en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/767645 Comments by KWO5020 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/south-park-off-the-hook__trashed/#IDComment70067729 I’ll watch South Park occasionally, but I can’t say I’m a huge fan of Matt Stone and Trey Parker. I know they put out episodes that offend various groups and that they attempt to push the envelope. However, I’ve taken issue with them every since their episode “The F Word”. This episode that’s causing so much controversy is one that features a depiction of the prophet Mohammed. In Islam it’s frowned upon to create visual images of Mohammed because they want to deter idolatry of said image. The rule basically wants to stop people from worshipping the image as opposed to actually worshipping the idea and person beyond the image. That’s why I’m a little eh over people saying “They showed Jesus, Buddha, etc!” Well, those religions don’t have a problem with depictions of their prophet, etc. Of course I’m not excusing the few crazies who want to kill over a depiction. There are many more liberal Muslims who don’t have an issue with depictions of Mohammed, but as the case with the South Park guys shows, there are people who take issue with images being shown. It’s the same with every religion I suppose. There are liberal and rational people in each religion, but the few crazies are the ones who are given media attention and as a result, people associate the crazies with every single person in the religion. The South Park episode aired recently and the image of Mohammed was blocked out because Comedy Central decided to censor it. They did it without the South Park guy’s permission and I suppose it was due to the death threats the producers were facing. I’m not a fan of censorship and as people have repeated over and over, South Park makes fun of every group. I think it’s ridiculous to censor an image just to please one group. You can’t make a death threat because you’re offended by something. I understand that South Park is offensive at times and blatantly pushes the creator’s beliefs, but you’re only giving yourself a bad image by threatening to kill over something you disagree with. An episode they had that really offended me was their episode about the f word and how it’s basically alright to use it because the meaning is changing. I’m changing the topic a bit but it relates to my previous opinion on the Mohammed episode. I quite like what someone said on another blog regarding this episode. “The privileged group does not get to make a statement for the oppressed group.” There are people who will argue that the Mohammed episode is a joke and shouldn’t be taken seriously, but half the time they’re the ones who use South Park as their go to political show. Kinda sad. Regardless, many people will watch South Park and believe everything is says is incredibly clever, but a few episodes are nothing more than a way for the creators to push their beliefs. Someone(outside of this blog) mentioned a few episodes such as “Cartman’s Silly Hate Crime 2000” where they attacked hate crime laws despite the facts that prove certain groups ARE targeted and hate crime laws are designed to protect them. It makes me sick when people try to say its special privileges. Or the episode about Mr. Garrison which basically poked fun at transgendered issues. The show isn’t really that brilliant (in my opinion) but it does have its funny moments that shine a light on important issues. Also, some of the comments here scream “ethnocentrism”. The comment that bashed Islam as bogus because of its background. I’m pretty certain the people that bash Islam have no background or any information on it save for a quick glance at Wikipedia or the minutes they can spare to watch Fox News. The fact that someone says Islam is bogus while ignoring the fact that Christianity claims Jesus was born to a virgin and came back from the dead screams of hypocrisy and nothing more than ethnocentrism. People need to get over themselves and realize that making death threats won’t solve anything, but neither will acting as if your point of view is the only correct one. Sat, 24 Apr 2010 02:39:17 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/south-park-off-the-hook__trashed/#IDComment70067729 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68393070 I enjoyed Thursday’s lecture and I hoped that it opened a lot of student’s minds. I was raised in a Muslim household(We’re pretty lax on religion nowadays) and grew up celebrating the Eid and Ramadan. My sisters and I even have Arabic first names. I definitely agreed with his points about the Christian Invasion. As an atheist living in a country where the majority of the people practice a certain religion, I can definitely say it often feels like a Christian invasion is occurring when people talk about the war, various political stances(from an outside perspective). I’ve often heard many people blast Muslim extremists and make incredibly ignorant statements regarding Islam. People fail to realize that Islam is set up to be a peaceful religion and there are always going to be various outliers. I’ve always been against the war in Iraq and have firmly believed that many of the reasons for the occupation centered on oil bases in Iraq. The quotes from any politicians and oil executives that Sam showed us were shocking. It’s disturbing to think that the people we elected are embarking on a modern Crusade. I’ve always been a firm believer in separation of Church and State. I feel religion has absolutely no place in government, so to hear George Bush’s comments and the worker on Giuliani’s campaign basically saying they want to attack all Muslims nearly caused me to headdesk. I hate hate the argument that the war in Iraq is being fought to free us. Free us from what? There are other so called tyrannical governments that the United States isn’t trying to invade. What makes Iraq such a different case? Oh yea, oil reserves which equal money. Bush and his administration constantly struggled to come up with a concise reason for the US occupation in Iraq and each proved as faulty as the last. First insinuating that there was a link between the 9/11 attacks and Saddam, Weapons of Mass Destruction, spreading democracy all in an attempt to ward off the public’s increasing belief that the war was nothing more than a war for oil. One of the political science courses I took last year was PoliSci 003 which basically focused on various governments around the world. We were able to watch a film that centered on Iran and the way the Iranians and others in the Middle East viewed the United States. Many felt angry that the United States became increasingly richer due to the oil they reaped from the Middle East, while people in their own country grew poorer and poorer. It was a classic example of the rich getting richer while the poor got poorer. As a result, tensions grew between the Middle East and the United States. It seems like a mutual understanding of cultures is needed to help decrease the tensions between the countries. And as for the Christian Invaders, I feel that this is especially relevant nowadays. I’ve heard about the Jesus Camp film and it’s frightening the way children are basically scared straight into being these “Christian warriors.” Even the name is terrifying. There seems to be a fascination with labeling Muslims as extremists but the same is rarely said about Christians. I get so angry thinking about the 2008 election and the way people felt that saying Obama was a Muslim was something shameful. Of course he isn’t, but it definitely showed that people link Islam to terrorism. Why would there be a big deal if he was? Though you have to remember that people made a fuss about Kennedy being Catholic. Like I said before, I’m an atheist so I’m really don’t care about religion or people’s fascination with fighting the good fight for God and the ways people will try to fight those who have a different religion. It seems to bring nothing but trouble, though I know people will get offended by that. I enjoy this quote by Richard Dawkins, a famous atheist, "The majority of children born into the world tend to inherit the beliefs of their parents, and that to me is one of the most regrettable facts of them all" People fail to question what is going around them and this is directly related to many people not understanding the situation in the Middle East. The way people blindly follow beliefs without even considering what they are following plays a big role in a lot of the lecturers we’ve have this semester. I’ll just end with this quote about religion ““Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:25:41 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68393070 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/this-is-totally-off-the-hook__trashed/#IDComment66706978 I usually go to a celebrity blog and this video and information about the game had been posted. I was shocked that such a game existed but I also noticed many people making anti-Japanese comments. There were several people who claimed that videos like these are a basic representation of the Japanese culture. Although this game and the news covering it is a bit outdated as it’s been out for a while, the entire issue of it is not. This game is not a direct representation of what all the Japanese people think or believe in! It’s just a small part of the population that creates video games like this. It’d be like watching MTV and thinking every American acted like a cast member of the Jersey Shore or the Hills. I used to read manga such as Love Hina, Peach Girl, etc and I’ve watched a few Japanese movies so the almost xenophobia I’ve been seeing about the Japanese culture is a bit off-putting. There is a serious problem with this game and the culture that surrounds it. However, it is annoying to hear people dismiss these things as a “Japanese thing” or even worse “Chinese” when it clearly says Japan if you could muster enough energy to click play and watch the video or even read the comments that state it is Japan not China. All Asian countries are not interchangeable. The game is clearly disturbing and there are youtube videos that detail certain scenes from the game. There are some that will argue this game allows these young men who will be playing it a form of escapism. They can play the video game without actually going out and committing the crime. I’m a little wary of this view because the game sets up these women as merely cartoon characters that can be manipulated and abused. The dehumanization of the women strikes a chord with me. It may make the players see the women in this light and then they will act on it. Who says this will stop them from taking a step further. It also raises the question of can games like Grand Theft Auto, etc even be compared to this game? Many people will claim that these games promote violence and feel that people will run out and commit the same acts of crime. I hate going with the argument that the things you see can actually inspire you to do the same act(I’ve watched the Japanese film Battle Royale but I very much doubt I’ll be going on a killing spree), but I do feel this game puts these thoughts in the player’s mind. I feel conflicted about whether the two can be compared but I want to focus just on the game and how it is such a clear view of this so called “control” over women. The main motive of the game is revenge. The character is supposed to seek revenge on the girl because she accuses him of rape. There’s even an option that forces the girl to have an abortion! It’s such a sick idea that games are perpetuating this idea that men can have complete control over women. It’s even more sickening that it allows the viewer to think that women actually want rape. The women in the game seem so encourage the male characters and it furthers this disturbing idea that many rapists have which is women who wear short skirts, have a large chest, etc are flaunting it and therefore it’s ok. This game is an attack on women and it’s unsettling that it was even created. Fri, 9 Apr 2010 02:34:41 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/this-is-totally-off-the-hook__trashed/#IDComment66706978 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/those-damn-dolls__trashed/#IDComment65669672 This video definitely was one of the more disturbing videos we have watched in class. I could see the children’s pained expressions as they were told to choose which doll was more beautiful and which looked like them. I do think it’s pretty disturbing that we live in a world where children are so affected by this so called standard of beauty at such young ages. They’re made to dislike their skin color as if it makes them ugly or less than someone with a lighter skin tone. I feel like a lot of it does come from the Disney movies and tv shows. Children grow up only seeing television shows that are dominated by white children and they feel that they must become white or they yearn to look white in order to make it in this world or to be accepted. I feel that more shows need to feature minorities, etc. I’m thinking of many of my favorite movies right now and they are heavily dominated by white actors and actresses. Positive role models can play a major part in the way these children see themselves. If they grow up watching movies or tv shows where the minority characters are seen in a negative light or not seen at all, chances are they probably will have a negative view of how they look. I’m glad that there are more children shows such as Dora the Explorer, Maya and Miguel and Ni Hao Kai Lan. These shows include characters that are white but the main character is a minority. I think it’s especially important that we allow children to see a positive representation of their race. I have a niece that is two and the video made me think of the dolls that she has. It seems like it is too often that people are bombarded with shows that have minorities but they’re only the “token character” They have little dialogue and don’t contribute to the plot in any major way. I also remember a girl’s comment during class that there are skin issues in the black community as well. I definitely know where she’s coming from as some people I know also claim they don’t want to have children with very dark skin as if it is something that is negative. Many movies also have blacks with lighter skin as opposed to blacks with darker skin. There was a big article about the movie precious and the casting for that film. I’ve read the book and the characters that help her are described as having very dark skin or something similar. However, the movie only featured the black characters with light skin as the positive characters. There obviously needs to be something done about this idea that having dark skin is not beautiful. Maybe it is people’s fascination with the so called standard of beauty that needs to be changed or as I said earlier, more representation of minorities. I think these ideas can possibly help these children realize that they don’t need to change their skin color to fit in with society. I have a niece who is only two but she has dolls of various skin colors, etc, but her favorite dolls are a pair of black doll twins. I hope we can advance as a society and allow these children to see that they are beautiful and should be accepted for who they are. Sat, 3 Apr 2010 00:30:04 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/those-damn-dolls__trashed/#IDComment65669672 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment64353105 Apologies for the multiple comments Sat, 27 Mar 2010 16:23:51 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment64353105 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment64250868 I’m familiar with the Tea Party protestors and their so called struggles against the Obama administration and “socialism”, but I usually ignore them. I just see them as a few radicals who spew speeches and words with no real backing. They just enjoy riling people up and causing a stir. However, ignoring them doesn’t seem to be an option as this blog post proves. There are some protestors that proudly shout about assassinating Obama or like the blog said, depicting him as Hitler or equating him to a terrorist or Osama bin Laden. The constant comparisons to Hitler remind me of Godwin’s Law. It pretty much says “It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." Maybe it’s just for shock value, but I’m pretty sure there are some people who actually believe this. A lot of these tea party protestors are regular watchers of Glenn Beck and Fox news. Fox News isn’t exactly known for being the most trustworthy news station and a lot of these protestors tune in without fact checking. As a result, this growing fear of us. against them spreads and they take it to such an extreme level. They also use racism and homophobia as a shield against ideas they may dislike. I heard about many of these protestors using offensive terms at the Senators and for what reason? I don’t care if you dislike Obama or didn’t vote for him, but to go so far and brand him a terrorist and demean him says something about your so called patriotism. It’s not just the tea party protestors who shout offensive things but sometimes it may even come from the Senators. I watched the Health Care Debate take place and it got especially heated as it grew closer to voting time. A Texas Representative, Randy Neugebauer shouted “baby killer” during the debate for the health care bill. The idea that those in power aren’t immune to being so immature to stoop to petty name calling also says something about our current state of politics. There was also booing by the Republican Senators when Nancy Pelosi mentioned Obama’s name and you can’t forget the infamous “you lie!” comment made by Representative Wilson. Politicians really need to grow up and realize you’re representing districts and people and shouldn’t let your own bigoted personal views get in the way of this. I’m all in favor of protests but everyone knows there’s a wrong and right way to protest. This is the United States and we do have the freedom to protest, but people often abuse this freedom by holding racist and homophobic signs. It’s time people used their brains for once and before heading outside with a sign comparing Hitler to Obama, take a step back and actually question what you’re doing. You can blindly follow a particular movement with few logistics and go the way of Ann Coulter, or you can question what you’re doing and actually do your research before protesting something you have no idea about. Fri, 26 Mar 2010 21:17:30 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment64250868 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment64209411 I’m familiar with the Tea Party protestors and their so called struggles against the Obama administration and “socialism”, but I usually ignore them. I just see them as a few radicals who spew speeches and words with no real backing. They just enjoy riling people up and causing a stir. However, ignoring them doesn’t seem to be an option as this blog post proves. There are some protestors that proudly shout about assassinating Obama or like the blog said, depicting him as Hitler or equating him to a terrorist or Osama bin Laden. The constant comparisons to Hitler remind me of Godwin’s Law. It pretty much says “It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." Maybe it’s just for shock value, but I’m pretty sure there are some people who actually believe this. A lot of these tea party protestors are regular watchers of Glenn Beck and Fox news. Fox News isn’t exactly known for being the most trustworthy news station and a lot of these protestors tune in without fact checking. As a result, this growing fear of us. against them spreads and they take it to such an extreme level. They also use racism and homophobia as a shield against ideas they may dislike. I heard about many of these protestors using offensive terms at the Senators and for what reason? I don’t care if you dislike Obama or didn’t vote for him, but to go so far and brand him a terrorist and demean him says something about your so called patriotism. It’s not just the tea party protestors who shout offensive things but sometimes it may even come from the Senators. I watched the Health Care Debate take place and it got especially heated as it grew closer to voting time. A Texas Representative, Randy Neugebauer shouted “baby killer” during the debate for the health care bill. The idea that those in power aren’t immune to being so immature to stoop to petty name calling also says something about our current state of politics. There was also booing by the Republican Senators when Nancy Pelosi mentioned Obama’s name and you can’t forget the infamous “you lie!” comment made by Representative Wilson. Politicians really need to grow up and realize you’re representing districts and people and shouldn’t let your own bigoted personal views get in the way of this. I’m all in favor of protests but everyone knows there’s a wrong and right way to protest. This is the United States and we do have the freedom to protest, but people often abuse this freedom by holding racist and homophobic signs. It’s time people used their brains for once and before heading outside with a sign comparing Hitler to Obama, take a step back and actually question what you’re doing. You can blindly follow a particular movement with few logistics and go the way of Ann Coulter, or you can question what you’re doing and actually do your research before protesting something you have no idea about. Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:33:47 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment64209411 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment64209303 I’m familiar with the Tea Party protestors and their so called struggles against the Obama administration and “socialism”, but I usually ignore them. I just see them as a few radicals who spew speeches and words with no real backing. They just enjoy riling people up and causing a stir. However, ignoring them doesn’t seem to be an option as this blog post proves. There are some protestors that proudly shout about assassinating Obama or like the blog said, depicting him as Hitler or equating him to a terrorist or Osama bin Laden. The constant comparisons to Hitler remind me of Godwin’s Law. It pretty much says “It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." The numerous fall Maybe it’s just for shock value, but I’m pretty sure there are some people who actually believe this. A lot of these tea party protestors are regular watchers of Glenn Beck and Fox news. Fox News isn’t exactly known for being the most trustworthy news station and a lot of these protestors tune in without fact checking. As a result, this growing fear of us. against them spreads and they take it to such an extreme level. They also use racism and homophobia as a shield against ideas they may dislike. I heard about many of these protestors using offensive terms at the Senators and for what reason? I don’t care if you dislike Obama or didn’t vote for him, but to go so far and brand him a terrorist and demean him says something about your so called patriotism. It’s not just the tea party protestors who shout offensive things but sometimes it may even come from the Senators. I watched the Health Care Debate take place and it got especially heated as it grew closer to voting time. A Texas Representative, Randy Neugebauer shouted “baby killer” during the debate for the health care bill. The idea that those in power aren’t immune to being so immature to stoop to petty name calling also says something about our current state of politics. There was also booing by the Republican Senators when Nancy Pelosi mentioned Obama’s name and you can’t forget the infamous “you lie!” comment made by Representative Wilson. Politicians really need to grow up and realize you’re representing districts and people and shouldn’t let your own bigoted personal views get in the way of this. I’m all in favor of protests but everyone knows there’s a wrong and right way to protest. This is the United States and we do have the freedom to protest, but people often abuse this freedom by holding racist and homophobic signs. It’s time people used their brains for once and before heading outside with a sign comparing Hitler to Obama, take a step back and actually question what you’re doing. You can blindly follow a particular movement with few logistics and go the way of Ann Coulter, or you can question what you’re doing and actually do your research before protesting something you have no idea about. Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:32:51 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment64209303 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/does-this-rudeness-thing-cut-both-ways__trashed/#IDComment62998504 The whole texting in class may seem like a good idea but there will always be certain people who take advantage of it. I had to inwardly groan when I saw the topic “What does it mean to be white” because I knew a few idiots would make certain comments just to cause an uproar. It reminds me of the scene in Jurassic Park, the one with the shaking water glass that warns of the incoming T-Rex attack. I knew something bad was going to happen as soon as I saw the topic and I was proven right as people started to text comments just to get a laugh out of the people in the class. I don’t really understand why some people are saying such a big uproar from all over was made when comments about the black students were made. There were a few yells and shouts of disbelief but it’s not like people were boycotting the class or getting into screaming matches. Many of the comments from the white students came before the question was posed to the black students. People weren’t expecting so many of the dumb comments and that’s why a lot of students felt angry. The question that was given to everyone of color came afterwards and people were probably expecting a few of the comments. An outrage was already made and people had calmed down. I felt the reactions were matched for all of the comments. Also, I agree with one of the posters that comments such as “Whites can’t dance” or “Whites only like John Mayer” don’t really match up to harsher comments like “Whites are the superior race” or responding to the question what does it mean to be white with statements such as “better”. There are some people who complain that they’re being called privileged or that they have an easier life, but we’re talking about the majority not individual case-by-case issues. You can look at the chart of family incomes and then wonder why some people are texting privileged or that so and so race has an easier life. At least people were answering the question without going off base with “Those loud black girls in the HUB and Computer Lab.” The point was made in class that Penn State is a predominately white school. There are fewer minorities so of course many people are going to get irritated when many racist comments are posed. The minority vs. majority issue. The minority feels threatened because of comments that where posted by the majority. Many people felt uncomfortable especially realizing the size disparity. People also get offended because even comments on this message board like “Blacks get more offended by racism” or blacks can tell racial jokes without any repercussions. It all goes back to stereotypes and people passing judgment. Seeing as the people texting these comments only want to get a rise or a laugh from the class, it’d be best to just ignore them and not give them any attention. It only ignores the comments that actually respond to the question and cast a light on the offensive comments. I’m not in this class to waste my time reading text messages sent by people who only want to test their joke making abilities. People need to grow up and actually text a response to the question or don’t bother coming to class until you’ve graduated from the second grade. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:23:47 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/does-this-rudeness-thing-cut-both-ways__trashed/#IDComment62998504 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/prom-or-no-prom-just-dont-let-the-queer-students-dance-together__trashed/#IDComment61794277 I feel that the school board was completely wrong for canceling the prom because a girl just wanted to bring her girlfriend to the prom. It’s always a bit of a jolt to realize how backwards our society really is despite the progress we have made. It’s also a realization that we still have a lot of work to do regarding equality for all. The school board should be ashamed for refusing to allow this girl bring her girlfriend to the prom. They claim that it wrong be a distraction to the educational process and cite this as a reason that they canceled the prom altogether. Last time I checked Prom wasn’t exactly an educational experience. We really can’t move forward as a society if we continuously discriminate against those we perceive as different than us. Prom is supposed to be a fun experience and a last get-together for many students. However, the school is basically telling this girl that she can’t be who she is and has to hide her true identity. Great message from a school, right? Also, it’s sad she can’t even be completely comfortable in school while her heterosexual classmates get to proudly flaunt their boyfriend or girlfriends around. The school needs to get over their inner prejudice and realize not everyone has their backwards opinions. I know this issue was raised earlier where a boy at a Catholic school fought to bring his boyfriend to the Prom, despite the objections of his school. The court case Marc Hall vs. Durham Catholic School Board gained public attention and I hope the same is for this case. I only recall this case because it was also turned into a movie. He won the case and I hope the same is for Constance McMillen. I’m also personally offended by the school stating that they reserved the right to ask Constance and her girlfriend to leave if anyone at the Prom complained of feeling uncomfortable. That whole statement that the school made is so ridiculous. Why should one couple change who they are to fit with a few prejudiced people. We shouldn’t bend to the needs of those who still harbor intolerant views and refuse to grow up and get over it. I’ll never understand why people are so concerned with someone else’s sexuality. You don’t want to bring a girl to the prom? Then don’t and don’t try to rain on someone else’s parade. I went to an all girls school and some girls attended the prom with other friends in the school, mainly because it was cheaper to take someone from the school then to take someone outside of the school, but a big fuss was never made. Schools should be a place for you to feel safe and it’s clear Constance is being made to feel ashamed of who she is and is being put in a prejudiced environment. She even fears that kids will hate her for having Prom cancelled when it’s clearly not her fault at all. Shame on the school for making it seem like she caused this commotion when they’re the ones making a big deal around *gasp* two lesbian girls going to the Prom together. I hope the school is forced to overturn their ban on same-sex couples attending the Prom together and realize we’re supposed to be moving forward and not going back. Sat, 13 Mar 2010 03:43:07 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/prom-or-no-prom-just-dont-let-the-queer-students-dance-together__trashed/#IDComment61794277 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/why-is-this-racist-really__trashed/#IDComment59857513 I think this man, without a doubt, has racist intentions for creating this team. Only players who are natural born American citizens with Caucasian parents can play? He can attempt to cover it up by saying he wants basketball to return to its “traditional brand”, but I think most people can clearly see what he means. He doesn’t want minorities playing basketball with him. I’d like him to further explain what he means by the fundamentals of basketball because it seems like nothing more than a poorly made up excuse to cover up his racist intentions without offending. The funny thing is his sad excuse does more offending. Even the name tinges with racist undertones. “The All-American Basketball Alliance.” It is almost as if he is saying that only Caucasians can truly be considered Americans. His constant repetition of “It’s not racist, I don’t hate people of color!” reminds me of many people who harbor racist feelings claiming “I can’t be racist, I have a black friend.” The comment that he also makes , “With players on other professional teams carrying guns, attacking fans in the stands, and going through the motions of playing the game, fundamentally sound [W]hite players are a vanishing species.” He’s making it seem as if it is a very distinct us. Vs them mentality. There is something wrong if he’s a strong believer that separating the races will be beneficial. Last time I checked, separate but equal wasn’t the most beneficial belief system. It won’t benefit anyone and especially this team’s reputation by dividing the players by race. How would we feel if every sports team was now split up by race. A minority filled team and an only white team. It’s all very close to the 1960s where separation dominated policies and laws. As we learned, though it seems some people missed the memo, this will never work. This man can claim he is protecting the sanctity of the game, but it’s clear what he’s really saying. He’s also relying on stereotypes of many minorities to justify why he needs these two teams. He claims that fans of these sports team will bring weapons into the arena and cause mayhem. This claim is nothing more than him relying on the stereotype that these black players bring black fans who do nothing more than tote around guns and celebrate violence. If he had just wanted to create a basketball team with just a slower style of basketball, there probably wouldn’t be any major issues. People may have questioned why anyone would want to watch such a slow boring version of basketball, but everyone prefers something different. However, the issue and controversy comes from the fact that he is discriminating against blacks, Asians, Hispanics, etc that would want to play this form of game. Therefore, his argument that he’s not really a racist is clearly wrong. He may not want to claim he is or that he has racist intentions but if the shoe fits… It’s also amusing to look at his argument and how he fears whites are becoming the minority. Last time I checked this wasn’t true, and even if there are more minority black players in basketball, does that give minorities the right to create sports teams that only cater to their race in sports such as hockey, track and field, football, etc because hey they just want to return to the fundamentals. I hope his team fails and it most likely will. No one wants to be associated with such a controversial team and while he’s celebrating the “traditional brand of basketball” those unruly NBA minority players will be cashing in their checks. Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:25:32 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/why-is-this-racist-really__trashed/#IDComment59857513 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/native-americans-question-two__trashed/#IDComment58676114 Sam constantly repeated during the lecture that no one is forcing you to feel guilty. The issue goes beyond feeling guilty, but realizing what happened and understanding why it is important to learn about these events. No one is pointing a finger at everyone and making them accept the guilt of their ancestors. The ramifications of this genocide are still going on today and that’s the real reason we should recognize the wrong doings. Yes not everyone is a descendant of a European, but that doesn’t exclude you from recognizing what happened. If you move to this country or even learn about the history of the United States, you still should understand the genocide of the Native American people. People seem to be mixing up guilt with accepting the wrong. In my opinion, accepting the wrongs means understanding how our forefathers committed heinous actions against a group of people. This doesn’t mean we should mope around because of it, but we must understand what happened and educate and inform others. We accept what happened instead of burying it into the back of our minds and living in blissful ignorance. The guilt issue sparks up a lot of uncomfortable feelings in people and I’m seeing people respond negatively towards it, though I can’t understand why they’re forcing the guilt on themselves. The effects of this genocide are still happening and this is why we shouldn’t let the past remain the past. The facts we were shown during class were shocking especially to learn that most crimes against Native Americans aren’t committed by other Native Americans, the rate of spousal abuse and how it is directly linked to the high alcoholism levels. Also, accepting the wrongs for past genocides isn’t just an American thing. Sure there are many people who came to this country as immigrants and who distance themselves from the Native American genocide, but there have been various crimes against groups of people in other countries, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t ignore what happened. The Holocaust is another example of a genocide. We as people, not necessarily dividing ourselves into our nationalities to avoid accepting the wrong, should accept that a wrong happened and work on ways to avoid such events from happening again. A bit far-fetched but regarding the genocides in such times as during WW2, many countries tried to distance themselves from it to avoid having to take responsibility. As a result, their actions are questioned later on and it makes you wonder why they chose to ignore it. People shouldn’t distance themselves from these events just because they’re from a different country. If more people came to an understanding of the events and educated themselves perhaps we wouldn’t have these events continuously happening. The question about who to blame should be ignored and more focus should be on “What can we do?” You can spend years trying to pinpoint who to blame and unless we have the Tardis to take us back in time, we can’t find who to blame. I just feel people should stop getting so defensive about the blame issue and focus on the bigger issue; learn more about the genocide and others like it and spread this information. “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:46:32 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/native-americans-question-two__trashed/#IDComment58676114 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/lgbt-class-question-six__trashed/#IDComment57409032 I don’t think either gay men or lesbian women receive better treatment than the other overall, but I have noticed that lesbian women may be treated better by straight men as opposed to gay men. These uncomfortable feelings that some straight men feel around gay men come about as a result of this deep fear that gay men could threaten their sexuality. Men often have to put on this macho act and when around gay men there’s this fear that these men would hit on them, etc. I always found it ridiculous that some straight men have this belief that every single gay guy is attracted to them. I guess these straight guys are attracted to every single woman and maybe women shouldn’t feel so comfortable around them-there’s a chance they may get hit on! Some people may feel more comfortable around lesbian women because they find it hot, but when it comes to granting these couples rights it becomes a bigger issue. It’s almost like saying lesbian women can be used for arousal and just for men to find them hot, but giving them basic civil rights is taboo. Society also plays a big role in the treatment of gay men. Men are often told to “man up” and become this truly super masculine guy and shred all strands of femininity. As a result, society becomes extremely judgmental against those who sway from this so called path of normality. I often hear family members telling young male cousins to stop crying like a girl, etc and then there’s the popular insult of “You throw like a girl.” Women, however, are stuck with this expectation that they must be sweet, kind, quiet, etc. Women that stray from this path are also struck with insults. So perhaps the only lesbian women that are so called “more accepted” than gay men are the feminine women who keep up this stereotype of women. Women who are attached with typically masculine traits are often told to act more feminine and get quickly judged just like gay men. It all reminds me of the various news stories I’ve heard where women with more masculine traits are brutally attacked and raped by men who feel they can change these women’s sexual orientation. It’s pretty obvious that each group isn’t treated better than the other, but they may receive less slack from either men or women. I’ve heard a few girls say they feel more comfortable around gay men than women. This goes back to the issue of men feelings more comfortable around lesbians and perhaps it’s the same for others? People need to get over this ridiculous fear that gays will hit on them and offend their oh so delicate sexuality. If you’re that offended by someone paying you a compliment then you have bigger issues. Women are also expected to be more open with their feelings especially in friendships. People usually ignore two girls who are hanging off the other or walking arm in arm. Two men are stared down and quickly judged if they were to do the same. Just an observation but men overseas who express affection for their male friends, especially in Europe are not really subjected to such harsh judgments. It’s pretty common to see two male friends give each other a peck on the lips or intimate hugs. There’s a big cultural difference when it comes to the way people in the United States view affection between two men and those in Europe. Of course, this doesn’t mean everyone in those countries have this view. Also, I know bisexuals weren’t included in the original question but it brings up an interesting point to consider how they’re treated compared to lesbians and gays. It’s almost the same with lesbian women and bisexual women where men see it as hot, but bisexual men are judged harshly. People seem to believe bisexual men are just gay men who haven’t come to terms with their sexuality and that bisexual women will just eventually get with a guy or that they’re only doing it for attention. I feel for bisexual women who have to combat these judgments simply because drunken college girls want to make out with each other just for guys or from songs just as “I kissed a girl”. Finally, (This is beginning to feel like a long tirade) I’d like to address the issue from a few comments that only gay men watch gay porn and that while straight men find two women together, no woman finds two men together appealing. The idea that straight women watch gay porn is rarely talked about. Most women wouldn’t admit to enjoying gay porn or seeing two men together, but men will proudly boast about enjoying lesbian porn. Men can boast about being aroused by two women, but a woman being aroused by two men together is taboo. It’s almost liking saying women can be used for sexual objects to please men, but the same can’t be said for men. I know plenty of women(straight and lesbian), who will admit to enjoying gay porn but as I said earlier, the stigma attached makes it harder for women to admit it. It’s not exactly gay porn, but when I went to see Brokeback Mountain the theatre was comprised of mainly elderly women. I guess this idea has no age limits. Also, I watched the popular Showtime “Queer as Folk” which had a majority of straight female viewers and I’m sure many weren’t tuning in just for the plot. Some women(I'm not saying every single one) are attracted to the idea of two men together. If men can want the idea of Megan Fox and Angelina Jolie why is it so different for women wanting hm I'll say James Franco and Jake Gyllenhaal for example. Thu, 18 Feb 2010 07:37:15 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/lgbt-class-question-six__trashed/#IDComment57409032 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/lgbt-class-question-one__trashed/#IDComment57198790 Well, this idea that the children of homosexual parents being ridiculed can be applied to minority children who are adopted by primarily White couples. These children may face discrimination in their new environment and in the schools they attend. I don't think we'll ever reach this ideal time where every homosexual couple that adopts children are praised and seen as every other loving family. As a result, we shouldn't limit their rights to raise children much like every other couple simply because there is a slight chance that their children might be teased in school, etc. Children will always get picked on in school and children of parents even without gay parents get teased in school. I think the only way we can even attempt to reach this ideal world where these couples are treated normally is if more people are shown these families. It's not fair to limit their rights because of society's close-minded views. It's not really protecting these children but only harming them. Perhaps I'm being a bitter cynic, but seeing as we'll never reach this "utopia" where everyone is accepted, why should we take away their rights because of society's refusal to progress? We can only progress by allowing these couples to adopt and maybe then more people will see the error of their ways. The error being their feelings that gay's shouldn't adopt, etc. Wed, 17 Feb 2010 07:21:58 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/lgbt-class-question-one__trashed/#IDComment57198790 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/animals-vs-humans-vs-welfare-cheats__trashed/#IDComment56623519 ...I fail to see the connection between gay marriage and a politician having a mistress, especially considering said politician is a heterosexual male. “I believe in equal rights for everyone, but this just seems to be totally morally wrong.” I think that invalidates believing in equal rights for everyone. People consistently use the Bible and religion to back why they’re against same-sex marriage and it never fails to confuse me. Separation of church and state? Also, should we start basing civil rights on what makes people uncomfortable? Let’s not allow certain groups to get married because so and so feels it’s wrong, let’s stop letting this group vote because we don’t feel comfortable with them in power. I think it says a lot about a person when they’re against rights for all simply because they don’t see it as normal. Can normality even be defined or is it just what you think is right or wrong? I’m glad many countries don’t have such backwards opinions on homosexuality and allow these couples to get married. As for would I be proud to have Mr. and Mr. Smith as parents? I’d be glad to have parents who didn’t force such close-minded views down my throat. And yeah, it was Mark Sanford, not Bauer who made trips to Argentina to see his mistress. Sat, 13 Feb 2010 10:31:58 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/animals-vs-humans-vs-welfare-cheats__trashed/#IDComment56623519 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/animals-vs-humans-vs-welfare-cheats__trashed/#IDComment56449393 While I understand some people mistakes, it is clear that Andre Bauer’s “word vomit” reveals a lot about his character and his personal political beliefs and ideas about the poor in the United States. I’m always convinced after every political scandal that things can’t get worse, but his comments proved me wrong once again. Bauer’s comments referring to those on welfare as animals disgusted me especially considering they were made against children who received free lunches during school. I try to consider what goes on in the mind of an elected official who can even dare say something like this and it’s hard to believe there is anything going on in there. The fact that he attacks kids angers me. Many of these children are the kids of parents who work two jobs to support their family and still don’t have enough money to buy the necessary essentials for their children. The free lunch these children receive may be the only meal they will get, so to equivocate these children receiving free lunches to feeding stray animals? I don’t even know where to begin. Bauer’s way of thinking reminds me of the class lectures on the freedom vs. determinism way of thinking. It’s clear that Bauer is looking at those on welfare through the freedom idea. He has this naïve belief that the poverty these children are in is an easily fixable problem. Let’s stop providing these children with food and let survival of the fittest take its place! I’m sure their parents had equal opportunities to make it in the world! I find it disturbing that someone with such a cynical view of those on welfare is in power and in control of making important decisions. I know the welfare system gets a lot of backlash by people who claims it aids in discouraging people to work and allows them to take the easy way out. I am sure there are some who milk the system but for the few that do should we eliminate an entire program? Should we get rid of every single government program because of a few problems? The schools that I attended always offered free lunch to students and I knew many of the people in that school greatly benefited from the program, so for Bauer to just refer to them as animals baffles me. This also makes me think about the class lesson on the privileges people receive and the luck/chance they had with their birth. Bauer simply didn’t draw the short stick in life and now he thinks he can criticize those who are suffering in poverty and from a lack of resources. I guess it all goes back to the good ole American idea of pulling yourself up from your bootstraps. However, it isn’t that simple. These children and those on welfare are not animals. The real animal is Bauer for even making a disturbing comparison like that. I find that there are a lot of misconceptions about welfare and the people who are on it. As I said earlier, there are a few cases of people milking the system, but I have family members on welfare and my family received support from the problem. My mom was a single mother of four children and it greatly benefitted us. Politicians shouldn’t be complaining about the free lunches, but trying to find more ways to help stop the poverty that causes these children to go to bed hungry. Bauer also tried to link reduced lunches to low test scores and it’s pretty obvious that he fails to realize a lack of resources(including food, school supplies) are big contributors. Should we stop helping those because of the situations they were born in? This all relates to class and goes back to the determinist and freedom ideas. Bauer seems to believe that everyone is on a level playing field and these children and their parents can easily pull themselves up. This is clearly not the case. His poor attempt at an apology is another issue. It’s obvious he’s only trying to apologize because of the backlash and it reeks of “I’m sorry you were offended” as opposed to “I’m sorry for what I said and understand the implications of it.” It’s clear he doesn’t regret what he said and it’s a shame he’s still in office. Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:07:39 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/animals-vs-humans-vs-welfare-cheats__trashed/#IDComment56449393 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/avatar-and-the-white-mans-burden__trashed/#IDComment55279237 I feel that David Brooks brings up a lot of valid points regarding Avatar and the “Messiah Complex” that inhabits many films. I often hear people referring to Avatar as simply “Pocahontas set in space.” or just a repetition of the same old racial themes. I have also heard opposing arguments from each side who try to counter-argue Brooks point. There are some who say the film does nothing more than promote the idea that the white man is a savior to the “savage natives”. He is often portrayed as being the only one who can save these people. The other side sees the film as nothing more than entertainment and believes we should just accept the movie for what it is-a film. I disagree strongly with the latter group who believe we should ignore these repeating ideas and just take the movie for what it is. It is necessary to discuss films especially this idea of the white man’s burden because it is not only in films, but it can be directly linked to the issues we face today. I have always noticed that many popular Hollywood films often have the light skin character swooping in to save the minorities. This occurs not only in films such as Avatar but in the recent movies such as “The Blind Side” and “Freedom Writers”. They replay the tired theme of the minorities having to be rescued by the white character. I know there are some who will argue that these events really do occur but this isn’t the issue. The main issue is that Hollywood continuously focuses on these stories. There aren’t many Hollywood films being made about the minority characters saving themselves. There is always the issue of these characters needing to be saved and almost welcoming the saviors as they are transformed. I feel this wouldn’t be as much of a big issue if there were more stories about other races saving themselves instead of needing outside help from others. I’m reading many of the comments and many people are saying would people be arguing if the main character had been a Black, Asian, etc man. This issue never arises because very rarely does Hollywood focus on these stories. They rely on the same formulas and plots because they know this is what will become the big Blockbuster movies that will rake in money. What does that say about our society? I also feel that a lot of times people tend to want to avoid bringing up this topic because either it makes them uncomfortable or they feel it’s not worth discussing. As I state earlier, movies are not simply just for entertainment but they are there to cause you to think. Should we ignore the social issues brought up in such films as “Brokeback Mountain” “Norma Rae” and just treat the film for what it is? These films can serve as a reflection of the social and racial ideas and values we have in our own society. These films simply bring up important social issues and should we ignore these issues as well? It’s also interesting to note that the outsider character is always the one who wins the native girl and is shown as being better at being a native than the native themselves. There is also the issue that these films are never told from the perspective of the natives but only in the eyes of the white character. I think this makes it difficult for viewers to really connect to the natives. The only relatable character, therefore, is the light-skinned character. I’m not intending for this to be an Avatar bashing piece. I just feel that people often want to throw aside these issues simply because it’s a movie. These topics should be discussed and the social and racial implications of the white characters consistently being used as saviors should be brought up and not swept under the rug. These problems will continue if we just think of films as “movies” and nothing more. It’s not looking too into a movie. These issues in the film are a reflection of our own social beliefs! Ignoring the issue of race in the film won’t make the problem go away and it certainly won’t do the same in the real world. It’s just saying how we as a society are accepting of this repeating theme and that nothing is being done to show a different side. Thu, 4 Feb 2010 04:03:27 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/avatar-and-the-white-mans-burden__trashed/#IDComment55279237 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/racism-looks-pretty-good-on-this-side-of-the-atlantic__trashed/#IDComment54032782 I was already semi familiar with the issue of racism in European football before reading this article and watching the video. I watched the World Cup in 2006 and I can remember this issue being brought up. I can also understand why there is an increase in racial slurs and attacks being thrown out during these games. Many of these football players are from different cultures and countries and they were grouped together in Germany to play football. There were bound to be a rise in racial problems because of the closeness of the many racial groups and the fans from each team. The supporters of these teams may harbor deep racist thoughts and find that insulting the race of the opposing team is the easiest way to show their hatred for the teams. This racial unsteadiness combined with the general competitiveness of sports resulted in various escalated feeling between different countries and their football teams I found it completely shocking, however, to see the lack of a major response from the coaches and others in the stands. There were some police officers in the stands, but for the situation to become so large that these “fans” began throwing bananas into the field and carrying banners that proudly stated racist remarks surprised me. It may be especially difficult to combat the large number of fans who carry these racist banners into the stadiums and shout, but something has to be done to stop this blatant racism. The video was shot before the World Cup 2006 and it is interesting to note that the 2006 World Cup had a big stance against racism. FIFA realized the rising racism in these matches and wanted to take a strong stance against them. The World Cup was the perfect opportunity to raise awareness for an understanding of racial differences especially because so many Europeans tune into the popular event. This theme of fighting racism should be continued during the World Cup this summer. The issue of racism can’t be brushed aside and blamed on just “European rowdiness due to their strong feelings towards football.” There is a deeper meaning which involves the separation felt between the immigrants who have recently come to Europe and the native citizens of European countries. This fits in with the article because the article discusses the racism faced by football players who are immigrants. This perceived “otherness” of the other races is seen as threatening and it can invade into the sports community. I can also remember that during the final four matches of the 2006 World Cup that many of the team’s captains made speeches against racism in their native language which was also translated. I don’t remember all of the speeches, but I do recall the speech made by the German captain, Ballack. I suppose these speeches were one way appeal to any of their fans. I decided to youtube one of the speeches to refresh my memory and the announcer declares “Say no to any form of discrimination”. I feel that more needs to be done to stop the racism in sports. More awareness should be raised during these popular sporting events in Europe especially during the World Cup and Euro Cup. The upcoming World Cup this summer will be interesting as it will allow us to see if the issue of racism will be tackled again. We can only hope that the situation has changed for the better and will not fall into such drastic situations such as the ones shown in the video. It was disturbing to see these racist remarks being thrown around so casually and I hope that the fans shouting these words are thrown out of the stadium to send a message that it is not ok to taunt the players. A stronger message needs to be sent out and hopefully this can at least decrease the violence and harsh words erupting in football stadiums around Europe. Wed, 27 Jan 2010 04:11:53 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/racism-looks-pretty-good-on-this-side-of-the-atlantic__trashed/#IDComment54032782 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/last-name-begins-with-n-or-o__trashed/#IDComment53883202 Karima Tue, 26 Jan 2010 03:31:37 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/last-name-begins-with-n-or-o__trashed/#IDComment53883202 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/clubbing-the-bejesus-out-of-rationality__trashed/#IDComment53126832 Pat Robertson’s comments about the situation in Haiti being the result of a pact made with the devil baffled me. I was familiar with Robertson’s past history and his comments made. I can recall hearing his name come up when controversy struck up and the media quickly turned their attention to his words and comments. This was especially the case with his comments regarding Hurricane Katrina and 9/11. He made a controversial statements saying that Hurricane Katrina was the result of the United State’s pro-abortion policy or as he called it “the slaughter of innocent children.” His name always pops up when he attempts to get into the news and cause a big scene. He knows that what he is saying will generation a huge flurry of news and bring more attention to his “cause” and everything he believes in. In a way, someone could argue that putting him on the news is just giving him more attention. However, I can understand why people like Jon Stewart and Keith Olberman bring attention to his many irrational comments. His comments are often hateful, but these newscasters are simply doing their job. They’re bringing attention to his blatantly ignorant comments and showing why these statements are irrational and completely wrong. I often watch Jon Stewart and the Colbert Report and they often do this with various public figures not just including politicians. While it does bring more attention to him, it also allows the public to distance themselves from Robertson and his cause. It gives the public the opportunity to bond together in a sense and point the finger at someone, albeit a justified pointing of the finger. The media just focusing on his statements and nothing else distracts viewers from what is happening in Haiti. The main focus of media stations that deal with international affairs should be on helping the people of Haiti and not just on why Robertson is wrong. The plight of the Haitian people cannot be ignored in favor of news stories that generate tv rating as people race to criticize what Robertson is saying. That is the main reason many news stations even choose to focus on what he is saying. I feel that people like Robertson are cowards that hide behind what they believe is religion. I’m not affiliated with any religion and consider myself an atheist if anything, but I can see Robertson morphing religious beliefs into something that is hateful and mean to encourage the blaming and hate of various groups. This is similar to the Phelps family, ranked “The Most Hated Family in America”. They constantly spew disgusting messages that do nothing but spark anger in others. I am often furious when I see television stations and the media giving them attention. This is definitely the case with Robertson. I do agree that we are just giving them what they want when we choose to focus in on the statements they make. It is best to ignore their hurtful comments because they only seek to gain more media attention. Robertson can’t be defined as mentally ill because he knows exactly what he is doing. It is a game to him and he wishes to cause controversy with his statements. It’s different with those who have actual mental illness and are not aware of what they are doing. Thu, 21 Jan 2010 05:57:33 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/clubbing-the-bejesus-out-of-rationality__trashed/#IDComment53126832