion of any part of the "whole"? Or, for that matter, room for "interpretation"?

Quote:

Looked at in context, it was questioning how an inclusive term "all" can possibly be considered "racist" (or exclusionary of certain parts of the whole) when a patently exclusive term "Black" is considered "inclusive", even though it specifically excludes a large portion of the population.

Put simply, to claim "X lives matter" is to imply that "'Non-X' lives do not matter" (or alternatively "X lives are more important than 'non-X' lives"). As such, the only inclusive possibility to avoid this would be to use 'All' in place of any race based identifier - The use of a race based identifier marks the statement (and those "believing" in it) as bigots\racists who elevate the given race above all others. Yet, strangely enough, these same bigots\racists seem to have invented their own "definition" of 'all', such that in their minds it means something completely outside all universally recognised understanding of the term in order to justify their use of bigoted\racist statements...

Given I was attempting to gain some insight into the bigot's new "definition" of 'All', referring back to the racist statement that only "certain lives matter" is in no way addressing this topic...

Last edited by Cornflake on 26 Feb 2021, 11:31 am, edited 1 time in total.: Redacted a personal attack

Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia

26 Feb 2021, 1:18 am

Brictoria wrote:

Because you need to look at the history of a term instead of just definitions of individual words out of context, and understand that "all lives matter' was made to directly oppose "black lives matter" as a way of considering specific grievances of the black community.

Brictoria wrote:

Put simply, to claim "X lives matter" is to imply that "'Non-X' lives do not matter" (or alternatively "X lives are more important than 'non-X' lives").

No, that does not mean it all, especially if you look at the context of the phrase other than people just assuming that it was trying to say that black lives were more important.

Brictoria wrote:

As such, the only inclusive possibility to avoid this would be to use 'All' in place of any race based identifier - The use of a race based identifier marks the statement (and those "believing" in it) as bigots\racists who elevate the given race above all others. Yet, strangely enough, these same bigots\racists seem to have invented their own "definition" of 'all', such that in their minds it means something completely outside all universally recognised understanding of the term in order to justify their use of bigoted\racist statements...

Again, these are conclusions reached by ignoring the context and history of terms, just to try and flip the script so to give a sympathetic reasoning to people who created the phrase to counter a movement to address racial disparity, and say those people are the real biggots.

Brictoria wrote:

Given I was attempting to gain some insight into the bigot's new "definition" of 'All', referring back to the racist statement that only "certain lives matter" is in no way addressing this topic...

From what I have seen, you have never actually tried in good faith to understand the point of view, because you are still having this conversation long after you have had it explained to you. Which means there is little other choice but to assume an actual malicious intent in either ignoring the explanation given to you, either there is something blocking it in your mind, or really don't want to understand it. So keep playing the victim like BLM is victimising you.

_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall

Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

26 Feb 2021, 5:07 am

Bradleigh wrote:

Brictoria wrote:

In order to ensure what is stated is understood by all parties, a common definition of terms is required. If your "message" requires a redefinition of a word, taking it outside the common\universal understanding of its meaning, to give it a distorted definition to support one side of the discussion, that indicates the party doing so is acting in a knowingly dishonest manner.

There is nothing "bigoted" or "racist" in stating that "all lives matter". The fact it was created as a "counter" to "Black lives matter" merely demonstrates that many people were not willing to support what is inherently a racist\exclusionary message and preferred to make an race-blind\inclusive message instead.

If your message is merely that "X lives matter", then it is perfectly understandable that people will take offence, given you have purposefully inferred that the lives of those who are not "X" do not matter. Trying to claim that "X" also includes "not X" is merely an attempt to dishonestly redefine "X" in order to hide the bigotry and racism of those who cling to "X lives matter" - If they truly believed "All lives matter", there is nothing (outside their personal racsim\bigotry) preventing them saying this instead.

shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,659

26 Feb 2021, 7:36 am

Brictoria wrote:

Bradleigh wrote:

Brictoria wrote:

For crying out loud, have you not read at least some Wittgenstein?
We*do*not*have*a*common*definition*of*words. Ever.
"All lives matter" has become a racist phrase through the way it was used.
If the phrase "the horse does not eat cucumber salad" would have been used the same way, then that phrase would have become a racist phrase.

_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.

Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia

26 Feb 2021, 8:22 am

Brictoria wrote:

If your message is merely that "X lives matter", then it is perfectly understandable that people will take offence, given you have purposefully inferred that the lives of those who are not "X" do not matter. Trying to claim that "X" also includes "not X" is merely an attempt to dishonestly redefine "X" in order to hide the bigotry and racism of those who cling to "X lives matter" - If they truly believed "All lives matter", there is nothing (outside their personal racsim\bigotry) preventing them saying this instead.

If I say that "dogs are cute", then can someone infer that I am saying that cats are not? That is not how this sort of language works. This is like some sort of weird victim complex where no one's problems can be addressed unless they are a part of that group.

This is the exact same thing of the people who rant against gay pride because they think it means that straight people should not be proud. So then they try and create their own straight pride marches, and then it just gets used to justify some people to be anti-gay, with signs that say things like "make normalcy normal again". The concept is not the problem, the problem is that it is just being used to talk over a minority group because it makes them uncomfortable.

_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

26 Feb 2021, 8:25 am

Brictoria wrote:

Put simply, to claim "X lives matter" is to imply that "'Non-X' lives do not matter" (or alternatively "X lives are more important than 'non-X' lives"). As such, the only inclusive possibility to avoid this would be to use 'All' in place of any race based identifier - The use of a race based identifier marks the statement (and those "believing" in it) as bigots\racists who elevate the given race above all others. Yet, strangely enough, these same bigots\racists seem to have invented their own "definition" of 'all', such that in their minds it means something completely outside all universally recognised understanding of the term in order to justify their use of bigoted\racist statements...

A simple solution would be to uncover the hidden qualifier "too".
I.E. Black Lives Matter Too.

shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,659

26 Feb 2021, 9:52 am

Pepe wrote:

Brictoria wrote:

A simple solution would be to uncover the hidden qualifier "too".
I.E. Black Lives Matter Too.

Nit as good a slogan though

_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.

Cornflake
Administrator

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 70,696
Location: Over there

26 Feb 2021, 11:25 am

Brictoria wrote:

There is nothing "bigoted" or "racist" in stating that "all lives matter". The fact it was created as a "counter" to "Black lives matter" merely demonstrates that many people were not willing to support what is inherently a racist\exclusionary message and preferred to make an race-blind\inclusive message instead.

Well plainly there is nothing "bigoted" or "racist" in stating that "all lives matter" - but you're focussing on one aspect (word definitions) to the exclusion of others (reason for use).

A simple racist way to demean, minimise or dismiss the statement "Black lives matter" and, more importantly, the sentiment behind it is to scornfully respond with "ALL lives matter".
It seems entirely specious to me to say that it's simply ordinary everyday pedantic folk saying "Well actually, while do I see what you're saying - as a point of interest surely all lives matter".

I'm sure all this would have been explained to you already.

_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.

Page 3 of 6 [ 82 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

Similar Topics
GRRRRRR RANT!!!! in General Autism Discussion	25 Apr 2025, 12:42 pm TheDandy1
human relations, a bit of an NT/ND rant... in In-Depth Adult Life Discussion	18 Jun 2025, 2:07 am kadanuumuu
I'm so lost in life right now. (Rant) in General Autism Discussion	23 Apr 2025, 12:17 pm adomka
Trump accuses South Africa of genocide against white people in News and Current Events	22 May 2025, 6:34 pm Kraichgauer

Mini-rant: Be Less White? Post Reply New Topic

Mini-rant: Be Less White?